WordWolf

Which has NOTHING TO DO with how vpw described the so-called "LAW" of believing. Don't change the subject off of the so-called "LAW" of believing. No, he just stuck to the subject, the so-called "LAW" of believing. Or, he stuck to documenting his subject, the so-called "LAW" of believing. Which makes lots of sense if he's only addressing one subject, rather than EVERYTHING HE KNOWS.When I write anything, I leave out lots of information I know about, since it's not relevant to the subject. In this case, that's the so-called 'LAW of believing. You might address that to him at some point- but bringing it up at this SPECIFIC point makes it look like you're trying to obfuscate the issues by changing the subject.

You're ignoring the meaning of the word "exonerate". Belittling someone or not belittling someone has nothing to do whether or not they are exonerated.] If you were accused of killing a man by stabbing him to death in a street-fight, and you were found to be innocent because it was believed you could not POSSIBLY have prevailed in a street-fight with him as it was reconstructed, and they found the man they believed did it-who was able, and the evidence points to him, then you would be EXONERATED. If you came along and said "What a minute! They claimed I was physically weak and a lousy fighter! How is it 'exonerating'?" that would demonstrate you ignored the meaning of the word "exonerate" while you were, in fact, being exonerated. Juedes exonerated vpw of being directly responsible for his death by his own believing- which is the logical conclusion of applying vpw's own explanations of the so-called "law" of believing to his own situation. Juedes said "believing doesn't work that way, therefore wierwille didn't kill himself with believing, or fail to save himself from death by refusing to use believing." That means Juedes said wierwille has been accused of killing himself directly- and that wierwille did not, and here are the reasons he did not. That is "exonerating." ==== Contrasting this with your hypothetical dead soldier who went to Iraq.... If a soldier was claimed to have shot himself as a desperate escape from the war, and someone showed the caliber of bullet was from a rifle, and that rifle was not in use by his army, and the rifle could not be fired at the angle the bullet entered him if he held it himself, then that man would show the soldier did not kill himself. In other words, that man would "EXONERATE" that soldier in his own death. Whether or not anyone LIKED his death, or used it for their own purposes, has nothing to do with whether or not that soldier was EXONERATED in his own death. I thought you were concerned with the PROPER use of logic and language....

Any person, no matter how busy, can usually fit in a few free moments across a week. Any minister who just bulls on infinitely without any downtime will be unable to help his congregation due to insufficient rest. Interesting, but it has no relevance to this discussion.After all, we don't have any full-time ministers here who have "a ministry" of "attacking any ministry", let alone one for "a doctrine contrary to his own." We do have many posters who are discussing doctrinal errors or what they think are so- and many posters who expose the practical evils of supposed ministers. Perhaps it's worth asking. Then again, the errors in pfal were there long before he first heard of pfal, and they remain there to this day, so timing is interesting on a philosophical level but not a practical one.

I've noticed how sometimes anything that wasn't written line-by-line in the books supposedly doesn't exist, and sometimes what IS written line-by-line in the books is meaningless because it ignores what was NOT written in the books. The books-and the pfal class- have vpw saying that if a man says that by a certain time next year, he's going to be dead, then, if you're a betting man, put your money on him dying, because "GOD WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THE LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE" to stop him from dying by that place and time. It says "FEAR IS NEGATIVE BELIEVING" and "FEAR IS BELIEVING IN REVERSE", and those don't count either.... The class talks about the woman who killed her son with her fear by causing a car to hit him. "It was the FEAR....in the HEART....of that woman....that killed him."

