Twinky

Oh, the hairs that were split over the difference if any between faith and believing. None of which hair-splitting ever got beyond an intellectual discussion. TWI was keen to tell us it was the "heart" that mattered and then distracted us by such intellectual discussions. And kept us all too busy to listen to our hearts. Whereas demonstrating (by actions) true grace, love and kindness, would have done far more to build our faith.

Squirrel, I'm sure you as a radio ham have never had a problem with finding a voice. Your own and many others. :wink2:/>

Article Raf refers to Useful sort of article. Actually I'd never considered it. What I have considered, and this is a bit off topic but not irrelevant, is that if Joseph had to travel - anywhere - to be censused, then so did his father (and possibly mother) and his brothers (and wives?) and who knows how many other hangers-on. What about Mary's parents, where were they from? They also are supposed to be in the same lineage, so wouldn't her father also be in the entourage? What a vast number of people on the move!!! (You'd think there might be some sort of swap-a-house for a few months, while everyone was moving about the country to their different places of origin) (Oh wait, pre-internet...) And surely, surely, Mary's mother would wish to be with her heavily pregnant daughter as she was about to give birth to her first child? Or some of the wives of the brothers? Would Mary really chose as midwife the innkeeper's wife or some random woman she just came across? Or did she expect the angel Gabriel or a midwife angel to materialise at just the right moment? So in this "stable" / caravanserai we have not just J&M but at least his parents, perhaps hers, a load of brothers (and their wives? and their kids?) quite a crowd. No wonder there was no room in the inn! But maybe in a nice big stable area, all of them could have space to move around and yet still stay together. With plenty of help for the new mother. Get rid of the schmaltzy idea of a lonely couple with naught but a donkey out in the savage wilds. Or two kids and a baby emitting light rays (halo) and mooing cows and whatever. There were loads of people present.

Hey, get this!! I was just drafting something up and used a word not in the standard MS dictionary though not an unusual one. As it's something I might use again, I added it to the dictionary. I finished the document and have gone to Save it - and up popped a new screen inviting me to send to MS all the words and phrases that Word doesn't recognize. "Help us to improve our proofing tools. The information listed below is from your use of the spelling checker, grammar checker, thesaurus and hyphenation tool. We want your permission to send these words and phrases to Microsoft. ...the information...is only used to improve our software and services." The program has been through ALL my documents (inc my old CVs/resumes) and has pulled out British place names (cities, streets etc), names of previous employers, phrases from my CVs - that's just what it's telling me about. While of course the place names can easily be picked up from any street atlas - or even Google maps! - I have to say I am NOT thrilled at a program that nosily pokes around in my documents and then wants to send info to MS or anybody else. Makes you wonder what else is poking around - without saying so - and what info is being extracted and sent who knows where. Win 8 ... spyware.

Krys, I do think you'll be happier with Win 7. Win 8 will probably be okay once they get all the bugs out of it. You can upgrade to Win 8 from Win 7 (on payment of a fee) but you should be good with Win 7 for some years yet.

Allan, in above post, the CC as in Corps Coord. The CC as in Country Coord didn't try to face-melt me, just to assault me Craig-style. (Y'know, "a man has his needs when he's away from home.") The only serious face melt from the Country Coord was the last time I saw him when he publicly threw me out.

