jen-o

hey grumpy! that's quite an astute analysis you made in post #84! and i concur... some people are overly invested emotionally in the comments made on a message board... i don't think i agree with WD on anything, but i'll defend his right to post his opinion... i'm a big proponent of free speech... and even though you, monsieur le grump, (as well as mr. ductape) have made some astute observations on this thread, apparently it has gone over the top of some folks heads... there have been some rather UGLY and mean-spirited posts directed at WD, even AFTER you have made your observations... incredibly, even directly following one of your observational posts (as evidenced by the "owned" post immediately following #58)... i dunno, but that post strikes me as a personal attack... i think that people should focus on the CONTENT of what someone says, and NOT go after "the person"... btw, grumpy, you never answered my question: qu'est-ce que c'est "pourrait"? peace, jen-o

monsieur le grump, qu'est-ce que c'est "pourrait"? i missed whatever went on in "forum 3", but i'm guessing it wasn't too "pourrait", eh? peace, jen-o

welcome back rascal and jonny! good to see you both!! i don't need to know all the details of what goes on in cyber-purgatory, but it sure sounds like there's some right nice fishing going on there!

hi jonny! welcome back!! glad to see that you were finally released from cyber-purgatory... LOL did the novena help? i find it interesting to note that jonny and i both had a very similar experience in that we both "cried out" to God and a "wafer" showed up on the doorstep (well, in my case, it was my doorstep)... and yet, i completely reject all "way" doctrine as being twisted and perverted (and in many cases, an outright lie) as the man-made doctrine of a false prophet/false teacher... i do, however, believe the bible as the Word of Truth... many ex-way (and current-way) folks seem to have confused these 2 things... on the one hand, you have the false teachings of a degenerate, self-centered, lecherous old man who was motivated by his own lusts (lust for money, lust for power, lust for sex, etc.) and on the other hand, there is the bible... these are 2 completely and entirely DIFFERENT things... i would even venture to say that MANY ex-way and current-way people know NOTHING about the bible because of this confusion... oh sure, vpw "used" the bible to support his twisted doctrinal ideas, but what else is new!... false prophets always twist the truth!... just because someone knows "way" doctrine inside and out doesn't mean they know a dang thing about the Truth (or the bible)... they may know how to chop it to pieces under the guise of "right-dividing", but they know NOTHING about the truth... i would also say that not everyone who was "in" twi was born again (okay, that's an understatement)... i would say that the MAJORITY of people who were "in" twi were NOT born again... why?, because twi did NOT teach anyone how to become born again... it was ALL lip service hiding under vpw's twisted version of "grace"... vpw's idea was to say some magical words, and abracadabra, presto-chango, you're "going to heaven and all hell can't stop you"... he (vpw) wishes... repentance was NEVER talked about, and you don't get born again without repentance... further, Jesus was relegated to some afterthought (when He is CENTRAL to true christianity) or worse, His Name was USED as a tagline at the end of a prayer in order to get some material object (gag)... it's all rather disgusting... twi is NOT a part of true christianity... it is a RELIGION, a FALSE RELIGION loaded with RITUAL and based on the MAN-MADE doctrines of a FALSE PROPHET... sad to say, most people that were in twi know nothing about Jesus and nothing about the Truth... (um, Jesus IS the Truth) and it is also sad to see people here at the gscafe criticizing christianity and calling christians "bible thumpers" and such, when their major experience consists of being involved with the false religion of twi (which is definitely NOT representative of christianity or christians)... let me also add that there is a minority of folks who were involved with twi that actually are true christians, and with whom the Holy Spirit continued to teach and guide throughout their "way" involvement; but if they learned anything, it was via the Holy Spirit and NOT twi... some of this minority may actually have had an easier time (ex. jonny) while in twi as a result of listening to the guidance of the Holy Spirit... in any event, it's a bit disheartening to see "way doctrines" and biblical doctrines used interchangably as if they were the same thing... they are NOT! peace, jen-o p.s. i won't name names, but folks who cling to way doctrines and call them "truth" are deluded, and are not representative of true christians...

