Raf

I don't think I can do that (it's work product, property of my paper).

No, but I do have a tape of him singing the song. :)-->

I'll check my mail as soon as I get home. I haven't gotten it yet, but I haven't checked the mail for a few days (last week of the semester: tres busy).

I love my job. I just got back from an interview with Jerry Maren. He's the one in the middle.

:)--> Or as I've put it: Death is not caused when someone stops believing. It is caused when someone stops breathing.

Dave, and everyone else: Let's try a completely different approach. Make your cases without referring to Wierwille as a person (you may refer to what he wrote, but not to his motives, behavior, education, etc). Let's see if the framework of administrations really holds up to scrutiny, with or without Wierwille. Great start from VL in the post immediately preceding this one.

Dave, I wouldn't expect you to write about where Crowley was right and where he was wrong, for two reasons. One: he is not the leader of the Baptists. He's a low man on the totem pole, and writing about his accuracy would be like writing about the accuracy of the average "twig" coordinator. Two: Crowley didn't set out to craft a unique subset of believers who would exalt him as the man of God for our time, and use and abuse the Bible in the process. Wierwille did, to devastating effect. For the past few years it's been my belief that Wierwille did some pretty bad things, and if I am going to value the things I was taught, it has to be independent of that man. I will not defend him, nor will I dismiss the things he taught merely because he taught them. However, if I determine that he was wrong about something, and the available evidence leads me to conclude his reason for being wrong was deliberate and self-serving, then I'm going to say it, and why not? Wierwille was wrong about tithing, and wrong in a way that profitted him greatly. I believe it was deliberate (the guy who taught "to whom addressed" couldn't possibly keep missing the point that "the church" is never given the tithe as a minimum standard). His failure to address adultery in the Christian Family and Sex class was self-serving. Honest Christians disagree about dispensationalism/administrations. I don't think it's right to accuse people of disagreeing with that doctrine just because they "hate" Wierwille (and if you didn't make that accusation, you sure as sugar implied it). Let's talk about the thread title: I think you need to know that the subject of dispensationalism has come up on this board a number of times. You should also know (and I'm sure you do) that not all dispensationalists agree on the nature and timing of the dispensations. In fact, Wierwille is, if I am not mistaken, the ONLY one who referred to them as administrations rather than dispensations. It's also odd that he sets the "Christ Administration" as a separate dispensation (others teach that it fell under the law, closing it out). Point is, Wierwille's particular brand of dispensationalism was unique: whether it's wacky is a statement of opinion, and I think you've read far more into the title of this thread than the substance of the posts that followed. Interested in your thoughts.

Forgive me, Dan, but I thought this needed to be restated, in bold, capital letters, if I had the time or patience to work on that:

Dave, Have you aligned with CES? If you haven't, sounds like you'd be mostly at home there.

Hmm... methinks Trefor hath proven mine point. George, I've often called Titanic "the best badly written movie ever made." You're right, the story is vapid and the dialogue is as bad as anything I've seen. But damned if I didn't love the movie, and no, I did not have a sense that more than three hours had passed when it was over. Cameron crafted a "story," such as it was, with one goal in mind: take me from bow to stern and everywhere in between, and give me a real good sinking sequence. Mission accomplished.

Why exactly do Pentecostal churches meet more than once a year?

Steve! I just checked the list I keep of things I need to know. Son of a gun, that ain't on it. :)-->

Forget about the movies you think everyone's got. Let's recommend some gems we don't think everyone's got. Top of my list: Sommersby (1993) Richard Gere, Jodie Foster The less you know about it going in, the better. This is a post Civil War romantic drama. The rest, I leave to you.

Well, someone's got to say it, so it might as well be me. In Titanic, Leo looked like a more credible love interest for Fabrizio or Cal than for Rose. There, I said it. Stone me.

How many of us would have even HEARD of this if not for the objections of the pious?

Okay, I haven't heard back from Rick, so I'm going to make this a public notice and apologize to him publicly for failing to tell him first. The Living Epistles Society Forum is back up, but all the old info is lost. I do not have any information on anyone who signed in before. Click on the logo to sign in. For those who aren't aware, the forum was set up as an explicitly Christian sidekick to GSCafe. People are often reminded on this site that GSCafe is "not a Christian forum." Well, LES is a Christian forum. There is no link to the new forum on the main LES page (yet), so this post is the only way to get there. I'll be changing that soon: my computer at home has been kerfurffle lately, so I haven't been updating (long story). Rick, I still need to chat with you (you'll understand why, if you don't already). Thanks to Rick and to Paw for helping out with this. See you there.

Not exactly: most JW's don't even know the ID of the man behind the curtain, and if they do know it, they hardly care. They certainly don't carry wallet-sized photos of the guy.

Woohoo!

Rick, Please contact me via e-mail. Raf

What the Hay: No, the reason is that believing is not a law. No, the reason is that believing is not a law. No one said believing doesn't work. Only that it is not a law. Want to know what God thinks of your opinion? When was the last time He asked you for it? Perhaps. Or it could just be that believing is not a law. Finally, we agree.

In order not to derail (and I apologize because I already have), I'll just say that Belle, with all due respect, you are seriously mistaken. Be happy to discuss privately if you wish.

I'd like to find the parents of Glenn Close, Darryl Hannah and Michael Learned to explain to them the difference between little boys and little girls.

Before you go, are you clear that what Wierwille did is considered plagiarism? I mean, plagiarism is a strong word, and if you really think what Wierwille did was plagiarism, you should be clear about it. So, was it plagiarism or was it plagiarism?

There's still something fishy here though. CBS should have outright denied the claim in the UCC press release, but they didn't, which suggests to me they are guilty of what UCC claims. That has nothing to do with any policy of not accepting ads for religions.

Knuckles, Sorry to hear that's the way things are in your community. I have no doubt there are churches right here in South Florida that are exactly the same. I doubt they are the majority, but I cannot knowingly deny they exist.