I have not known women to be less abusive than men in general. Marriage rates have declined because there's no incentive for anyone to do something so limiting and destructive.
It sounds like VPW is speaking to the fourth wall, and said what he thought others would be drawn too.
You're quite right about women being abusive as well. Thanks for the insight.
Yes, that bothers me also. Worse, if LCM is on it, still.
Theres negligible differences between rosalie and craig. I think Rosalie is faithful to Craigs ex-wife but beyond that she is just as mean...well...maybe not just as mean but mean... and cloaked in syrupy southern hospitality. She has no loyalties outside her circle and the way international.
Thank you. This is valuable information. I have been learning this slowly in small elements. I want to know these things so I know to whom I should write and phone.
Have you ever tried looking on their website? It tells you who the BoD are and gives contact details. Not hard, Mike.
The majority opinion among the active posters is that there was only ONE problem and that it was totally located in the pure evil anti-idol that VPW is depicted here often, and in every way.
What if all three of them lived inside us - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?They are all one in purpose so it would be detrimental to separate the spirit of truth from the other two as I was doing.Although they work together as a team, I think they each have a vital “role” in helping us to walk in love and in power.I’ll have to think more about this - what their ”roles” are according to scripture, so I can then know them better and confidently reach out to them in times of need.
Make sense?
Yeah, your posts always make a lot of sense !
In my opinion those kinds of notions will always pop up ‘naturally’ since we are by nature inquisitive beings.
Reflecting on my former frame of thought – which I had built based upon wierwille’s theology – I now realize how stifling and closeminded it was. What attracted me to wierwille’s theology was that it supposedly had all the answers – he demystified God, the supernatural, interpreting the Bible, how spirit works, how prayer works, how life works, etc…Buying into wierwille’s bull$hit was enough to deter me from looking into stuff like that on my own or check out any other source or viewpoints. I touched on that on another threadWhy PFAL sucks – the illusion of knowledge where I quoted from a Psychology Today article:
This brings us to the second question: what behaviors are motivated by the feeling of understanding…researchers feeling that their understanding per se was incomplete. What did this feeling motivate researchers to do? Continue to attempt and build their understanding per se. In the cases where researchers lack the feeling that their understanding per se was incomplete, they seem to do one thing: stop.
Maybe with my curiosity being satiated by wierwille theology - it’s like the feeling of filling up on junk food – you’re no longer hungry – so why go looking for a nutritious meal.
Since I left TWI, I leave myself open to explore further – especially when we’re talking about metaphysical stuff. For a while I was drawn to Superstring theory - Wikipedia – and it’s possible the supernatural realm is wrapped up in other dimensions…I talked about that on a thread Rocky started about the book Love Wins – see Love Wins thread – T-Bone’s comment on extra dimensions
But that’s only ONE possibility !!!!
Quantum mechanics - Wikipedia arose gradually from theories to explain observations that could not be reconciled with classical physics…Science is always evolving – as scientist stand on the shoulders of those that came before – see String Theory and Quantum Physics - dummies…it could be the supernatural realm is something totally different than what anyone could conceive or understand with our finite minds…
…Fundamentalism has a bad habit of interpreting the Bible so literally…I got into this on the
Thought I’d reference that other thread again – the post that inspired me to look more into the idiom of permission – here
And I’m reposting below what I recently said on that thread ( here ) ... if you want to check the hyperlinks in the reposting below you'll have to go to my post on the Absent Christ thread...anyway here it is:
It seems to me you’re trying to reconceptualize the book of Job with a confirmation bias I suspect you may have. I’m aware that you tend to interpret or recall information in a way that supports your belief in the value of wierwille / PFAL.
wierwille often interpreted the Bible through several myopic lenses – a couple of which are fundamentalism and spiritualism. That much is evident by your comments. wierwille’s tendency to enforce his rigid dogma and pretentious pseudo-spirituality never failed to play havoc with the linguistic and cultural resources embedded in the Bible.