dear roy, God loves you, too, my friend... peace, jen-o

hi roy! what i hear you saying (and correct me if i'm wrong) is that homosexuality is not a sin against God, but rather it is a sin against nature... do i understand you correctly? peace, jen-o

yep, that's called *grooming*

hi jeff! no problemo... it just sounded like you were mad at someone... but maybe you are mad at folks who condemn homosexuals (since you mention that you've run across these kinds of people) but i still haven't seen anyone here at the greasespot condemning or persecuting homosexuals... actually, i haven't run across anyone who is persecuting homosexuals... (it is just not the politically correct thing to do) although i think that it does seem to be open season for condemning christians... anyway, not a problem... peace, my friend, jen-o p.s. (not directed to jeff) the bit from the door magazine was suppose to be funny?? it just sounded like a bunch of rambling mindless nonsense...

everytime i think that my opinion of vpw can't get any lower, someone proves me wrong... the issue of incest has crossed my mind before... who does these kinds of things? only the lowest, most depraved, most vile members of society... everything that vpw "taught" is suspect due to his totally corrupt and unsound mind...

very well stated, wordwolf... and i do believe i share your position! :) i.e. "God calls me to love. I treat all people with respect, and understand that all people sin, but I neither approve of nor sanction those sins, nor claim God approves or sanctions them, no matter WHICH sin it is?" peace, jen-o edited to add the stated position...

i am sick to my stomach after hearing how this old, manipulative, self-centered pedophile used women like this... i used to compare vpw to balaam, but now i think he is far worse than balaam ever was... even a donkey couldn't get this guy's attention... and still some folks insist that vpw did "acts of kindness" and "genuine good"... (gag) if anyone thinks that vpw did any "genuine good and kind" act, i can guarantee you that it was just an i-l-l-u-s-i-o-n... it is not within the nature of a false prophet to do "genuine good"... if people can't see thru vpw, they won't have a chance when the coming world dictator rises to power... cuz that guy is gonna be one smooth talker... and he will do signs and wonders that will make your head spin... no wonder the whole world follows after him... vpw is chump change...

(((robi))), just wanted to give you another hug first... robi, actually one of the reasons i posted the story about my son's friend was because you had voiced some concerns over who to get to do the service and what would they "teach"... i was just trying to let you know that there were other options (other than having someone "teach")... the service for my son's friend was very beautifully done without a "teaching/sermon"... it's just a suggestion... my aunt's service was done in my father's home, and people got up to read poems and letters they had written directly to her or to share memories about her... (again, there was no "teaching").. there are a lot of ways to personalize the service to honor the person's life... anyway, it's just a suggestion... btw, i no longer believe in twi's version of soul sleep... i now believe literally that "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" and that upon "death", one goes immediately to be with the Lord (without some kind of period of suspended animation)... for if we have already received the gift of eternal life, then that moment we receive it is when our eternal life starts... it is a great comfort to know that my loved ones who have passed on are currently WITH the Lord (and not in some sort of limbo)... hugs, jen-o

well, i have the same question as rhino... who are the "mocking, backstabbing, gossiping folks that you refer to? i have seen no one at the greasespot exhibit any of these behaviors... nor have i seen anyone advocate the "mocking, backstabbing, or gossiping" of homosexuals... so it seems like a straw man argument to me... personally, i believe that homosexuals should be treated the same as everyone else... i'm not the one who is putting them into some special category that requires special treatment... seems to me that the bias belongs to those who list specific treatements for homosexuals... although most folks didn't take the bait and simply stated that homosexuals should be treated the same as everyone else (instead of singling them out for special treatment)... but what are you so mad about, jeff?? peace, jen-o