Personally, I'm not aware of Bumpy SPECIFICALLY stopping someone posting because of the "input" of Bumpy SPECIFICALLY. Perhaps rascal knows of one such person. I AM aware that some people have left the GSC because they've gone on with their life and feel no need to come here any more. I am ALSO aware that some people have left the GSC because of personal attacks, character assassination and a general contentious environment. I suspect rascal was thinking more of them, but she may also know someone who SPECIFICALLY left due to Bumpy. I imagine there's people once in a while who that applies to. There's also people who show up once or twice, who begin new threads specifically for the purpose for condemning anyone who challenges their idyllic view of vpw ("you spend all your lives attacking a great man" and things along those line). There's also people who DO come here for help, and in no time, there's people who get on them for challenging their idyllic view of vpw. I'm not aware of ANYONE who believes in "telling the truth about vpw's rapes and plagiarism" who is NOT dedicated to people "MOVING ON IN LIFE" BY WAY OF people coming to grips with the truth about vpw. "If anything." I can only answer for myself. As for me, the main reason I post about "the other side of the story". It says so. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/main2/about-us.html "Our mission is to provide information that tells the other side of the story about The Way International and its trustees. Our hope is that GreaseSpot Cafe serves as a place where those who have been impacted by The Way can make connections with people and information which will support their particular process of recovery. We want people to be able to make informed decisions regarding their past, present, and future affiliations with The Way International (TWI). Whether you are standing with TWI, thinking about leaving, trying to help someone else get out, or looking for support from others who have left, we believe the information here is highly relevant and well worth considering." "Consider the longstanding patterns of conspiracy at the trustee level, questionable doctrines and practices, ongoing cover-ups, and sexual abuse of numerous women at the hands of certain TWI leaders. It's no wonder that TWI is desperately trying to shield their followers from this information by warning them off the Internet. We think that if you give this information an honest reading, you'll see that you haven't been told the whole story." "The opinions expressed here are often passionate and while disagreements are not uncommon, the online Ex-Way community is a great arena for conversing and connecting with others. You may get caught in a food fight now and then, but unlike TWI, GreaseSpot Cafe is a place where questions are encouraged and people make up their own minds." ===== So, my PRIMARY purpose in posting here has been to provide information, and participate in dialogues that provide information. Funny you should ask at this moment, since I just started a discussion about God's knowledge a few days ago, and will be part of that discussion very, very shortly. ======= What is the deep, personal benefit I derive from posting here? Well, who said I must derive some deep personal benefit from posting here, reading the newspaper, watching television, listening to the radio, playing video games, or anything else I do? Sometimes I derive benefits from each. Sometimes I derive GODLY benefits from each. I post on messageboards- or stop posting on messageboards-for my own reasons. If you MUST hear about some benefit, I've gained considerably in understanding history and human behaviour in analyzing the processes that went from plagiaristic sex maniac by himself to multinational organization. I can also spin fascinating dinner conversation for more conventional Christians. (If they pick up the check as a result, you can consider that an immediate personal benefit as well.) Yes- as well as another verse where the same writer notes the evil done to him personally by Alexander the coopersmith. Which is preserved for eternity by God Almighty. Neither of those verses recommends spending the entirety of one's life on any one subject. Of course, the people exposing the evils of vpw don't spend the entirety of their lives posting at the GSC, nor exposing vpw's evil. Did you mean to suggest they did, or was that accidental? Is there a membership list for "that little clique group"? If so, I bet we've had rotations over the years. I can name a number of posters who don't post here regularly (or in years) who WOULD have been considered part of this list, in all likelihood. Sure- when twi's gone, or possibly when everyone who COULD benefit from the information here HAS benefitted from it, and when the people who keep trying to rewrite history and make vpw a great humanitarian who never plagiarized, raped, etc. stop doing so. In case you're wondering, we DO still get new posters who are posting and freely claiming to benefit from the GSC as it's stated and as we envision it. Every time they say so is more proof we're benefitting SOMEONE, whether or not YOU perceive it. Hey, we're all adults here. Some of the time, we're here to socialize, some of the time we're here to dialogue, some of the time to provide information. We can choose to leave, return, or leave for good whenever we wish. Thank you for your concern, but we're not exactly "trapped" here.

"Offer me money." "Yes." "Power too-promise that!" "All that I have and more. Please." "Offer me everything I ask for." "Anything you want!" "I want my father back, you son of a b*."

I find it interesting that a full-time minister gets blamed for not being here all the time continually countering the attempts of people to discredit anything he says that they don't like. If he was here all the time, naturally, he would be blamed for neglecting his flock. If he wasn't a minister, naturally, he would be blamed for not doing something positive and cultivating the flock. In short, it's determined-by a few- that disagreeing with vpw-and especially, providing documentation when he contradicted Scripture in teaching or conduct- makes one a bad Christian, and then after that, the pretexts, justifications and accusations are assembled. No matter WHAT he did, some here would be indicting that minister.

General rules-of-thumb around here about giving away someone's name... If you want to, you can give out your first name, full name, or any parts thereof. Some of us recommend you do not, simply because of the "Google" factor- if you ever end up with a cyber-stalker, or have a job interview, this information will be found and someone may use it against you in some way. Usual rules on the entire internet are to recommend against posting ANYTHING by which you can be personally-identified, which means no name, no phone#, no address, no Social Security# or government ID#, no specific name-of-company-you-work-for or school-you-go-to", and so on. Identity theft is another big internet issue, and one criminal industry on the internet is trying to get your personal information ("phising" and so on.) You will never see ME posting my name online. You'll see me post the city I'm from, with no other information to track me down. If you can single me out like that from among 9 million people or so, then you deserve to find me. (Imagine your disappointment in doing so-I'm not a rich target by any means. You'd waste a LOT of time doing something that would be of little use to you.) As to information about other people, it's not permitted-unless they give permission- to post their full name. (The staff does not always CATCH all instances, so it might be gotten-away-with despite being not permitted.) Using initials or blocking out part of the name is permissible- things that would stop, say, a Google-search on their full name showing that post. For example, if you knew the first president of the US personally, you would not be permitted on the GSC to type his name as "George Washington" unless he posted here using his full name. (There's more to this a little later.) You could instead type in "G***** W*********", but that's a little confusing unless you were saying something else specific to him. You could type "Ge**** Wa********", or substitute some letters, like "G30rg3 W@$h1ng+0n." Would you have any problem reading that name as-is? However, that version won't trigger a Google-search. A few names get creatively re-imagined. For example, one fellow who pushes the twi party line even when it's a lie to someone's face-including the debt policies- has been referred to as "Moneyhands", which is not QUITE his last name, but is close enough that you can identify him-and seems pretty apt. The exceptions are the public figures. Thus, we've generally agreed that members, past-and present, of twi's board are fair game for posting, as well as a handful of people who are universally-identifiable, like Mrs W, trustees of the alternate sites (CG and RC, for example), are also fair game. Even then, just as a general policy, I rarely do so without knocking out a letter, although I COULD. Overall, it's not a tough policy, and the long-term benefits for all whose names are used are not that hard to picture once it's explained.