I purchased a new laptop with Win8 in late December, to replace my ancient thing that ran Win2000 (!). Of course, I was fully familiar with later operating systems (XP, Win7) through other computers that I had regular access to. The difference between Win 7 and Win 8 is profound. If you want a program that will drive you bonkers, Win8 is it! It is VERY different from Win7 and many of the features you expect are absent or located somewhere else. There is no Start button (though due to common complaint Microsoft is thinking of reintroducing that) - there is a Start screen (like a Desktop) which is littered with Tiles (which are the apps). There sometimes don't seem quick ways to access data or other programs. There is no "Find File" aspect (part of the Start button in Win7) or if there is I haven't found it yet. Other familiar features are missing or hard to find. The Tiles on the Start screen give access to various other programs and come pre-loaded to Wikipedia, Bing, Skype, Skydrive, Google, IE, Messenger, etc and a load of games, photo software and such like. However, these Tiles don't always take you to where you really want to be. I had loads of trouble with the Skype program as (would you believe it!) there is no way to answer an incoming call! (After some months of failures I rummaged around on the Skype website and found this is a common problem and a huge complaint - the solution is to uninstall the app and download the latest desktop version of Skype). Win8 reads your (Hotmail) address book and tells you lots of things about the people in your address book and has added my Hotmail contacts as contacts in Skype (yeah, I really wanted them to do that...not). It's added stuff in my Facebook account too. You might wonder what info about yourself it is passing to other users. Disgracefully (but secretly in the background) intrusive - though Microsoft would say it's doing everyone a favor. If you have other older devices you may find they do not work with Win 8. My HP printer does not work and HP does not make a patch for it. Some other manufacturers of printers have made patches. My brand new camera purchased less than 2 weeks ago is set up to download to Win 7 and the viewer program does not work with Win 8, found that out two days ago. The patch/recommended solution doesn't work either. Fortunately I have some other software (pre-installed) that can view the photos. I find viewing photos is hard work just getting round the viewer and making it do what I want. There is a quick link to the Pictures Library but not in a useful way like letting you move easily from one photo to another; you have to go to some other location and set up Picture viewing another way. I use this computer every day, probably totalling several hours a day. I only have simple requirements and very often wish I'd got a computer loaded with Win 7 instead of Win 8. I don't want or need the extra toys it provides and don't find them helpful - rather, they're intrusive. There are probably lots of things that Win 8 is good at, does better; however, given what I use my computer for and given the annoyance factor in such longwinded ways of getting to do simple tasks, I'd go for Win 7 if I were buying again. I find if I'm not very careful how I use this computer, I inadvertently bring up the Start screen again and again. There is a Windows button to get out of it. Visitors who have attempted to use my computer often give up. You might want to arrange a tutorial if you do buy a Win 8 computer. Vendors are keen to promote this new program so may throw a tutorial in for free.

I endured several face-meltings from Craig, who would have the Corps Coord and maybe a few other henchmen present, and he'd scream at me about my disobedience and "lack of meekness." Heck, all I'd've been doing was something somebody "in authority" over me had told me to do; or it'd been something that appeared completely inoffensive where no direction had been given...nothing of substance or in itself wrong. He terrorised me several times about my "lack of meekness" and also had the CC do the same - the CC did it to be "obedient" but Craig did it to be manipulative. He didn't like that I still had a brain that functioned. We all know now how "meek to the Word" that rapist and serial abuser of women Craig was. This is a most interesting thread.

"Severally" in its ancient usage meant "separately" - ie severed, separate, cut off, from the other aspects; individually. It's part of a phrase which nowadays is encountered mostly in legal documents: people might be "jointly and severally" liable for something - a contract, a lease, a mortgage, whatever. "Jointly" means together with the other people who have signed the document. "Severally" means separately, solely, individually. And the liability will be for the whole of the contract, debt or whatever. When a person is "jointly and severally" liable for say a legal contract, in case of default the other party to the contract (let's call him Z) can go against (sue) any of the people who signed the legal contract if there is a breach of contract. Usually Z would go against all of A, B, C and D all at the same time; but Z doesn't have to do that; Z can go against any of A, B, C and D. Each one of these is "severally" (individually) responsible for the entirety of the debt. They're not each responsible for a half or a quarter, however many of them there are - they're each responsible for all of it. If A is dead, his whole legal responsibility continues on his estate and on B, C and D. If B is bankrupt, his legal liability falls on A's estate and C and D. If C is a minor and not legally allowed to enter a contract, his liability falls onto A's estate and D (That's because A B C and D were jointly liable, B's liability is extinguished by his bankruptcy, and C was never legally liable, being a minor). Even if A, B, and C are all alive, of age and financially stable, Z can still choose to sue only D and doesn't have to sue A, B and C at all. (That's "severally" liable - a severed responsibility for the entirety of the liability.) Of course, D if he has any sense will immediately join A, B and C in the same proceedings so that they are jointly liable with him - which is why Z usually sues them all in in the first place. In this sense, just as there is a separate individual responsibility to fulfil the legal obligation, "dividing severally as he/it will" emphasises the personal, individual, entire spiritual package which each person receives. It's not a "part" of the gift - it's the thing itself in its entirety. The very same as is given to everyone else. That's not at all from a PFAL perspective. That's from the perspective of a lawyer of many years experience who had a specialty in litigation and contract law. Joint and several liability is something a law student learns about in the first term. As a practising lawyer, it was something that had to be explained very carefully to clients about to embark on any kind of legal contract. Again, they're not each responsible for a half or a quarter, however many of them there are - they're each responsible for all of it. In fact, when coming to that part in PFAL, I understood immediately that everyone got everything. I very much doubt that VPW had that anything like that perspective on it, whatever angle he came at it from. Lesson over. Back to the bunfight.