19 Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne with all the multitudes of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’ “One suggested this, and another that. 21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’
22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked. “‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. “‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’ 23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.” I Kings 22:19-23
~ ~ ~ ~
One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them. The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Job 1:6
~ ~ ~ ~
My summary of The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible comments on the above verses:
In the ancient world, most cultures believed in many gods, imagining that the business of the gods was done in council – as typically happened in human governance. Unlike Israel’s understanding of Yahweh, the gods of other cultures had no overarching plan – it seems most decisions were made ad hoc. This corporate operation reflected an idea in the ancient world that one’s identity was found in their community. Just as the most significant identity is in one’s own clan, so the gods also acted in corporate solidarity.
The idea that the gods operated in community, however posed serious problems in Israel’s theology, in which only Yahweh had the ultimate divine authority over all other “gods”. Israel’s theology did not eradicate the concept of a divine council from their thinking – instead the council was transformed. Rather than being comprised of various gods, the council featured the “sons of God” over whom Yahweh presided and whose activities he delegated. These council members were not considered gods with autonomous divine authority equal to Yahweh’s. Rather they were spirit beings given a role in Yahweh’s governance of the world. This may also lend credence to the idiom of permission.
The pantheon of gods was often characterized by a hierarchy - cosmic gods, national gods, city patrons, clan deities, ancestral deities - and also differentiated by jurisdiction, manifestations and attributes. We can surmise that it was very difficult for the Israelites to adjust to a single God spanning all levels of hierarchy and all categories of jurisdiction.
Another factor that debunks wierwille’s literal interpretation of the divine council in Job is that every time the word “Satan” occurs in Job it is preceded by the definite article “hassatan”. This is strong evidence that satan is NOTa personal name, because Hebrew does not put a definite article in front of personal names. There’s little reason to equate this character with the devil since it can be used to describe other individuals by function – Numbers 22:22; I Samuel 29:4; I Kings 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25; Psalm 109:6.
God’s policies are the true focus of the challenge in the divine council. Job’s character is only the test case. The challenge therefore does not necessarily imply some flaw in God or Job.
Central to the book of Job is the question of human suffering – especially why people who are seemingly innocent suffer, which in turn raises the question about the righteousness of a loving God. Job deals with the question of retribution, the popular theology that the righteous prosper but the wicked suffer – this attempts to vindicate God – theodicy. Wisdom accounts of innocent suffering are found across the ancient Near East – which shows a universal concern from olden times and is still a contemporary issue.
End of my reposting - thanks be to God
~ ~ ~ ~
What’s all that got to do with your question “What if all three of them lived inside us - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?” That’s just my typical verbose way of admitting I don’t know
that's the challenge of a lot of deep theology...trying to explain the metaphysical...doctrine of the Trinity is one attempt to explain how the Farther, the Son and the Holy Spirit relate to us...…but keep on exploring…it makes for an exciting journey!
In the third or fourth paragraph, Dec 26, 2022, it's the great principle. (GP)
But it IS lower case.
The article goes into freewill decision making . . . after being told we have power and decide to do it.
That's how you make things happens. Someone puts a thought in your head about your freewill. So you're all like "I have the POWER", cause you thought it.
Ok, so the Giver gives a thought . . . and you have that thought . . . which is a He-Man image inside you . . . and that dopamine hit results in a manifestation of fruitiness . . . which is why you have to keep putting on The Word . . . cause dopamine crashes . . . and new thoughts are needed . . . and your dependent on the source, The Giver.
Mike said: The majority opinion among the active posters is that there was only ONE problem and that it was totally located in the pure evil anti-idol that VPW is depicted here often, and in every way.
5 hours ago, waysider said:
This is not at all accurate
Like the collaterals (BS), Mike's assumption (postulate) is not even close to being accurate.
Based on observations from objective investigations, my conclusion is there were many problems but one SOURCE.
That one source is the thief come to steal, kill and destroy, victor paul wierwille.
Have you ever tried looking on their website? It tells you who the BoD are and gives contact details. Not hard, Mike.