*wild swing* "Fight Club"?

======= And those of you, who, like me, object to subscription radio, can always STREAM radio stations through your internet connection. You don't need anything more complicated, than, say, Windows Media Player or the equivalent. AFAIK, most radio stations you can pick up SOMEWHERE on broadcast also have an internet stream to pick them up on. I keep getting surprised NEWS stations have one. Me, I sometimes listen to a radio station in CANADA I like.

Suda being the first to correctly name the artist, and since it's obvious nobody's going to get the title at this point, I'm passing the baton to Suda. The artist is the Goo Goo Dolls, the song is "Slide." (I was hoping the last quote would trick a memory, since I dropped a quote just before one of the places the word "slide" appears.) Serves me right for breaking my "pre-1986" personal rule. Ok, Suda, your turn.

I'll give it one last chance. Maybe someone will get the title as well. "Do you wake up on your own And wonder where you are You live with all your faults" "I wanna wake up where you are. I won't say anything at all. So why don't you...." "I'll do anything you ever dreamed to be complete, Little pieces of the nothing that fall. May, put your arms around me. What you feel is what you are and what you are is beautiful"

*wild swing* "TURK 182"???

I want to wait a bit before adding my opinions to this discussion. I want to give posters a fair change to present THEIRS without me interfering. That's why my opening post was so neutral. It would be appreciated if you could provide the verses for your assertions whenever there are verses- especially if you could post the actual verse. That's not a rule, but really a request, if you please.

Ok, we haven't discussed this in a long time, if ever. There's different schools of thought about God's knowledge. What does God know, and when does He know it? Whenever I think of this, I keep flashing back to a classic Doonsbury, where someone said to one President. "Sir, as your special counsel, I have to know what you knew and when you knew it." It was a jigsaw puzzle, and-when assembled- it missed one piece- which was the President's reply. Which was apt. So, that's what we're discussing-in theory- here. What does God know, what did God know, and when?

You may have missed this, dooj, but there was a time-and possibly it's STILL true- when cg was teaching this very thing- that God is NOT omniscient, that God is NOT transcendant, that God exists in the present with us (as opposed to inhabiting eternity), that God WAS surprised and taken aback when events happened- specifically using Genesis 3 as an example. John APPEARS to be saying much the same thing.

IIRC, that's one of the main criticisms of socialism. At least, when I was taking Philosophy, that's what I read. From what I've heard, fast-trackers in twi tended to exemplify this, too. Wanting a free ride on the wow field correlated with wanting a free ride getting a twi paycheck for bossing people around. (Not that every leader was like that, just the fast-trackers I've heard of.)

That's the correct title of the ship and the episode. The more I think about this episode, the more problems I see with the strategy. First of all, Starfleet has an incredibly rigid screening process to get INTO the academy, but the cadets are allowed to get into trouble- at least the ones in elite units. Nova Squadron killed a cadet trying a dangerous, prohibited stunt. Red Squad's been in trouble more than once. Small wonder they have ANOTHER loose cannon there. They need to disband "elite" groups as troublemakers in the first place. In the second place, using an older ship in the Terran system makes a lot of sense. Keeping in the Terran system means less of a chance cadets will be killed, which is a bad thing when training cadets. Further, in time of war, all the warships- and Defiant-class ships are warships and of limited numbers- are needed for the war. What idiot decided to take a top-of-the-line warship and assign it to 3 months of training duty? In the third place, cadets who train in the field are assigned SINGLY to places so they can benefit from everyone's experience. Nog did that, and Kirk did that, as did others. Otherwise, why is an entire group of cadets taken out of school for 3 full months? Finally, this MAY have happened but the actual officer who was dying should have given explicit instructions to return to the academy as directly as possible, by the most direct route that was safe, and to not be diverted from this for any reason whatsoever unless their ship is under direct attack. It sounds more like he SUPPOSED the cadet in charge would decide to do that- which IS the sensible course but was not guaranteed. Then again, he may have told him that, and the guy might have just lied to everyone else. Might as well take the next turn, George.

