Trefor Heywood

Just typical - more religious bodies with absolutely no sense of humour! :D-->

WhiteDove: I was already out by the time Gartmore was set up. I knew a girl from Bristol who I used to see occasionaly who was still active at the time and she had been to Gartmore. From what I could gather the Way in GB under Geer had decided to separate themselves from the US body after Martindale insisted that monies should start being sent to the US instead of remaining in Europe. This may have occurred after VPWs last visit which was described in Passing of a Patriarch. It probably was actually come to think of it as Martindale would not have come up with that idea with VPW still around. But since then I have heard nothing. I would like to know what has happened to Robert Wilkinson since then but have not managed to obtain any information. I only knew that Gartmore had been sold when I checked its website.

I thought Leo was brilliant in "Titanic"! But he doesn't come across as a Howard Hughes lookalike. However I will reserve judgment until I see it in due course.

I wish I knew what had happened to the Way In GB but can find nothing out whatsoever.

Just as Theresa Tickles would not like to be known as Tess... :D-->

When churches become less interested in their own power and self-importance, when they stop playing mind games and finding ways of extracting money from their followers, when they stop trying to mould people into fulfilling their own self-imposed expectations, when they stop using their flocks as political pawns and start dealing with people as they are with total love and acceptance (just like Jesus as the ad states), then they might well start appealing to the disaffected.

Rosie would need an appropriate title for her emeritus status. After all VPW turned from "founder and president" to "founding president." Perhaps if rumours about her and Donna are true she could be the "fondling president" ! :D-->

def: Not wishing to go too much over old ground but just to remind you that not everyone has the same conception of what God demands as others. The reason it is considered hate speech is precisely how it too often comes across - the against bit is too often in some kind of inflamatory language or another without comprehension and understanding. The discipline can be applied with an iron fist when people do not measure up the to rules, regulations and expectations demanded of them. Kind of reminds me of TWI ;)-->

I apologise Mark - the group I was reading at the time said United Church of Canada whereas obviously it is the United Church of Christ! Having now been able to see the ad I thought it thought-provoking and challenging. I loved the phrase "no matter who you are, or where you are on life's journey, you are welcome here." It is not pushing a pre set agenda or making pre judgments, asking for people to fit into a particular mould. If a network has a policy of no religious advertising, as Raf states, then there can be no claim of unfair or unequal treatment. That is certainly the policy of terrestrial TV networks over here, although about 3 or 4 years ago there was an LDS ad for its video Lamb of God. Perhaps that got through because it was advertising the video rather than the church directly. The ad campaign was of short duration and I only caught the ad once. The bouncer scenario is a clear statement that a church should not be like an exclusive nightclub. It is a sad fact that many people do not feel welcomed or wanted and they are very used to having their lifestyles condemned and criticised by religious figures using the media. But I did not see the ad as being particularly directed at gay people - I could not see anything in it which remotely suggested this. It came across to me as an invitation to all the "halt and the lame" who feel rejected and unwanted.

I also remember somone, perhaps the president of IBM, forecasting the world would never need more than three such computers. Without the silicon chip, that prediction might not have been too far from the truth.

I have not yet been able to view the ad as it keeps on timing out when I try to connect. I have seen the press release in several yahoo groups to which I subscribe, however. If true, it can only increase the already stongly existing viewpoint of many gay people that there is alienation. However, the UCC is a Canadian body and it's appeal to people on the US side can only be limited unless they live close to the border. Not that this would explain that some broadcasters would turn away the revenue they would gain from carrying the ad. It's true that most churches don't have bouncers at the door but once inside there are other methods, perhaps more subtle, but equally rejecting. But I will reserve full judgement until I can get to view the ad.

I take it that this booze cruise on Lake Superior is possible because it qualifies "international waters" D Miller?

"Light a candle"? Well they do have wicks that have been dipped! ;)-->

We have a phrase over here Booze Cruise which refers to people jumping on ferries to Europe to stock up on much cheaper drinks there which saves on UK excise duty. This would appear to be something similar for the voyage of "Old Ironsides"! Interesting to read about seamen getting pickled from Nelson's pickling! :D-->

I just watched the clip and was very impressed. He was talking plain sense about the right to believe or not to believe. We don't have a written Constitution but we have been practicing the above for years. The US does and the religious right has been ignoring it for years. Harvey was right on about Iraq in the religious sense.

laleo: Religion can also appeal to the worst in people too. Look at the countless wars, persecutions and suffering it has created. This does need to be balanced against the good.

Ex: Do you need another computer because you have worn the other out with your record number of postings? ;)-->

It might be different here Cool but the missionaries helped out in a charity shop which was def not Mormon. After all, the idea what that they represented the LDS to those outside and not inside. That is not to say that they didn't help those inside too of course.

Missionaries are allowed a certain amount of time each week for activities to help the community and you don't have to be a Mormon to get them to do something for you. And they are always grateful for a decent meal after doing so! :D-->

The whole upper echelon of the Church are businessmen. It is run more like a corporation than a church. And unlike a corporation it is not subject to tax. There are many poor Mormons around also. I should know I was one! :D-->

I remember the glossy ads in the Rag: "Remember the Way in your will." Well you know what they say... "Where there's a will there's the Way!" :D-->

"The Way Living in Lust." "L. Craig Martindale is not God (he only thinks he is)" "Are the (brain)dead alive now?"

It could well be! :D-->

Lindy: If you were a Christian today what would make you not be a Christian again? I seem to recall that Ghandi said something similar but cannot remember the exact quote. A few people have been like Governor Felix in Acts! :D-->

I thought it all very impressive at the time. However, whereas it is an interesting intellectual exercise, the details are much less relevant than the significance of the crucifixion, the gospel empahasis is upon the one "in the midst" - Jesus and how Peter caved in after stating that he would never deny the Lord. The gospel writers took their material from various different sources and were not necessarily witnesses to all the events themselves. Matthew Mark and Luke are known as the Synoptic Gospels in that they agree together more upon the details and incidents and were more likely to have used a common source which scholars call Q which comes from the German word Quelle meaning "which." John upon the other hand uses very different sources and included much material that is unknown in the other gospels. VPW himself stated that "men of God, moved by the Holy Ghost" used their own vocabularies which is on of the reasons why we get lestai and also kakourgoi. Semantics and punctuation (which he was more than happy to criticise when it did not fit in with his teachings) help to give us six denials but surely the original writers would have listed every one individuallly in their own writing if it was that important a detail - the idea of "I will only mention half of them and let another apostle mention the other half" is patently ridiculous.