Yes, to the website. I was at a large local TWI meeting for the 80th Anniversary video live-feed last October. They had all these people on stage, but most who were in charge were new names to me. I think I got a photo of some of them in the mail as their follow-up on my taking the PFAL-T class. Still, no real info on who is who. Donna was not on stage, I don't think. But I hear Donna's sister was? The only one in the new administration I recognized on the video was Joe Coulter, but I rarely spoke to him when I was at HQ. He worked on the farm, and I worked in the town of New Knoxville.
I must admit that there are many posters here with names that blend badly in my mind together.
Rocky has made a similar point months ago. Those posters who have pictures, especially of their face, are easier to remember and easier to treat as a human. I only vaguely remember, Rocky, what you said, but it made sense to me at the time. Sorry if I got it wrong.
But, waysider, I have noticed that I tend to merge the people behind the posts if they have names that are all in lower case, and no picture.
I apologize if I lumped you into what I perceive is everyone's point of view, that VPW was never in fellowship and never walked with God and never blessed many very much.
BTW, I use my real name and an artist friend drew my cartoon face. But that was drawn 20 years ago, and I don't have that much hair any more.
In the third or fourth paragraph, Dec 26, 2022, it's the great principle. (GP)
But it IS lower case.
The article goes into freewill decision making . . . after being told we have power and decide to do it.
That's how you make things happens. Someone puts a thought in your head about your freewill. So you're all like "I have the POWER", cause you thought it.
Ok, so the Giver gives a thought . . . and you have that thought . . . which is a He-Man image inside you . . . and that dopamine hit results in a manifestation of fruitiness . . . which is why you have to keep putting on The Word . . . cause dopamine crashes . . . and new thoughts are needed . . . and your dependent on the source, The Giver.
Kata Kratos Karate! (KKK)
*grabs more string and thumb-tacks*
"The nine manifestations of holy spirit operate under a basic principle that can be seen in the following verses, which record Jesus Christ prophesying of the gift of holy spirit. Referring to the gift of holy spirit, John 16:13 says, “…for he [it] shall not speak of himself [itself]; but whatsoever he [it] shall hear, that shall he [it] speak….” This implies that your spirit, the gift, hears and learns from God and obeys what He tells it to say. We can see this again in verse 15. Jesus Christ says, “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he [it, the gift of holy spirit] shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” This is the first part of our basic principle—God, Who is Spirit, teaches your spirit."
===========
I see now.
It's kinda like "scripture build up." It's a rhetorical tactic. It establishes the principle as basic (fundamental) before revealing its greatness. Just tremendous!
"The nine manifestations of holy spirit operate under a basic principle that can be seen in the following verses, which record Jesus Christ prophesying of the gift of holy spirit. Referring to the gift of holy spirit, John 16:13 says, “…for he [it] shall not speak of himself [itself]; but whatsoever he [it] shall hear, that shall he [it] speak….” This implies that your spirit, the gift, hears and learns from God and obeys what He tells it to say. We can see this again in verse 15. Jesus Christ says, “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he [it, the gift of holy spirit] shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” This is the first part of our basic principle—God, Who is Spirit, teaches your spirit."
===========
I see now.
It's kinda like "scripture build up." It's a rhetorical tactic. It establishes the principle as basic (fundamental) before revealing its greatness. Just tremendous!
It's also like a wallet forgotten.... kinda...
"Great Principle"
"Greatest Secret in The World Today"
No (scripture) build up of where the ideas came from. Just presented like one were learning the alphabet as a toddler. This is an "a", Don't ask questions, just accept it.
No (scripture) build up of where the ideas came from. Just presented like one were learning the alphabet as a toddler. This is an "a", Don't ask questions, just accept it.
But, waysider, I have noticed that I tend to merge the people behind the posts if they have names that are all in lower case, and no picture.
C'mon, Mike. Your inability to pay attention to small details like people's names is --- rather telling about your attention to detail elsewhere.
And your ability to conflate experiences and opinions shows you just don't care, despite your protestations otherwise.
Wouldn't matter if we all sat around here in the Cafe with paper bags on our heads and drinking our coffee through straws. You'd still hear the different voices and opinions, and manage to distinguish those.
C'mon, Mike. Your inability to pay attention to small details like people's names is --- rather telling about your attention to detail elsewhere.
And your ability to conflate experiences and opinions shows you just don't care, despite your protestations otherwise.