((((robi)))) i am sooo sorry to hear about your family's loss... words are so inadequate at a time like this, but i do want to let you know that my thoughts and prayers are with you... two years ago, this month, a very close friend of one of my sons committted suicide by shooting himself in the head... he was only 16 years old, and there was no warning... his mother came home from the grocery store around 10am and found him in the backyard... it was very tragic... my son had played basketball with him a couple of days earlier, and said that he showed no signs that anything was wrong... he was his normal, cheerful, outgoing self... he had a ton of friends, he had a job he liked, school was out for the summer... none of his friends had a clue that there was anything out of the ordinary going on... the funeral was one of the most heart-wrenching things i have ever experienced... (i wrote about this on the oddlist at the time)... and i still get choked up thinking about it... he was a twin, and had a very large family (along with stepfather, stepmother situation)... his twin got up to speak first... and then every member of his family got up in turn to say their final words... the chapel was filled to capacity with folks standing in the side aisles and in the back all the way out the door and onto the patio... there must have been 300 to 400 high school students there... but there was NO teaching or sermon at all... the family put on a power point presentation on a large screen above the closed casket... with an endless collage of pictures of the boy with friends and family at every stage of his life, set to music (songs like freebird, etc.)... it was very touching, and not a dry eye in the place... but after the power point, instead of having a teaching/sermon, they opened up the mike for anyone to come up and speak... and one by one, those high school students came down to the mike and choked out their good-byes... (truly heart-wrenching)... but who says there has to be a sermon at a funeral? i thought it was very well done with the pictures and music and everyone getting a chance to speak... the pastor barely said anything... the family and friends were in charge... as far as suicide and heaven is concerned, i agree with caveman... Jesus is a complete Savior!... i think the idea of not being able to go to heaven if you commit suicide comes from RC doctrine... they are into all that sacrament stuff... and i guess they think that if you don't get "the last rites", then you aren't "cleared" to go to heaven... of course, i think all of that is nonsense... Jesus said: "Those whom You gave Me I have kept, and NONE of them is lost"... certainly God is not going to require that people jump thru the hoop of confessing their sins to a man to fulfill some "last rites" sacrament before one can go to heaven... that's ludicrous!... going to heaven is NOT contingent upon ANYTHING that a person does (other than accepting the Savior) but confessing one's sins to a man falls under the category of works (as caveman has pointed out)... and we all know that we are not saved by works... robi, i am convinced and completely assured that committing suicide does NOT prevent someone from going to heaven... probably the only thing that your sister will be able to absorb in a time like this (emotional shock, i would suspect) is you reassuring her that suicide does not prevent someone from going to heaven... (((robi))), i will keep you and your family in prayer! hugs, jen-o

eyes, what is the link to the site you are referring to? peace, jen-o

dear spectrum, your post was not wasted on me... i have continued to post basically to respond to the multiple insinuations that have made about me... and to defend my right to post my opinion... but you are right, i really don't care what other people think about me anyway... and those who make unfounded accusations will reap what they sow... peace, jen-o

