WordWolf

I've never heard the NAME "Idiocracy" before.

How ridiculous your logic is: the day of Pentecost was a SPECIAL CASE, and no verse exists to indicate- either in Acts or elsewhere- that this was meant to ever be repeated. Hello. I Corinthians 14:23, 27, 28, 40. 23Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. 40But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner. ====== Those believers were together and all of them spoke in tongues at the same time. They were PRACTICING ERROR. I agree. This is also the ONLY instructions concerning speaking in tongues when Christians aren't alone. Finding pretext to disregard them is NOT based on a verse of Scripture. It is, as vpw would have called it, "private interpretation." ======== As to "a black cloud coming into the room as soon as the fourth person spoke", Paul certainly would have pointed out that this crude caricature wouldn't happen- but that doesn't mean it wasn't a bad idea and not to be done- and certainly not to be made a POLICY. If Corinthians was correcting PRACTICAL error, they were already DOING THIS and Paul was instructed to tell them to STOP. As well live in Corinth, read this, and conclude that the absence of a "black cloud" meant Paul was wrong. WHEN Scripture says something's not to be done,it's unScriptural to say the opposite. Like when some verses say to only have sex with one's spouse, and someone tells other people that God wouldn't mind for them to commit adultery with them, or that orgies are permitted by God but not "best." Or when an Epistle says not to do something, and excuses are found to do it anyway.

twi never seems to give a straight answer on lcm's status. He WAS fired and kicked off grounds. Whenever that happened to everyone else, they were denied any connection to twi, their FAMILY was kicked out and off grounds, and of course no support was ever given. Oh, and their reputation was smeared. With lcm, of course, this is all different. People aren't even allowed to ASK QUESTIONS about him- and asking will draw twi's ire on the questioner. lcm's family is still on grounds, supported by twi and Donna's paycheck exceeds SOME OF THE VPs. Not bad for not really having a job. twi quietly still supports lcm. He's lived in twi-owned houses, and nobody's answering if he's getting any money from them. Of course, since twi's pretty much guaranteed he doesn't need to pay alimony and is supporting his family, that ALONE is considerable support.

"... but then the brothers started to argue about how to divide the money they got for the kava root. The oldest said that since it was his idea to bring it to the city, he should get more. The youngest objected, saying he was the one who'd tended the field where... " "One of these diodes connects the warhead to the power source... the other is the firing mechanism." "How do you know that?" "I saw a design schematic once." "Where?" "At the Ministry of Trade on Karemma. We sell these torpedoes to the Jem'Hadar." "You're kidding." "No." "I thought you said you'd never sold substandard merchandise... It was supposed to explode on impact, wasn't it?" "Maybe I should offer them a refund..."

For one thing, the claim that Holocaust deniers approach things in a fashion even vaguely approaching logical.

Oh, and for the benefit of those (or one) who don't see the benefit of it, I'm going to ask a slightly self-serving question. Are others of you appreciating my posts on this thread to date? The ones about what God knows, of course, not the ones about rudeness. If you are, please say so.

So it's their OPINIONS that there would have BEEN no 9/11 attacks if the US didn't support Israel. So, it's disapproval that the US has Israel as an ally and supports it that gives Holocaust denial its appeal? They're angry about Israel as an ally so they rewrite history in retaliation, or to vent?

