Raf

Ok. I happen to agree with you. But I still don't see anything self-serving about the stand they're taking. If anything, I'll be it cost them followers.

Of course you can! It's just that the moment you do, it ceases being a pizza.

Heh heh heh.

Self serving, man made, slavery... ? You don't think they resisted this conclusion just as strongly as you do now? These people were taught just as we were. But they studied and came to an opposite conclusion, and they're entitled to do so. Why do you think it happened? Do you think they looked at three scriptures and said "whoops! changed my mind"? I respect that it took a ton of soul-searching for them to go back on a popular doctrine. By the way, VF teaches that "born again" is a reference to the resurrection, not to what we have long referred to as the "new birth." Jesus talked about being "born again" with Nicodemus. He expected Nicodemus to know what it was. That means whatever being "born again" means, it's not a part of some future "mystery" that Nicodemus could not be expected to know. Prove all things. Hold fast to that which is good.

I mean, really, how hard was that?

Jeff Goldblum Independence Day Brent Spiner

Please move to silly... I sit before a bowl of Cheetos and a six pack of Jolt Cola with one question on my mind... What would the world be like if Steve! were God? ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ If Steve! were God.... Cindy! would be the Virgin Mary. (*) would replace the sign of the cross. Instead of saying "in the name of ..." He! would want our prayers to end, "Praise be Your! Name." Everyone would be required to drink an entire bottle of wine at communion services. And a pound cake. Instead of a Divine Son surrounded by 12 apostles, He! would approve a holy terror surrounded by 12 Chicago area nurses. (A guy can dream, after all). He! would tell a preacher from Ohio that He! was going to teach him the Word as it has not been known since the first century. Then He! would lean over and tell him the Word. And the Word He! would tell him is... Keep it in your pants, you pervert. Not in My! Name!!!

I think others have come to that conclusion, though not nearly as politely.

From their statement of beliefs:

Knock out a few of those question marks, willya????????????? :)--> Christian Biblical Counsel (V Finnegan) now teaches that salvation is for those who make a lifetime commitment to Christ. I don't know about "how many sins does it take to get to the Gehenna center of a Tootsie Pop," but the point is that they no longer believe the new birth is the incorruptible seed that TWI taught it was. They believe the new birth is synonymous with the resurrection. I don't think they refer to themselves as "born again" anymore. new birth = resurrection incorruptible seed = the Word of God

Well, since no one else has jumped in, I'll toss in a REAL easy one... The Chicago way Never stop fighting until The fighting is done

Will the Real You Please Stop Thinking, Pay $40, and Refrain From Questioning Your Leadership!

Count me in for a small portion. PT me for details.

WTH, I wish to congratulate you on your independence of thought and refusal to cave in to the pressure of groupthink. In fact, if you had applied those qualities during your time in TWI, perhaps you wouldn't be so dismissive of valid criticisms of VPW and TWI today. Oh well, someday, when you grow up and mature a little, you'll see the light. Until then, Raf

Dont be sillee. Ima grammer perfesser!

And since I'm sure... You get NOTHING! You lose! Good DAY, sir!

Every movie made in 2004. Julia Roberts Mona Lisa Smile (umm, I meant Closer).

But wan't he the man, though? The Shootist Love that flick.

What's your fundraising goal (ie, how much)? What do you say, Cafe? Wanna help her out a little?

They say giving up cigarettes is good for your lungs. It works!!!!

Don't confuse not knowing who someone is with not knowing his name. Americans are famous for referring to actors as "that guy..." John Mills is a classic example.

I'm sure that's what it is. Either that, or someone in TWI ordered him... er, suggested that he exercise his right not to post here.

What he's saying is: Many of you have shown disturbing signs of independent thought and lack of loyalty to your Father In The Word. You think you're smarter than he was, that you have the independence of mind and thought to apply the Biblical directive of "prove all things; hold fast to that which is good" to Weirwille's work. But today you think you're right. Two years from now, will you change your mind and THEN think you're right? What's your standard for right or wrong? What gives you the right to question Wierwille, whom I have declared to be 98% right? (something I managed to do without judging what is right and what is wrong with his works: try it. It's fun). MDVaden, Where'd you go?

Why, yes, of course, that would have solved everything. Thanks, Fadduh. John Mills? Who the hell is he tawkin about? :)--> Sigourney Weaver Alien John Hurt