Twinky

:offtopic:/> In context of being a cheerful giver and of being conscious (thoughtful) of where you give money, you might be interested in the following two websites that attempt to evaluate charities for their impact and their best use of donated moneys. Notably some of the bigger/more famous charities don't make it to the "best value" places. It does not mean, of course, that your pet charity/ies isn't "good value" or doesn't carefully manage donations. You may prefer to donate to charities of which you have your own knowledge and involvement with. It's your hard-earned money; make it work hard for someone else when they spend it; don't let it line the pocket of a rich CEO. One of the following has a page on "tips" to consider, questions to ask, when it comes to giving, particularly of large donations. GiveWell Giving What We Can

Report in ComputerWorld: My link

Thanks, George. I don't think I'll be going there any time soon! I dislike Win 8 and don't need any more annoyances! When MS sorts out Win 10 properly...in a few years...maybe... :)

Nice to see you back here for a while, DWBH.

Dana - your story gets worse. Who set that for the second wedding date? Not your Mum, I'm sure! If she's still alive, it's time for her to open her "lock box" and shout loudly about the contents - just as you are doing. How is your brother doing now? Please remember some of the good times with your dad, with us. The things some people have posted on this thread are very kind and perhaps a comfort for you to read.

VPW also used this verse to support his claim: Ex 21:22: If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. VPW said that if she miscarried as a result of the fighting (striving), then the punishment was only a fine. If it had been a person, it would have had a life and the penalties for the taking of a life would have applied [death or banishment]. He glossed over or rather ignored the "no further mischief" aspect. But look at this same verse in other translations. Several look at this as meaning simply "premature birth" and some go on to talk about premature birth with no further injury (mischief) - ie, death of the child/ren or the mother. The commentaries on this Biblehub link are interesting, especially Gill's commentary (at the bottom of the page).

:offtopic:/>I thought this was interesting from that web page, waysider: © 2014 S.O.W.E.R.S.®. (L.E.A.D. Outdoor Academy™ and W.O.W. Ambassadors™ are trademarks of S.O.W.E.R.S.®) And you know who fiercely protected their trademarks, name, etc...

So - Johniam - what "faith" was VPW demonstrating by his works upon young women? And upon the young women's husbands, if they had a husband? or more familiarly: If one can tell what is going on in a child's head and heart by the child's actions, by the outward demonstration of what the child believes, how much more for an adult? Remember, we're not looking in the short term of a quick and convenient lie about something that VPW did or didn't do - anyone can lie and dissemble for a short period. On the contrary, we're considering the pattern of behavior over a period of years. Over some decades, what does that man's actions betray about his heart? His thoughts? His faith? And that's what gives the right, or insight, to know what's in someone else's heart. The long-term actions, or works, of that someone. Whether that someone be VPW, Johniam, Rocky, the Pope, the President, the Queen ...

Another excellent post, Steve. Well put. :eusa_clap:/> For those not interested in "multiple centres of reference" - Proverbs 15:22 (ESV) (my emphasis): 22 Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed. For anyone interested in wise counsel: Wise Counsel - from Open Bible

Steve - thanks for these three wonderful posts that set out your history (and perhaps something akin to the history of many of us). You present your account very clearly. I especially liked: " I had been in love with TWI because the people in my original twig had loved me, and I attributed the same kind of love to all of the rest of the people involved with TWI..." The hook that got most of us, it seems. Thank you again.

Over HoHo Relo, they expected you to meet and mate with some random female? Or some female that you'd already known? Sh@g 'em and leave 'em? Only responsibility = get rid of the evidence? A somewhat different approach from most churches, which advocate more of a pre-marital celibacy line.

Mea culpa, Sky, thought you were out before 1995. I'd been banished by then. I never got there in 1995. So... a RoA with "real" (ahem) d.s. infiltration. (1) where was the BoDs' "believing" to keep these d.s. away in the first place? (2) why didn't the BoD or one or more of them simply banish the d.s.? You know, a real exorcism. Ah heck. Much easier for the BoD to banish all believers, rather than banish a few d.s. Holding a RoA might also have exposed the dramatic fall in numbers. If the BigTop was as empty as the auditorium is now, who'd want to be there at all? But you could well be right, Sky, with your assessment that the cost of bringing all the WC in wouldn't be cheap (even if you do have$65m in the bank).