Wouldn't matter if we all sat around here in the Cafe with paper bags on our heads and drinking our coffee through straws. You'd still hear the different voices and opinions, and manage to distinguish those.
I will manage. I mentioned this because sometimes I have some difficulty, due to the large number of people I debate with simultaneously.
I imagine other people, like new readers, may have similar difficulty. Putting a face to a poster's name will increase that poster's individual impact, and assist memories in an impersonal medium as a text forum.
Theres negligible differences between rosalie and craig. I think Rosalie is faithful to Craigs ex-wife but beyond that she is just as mean...well...maybe not just as mean but mean... and cloaked in syrupy southern hospitality. She has no loyalties outside her circle and the way international.
What do you accomplish by engaging in Mike's narrative? (rhetorical question)
I will manage. I mentioned this because sometimes I have some difficulty, due to the large number of people I debate with simultaneously.
I imagine other people, like new readers, may have similar difficulty. Putting a face to a poster's name will increase that poster's individual impact, and assist memories in an impersonal medium as a text forum.
Do you have any data to demonstrate that you actually lead "new readers?"
Do you accomplish anything worthwhile by "debating ANYONE" let alone a "large number of people you debate with simultaneously?"
Do you even reflect in whether the activity you engage in on GSC accomplishes anything worthwhile?
All three are rhetorical questions. You will not accomplish anything worthwhile by considering any responses/replies to me to be debating about anything.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
43
56
44
67
Popular Days
Jan 3
56
Jan 12
47
Jan 13
44
Jan 4
44
Top Posters In This Topic
T-Bone 43 posts
Bolshevik 56 posts
OldSkool 44 posts
Charity 67 posts
Popular Days
Jan 3 2023
56 posts
Jan 12 2023
47 posts
Jan 13 2023
44 posts
Jan 4 2023
44 posts
Popular Posts
Charity
Reading twi's article both was emotionally and physically sickening. It so reinforced the doctrinal and practical errors that robbed believers of having a personal relationship with God and Jesus Chr
Bolshevik
Rocky
Who among you (or us) might be strategic thinkers? Was Victor Wierwille a strategic thinker? (not necessarily a rhetorical question) Is Mike a strategic thinker? (rhetorical questi
OldSkool
It's murky by design. Use the search feature and lookup Rosalie's Retirement Plan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/20536-rosalies-retirement-plan/#comment-481250
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes, that bothers me also. Worse, if LCM is on it, still.
These are major items when considering where my giving should go.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
You're quite right about women being abusive as well. Thanks for the insight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Theres negligible differences between rosalie and craig. I think Rosalie is faithful to Craigs ex-wife but beyond that she is just as mean...well...maybe not just as mean but mean... and cloaked in syrupy southern hospitality. She has no loyalties outside her circle and the way international.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Have you ever tried looking on their website? It tells you who the BoD are and gives contact details. Not hard, Mike.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This is not at all accurate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Yeah, your posts always make a lot of sense !
In my opinion those kinds of notions will always pop up ‘naturally’ since we are by nature inquisitive beings.
Reflecting on my former frame of thought – which I had built based upon wierwille’s theology – I now realize how stifling and closeminded it was. What attracted me to wierwille’s theology was that it supposedly had all the answers – he demystified God, the supernatural, interpreting the Bible, how spirit works, how prayer works, how life works, etc…Buying into wierwille’s bull$hit was enough to deter me from looking into stuff like that on my own or check out any other source or viewpoints. I touched on that on another thread Why PFAL sucks – the illusion of knowledge where I quoted from a Psychology Today article:
This brings us to the second question: what behaviors are motivated by the feeling of understanding…researchers feeling that their understanding per se was incomplete. What did this feeling motivate researchers to do? Continue to attempt and build their understanding per se. In the cases where researchers lack the feeling that their understanding per se was incomplete, they seem to do one thing: stop.
Maybe with my curiosity being satiated by wierwille theology - it’s like the feeling of filling up on junk food – you’re no longer hungry – so why go looking for a nutritious meal.
