GT

Using standard Internet skepticism: Pictures or it didn't happen.

Just a reminder that it is against GS policy to post information about the real identity of any poster. Many people choose to remain anonymous for varying reasons and GS will always respect that, irregardless of the person or what they post. This is in no way an endorsement of Anothen, what he did, or what he has posted. There is a reason why we keep the mug shot of another pedophile on the front page of GS. This topic has been discussed at length by the moderators on what to do about it without any consensus -- suffice to say that if Anothen farts in the wrong direction he's out of here. And anyone who knows me personally knows I hold no sympathy for any pedophile. On the other hand, I think Anothen has done GS a service. He has provided a look into the disgusting mind of a pedophile. TWI attracted a lot of messed up people, including pedophiles. And it is a known fact that The Way International covered up their crimes, moved them around, and provided them access to new victims. All indications are that The Way International still supports Mark Naberschnig while he is serving his prison time. Reading this thread, I don't know how anyone could not feel anything but disgust and anger at TWI's leadership. You can configure the forum to ignore any posts and refuse any PMs from anyone. This is done by clicking on the "My Controls" link on the menu, then the "PM Block List" and "Manage Ignored Users".

If you're referring to John Lynn, he has posted here twice -- basically promoting CES. Hi! It's the real me - John Lynn

Excellent topic title.

Finally got tired of seeing "Goos things....." jumping up and down the forum index and fixed the title. Probably will be the last you see of me in this topic...

I believe WAMP5 makes the Apache document root to be at c:\wamp\www. If you put your PHP file in this directory, you should be able to execute it by pointing your browser at: http://localhost/myfile.php

I believe FullCircle quoted 1 Cor 15:19. And we don't care much for stalking posters around the forums. Just a warning.

This is right where it belongs. Remember those commercials with an egg and a frying pan? This is your brain. This is your brain on drugs. Considering the path of destruction of Vic/TWI being collateral damage in doing God's work? Your brain is fried and you're a public service announcement warning others to just say no!

I've been getting addicted to this Firefox plugin called StumbleUpon. I won't disagree that I might need an intervention...

Indeed. I forced my way through the book, reading a few pages each night. Took a few months, but was well worth it. Did you know James used to take a cold water bath every morning (at least until he was killed)?

Too damn lazy to make a phone call and see if she's there yourself? Sounds to me like you're trying to gather information on her current status to see if there's any chance you can hop in the sack with her again.

Here's one of those standard, boring and dry higher-critical textbooks: James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls 1,000 pages of dry, repetitive (how many times do we have to analyze the bathing habits of James?), long-winded reading. But the research is top-notch and well worth the read. Basically, in regards to the current subject, Eisenman shows that Stephen's speech actually belongs to James. A combination of when he was killed by the high priest in about the year 63 C.E., and when he was attacked by Paul and thrown down the steps of the temple, breaking one or both of his legs, leading to the retreat and chase by Paul mentioned in Acts 8. It was re-written to minimize James' role in the first century and promote Paul's. He did identify who Stephen most likely was, but I forget who. All I remember is that he was associated with Paul. I'll have to check out Marcion and Luke-acts.

[Resisting the urge to shoot fish in a barrel] As of about 1 year ago she was still at the compound. Pick up your phone and dial 419 753-2523. When you hear, "God bless you, The Way International. How may I help you?" ask to speak with Ramona Bidon. Specific enough for you? My real name is GreasyTech as far as you're concerned. If you don't like it, get over it.

I was more focusing on the 1st century post-maccabean Jews and before the reorganization done by the pharasies after the Jewish war (of which I know little, except that the book of Daniel was almost not included in the canon because it was thought too hard-corps for the Romans to let them keep). As far as earlier Jewish history, everything I've studied points to Israel being a confederation of polytheistic tribes up until the time of King Josiah -- who "found the book of the law" and the book of Deuteronomy was born, to be followed by the other books at the beginning of the Bible -- haphazardly transforming a polytheistic history into a monotheistic one. It's a fascinating study but it's way off topic. I'm not sure a son with a Gentile name, born from a Gentile father and a Jewish mother would be considered a Jew (in the 1st century). From what I understand, the father's religion was the religion of the house and thus the son's religion. If the Gentile father converted to Judaism, then it seems more likely the son would get a Hebrew name so that he could assimilate into the new religion more readily. I'm sure there are exceptions. But seven people promoted by the people with Gentile names? Reading Acts 6 and 7 is like reading a book on U.S. history about the revolutionary war. You come on a section that talks about Chief Running Bull defeating the British at Gettysburg. If this is the only book you had, you would pretty much have to take it at its word. But given other history sources, reading this jumps out as something not being right. Has anyone had the thought that the text in Acts might be corrupt?

