Rocky

SMH. We do NOT have "God's Word." Anywhere. There has not been discovery and/or verification of any original manuscripts. Therefore, your declaration, which I quoted in this post, is nothing more than an exposition of your belief. Geez... I wish you had emotional intelligence, legit critical thinking/analysis skills, and effective communication skills.

Without much insight.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/WHMaeTn4NK0 This one is embodiment of the prodigal son or the lost sheep parables. Has anyone ever seen Victor Wierwille or Loy Martindale or any other twi official act like this when someone returned to the fold?

Yes, that's what I was considering as benefit to the business/retailer... Definitely mitigates some labor costs and security risks.

Not a direct parallel but this inspired me to think of the gospel story of the good Samaritan.

Wonderful!

https://youtube.com/shorts/4GI4ToJqLaw Apparently the clip has an emoji in the title and the GSC platform doesn't like those. I submit this to starkly illustrate the contrast between twi and love.

Indeed, the "subject matter" overlaps. However, it was (as I understand it) brought up to primarily comment on and illustrate how and that twi behavior standards (i.e unwritten rules aka mores) were completely divorced from what love is and what love does. Just my take on it anyway.

I hope that was satisfactory, Oldiesman.

LOL... seeing the word live there was a simple case of cognitive dissonance.

And easier to steal undetected.

Let's face it. The technology has arrived. Don't blame the government. It's far more secure for retail establishments to transact with cards. The hassles of dealing with cash make financial institution fees a simple cost of doing business, and less expensive to the business establishments. So, yes, we are moving in that direction. However, I don't see cash as being outlawed any time soon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry

Speaking of LOVE... this seems to illustrated it well.

Should we check the history of Xerox? Oh, and btw, here's an intriguing YT short about LOVE. Do you think the best way to love this puppy is to love his words?

Sounds like you are still trying to rationalize/justify your apparent bibliolatry. Which means you (again) seem to completely miss Charity's point. Though others apparently DID get it. So, to you, walking in love equates to what the Pharisees did? Knowing scriptures (and collaterals) better than anyone else and self-righteously flaunting that knowledge?

Is that where you want to leave this? If YOU believe Charity did not receive the message you intended to send, what's your responsibility? Are you content with blaming her? Or, do you seek excellence in communication and figure out how to make your intended message more clear to your readers?

And a legend in his own mind?

And as per usual, he had a lame rationalization for it.

Of course!

Which he went and actually did.

Isn't that circular "reasoning?"

Alas... Mike's "reasoning?"