That's the pattern that was set all through Corps training: 4 hours "study" which could be interrupted at will if something more important was mandated (like killing chickens) and four hours work experience (tidying the pens in the drawers or doing the washing up). What got me more was the inability to participate in RoA at all. It was really after your time, Sky, but it was basically 18 hrs hard work and little time to socialise with one's spiritual partners, friends and whoever. Specially hard for internationals like me - when the people had come thousands of miles on expensive overseas flights and I couldn't get time off to spend with them. I was happy to do the work assigned to me and to serve people, but a few hours off to hang out with "my" visitors would have been nice. And I didn't get much opportunity to "enjoy" Corps week either. I often wasn't released from my normal work tasks to participate. Don't suppose I missed much, though.

Wow. What a sad story. I can't add any info at all (long before my time there) but extend sympathies to the entire family.

Just bumping up this humorous old thread for further additions and amusement.

Not quite the same, Allan, but in the UK you don't lose points, you are given them. And if you are awarded 12 points, you get an extra award: disqualification. All offences start at 3 points and some are awarded from 3 to 11 depending on the seriousness of the offence. Points are usually there for a min 3 yrs. There may be other penalties as well (fine, restrictions on driving times, short prison sentences). There is also "diversion" for minor offences. Typically this is for the person who is caught going just above the speed limit (say 34mph in a 30 zone) but not otherwise doing anything wrong (like being dangerous, swerving around, using a mobile phone etc). The offender has to undertake (at a fee) a 4 hour course and be an active participant. This keeps the driving licence clean, you don't have to tell the insurance company (so no effect on raising premium) and actually does promote better driving behaviour. If you're caught doing the same thing (eg speeding) within three years, you get points for the later offence and how many is based on your failure to learn from the previous course (ie, instead of getting 3 points you might get more.

"Penny rich and pound foolish," waysider. Save money on pens and toilet paper, and blow it on vehicles, fancy clothes and Drambuie.

WG, that's disgusting. Chronic sin in your life? Heck, aren't we all sinners - chronic sinners? (Even if we're born again! we still sin!!). Jesus, I recall, yelled at a man who had had a chronic illness such that he couldn't walk. And was too lazy to get into a magic pool. Yeah right. Hey, wait, didn't he do something similar when the man's mates tore open the roof? (Can you imagine doing that in the WoW Auditorium. Hahahahahahaha!) And his disciples - just as bad, didn't give out silver or gold, just a b-llocking to a man who hadn't ever walked. Yeah, right. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sure that in every respect your life is incomparably more healthy now, WG :knuddel:/>

I stand fully behind my post #7 on this thread. And even from his grave, VPW has got us distracted from ***GOD*** and got us wasting time on arguing about words. Just words - though there is some effort on this thread, to address the concept behind the words. Read other versions; try using synonyms; don't split hairs or even split the atom - keep it simple If understanding is getting more complicated - the "explanation" is probably not of God.

VPW cobbled together a few bits and pieces that he found. He found some stuff on apeitheia and apisteia; he found some stuff about pistis, he found bits here and there, and mixed in a good dash of private interpretation. That's why all this stuff is so hard to get one's head around. It was hard in the first (PFAL) place to try and take on board his explanations and expositions. Now, having worked hard to try and get them to make sense - one has to work hard to get rid of the crazy explanations. The man didn't understand English, never mind Greek, or his version of Greek. He didn't understand mediaeval English (well that of the late 1500s and, let's be kind, half a century out of date) - how much less would he understand of NT Greek, of (let's be honest) nearly two millennia out of date - that's four times as old. He dissed the work of countless educated theologians from many generations, unless they were too long dead, or he could plagiarise their work to fit his own ideas. He was also a cultural moron and didn't give a hoot about any kind of background other than what he was familiar with. He mocked the background of other people - even in PFAL - mocked "an English theologian" [unidentified] to whom he, VPW, could teach some new stuff [yeah, right]. The ethos of TWI was to mock and disregard the background of any believers who weren't Americans and who weren't seeking "prosperity gospel." So...he didn't understand modern English. He didn't understand 1500s English yet deliberately chose a Bible version from this period because he counted others even less able to understand this English than himself. He didn't know any Greek (from any period) He wasn't interested in anyone's background except his own mid 20th C background He had a history of "sleight of hand" (or rather, of tongue) and twisting the ordinary meaning of words to bolster his own ideas Does this man sound like someone to be trusted in his explanations of what words mean? Or does he sound like someone whose words have been weighed in the balance and found wanting? (= inadequate, insufficient)?