Actually, I've posted some things, and others have posted some things. In some things, we've agreed, and in some we have not. We call that "discussion." Personally, I'd prefer more posting at the moment from the others, but I am responding to what they posted, and they are responding to my posts. We STILL call that "discussion." If my posts-which ARE including the verses- are too long for your taste, sorry, you won't find my posts to your taste. They ARE perfectly serviceable posts, and OTHERS are gaining benefits from them. My posts ARE appreciated by others, and if you really cared about the topic, you might receive benefits from them, especially since I answered a number of your questions. As for you, you've been a veritable one-note orchestra for several pages. If that's not "soap-boxing", then nothing is. If you don't understand that, then YOU'LL get nowhere in this discussion. You'll waste the time of the posters, and gain little or nothing from what IS posted. Actually, once or twice is "reminding." The systematic reposting of the same thing over and over with no other posting is "spamming." I had responded to you and said I WILL get back to you eventually, and you insisted on repeating the question ad nauseum. That's not "reminding". I've given this some thought, and I've made the following conclusion. I actually was done with page 3, didn't see anything I needed to respond to on page 4, and was thus next to approach page 5, and your original question. So, I was GOING to address it DIRECTLY. (I've addressed its subject already, but not phrased as a direct answer to you.) However, I've considered, and I find the continual hectoring to be discouraged. If I respond to what's acknowledged to be only there to be a TRAP, I don't give benefit to the other posters. I MIGHT be able to teach you something. However, at this point, I'd be rewarding you for poor manners, and I see no benefit for anyone to do that. So, I will not be addressing your question after all. That's a specific change of mind as the direct result of the poor manners you've evidenced the past few pages. (In other words, if you had not been so persistent in rudeness, I WOULD have addressed it, and have reconsidered DIRECTLY because you did so.) I can't control your posts, neither of content, intent or style. I don't, however, have to ENCOURAGE your posts or anyone elses, especially when I see poor behaviour. I don't wish to encourage it, and you can't FORCE me to post to your satisfaction either. I asked you nicely to exercise common courtesy. You refused. You DEMANDED-repeatedly- I answer your question. I am NOW refusing. You are free to throw a tantrum over it all you want. It's NOT going to benefit the other posters, however, and they'll hardly welcome it. If you want to make a SPECIFIC on Moses and the overseers, feel free. If you're going to play coy, then feel free as well. I'd address a SPECIFIC, but not grammar-school games. (You are free to throw a tantrum over THAT as well.) Actually, we WERE going to see a post on it (one post is not a discussion, posts from several people are a discussion) on it within the last 24 hours. Now we won't be seeing one.

Your post "quoting" mine had nothing to do with my post. I'm still proceeding forwards in the thread. I've completed my review of page 3. I don't address page 5 while addressing page 3. I also am not eager to address anything someone intentionally introduced- by their own admission- specifically TO TRAP ME. If you want me to address this question, you might try "patience" and "waiting until I get there." It works GREAT for everyone else. I even addressed one of your EARLIER questions just now. If you asked because you CARED ABOUT THE ANSWER, you might appreciate it. If, however, you asked it only to "score points", then you might NOT appreciate it. And you did it again. Honestly, I'm currently under the impression that your SOLE REASON for participating in what's OTHERWISE a nice discussion about God's Knowledge is to lay traps and see who you can have fall in them. Since your posts have COMPLETELY FIXATED on one ADMITTED trap for the past FEW PAGES and tantrums that no one's fallen into it, I don't see any other LOGICAL conclusion.

