oldiesman

No I didn't. I said I agreed with you that "The Believer's Enemy -- Fear" is not in the scriptures. So what's your point? Do you want a medal that you found something in PFAL that is not in the scriptures? How about a standing ovation? Adulation? I don't know what your point is, really.

Rocky, I am not answering any more of your questions. I was dumb enough to try, then asked you to reciprocate, and got the back of your hand. No more ... don't keep asking.

Why?

Right.

I am not a mind reader.

Skyrider, I agree with you, it is not in scripture. What's the point?

Can you make larger print I can't see. :) Your message appears to be correct, and the point is?

What's the question?

Goodness geeze. To put your own anyones internet rants and harangues on the same moral equivalence as Jesus has got to be some serious Chutzpah.

right, adding "as opposed to anonymous internet chatter which solves nothing." I suppose a couple of verses about gossip and backbiting may have been appropriate as well, but heaven forbid greasepot posters (myself included in the mix) be occasionally reminded of those things the scriptures ask us not to do, like gossip and backbite, and be reminded about those things the scriptures ask us to do, like speaking one on one to a brother in private.

Since you said there is enough blame to go around, let's also reference some on the left with the "income inequality" rants of Barney Frank & Co. Here's an excerpt from "The Humble Libertarian" about how AIG failed in the first place: BTW I don't think the AIG bailout was necessary at all. Could have gone to Chapter 11 and reorganized like many private industries do. In the free market system, there MUST be consequences for failure else the government takes over like it has and you get socialism/fascism whatever you want to call it, it is another name for tyranny.

Thanks Wordwolf... exactly the point ... face to face, one on one in private.

Skyrider, Might as well get the quote accurate before you discuss it. The exact quote from PFAL is below. The context on the top of the page was "The Believer's Enemy -- Fear"

Perhaps but not always. Because among other things it may not be so readily apparent that he did something wrong or caused hurt in a particular instance. He may think he was correct, for whatever reason. So that is why it is incumbent for the hurting party to go directly one on one to the person who they think caused the hurt. Matthew 18:15

OK fine, then according to that statement "we" take the place of Christ when performing that manifestation. So why single out Vic?

This finger pointing seems too general. I don't know of any abuse performed by Vince, but why don't the folks who feel they were abused go to Vince personally themselves and ask for an apology? I think that'd be the right way to go about it. Vince is still around and having known him I think he'd be willing to apologize if he knew someone was hurting. Geeze. Get up one on one, face to face, man to man, instead of anonymous internet chatter which solves nothing.

Waaaaait a minute, what are you blaming Alan for he's not even an elected official. Just for clarity, what about Democrats Clinton, Pelosi and Biden, who signed the Glass-Steagall Repeal? Was not that deregulation that opened the door for banks to bundle and invest in these bad loans? You know, they all make a great team, along with Barney Frank (the bad loan king of Freedie and Fannie) who now are stealing billions of taxpayer dollars to try to fix the mess they themselves helped create.

In your own mind. He taught that the Word takes the Master's place in us, the place of Christ. (It takes the Master's place in us.) Just read what he wrote. The fantasies are lame. I use it rarely and didn't know it was taken that way but I'll keep that in mind, thanks.

I second that ... it was a noble effort.

I made the conclusion, true, but it is based upon evidence that you repeatedly gloss over.

Well, this is America, and folks have the liberty to choose which religious group they want to attend, or not attend one at all if that is their choice.

I would agree, except he said "lots of the stuff I teach is not original" which means it wasn't ONLY him who knew the stuff, and he never claimed it was. He backed that up both verbally, and with bookstore books. God's promise to him was (if one believes it happened): "I will teach YOU the Word as it has not been known since the first century..." He didn't say "I will teach ONLY YOU the Word as it had not been known ..." Doesn't mean God didn't teach anyone else or that VPW was the ONLY one God taught. Obviously, it wasn't. The words "ONLY you" change the entire meaning.

Perhaps if you find someone who looked at Dr. Wierwille as a replacement for Christ... confessed him as Lord, then for that person, VPW was Lord. But I don't know of anyone who made VPW Lord and Saviour. It simply is a fraudulent theory... intellectual gobbledygook and dishonesty at its lowest.

Good point on transparency and laziness. President Obama and Congressional Democrats were in such a hurry to sign the spending plan they all didn't read it or even attempt to make it transparent for the American people to read and study it. Republicans and some Democrats complained about the lack of transparency and rush to sign. I think the whole procedure was lazy and irresponsible and non-transparent, from Obama on down. Obama pledged differently, so it is more evidence of Obama dishonesty since Americans are not getting something they voted for: transparency. Obama Dodges Transparency Pledge