Oh I'm just being naughty, Chocky. It was a weird thought that occurred when clearly my brain had nothing better to do. Yes I'd agree that LCM's rants were probably frustration with his wife's activities with her girlfriend. But he was violently anti-homosexual particularly against males. In fact, he spent almost an entire Corps night :wacko:/> detailing what (he said) were the activities that males got up to and the things (he said) they did to enhance their sexual enjoyment. And returned to the topic on many other occasions. In fact, he spent nearly a whole semester referencing these activities one way or the other in Corps night. Gross, or what? He cast out male WC Corps, graduated staff and living in Founders Hall, for alleged homo activities. I don't recall him doing that with any female Corps. Maybe he didn't have the courage (?) to do the deed himself. So he attacked men's wives as surrogates. Two years in rez under his leadership...is more than enough. I probably saw and heard more of him that you did, Chocky. Having a hard time remembering anything positive that he said.

Something even creepier: Husband and wife are supposed to become one flesh, right? A man leaves his father and mother and sets up a new household with his wife. That's where his allegiances are to lie, not with his parents. Forsaking all others, right? In fact, they are supposed to become "one flesh" so much so that the nakedness of Noah's wife was considered Noah's nakedness- Gen 9:18-24; Lev 18:8. Soooo.. bearing in mind all the anti-homosexual rants....and all the abuse of women, especially wives, in TWI - have in fact the assaults on females got another side to them? Are they in fact homosexual assaults perpetrated by LCM and the likes, against male Corps? Possibly, even ... homosexual incest? :evilshades:/>Creepy indeed! (Thanks for your help there, Waysider)

And the teachers of the early WCs?? When did that stupid rule come in? But of course, Mr Garden, being a mere hick from Galilee, had nothing to teach the Pharisees. :evildenk:/>

Okay, Waysider might post the two quotes that for whatever reason I can't post. And then I will post the rest of what I wanted to say. Don't hold your breath too much folks. It's really not that exciting. Just a naughty thought that occurred to me. :evilshades:/>

Waysider, I wish I could post a response...but I get a message saying, You must enter a post Guess I have to type the whole thing manually - maybe it's the quote function or something stuffing up the post.

Was intrigued by a couple of comments on the Dating in the Way thread:

"They"... And that's right - it wasn't just VPW. Or LCM. But all those who colluded with them to cover up the misdeeds. Some or all of the original trustees. Some or all of their spouses. "Uncle" Howard has suffered accusations, at least here. Never heard anything about Irmal. Didn't their wives know or suspect anything - about their own husbands, at least? Movin' on into the hippie free love era, somebody shoulda challenged VPW then. Maybe they did - and walked away - didn't expose the abuse. Thing is though, it wasn't a "business owner" but a despot that was in charge. And despots think they can do anything, governing solely by their own will and capriciousness. And usually impervious to criticism, conscience, and common sense.

Okay, here's a cat giving a miaow. And I think there is a butterfly about somewhere. Which my cats would catch and eat, if they could. Better than Go-Cat, apparently.

Agh, that's just pants!!