holy camoly! this thread sure grew in one day... i haven't read all the posts, but i do want to comment on the following: straw man, abi...no one has suggested that this is the "christians" only or "biblical" discussions only forum... BUT this IS a thread about biblical doctrine (or was suppose to be) as noted by the intent of the person who started the thread in his first post: "With all the talk of late on other threads and in politics etc, I thought I'd go back to the Bible and and see what it says" one could just as easily have started a thread here in the doctrinal section, and said: let's discuss the pagan doctrine of homosexuality... let's look at the doctrine in the koran concerning homosexuality... let's look at all doctrines in reference to homosexuality... (and folks can still start those threads that focus on a variety of doctrines) but that is not the intent of this thread... the stated intent of this thread was to look at what the bible says.... i.e. biblical doctrine... i agree, so what!so what did you bring it up for?? the point is to present my opinion that homosexual acts are not okay according to the bible... i definitely do not care whether anyone is interested in my opinion or not... nor do i seek to be reaffirmed in any kind of way... by any stretch of the imagination... what i say is neither popular nor politically correct... but i still have a right to post it... well, i don't know about "proclamations", but there definitely have been insinuations and innuendo...eyes has stated that she was "attacked" and that she is a "target... you have accused me of nagging, stalking (following), hounding, and harassing... you have both insinuated that eyes is a "victim" via the use of these kinds of words... i get the impression that you think that eyes is some poor defenseless victim that i continue to relentlessly persecute... look, abi, if eyes doesn't want to respond to any of my posts, she is most certainly free to do that... but instead you hurl accusations at me in an attempt to get me to shut up and stop posting, obviously, on any thread where eyes is posting... what makes you think that you have the right to tell me where i can post, and what posts i can respond to?!? more innuendo... again, you are telling me who i can and can't talk to...what gives you this right?? um, it's a free country...why do you care who i talk to?? just for the record: i asked eyes to explain the reasons for her disagreeing with the plain meaning of the verses a total of ONE time back on may 24th... perhaps you should review my posts! by may 25th, i realized that eyes was NOT going to explain her reasons or support her opinion... although i did ask her one more specific question on that thread, namely: "are you saying that the prohibitions against incest, adultery, and bestiality also refer to an idolatrous ritual?? (and there really is no prohibition against those things?)"... which, of course, she did not answer... that is the extent of my questions to eyes regarding the topic of homosexuality! so why do you keep saying that i ask her questions about this issue "over and over and over"?? maybe if you say that i'm "nagging", "hounding", "harassing" long enough, you can get others to believe you... and get others to think of me in a derogatory way... i think your accusations of me are a dishonest attempt to discredit me... i didn't think you did this kind of thing, abi... i also asked her about the alleged "attack" on her book thread... or do you think i should not have asked that either? do you think that i should let unfounded accusations go unchecked?? for the record, eyes could not provide any information about this... but then, how can one provide information about something that doesn't exist? perhaps this, perhaps that...what difference does it make? are you telling me that i should just shut up because eyes doesn't care to discuss it with me but only with other people?? what sense does that make?!? are you again telling me who i should talk to and what posts i can respond to? or are you suggesting that i be removed from the conversation... in effect, marked and avoided??? peace anyway, jen-o p.s. i just noticed that eyes made a post to me regarding doctrinal issues about homosexuality... (post #77) so how am i forcing her to "debate" with me via "nagging, hounding, stalking, and harassing"?

eyes, you have yet to "explain" your position or support your opinion that homosexuality is "okay" according to the bible...you have been evasive and have avoided doing this... how do you expect me to "nod in assent" to something that you have never clearly expounded on? i have watched you evade the topic for 18 days (since may 24th)... you have spent more time talking about how much information there is... and very little time actually presenting any of it... so yes, i'm assuming that is because you do not have any evidence that the bible approves of homosexuality... if someone had evidence of this, i would think that they would want to shout it from the rooftops! you haven't... you haven't bothered to support your opinion for 18 days, so i wouldn't expect you to start now... the subject has always been: are homosexual acts right or wrong according to the bible...and i do note the "persecuted victim mentality" use of the word "target"... peace, jen-o

Rhino and Jeno, my overall impression in these discussions is that your minds are made up and you are not going to be persuaded to a different pov, regardless of what anyone says to you. huh? so that's what the goal is!... to try to "persuade" me to a different pov? yeah, my mind is made up... is that suppose to be a bad thing?!? i've read the scriptures concerning "homosexual acts", i've let the scriptures speak for themselves without my having a hidden agenda... and i've come to my conclusion thru research, analysis, and logic... so are you telling me that is a bad thing?!? abi, you've never made up your mind about anything? i don't think the problem is that i've "made up my mind", i think the problem is you don't like my conclusion... What I fail to understand is why the two of you insist on following her from thread to thread on this topic and hounding her, when she has already said she does not care to debate it with you? again i say: huh? what makes you think that i am following eyes around... i had been posting on the "God bless CA" thread long BEFORE eyes showed up there! my question to eyes on her book thread concerned her false accusation that she had been "attacked"... and i began posting here in response to lindy's question about "abominations"... i will say this though: when people don't like what another person is saying, they sure pull out the "victim" mentality in order to shut them up! Do you think if you nag her enough she will give in??? give in to what?? reality check: this is a conversation on a message board... i originally asked eyes why she disagreed with the plain meaning of the scripture... (no response) i then asked eyes for the who, what, where, & when of the alleged "attacks"... (again, no response) abi, are you telling me that certain questions are "off-limit" on a message board?? and perhaps you think that certain opinions should be "off-limit" as well... Do you think you would like someone to follow you from thread to thread and hound you into engaging in a debate you have already said you have no desire to engage in??? more of the same old victim mentality... i've been accused of: hounding, nagging, stalking (following), attacking... all because i asked for the reasons why someone disagreed with the plain meaning of sciptures... this is definitely one hot topic... people seem to be willing to go to any lengths to stop the mouth of one who repeats the plain meaning of scriptures... is the plain scriptural meaning really that threatening? evidently so... now people may disagree with the bible, they may criticize the bible for being "flawed", they may point to outside sources to support their opinion, they may set up a straw man argument accusing those who disgree with them of "hating homosexuals", they may pull out the persecuted victim mentality to garner sympathy, etc. etc. ... they do everything BUT support the opinion that the bible approves of homosexuality... and i have seen NO EVIDENCE, ABSOLUTELY NONE, that supports the opinion that the bible approves of homosexual acts! and folks have had plenty of opportunity to present such information (if it did exist)... btw, abi, if someone does not want to engage in debate about whether homosexual acts are right or wrong according to the bible, then why would that person post on a doctrinal discussion thread in the doctrinal forum?!?... seems to me that's what happens on doctrinal threads... peace, jen-o