Continuing in I Samuel... I Samuel 8:22. "22The LORD said to Samuel, "Listen to their voice and appoint them a king." So Samuel said to the men of Israel, "Go every man to his city." I Samuel 9:15-17 15Now a day before Saul's coming, the LORD had revealed this to Samuel saying, 16"About this time tomorrow I will send you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over My people Israel; and he will deliver My people from the hand of the Philistines For I have regarded My people, because their cry has come to Me." 17When Samuel saw Saul, the LORD said to him, "Behold, the man of whom I spoke to you! This one shall rule over My people." God has Samuel anoint Saul as king, then has the nation assemble for the announcement. I Samuel 10:17-27 17Thereafter Samuel called the people together to the LORD at Mizpah; 18and he said to the sons of Israel, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'I brought Israel up from Egypt, and I delivered you from the hand of the Egyptians and from the power of all the kingdoms that were oppressing you.' 19"But you have today rejected your God, who delivers you from all your calamities and your distresses; yet you have said, 'No, but set a king over us!' Now therefore, present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes and by your clans." 20Thus Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken by lot. 21Then he brought the tribe of Benjamin near by its families, and the Matrite family was taken. And Saul the son of Kish was taken; but when they looked for him, he could not be found. 22Therefore they inquired further of the LORD, "Has the man come here yet?" So the LORD said, "Behold, he is hiding himself by the baggage." 23So they ran and took him from there, and when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward. 24Samuel said to all the people, "Do you see him whom the LORD has chosen? Surely there is no one like him among all the people " So all the people shouted and said, "Long live the king!" 25Then Samuel told the people the ordinances of the kingdom, and wrote them in the book and placed it before the LORD. And Samuel sent all the people away, each one to his house. 26Saul also went to his house at Gibeah; and the valiant men whose hearts God had touched went with him. 27But certain worthless men said, "How can this one deliver us?" And they despised him and did not bring him any present. But he kept silent. God made it clear this was the best of the options they had chosen to limit themselves to. And Saul was really tall, and looked like a king. Probably looked vigorous, a fighter-type. We do know later they said he slew "thousands" and this went over, so I think he DID look the fighting type. Was Saul always giving WISE decisions? Well.... I Samuel 14:24-30 24Now the men of Israel were hard-pressed on that day, for Saul had put the people under oath, saying, "Cursed be the man who eats food before evening, and until I have avenged myself on my enemies." So none of the people tasted food. 25All the people of the land entered the forest, and there was honey on the ground. 26When the people entered the forest, behold, there was a flow of honey; but no man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath. 27But Jonathan had not heard when his father put the people under oath; therefore, he put out the end of the staff that was in his hand and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes brightened. 28Then one of the people said, "Your father strictly put the people under oath, saying, 'Cursed be the man who eats food today.'" And the people were weary. 29Then Jonathan said, "My father has troubled the land. See now, how my eyes have brightened because I tasted a little of this honey. 30"How much more, if only the people had eaten freely today of the spoil of their enemies which they found! For now the slaughter among the Philistines has not been great." His own son knew that it was dramatic, but stupid, and hampered the people. Fighting means you need food and sleep. Depriving soldiers of either is to hobble them in combat. Let's skip over the incident with Amalek and Saul's disobedience in that one, and God selecting David as Saul's replacement. I Samuel 17:1- 1Now the Philistines gathered their armies for battle; and they were gathered at Socoh which belongs to Judah, and they camped between Socoh and Azekah, in Ephes-dammim. 2Saul and the men of Israel were gathered and camped in the valley of Elah, and drew up in battle array to encounter the Philistines. 3The Philistines stood on the mountain on one side while Israel stood on the mountain on the other side, with the valley between them. 4Then a champion came out from the armies of the Philistines named Goliath, from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. 5He had a bronze helmet on his head, and he was clothed with scale-armor which weighed five thousand shekels of bronze. 6He also had bronze greaves on his legs and a bronze javelin slung between his shoulders. 7The shaft of his spear was like a weaver's beam, and the head of his spear weighed six hundred shekels of iron; his shield-carrier also walked before him. 8He stood and shouted to the ranks of Israel and said to them, "Why do you come out to draw up in battle array? Am I not the Philistine and you servants of Saul? Choose a man for yourselves and let him come down to me. 9"If he is able to fight with me and kill me, then we will become your servants; but if I prevail against him and kill him, then you shall become our servants and serve us." 10Again the Philistine said, "I defy the ranks of Israel this day; give me a man that we may fight together." 11When Saul and all Israel heard these words of the Philistine, they were dismayed and greatly afraid. Now, Israel really needs a CHAMPION. They need a really BIG guy, one who can GO FIGHT THEIR BATTLES. Do they have such a guy? *coughSaulcough* Well, Saul-who the people wanted SPECIFICALLY for this, was busy being afraid. That's how David ended up getting tapped for the job. I'll skip the details, you all know where to find them. ========= Hm. I skipped the verse where the original question was raised. I Samuel 15:10-11 "10Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying, 11"I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands " And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night." Looks like we have to look over the Amalek incident after all. I Samuel 15:1-11 1Then Samuel said to Saul, "The LORD sent me to anoint you as king over His people, over Israel; now therefore, listen to the words of the LORD. 2"Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt. 3'Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'" 4Then Saul summoned the people and numbered them in Telaim, 200,000 foot soldiers and 10,000 men of Judah. 5Saul came to the city of Amalek and set an ambush in the valley. 6Saul said to the Kenites, "Go, depart, go down from among the Amalekites, so that I do not destroy you with them; for you showed kindness to all the sons of Israel when they came up from Egypt." So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites. 7So Saul defeated the Amalekites, from Havilah as you go to Shur, which is east of Egypt. 8He captured Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword. 9But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were not willing to destroy them utterly; but everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed. 10Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying, 11"I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands " And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night. Saul made the deliberate decision to disobey God as soon as he found it convenient. Then God said he regretted making Saul the king. Did God know Saul would do this before making Saul king? Yes- God even warned the people this would happen. Did God regret making Saul king anyway? Yes-He JUST said so right here. Does this pose a problem? Not to God, nor to Scripture. Thus, if there IS a problem, it's in our UNDERSTANDING, and we need to adjust our understanding to match Scripture. God knew long before that this was coming, and He didn't like it. He elected to allow the people their choice, stupid though it was, warned them-and they disregarded that, and minimized the damage-by giving them the least-disastrous choice of king. (ANY choice was bad, God found the least-bad.) God STILL didn't have to LIKE any of that. Since He allowed people the chance to make their freewill decisions, He put up with it ANYWAY. Let's also not ignore the context.... I Samuel 15:10-12. 10Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying, 11"I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands " And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night. 12Samuel rose early in the morning to meet Saul; and it was told Samuel, saying, "Saul came to Carmel, and behold, he set up a monument for himself, then turned and proceeded on down to Gilgal." God, at the time, was telling Samuel that Samuel needed to confront Saul over his transgressions. He began by telling Samuel that He regretted making Saul king. (Didn't say He didn't see it coming- He just said He regretted it.) God COULD have told Samuel, specifically, that this would be the incident that Samuel would need to deal with eventually- if He wanted to show off. Instead, He lets Samuel (and Saul and the nation) to interact in a linear fashion like everyone else. In doing so, He allowed them to interact and exercise their free will entirely.