Well, I can pm the lyrics to you, but, really, is there a benefit to you having them? Tom hasn't done that one in a very, very long time. I speculate it's part of his embarassing twi days. Since I had some of those as well, I'm willing to let his fade with time.

Or that God's understanding isn't infinite, or that He doesn't know all things. Or that He doesn't know the end from the beginning.

"I wanna wake up where you are. I won't say anything at all." "I'll do anything you ever dreamed to be complete, Little pieces of the nothing that fall. May, put your arms around me. What you feel is what you are and what you are is beautiful"

"Put that in the story too. Let people read it... and decide for themselves." "He may have been a hero... he may even have been a great man... but in the end, he was a bad captain." "I came to see Ferenginar. I've heard a lot about it -- I can't wait to see all the... the rain... and the muck... "But this is work for a... a mechanic. A repairman. A lowly engineer." "I'm going to tell Chief O'Brien you said that." "It's the Defiant!" "What??" "Thank you... sir?" "'Sir' is correct, ensign. I was given a battlefield commission and command of this vessel by the late Captain Ramirez." "Our mission was to circumnavigate the entire Federation before returning home." "So... uh... where are you from?" "Me? Tycho City." "Oh... a Lunar Schooner." " I haven't heard that in a long time." "I picked it up from my grandpa. Of course, he still calls Luna The Moon -- like it's the only one or something." "Well, nobody who's ever lived on the Moon calls it "Luna," either. That's just something they say on Earth." "Sir, the Engine Room also reports that we still have power spikes cropping up all through the deuterium injector startup routine." "I thought we had that under control." "I did too, sir." "Have you recalibrated the lateral impulse control system?" "No. What does that have to do with the injectors?" "Well, the impulse system shares some of the same power relays used in the injector startup routine." "Like that other one... the, uh... uh -- the Republic." "Not quite. The Republic's an old ship -- I don't think she's left the Terran System in fifty years." "As of this moment, you're chief engineer. Congratulations." "Chief Engineer?" "With the rank of lieutenant commander. Your first assignment is to figure out why we can't go above warp three point two." "Well. It sounds like you and the chief had quite a conversation this afternoon: home and family, and the glories of dawn on the Moon. Does that about cover it?" "That's... about it. What's going on?" " What's going on, Mister Sisko, in case you haven't noticed, is that we're in the middle of a war. We can't afford to have young cadets thinking about mommy and daddy when they need to be concentrating on their duties.." "All I did was ask about her home." "All you did was plunge a member of this crew into emotional turmoil. The safety of the entire ship can rest on the actions of any one of us at any given moment. That cadet was not ready to handle an emergency today and you are the reason why." "Look -- if you're telling me that just talking about home can jeopardize the "safety of the entire ship," then you're in bigger trouble than you think you are." "You're not here to volunteer your opinion. What you have to do is shut your mouth, obey the rules of this ship and stay away from Chief Collins!" "Jake -- may I call you Jake? You're a reporter. Your job is to watch the way events unfold, not participate in them. Right now, you need to stand back and take a good look at where you are and what's going on around you. You're in the middle of a great story. Maybe one of the greatest stories of the entire Dominion War. This ship is special, Jake. This crew is special. Whatever fates guide the universe have chosen us to achieve some purpose in this conflict. I know that. I know it as surely as I know your presence on this ship is no coincidence. You're here to write the story..." "Don't interfere with the story, Jake. Don't become part of it. Just let it unfold around you. Observe. Listen. And then write it down." "You do realize you're violating about fifty safety regulations?" "Yes sir, I do. But I also know that Chief O'Brien made the same changes to the Defiant and she never had a problem." "You probably all know who my father is -- Benjamin Sisko. So you know I'm not exaggerating when I say that he's considered to be one of the best combat officers in the fleet........ ...And I'm telling you right now that even with the entire crew of the Defiant with him... my father would never try to pull off something like this. And if he can't do it... it can't be done."

Sometimes I don't have to post anything.

You've gotten entirely out of twi, but has twi gotten out of you? That's fair. That's one reason why there's professionals. So either they can "just get over it", or "there is no God." Nice False Dilemma. Absolves you of trying to understand the heart of another person, though. You might thank God that nothing ever happened to you that was so traumatic you get flashbacks about it a lifetime later. There's plenty of people who walk this earth who can't say the same.

"I'll do anything you ever dreamed to be complete, Little pieces of the nothing that fall." "What you feel is what you are and what you are is beautiful"