I got into a spat with Johniam about this some months back. Some worldly wisdom is just that. Wisdom. It's unwise to cross the road without looking both ways. Should we deny that? (See you in the hospital!!) God gave us "common sense" and a brain to think with. It's certainly not spiritual wisdom to deny our God-given thinking powers, our common sense. If you read Proverbs, you'll see that a lot of that is just "common sense" - how to live nicely with other people. How to behave in a socially responsible manner. And yet, Proverbs is often accepted as a collection of helpful sayings that were common at the time. Even though "common sense," does that confirm or negate that the sayings in Proverbs are also Godly wisdom? What about the wisdom of a surgeon operating on a human body? The wisdom of a non-Christian parent tenderly teaching a young child how to live - not to hit other kids, not to tell lies and so on? Now philosphies of men, wordly wisdom about the meaning of life and the existence of karma, nirvana, re-birth, reincarnation, dog-eat-dog approaches to life, etc - those are a different matter. These are the references to wisdom of the world: 1 Corinthians 1:20 KJV Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? Read 1 Corinthians 1 | View in parallel | Compare Translations 1 Corinthians 1:21 KJV For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe . Read 1 Corinthians 1 | View in parallel | Compare Translations 1 Corinthians 2:6 KJV Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought : Read 1 Corinthians 2 | View in parallel | Compare Translations 1 Corinthians 3:19 KJV For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written , He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. Read 1 Corinthians 3 | View in parallel | Compare Translations 2 Corinthians 1:12 KJV For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward. Read 2 Corinthians 1 | View in parallel | Compare Translations Quite interesting that the refs are all in Corinthians and not in other books of the Bible (now somebody will try to contradict that!) - where the inhabitants loved to argue. VPW made a bigger deal of "wisdom of the world" than it ought to have been, as a control issue, so that people ended up taking in what VPW said the Bible said, and disputing what is or is not wisdom, rather than simply focusing on getting to know what God really wants and imbibing God's wisdom.

Well done, BB. :eusa_clap:/> Really good financial saving, but the real saving is to your own health, of course.

Accidents can happen, Johniam, though less likely in baseball where there isn't a bounce (like in cricket) to potentially deflect the pitcher's aim. In these days of hard hats and (optional) cages round heads that sort of accident (or design) shouldn't happen at all. Compare and contrast: Baseball helmet and Cricket helmet

Allan, condolences (again) to you and all your family. Your bro in law musta been a real no-nonsense character to have raised all his siblings - and his own kids. Seen it and done it all before - no pulling the wool over his eyes. Nice (?) of some of the Wayfers to attend but I hope they didn't get to speak, mouth off the usual platitudes. I can't imagine what a full-blown Wayfer funeral would be like, but compassion and caring are not words that spring to mind readily. They obviously weren't either of those things when your bro in law went to the home fellowship. Contrasting that with the various funerals I went to last year - I think there were 6, maybe 7 - the Christian funerals were all uplifting, joyous, celebratory and very loving. Mostly, the gospel message and the Hope were held forth, because that's what the deceased would have wanted - but not in a preachy way - in a loving and tender way. The bereaved family were cared for, before, during and after the funeral. The gatherings afterwards were lovely. By contrast, non-Christian (non-believer) funerals were sad, dull events with a gloomy party afterwards. I imagine a Wayfer funeral would be the worst of both. Well done on your bro in law escaping the oppression.

The rapid "no debt" policy was early 90s. Salaried WC came somewhat later, mid or late 90s. I know one person who wanted to enter the WC - had a lovely house, small mortgage, careful in handling money; to enter the WC he had to be debt-free - and ended up selling the house at least $50,000 under value. He could've rented it out for way in excess of the mortgage - TWI could in fact have made money on it, on tithes on the rental income, it coulda paid this person's way through TWI...but no. What sort of financial management is that? To compound the injury, this person didn't even survive the first year of WC. But who would want WC with ties to an area - with a house, kids in good schools, roots in the community... I'm a bit ambivalent about whether or not people should incur debt. I do a lot of debt counselling and see the misery that out of control debts causes in the lives of individuals and families. People need to learn better financial management. For some people - perhaps they should never ever ever have any kind of debt. For others - a carefully thought out debt may lead to a much better physical life. Like it or not, western culture is very debt-oriented and it would be much better to acknowledge that and encourage proper financial planning/management and responsibility than to legalistically ban any form of debt.

Sometimes I rummage through old threads and I found this one. Wow, and to think I daren't buy a house (=going into debt) after they'd kicked me out - and I watched prices rise and rise. Of course now they are falling and falling... I bought a house and I pay less on mortgage than I would if I rented. I found the house after months of searching "in my own strength" after I'd finally got mad with God and said if He really wanted me in this city, he had to do something about somewhere for me to live. Funny thing, but I found this house the very next day. The finance to buy the house came together completely miraculously; I still don't know how it happened. Lot of amazing things happened there. And now I am self-employed, He always makes sure there is money for everything I reasonably need inc the mortgage - and then some left, to give to others. So glad that God has an eye on the future and knows what will be best for each one of us, long-term, in this lifetime.

Only the busboys get T-shirts, JT. But ask nicely and you might get a refill on the coffee.