One question on the table then becomes, "The Bible claims God has an infinite understanding and knows all things. (Omniscience.) God has been said to regret decisions. How can God regret a decision if He knew the result before making the decision?" At this moment, we'll look at one such decision and examine the process. I Samuel 8:1-9 (NASB except where noted otherwise) 1And it came about when Samuel was old that he appointed his sons judges over Israel. 2Now the name of his firstborn was Joel, and the name of his second, Abijah; they were judging in Beersheba. 3His sons, however, did not walk in his ways, but turned aside after dishonest gain and took bribes and perverted justice. 4Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah; 5and they said to him, "Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations." 6But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to judge us " And Samuel prayed to the LORD. 7The LORD said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them. 8"Like all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them up from Egypt even to this day--in that they have forsaken Me and served other gods--so they are doing to you also. 9"Now then, listen to their voice; however, you shall solemnly warn them and tell them of the procedure of the king who will reign over them." Here's the setup. God had set up the Judges (as seen in "the Book of Judges" and explained in the opening chapters) to lead the people and God would be with the judge. When the people would forsake God, they would get themselves in trouble. Eventually, they would turn back to God and ask for help. God helped by raising up a Judge, to lead them and stand for God to the people, delivering them. As long as the Judge lived, he (or she) stood for God, and led the people, and things were fine. After the Judge died, the people would forsake God, getting themselves in trouble.... This was a repeating pattern across the entire book. In this cast was Samuel, a Judge appointed by God. Two problems developed in this situation. 1) Samuel appointed judges on his own. I suppose he thought this made sense- after all, he raised them, and (presumably) taught them about God, and justice, and they saw him make godly decisions for the good of the people. Plus, they were his sons, and he'd want them to have good jobs. Those are not bad reasons, in and of themselves. However, for the position of Judge, God Almighty reserved EXCLUSIVE right to choose them. They had a great deal of responsibility, and could make mistakes or grow corrupt, thus, God-who sees the hearts- is the only proper selector. That was the first problem. 2) The people were idiots. The system had worked fine until the current guys. Instead of saying "the current officeholders suck- ask God for a REAL Judge that won't suck", they said "We want to keep up with the Joneses. All the other countries have kings- we want a king." Samuel, naturally, saw this as big trouble, and went to God. God reminded them that the people had rejected GOD as supreme ruler, and it wasn't really about Samuel. After hundreds of years of God pulling them out of messes, they wanted this. (Idiots.) HOWEVER, God was going to let them have what they wanted- a King in place of God Almighty- so long as he was VERY CLEAR what the consequences were. The people were being TRENDY and had NO IDEA what kind of messes they were going to get into. So, God warned them FIRST. 10So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who had asked of him a king. 11He said, "This will be the procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots. 12"He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and some to do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13"He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14"He will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves and give them to his servants. 15"He will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards and give to his officers and to his servants. 16"He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys and use them for his work. 17"He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants. 18"Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." 19Nevertheless, the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel, and they said, "No, but there shall be a king over us, 20that we also may be like all the nations, that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles." 21Now after Samuel had heard all the words of the people, he repeated them in the LORD'S hearing. -------------- God had Samuel let everybody know the CONSEQUENCES of having a king. Unlike the current system, they'd end up WORKING FOR HIM, not him WORKING FOR THEM, which is what they wanted. He'll take some of their property, and their people, and possessions. And they'll realize too late that it was a stupid idea in the first place. Which will be too late to fix anything. The people blew all that off, and said "We want a king to rule us AND FIGHT OUR BATTLES." So, Samuel tells God what they said. Of course, God knew all that, but Samuel had to report in anyway, and find out what God said. God COULD have saved some time when Samuel walked in and said "I know what they said-I'm God, remember? This is what you do..." But He did not. Why? For Samuel's sake. I expect Samuel needed to get some of it out of his system. Makes a lot more sense than God not knowing what the people said... Was it God's Will that the people have a king? No, God warned them WHY it was a Stupid Idea. However, they insisted. God, at this point, can do several things. He was going to honour His covenant, and not just abandon them, so that's off the table. He COULD have overridden their decision, and selected a Judge, and announced "Here's your Judge. Accept Him or I will smack you up and down the valley." He COULD have reached out and overridden their free will, and MADE them accept another Judge. He COULD have let them do their own election and pick whoever they wanted. He COULD give them a king- the best of all the bad choices. He chose to do the last of those options. It had the virtue of affording them less harm than the option before it, and the other choices were unacceptable to Him.