huh?not sure what you're trying to say here, el bumpo... i hope this isn't a serious suggestion... because i'm not about to buy this book... i have checked out the foreword and 1st chapter, and have already found serious flaws... and what kind of "peace" is that to nod in assent about something that has not been clearly defined... imo, because it cannot be clearly defined... the only way to say that the bible approves of homosexual acts is to ignore the plain meaning and look to outside sources... in an attempt to cloud the real meaning of the straightforward verses... eyes, if you see no point in relying on the flawed document (i.e. the bible), then why bother to write a book about the biblical perspective on homosexuality??... why not just cut to the chase and write a book about how you think the bible is flawed and back up your opinion that homosexuality is not wrong based on outside sources... that's more honest than trying to change the meaning of the biblical verses... why use the bible at all if you think it's flawed? cman, i think we are talking about biblical doctrine here...and the question is: are homosexual acts right or wrong according to the bible? peace, jen-o

hey oak, i actually think the comparison is quite apropos...they might not have done the same specific evil acts, but the analogy is on point regarding how "good" one looks on the exterior and the "nice" acts that they do... afterall, gacy was "nice/kind" to his friends and neighbors, he did "good" things in community groups, he was "kind/loving" to children, he was a "good" catholic, people describe him as "generous, friendly, devoted" (all very "good" things)... point is: should we acknowledge that gacy was genuinely "kind and loving" and did "good, kind, & positive" acts when he wasn't letting his fleshly lusts get the best of him? peace, jen-o

ROFLOL, rumrunner...is that what vpw said!... i hadn't remembered that his "tongue" was a repetition of the word "shanta"... but i love your interpretation! :lol: peace, jen-o

and i also wanted to respond to this...all people are sinful... this is nothing new! i admit that i am a sinful person... and that is why i needed a savior! the word "vile" was not applied to people in the bible... the bible described certain "affections" as "vile" (atimia: dishonorable), i.e. the vile affections referenced in romans 1:26... also, i know of nowhere in the bible where it says that homosexuals are "lesser in value" than any other people... i also want to make it clear that i do not think every homosexual is "possessed"... i'm assuming this idea comes from twi which thought that everybody (and their grandmother) was "possessed"... but people who think "it's a choice" don't think in terms of "possession" because possession is the opposite of choice...eyes says that she is a christian, and i believe her; so therefore she is my sister in Christ, and obviously we are of equal value as members of the one body of Christ... i just have a hard time following her logic (and train of thought) on this topic... peace to all, jen-o

i stand corrected...(and i'm actually a bit relieved by this) i would consider this an arrogant delusion...it appears you have mastered judgemental and critical backhanded generalization... you seem rather proud of your finger pointing...you continue to do the very thing that you accuse others of... it's very hypocritical... the pharisees did the same... i'm glad you clarified that you are not a christian...