Try calling the compound in Ohio. Last I heard, she was still there.

You already know it all, like me? Yes names can change through translations. Best example of that is the name of God himself, Jehovah. Jehovah is the slaughtered form of Yahweh. It came into English from the Septuagint, which came from Hebrew. But it doesn't change the fact that the word Jehovah is Hebrew in origin. And Stephen is Greek. Can any of our Jewish history experts honestly say, given the black and white, hard-corps, monotheistic theocracy of the Jewish society in the first half of the first century: a) That a father would give his son a Gentile name. b) A large group of Jews would select such a person to be a leader over them. It would be like an Islam father naming his son George. It just ain't going to happen. Josephus was an Essene, or a group close to them. When the fighting broke out, he decided he'd rather live than fight to the death. He dumped his religion and joined the Romans. Flavius is a title. He worked closely with Titus, a.k.a Flavius Titus, as he destroyed Jerusalem. He would have been considered a traitor by his former kin.

Too blunt?

Actually, hating the Gentile invaders of their country and wanting to kill them and drive them out is right in line with the Old Testament. People's names do not change in different languages. There is only one pronunciation of a person's name, no matter what language it is transliterated to. Eh Jose? That's funny! There is no Jesus in Greek (well, at least until Christianity took over). When appearing in a Greek text, It is transliterated from the Hebrew word for Joshua. About the only ones who chose the assimilate route were those who could take advantage of it -- namely the Sadducees. They were able to gain power by cooperating with the Romans. Any cursory reading of the dead sea scrolls, which are 1st century source documents unaltered through the last 2,000 years, shows that these people despised, hated, and wanted either dead or gone everyone Roman or Jew who cooperated with them. The fact that the whole region exploded in the late 60's C.E. in a bloody revolt that lasted years should speak loudly enough as to how the Jews felt about the Romans. Even after being trapped within Jerusalem for 3 years, cut off from any supply of food, people starving to death, reports of cannibalism, and threat of destruction of the temple they refused to surrender and give Jerusalem back to the Romans. So they were slaughtered and the temple destroyed. Even if a few wanted to assimilate, they would never name their kids with Gentile names. The poor kids would be ostricized in that society.

Andrew and Philip are also problem names. Even worse because they occur in the Gospels, before "Pentecost". Philip -> Philippi? -> a Greek city? -> populated with Philippians? -> a.k.a Gentiles? Given how much the Jews hated the Greeks from the time Alexander conquered them through to when the Romans took away their hard fought independence from Greece, I think it's a safe assumption they would not name their sons after them. Especially given their hard-corps monotheistic religious culture and the Greek and Roman's polytheistic one being pushed on them. I also think that newborn sons were named after someone in their lineage. The account of John the Baptist is a good example of it -- when everyone got upset that he was named John and there was no one in the family with that name.

I don't consider PFAL an authoritative source for much of anything, but even Vic made a big deal about Peter going into a Gentile house because he would be "called on the carpet in Jerusalem." The text of Acts does support this position though. Peter did have to answer for going to Cornelius. And the proof that God did indeed invite the Gentiles to their new religion was that Peter heard them speak in tongues. This all occurred in Acts 10 & 11 -- after Stephen was stoned. Acts 6 Being chosen by the people, set before the apostles, prayed over and hands laid on is generally considered an ordination by most groups. Even TWI considers this section an ordination of the seven. So how could someone with a Greek/Gentile name be in such a position well before they considered Gentiles anything other than dogs?

A better question is why is there a man with a Greek (a.k.a. gentile) name, risen to a leadership position, before the official bringing in of the gentiles in acts 10? Stephen = Setphanos = Crown. In fact, all the names of the magnificent 7 listed in Acts 6:5 are Greek names. They also happen to be names of friends of Paul....

No idea, but I think I need one.

Modular chair