1:"Unfortunately, we've found there's little profit in trading with the Federation. In order to comply with your commerce laws, we've had to pay a series of taxes and fees that have made the cost of doing business with you too high." 2:"What sort of taxes and fees are you referring to?" 1:"For example... on a recent shipment of Karemman Fleece, a four percent surcharge was added to pay for inspecting the cargo for 'changeling infiltrators.'" 2:"What?" 3:"You never know where they might be hiding." 1:"Another three percent of the shipment's value was lost due to 'unforeseen' currency fluctuations." 3:"There was a run on the Bolian Credit Exchange... played havoc with the markets..." 1:"A six percent tariff was imposed to help offset the 'lost income of Tarkalian sheep herders.'" 3:"Hardworking people... you have to feel for them..." 1:"Should I go on, Captain... ?" 2:"No... I think you've made your point..." "Sensor range was limited, so we learned to use an old active-scan system to navigate." "It works by echo-location... we send out a modulated tetrion pulse, and if it reflects off the hull of a ship, we can approximate its location." "Won't these pulses give away our position as well?" "We'll have to alter course and speed after each one." "Helm, take us to a higher altitude." "We're gaining altitude..." "How can you tell?" "I've got the lobes..." "You've got them, too. It's a Ferengi expression. Usually, when we say someone has "the lobes," we mean they have a keen business sense. That's you. I'll admit it. You fooled me. I thought you were just another easy mark. But you saw right through my little scam, and taught me a thing or two about doing business in the Gamma Quadrant. I guess I've gotten lazy. I'm used to dealing with the Federation. You think I was cheating you, you have no idea what I was doing to them. They still haven't caught on. And if someone like me can put one over on them, think of what someone like you could do." "Someone with my... lobes?" "Exactly. And I'm just the man to help you do it. we could become rich, rich beyond our dreams." "You... are despicable." I hate the Gamma Quadrant... "

I don't think you're going to get anyone who saw it. For that matter, we may not have HEARD of it. Especially if Raf was correct.

Must be.

So, the local fellowship in your area was NOT the direct result of the personal arrival of any of the "groovy Christians" and THEIR direct involvement? Seems you posted that before- which explained why YOUR local group deviated so completely from most of the STATE, including all of NYC. Seeing that allowed me to look at your experience and say "despite being in almost an entirely different MINISTRY than me, this could have happened not far away, and he could be telling the truth."