First, acknowledge that VPW's grasp of the English language was very limited. He often mixed up parts of speech. He also invented words (so as to build a cult mentality). The verb is: BELIEVE, and "believing" is a grammatical construction being part of the verb. The verb believe means: : to accept or regard (something) as true : to accept the truth of what is said by (someone) : to have (a specified opinion) (from Merriam-Webster online dictionary) You can add synonyms like, have confidence in, trust in, etc. Generally, we believe someone (take their word for it) or something (that it is as stated). If you believe someone, the emphasis is on that someone. I believe You said... it's about my confidence in You. I believe You are honest, trustworthy, a liar, a thief... It's about my believe in You. When we get into this business of "believing" that shifts the emphasis. I am believing... who? what? I, I, I. Is that perhaps how the magical thinking gets in, the power of thinking positive, etc. It's all about I, me. Where is all this is believing God? Where in any of it is prayer? is asking God for his help? is acknowledging Him (in all our ways) as the Giver of life, of healing, of everything. I think this word, this expression, this "believing" is another of those sleight of hand tricks that VPW dragged in, to distract us from knowing and relying upon God. Instead of "I'm believing [who? or what?] for a house with red drapes," try "I trust God to meet my needs and I would like red drapes." Get rid of the jargon, and return to simplicity.

Waysider - you still have that stuff? Isn't it like witchcraft - you have those books and devil spirits lurk in them and will pozzess you? :biglaugh:/>

Hmm, no comments on the piece I posted. Perhaps I was wrong, then, and VPW didn't use this at all. Knowing what I know now, I can only imagine him using it as subterfuge - not with any sense of believing or meaning it.

I receive the CFFM newsletter weekly. Dunno why, it was a “comfort thing” when I was first getting my head back together and now I simply haven’t got round to unsubscribing. However, in the latest edition appears the following wording (it goes on for at least twice the length of the extract – if anybody’s interested I’ll post the rest of it. It brought back memories of something TWI-related and I can hear VPW’s voice reciting this in resoundingly enthusiastic tones (wonder why, given what I know now – all part of the trickiness no doubt). It must be in PFAL somewhere. Quite late on, I’d think, a later session. The person reciting, Dr Shadrach Meshach Lockridge (March 7, 1913 – April 4, 2000), was the Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church,[1] a prominent African-American congregation in San Diego, California, from 1953 to 1993. He was known for his preaching across the United States and around the world. As such, he would have been alive when VPW was out there pushing his stuff. Or am I misremembering it all? And VPW never got his teeth into this too? Or was it not PFAL but some other TWI thingy (not AoS, that's for sure). ++++++++++++++++ The Bible says my King is the King of the Jews. He’s the King of Israel. He’s the King of Righteousness. He’s the King of the Ages. He’s the King of Heaven. He’s the King of Glory. He’s the King of kings, and He’s the Lord of lords. That’s my King. I wonder, do you know Him? My King is a sovereign King. No means of measure can define His limitless love. He’s enduringly strong. He’s entirely sincere. He’s eternally steadfast. He’s immortally graceful. He’s imperially powerful. He’s impartially merciful. Do you know Him? He’s the greatest phenomenon that has ever crossed the horizon of this world. He’s God’s Son. He’s the sinner’s Saviour. He’s the centerpiece of civilization. He’s unparalleled. He’s unprecedented. He is ... ++++++++++++++++ Dr. S.M. Lockridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._M._Lockridge Listen to this presentation at: