Oakspear

Ana: The chatroom is still fun :D-->. But regarding the forums: it's not a pro-Way, or pro-Wierwille website, so where's the surprise? I wish some of us wouldn't resort to personal attacks on other posters, but negative stuff about "the ministry" and "the Doctor" should be expected. Happy & fruitful lives is not a condition that is mutually exclusive with talking about "the bad ol' days" of TWI. I've met several dozen of our fellow posters and they all seem to be doing okay in the happy & fruitful department, even when spending time flaming TWI here. And you know, there are good uplifting things to read, mostly on the other forums within GS, "About The Way" tends to be a little bit more gritty.

While I agree with the (negative) assessment of CF&S, if Ana wants a copy, why bother trying to talk her out of it? (Other than the copyright thang :D-->) As much as it mystifies me some GSErs like Wierwille and like PFAL . As far as I know Ana hasn't tried to preach Wierwillism here.

No exC, 3somes means wimmins with 3 breasts

As much as some of us "sharpen our doctrinal wits" against Mike, the Doctrinal Forum, although a less trafficked place than say "About The Way" is by no means a "dungeon", or a barren wasteland. The Doctrinal Forum has been the site of debates about the Trinity, Predestination, various Way doctrines and critiques of the collaterals. I've always thought it was a fun place to come and play. Of course threads with titles like "Just For Fun Do You Think That Flying Whales Live Outside The Firmament" pop up from time to time.

The Weenie Roast is a real event :P--> The FULL name is "The Southern Comfort Weenie Roast" The first one was held in 2002 in Tennessee and was attended by four Grease Spotters and their children and dogs. They had such a great time that thirteen Grease Spotters, plus children, dogs, and agnostics attended the 2nd annual SCWR, also held in Tennessee. It has achieved the status of legend, of tradition, of sacred ritual. We are already planning for the Third Annual Southern Comfort Weenie Roast on Columbus Day weekend.

Wordwolf: I think you must have gotten your notes from somewhere else. In the notes in the Companion bible for Genesis 6, there is no breakdown that you mention, just the note in verse 4 that giants = nephilim. Appendix 25 does go into more detail about the Nephilim, but still maintains that they were the offspring of humans and angels. He goes on to say that the Canaanites of Abrahams time onward were nephilim also. There is too much here to type out (and besides, it's real small print :(-->) but I can photocopy it and mail it to you if you'd like. PT me or my email is on my profile.

Mike, I thought it belonged in Doctrinal - my opinion. There are moderators who monitor this forum. I don't know what the process is for moving threads to other forums is, but I'll let them worry about it. By the way, I don't view Doctrinal as a dungeon. I've been a semi-regular here for quite a while; always enjoyed the give and take of serious topics.

This isn't going to be anywhere near a complete answer! The differences among the different denominations are sometimes large and sometimes subtle. Often Protestant denominations have more in common with other groups or even with Catholics than they do with churches of similar names. Churches in the United States are often quite different than those with the same name in Europe, largely because of the tendency in the US toward congregational participation (related to democratic principles). Churches and denominations can be differentiated by doctrine, by practice, or by the method of church government. New denominations have sprung up in response to revivals or "awakenings", or even due to societal concerns like slavery. I'd suggest the above website, or some good thick books on church history.

Mike, you didn't vote :D--> Either that or you disagree with yourself

doh! Burned again! :D-->

Companion Bible Appendix 23 "The Sons of God" in Gen 6.2,4 And on and on...Bullinger clearly believed that the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 were angels. It was Wierwille who believed (rightly, IMHO) that both the sons of God and the daughters of men were human.

dante: I worked for the OWH from 1983-85 and 1987-1999 as a sales rep and regional sales manager. I believe I am less than 2 hours from you - about one hour from Nebraska City. Maybe we can get together in Neb city for coffee or a burger. Car pooling is available to the weenie roast :D-->

Mike believes and propounds that PFAL is "God's Word Reissued" and similar ideas. I won't try to summarize, but try to be familiar with the Mike Threads before voting ;)--> Mike claims that there are lurkers who agree with his message, but don't post. Here's their chance to anonymously give their opinion.