And if the role of "the class" wasn't more of a "do as I say, and this is what I say" as opposed to "do as I do (and this is NOT what I do), that wouldn't have happened.

A few cosmetic changes have developed in some of the offshoots, but many things have stayed the same. The leaders are unquestionably right, the answers are capsulized in their progam/class, if it didn't work, take it again. If it still doesn't give you answers, the problem is YOU. As someone else said, a lot of the questions it answered were provided by THEM.I can pose a BUNCH of questions I'm going to provide the answers to, and then provide them, thus proving my efficacy as well. A lot of us ex-twi'ers, familiar with that process, can. I think 1 evening, at most, should be sufficient to cover the basics of the entire 12 sessions that people REALLY want: God loves you, God wants you to understand, etc. Those are hardly unique to twi or ex-twi, although many may not have heard them- or heard them in a form they wanted to hear- before twi. We know vpw himself grew up going regularly to church, decided on going into preaching, completed his curriculum in undergraduate and graduate studies (and Princeton Theological Seminary, although it is not Princeton, is a respected institution for the education of Christians) and was preaching for A YEAR before he claims he FIRST claimed to have heard that the Bible was God's Word, at least "believing it." I have great difficulty picturing a man making it through SEMINARY without ever HEARING that, so to me, the catch is "hearing it such that I believed it." If you finally accepted it in the pfal package despite having heard it other places, hey, I'm glad for you. But the Bible being of God, God loves you, etc, that's not a secret, let alone a GREAT secret. Of course, if you're going to accept vpw's word for it, it is "THE GREATEST SECRET IN THE WORLD TODAY". (As opposed to, say, the exact time of Christ's return. Now, THAT's a REAL secret.) EXACTLY.

That's great. Then again, IIRC, she heard during the "best" days/times of twi, face-to-face from some of the "groovy Christians", the hijacked hippies from the House of Acts. No surprise THEY weren't high-pressure salesmen- the corps was still in its early development then, and there was no Dale Carnegie section in it-if they were even IN vpw's corps. THEY were about enjoyment and blessings. If twi as a whole had been about that, there'd be no GSC. Me, I got the later stuff, and my twig was much lower in pressure. That meant I got to attend a few before they mentioned signing up for "the class." However, when we had a corps drop in, he immediately began pushing for signups. When he found out I was the only one there who wasn't "a grad", they practically had to pull him off me and keep repeating "he's signed up!" At that moment, I might have been the ONLY person signed up locally, in fact. What a shame we all couldn't experience the groovy Christians who were the backbone of the "early twi" experience. (Actually, the REAL early twi days supposedly would run from 1942-1968, before there were groovy Christians. Of that period of over 20 years, we haven't heard any personal accounts, membership being small enough to barely displace water in a hot tub across the entire "era".

Having spent some time listening to all posters from the earliest days they've posted from, and read what twi themselves have written, it's a little more complicated. Despite them wishing otherwise, twi was greatly dependent upon the times and the "Zeitgeist." twi didn't really exist beyond a double-handful of people- despite having pfal and the pfal books- until vpw selected the hippies of the House of Acts in Haight-Ashbury, and recruited some of them into twi, and convinced THEM to be his "sales force" for pfal. Almost everyone who ever posted here can trace back, and back, and eventually point to one of the handful as they were assigned to different locations. (For example, if Steve H went to a place, he convinced people there twi had something to offer, and they joined, and got involved, and THEY convinced people twi had something to offer, and THOSE people joined, and so on. That process slowed when the days of the hippie waned, and vpw indoctrinated people out of the spontaneity and liberty that was once such a draw. So, fewer people were convinced, and membership growth SLOWED. However, with so many people now IN twi, a slower rate was STILL a sizeable number of people joining each year. As legalism got stricter and stricter-which began at the end of vpw's reign as he put more corps on-location locally. (Many corps absorbed the loyalty and obedience vpw wanted them to learn, so this served him well when they did.) Once lcm was in charge, this process sped up a LOT. However, it was already in place. lcm was a lot more efficient, however, at choking all the spontaneity, joy, and freedom from people, which led to membership numbers freefalling to current numbers of a few thousand adults where tens of thousands freely acted and were involved. All true. lcm learned it when HE was in the corps, he passed it on to all the corps when vpw put him in charge,and he imposed it on EVERYONE eventually. By this time, he was convinced this was "normal", since he'd spent almost his entire adult life fulltime on-grounds at twi. True, and a pity, true it's a pity, and a pity it's true. I'm confident those were good things. They weren't ALL things in twi, but those you mentioned were good things. They meant people's lives, and those are not minor things! True. So long as you don't say "that relationship=reproducing twi-classic all over again," I can get behind this. Of course, I only speak for myself. I'll take your word for it that you saw it then. I'm also being honest that anyone looking back and trying to reconstruct thinking in the past can sound a lot smarter than they would honestly have been at the time, since they can now suppose they'd happen to have passed judgements that reflected what actually happened. So, I THINK this would have been obvious to me if I'd been close enough, but since I was not, I can't guarantee it.

It's pretty much a consensus here that there was a least a dozen competent top people who would have stepped up if asked, all of whom would have been a better choice than lcm. (Which ones they are sometimes vary depending on the speaker- since some would name cg, some would name vf, some would name neither, and so on.) I don't think ANY of them-based on what I've seen since- would have been a PERFECT choice, but a few would have been very good choices, and most of the "short list" would have been less awful even at their worst when in office. People who were close have reported that vpw was recommended to a lot of people- none of whom were lcm. However, he decided lcm would be it despite all considerations offered to him. He gave one of two answers to the few he answered as to why: A) lcm was the corps director, therefore, the corps would follow him without question B) lcm never gave him an argument-whenever vpw told him to do something, he just did it, no questions. Hindsight is 20/20, but if someone could not give me better reasons than that today, I'd know the organization in question was steering on a course for destruction.

That's pretty much what he's saying, I think. It's essentially one thing I'm saying- we experience time moving from past thru present to future, and to God, they're all simultaneous, since He has full Understanding of all of them, and has the power to act fully in all of them. Isaiah 57:15 (King James Version) King James Version (KJV) 15For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones. It looks like it from here. Then again, it's not QUITE the "smoking gun" when King James English isn't relied on, so it's not exactly fair or honest for us to do so.... Isaiah 57:15 (New American Standard Bible) New American Standard Bible (NASB) 15For thus says the high and exalted One Who lives forever, whose name is Holy, "I dwell on a high and holy place, And also with the contrite and lowly of spirit In order to revive the spirit of the lowly And to revive the heart of the contrite." I think that, despite this not being a "smoking gun", that we're still representing the concepts fairly, accurately and truly. Please note that not having the family since He already knows us in the future is not an option- God would produce a time-paradox, where he prevented events from happening and they happened anyway. The old example in science fiction you know from Back to the Future- if you prevent your parents from ever meeting, you prevent your birth, which prevents you from going back in time, which prevents you from stopping them from meeting, which means they DO meet, and give birth to you- so now you can go back in time and prevent them from meeting..... It can make the head hurt. So, God, being sensible, doesn't miracle up a prefabricated "family" designed to love Him, he goes thru the trouble of raising them the slow, old-fashioned way. He also avoids making paradoxes and other problems. God doesn't just miracle away things and erase rules He's made (like "past" and "present", and "cause and effect.") ======== In other news, I have to take on faith that, to God, we're worth all the energy He's invested in us. Me, I don't see it. I think He's wasting a lot of energy on some barely-appreciative, and barely-loving, fractious children. To someone All-Knowing, this makes sense. So, I'll have to trust Him that we're worth it.

I already answered that in the past few posts....