Even though I'm an agnostic myself, I don't see how a bad experience with a cult would necessarily turn one off from Christianity or God. Unless one believes it was somehow God's fault. I can see being leary of a system that asks unquestioning acceptance or obedience though

Well Zix, you do have a reputation to maintain ;)-->

Yes Kevlar, Bullinger did believe it. Recently there was a thread on demonology that talked about this as well.

Joe Corpsgrad's assignment: Go to a city with one small fellowship and split it into two tiny ones so that you can call it a branch. Since there are no other cities in your state with a Way presence, you're now the Limb Coordinator too. The next state over has no fellowships, just a few scattered subscribers to the Way Rag and the Sunday Propoganda Tapes, so you are annointed Limb Coordinator for that state too. You report to a Region Coordinator who "oversees" three states in the same manner that you coordinate your two in a five-state region. God bless Joe!

I agree P-Mosh, if they get rude with me, it's open season! As far as doctrinal discussions go, I don't find too many who could hold their own in one of those anyway.

Especially door-to-door? Depends on my mood I guess. A few months ago I let a couple of Mormon missionaries into my apartment. Nice guys, not very convincing though. I just wanted to hear what they had to say. A week later I was in need of a jump start and they happened along at just the right time! A few days ago a guy wanted to do "an informal survey about religion" while I was at the University fountains. I politely answered his questions, but didn't encourage him. I get a little irritated at people who think that it's fun to treat door-to-door witnesssers like crap. A story about door-to-door that keeps popping up so much that I swear it's an urban legend: The person telling the story knows someone who came to the door in a towel and invited some JW's in, but cautioned them that it was a "nudist home", or guys actually answering the door nude. No one ever claims to be the one who actually did it, just knows someone -->

In 2001 they announced all the new Limb & Region Coordinators at a Pentecost service that we heard via phone hook-up. I had all the assignments posted on Grease Spot that night. (That's part of how WayGB nailed me :D-->)

Refiner: I'd say Wordwolf's estimate is right. There's a lot of people who don't say what their religous beliefs are, and there are quite a few that are still trying to figure it out, not ready to embrace Christianity whole-heartedly, nor willing to stake out the atheist camp. We've got Christians of all persuasions here, as well as Buddhists, Wiccans, and other religions. Enough agnostics to form a pickup softball game and a handful of atheists. AS JF said: "...as long is there is a mutual respect for each other's beliefs/non-beliefs... There have been a few here that like to cram their theology or lack there of down your throat, that's when folks get ....ed..." I go along with that :D--> And before you say that Agnosticism is the "only logical position to take", have a few conversations with Zixar and some of the other "PhD believers" around here :P-->. I disagree with them, but they make me work for it

Hooner: Martindale took Genesis 3:6 and "defined" virtually every word as having a primarily sexual meaning. A simple look at a concordance or any other research source showed that his definitions were wrong. By the time he gets to the end of the verse he is convinced that the original sin of mankind was "in the sexual catagory", because of the "sexual imagry" in the verse (imagry that isn't there unless you make up your own definitions). Since he has already defined homosexuality as the lowest form of degradation in the sexual catagory, then the original sin of mankind "must have been" homosexuality. Since Eve was (obviously) a woman, then she "must have" had lesbian sex with the devil, who had "come into concretion" as a beautiful woman. Adam's sin was that he did not speak up, but by his silence approved of Eve's sin. There's more detail, but its not really necessary IMHO.

What? Do they have about three people graduating this year?

No

Good point miller, but to me it's more like seeing the "written record" of how the toaster came to be, but I can't find any toasters anywhere, although I run into plenty of people who claim to own toasters. I too can own a toaster if I just have faith.