You know, if you were less eager to insult me, you might be less eager to perceive insult WHERE NONE WAS OFFERED. I'm going largely from the front of the thread to the back, with pauses for what I consider are germane posts on this thread.So, I'm responding to MOST posts from days ago. I don't see anyone else perceiving insult in this. But it's particular with you. And I was writing a pair of very long posts, and didn't LOOK for your post while I was posting them both. This may surprise you, but when I post here, it's often to say something, and often that's not necessarily something YOU find a benefit, nor addressed to you at all, but OTHERS here find the use. This thread isn't about me- I deliberately stayed quiet for the beginning for that reason. It's also not about you, OR you and me. Your second request-which was NOT a "polite request" but an insinuation I wasn't replying for some reasonor other of less-than-innocent intent- was seen by me after I posted the second of the 2 lengthy posts. Actually, it would have been less polite if I just rattled off some quick answer to your question-suggesting that I didn't think it was worthy of serious consideration. Instead, I said I'd get back to it- so I could address it with a full measure of attention. Somehow, you perceive that as an insult. When you rephrased it, and I saw the rephrasal, it's obvious the question you want specifically addressed is one of Calvinism, which is not my interest, nor what I'm working on at this time. I wasn't having any discussion on Calvinism-others were. I have other aspects of this that I consider warrant more of my attention, and I'm addressing THOSE, both in my own mind and in the posts earlier on in the thread. I didn't say I'll NEVER address this, but if I do, it will be when I've dismissed what I consider are higher priority. So you're admitting that bringing in Calvinism-or those specific questions of Calvinism-were "to trap me." The rest of us were having an intelligent, cordial discussion about the knowledge of God. We're discussing in good faith. I'd rather complete THAT discussion before delving into trick questions. I certainly haven't been giving YOU trick questions-I've been giving you questions in good faith and in light of the posts already here-thus, questions with no surprises hidden in them. So, you're saying I can't expect the same from you. That's a shame. If you were less interested in "scoring points" and more interested in the exchange of knowledge, you'd get more from this thread. As it is, it's really not supposed to be about you, me, or both of us. You seem determined to change that, however.... Each of us can ASK others nicely to stay on topic- and I do so. Many times, they do. Many times, they do not. Since neither of us runs this messageboard, we can't do more than that. This came as news to you? No, just in a matter-of-fact fashion.I was stating a fact. I don't couch those in flowery prose, most of the time. You may have PERCEIVED insult, but none was offered. A) The rest of us are having a nice discussion without anyone having to give any sort of rules. You just admitted that-while we're doing that- you're upset that you're trying to trap (your words, not mine) us and getting angry when we're not satisfying your trap. B) You're the one showing anger and pushing a run of interruptions because we're not posting the way YOU want and falling into your INTENTIONAL trap. And you're trying to claim that refusing to do so, and carrying on with a polite discussion, is "bullying." How many people do you think you're fooling there?

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 (NASB) 13The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. 14For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil. =========== Now, how about a partial answer as to why God doesn't just smash all evildoers NOW like some masked vigilante? Matthew 13:24-30. (NASB) 24Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25"But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. 26"But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. 27"The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?' 28"And he said to them, 'An enemy has done this!' The slaves said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?' 29"But he said, 'No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30'Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn."'" Matthew 13:36-43. (NASB) 36Then He left the crowds and went into the house And His disciples came to Him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field." 37And He said, "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, 38and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one; 39and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels. 40"So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41"The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43"Then THE RIGHTEOUS WILL SHINE FORTH AS THE SUN in the kingdom of their Father He who has ears, let him hear. We're addressing now what may be considered a great mystery to some people, but it can become obvious when asking the right question while looking at the right verses. Jesus said the servants of the evil one weren't removed and destroyed NOW because there would then be a risk to the sons of the kingdom. One might ask why there would be such a problem, since God can see who is His and who is not. The answer is actually pretty simple. God knows- but he relates to us not necessarily with all He knows about us, but only what we have done up to the present. Some people, at different times, whether through foolish choices, horrible events, or the malignant intent of others, can SEEM to freely choose to serve the evil one- at least for a time. If a sudden judgement was upon us at that time, we would have no time to reform, to turn and walk the paths of righteousness, to serve God. If a sudden judgement was upon us and reflected our later decisions, it would be unfair, since it was based on what we haven't DONE yet. (It would be like being jailed for a FUTURE crime when you haven't even CONSIDERED committing a crime...) Some of us children of God have traveled harder paths, traveled darker paths. God allowed us to turn to Him when WE were ready, and did not "rush" us. God's allowed us to leave those paths on our own time, and did not render a summary judgement BEFOREtime. God operates on GOD's schedule, which is often FAR too slow for our tastes, especially in the era of microwaved foods, airplane travel, overnight mail, and e-mail. However, He operates on a schedule with more than our whims taken into account. ALL is taken into account, eventually. Once it IS taken into account, things will be different. Revelation 21:1-4 (NASB) 1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. 2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, 4and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.