Since I left TWI, I leave myself open to explore further – especially when we’re talking about metaphysical stuff. For a while I was drawn to Superstring theory - Wikipedia – and it’s possible the supernatural realm is wrapped up in other dimensions…I talked about that on a thread Rocky started about the book Love Wins – see Love Wins thread – T-Bone’s comment on extra dimensions
But that’s only ONE possibility !!!!
Quantum mechanics - Wikipedia arose gradually from theories to explain observations that could not be reconciled with classical physics…Science is always evolving – as scientist stand on the shoulders of those that came before – see String Theory and Quantum Physics - dummies …it could be the supernatural realm is something totally different than what anyone could conceive or understand with our finite minds…
…Fundamentalism has a bad habit of interpreting the Bible so literally…I got into this on the
Idiom of permission thread where I posted this (this is like a repost inside of a repost
):
Thought I’d reference that other thread again – the post that inspired me to look more into the idiom of permission – here
And I’m reposting below what I recently said on that thread ( here ) ... if you want to check the hyperlinks in the reposting below you'll have to go to my post on the Absent Christ thread...anyway here it is:
It seems to me you’re trying to reconceptualize the book of Job with a confirmation bias I suspect you may have. I’m aware that you tend to interpret or recall information in a way that supports your belief in the value of wierwille / PFAL.
wierwille often interpreted the Bible through several myopic lenses – a couple of which are fundamentalism and spiritualism. That much is evident by your comments. wierwille’s tendency to enforce his rigid dogma and pretentious pseudo-spirituality never failed to play havoc with the linguistic and cultural resources embedded in the Bible.
NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible: Bringing to Life the Ancient World of Scripture editors John H. Walton and Craig S. Keener offers some scholarly insight of the book of Job & Kings – on pages 615, 819 and 820. Here are verses in I Kings 22 and Job 1 that speak of a spiritual assembly that the study Bible addresses on those pages:
19 Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne with all the multitudes of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’ “One suggested this, and another that. 21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’
22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked. “‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. “‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’ 23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.” I Kings 22:19-23
~ ~ ~ ~
One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them. The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Job 1:6
~ ~ ~ ~
My summary of The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible comments on the above verses:
In the ancient world, most cultures believed in many gods, imagining that the business of the gods was done in council – as typically happened in human governance. Unlike Israel’s understanding of Yahweh, the gods of other cultures had no overarching plan – it seems most decisions were made ad hoc. This corporate operation reflected an idea in the ancient world that one’s identity was found in their community. Just as the most significant identity is in one’s own clan, so the gods also acted in corporate solidarity.
The idea that the gods operated in community, however posed serious problems in Israel’s theology, in which only Yahweh had the ultimate divine authority over all other “gods”. Israel’s theology did not eradicate the concept of a divine council from their thinking – instead the council was transformed. Rather than being comprised of various gods, the council featured the “sons of God” over whom Yahweh presided and whose activities he delegated. These council members were not considered gods with autonomous divine authority equal to Yahweh’s. Rather they were spirit beings given a role in Yahweh’s governance of the world. This may also lend credence to the idiom of permission.
The pantheon of gods was often characterized by a hierarchy - cosmic gods, national gods, city patrons, clan deities, ancestral deities - and also differentiated by jurisdiction, manifestations and attributes. We can surmise that it was very difficult for the Israelites to adjust to a single God spanning all levels of hierarchy and all categories of jurisdiction.
Another factor that debunks wierwille’s literal interpretation of the divine council in Job is that every time the word “Satan” occurs in Job it is preceded by the definite article “hassatan”. This is strong evidence that satan is NOT a personal name, because Hebrew does not put a definite article in front of personal names. There’s little reason to equate this character with the devil since it can be used to describe other individuals by function – Numbers 22:22; I Samuel 29:4; I Kings 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25; Psalm 109:6.
God’s policies are the true focus of the challenge in the divine council. Job’s character is only the test case. The challenge therefore does not necessarily imply some flaw in God or Job.
Central to the book of Job is the question of human suffering – especially why people who are seemingly innocent suffer, which in turn raises the question about the righteousness of a loving God. Job deals with the question of retribution, the popular theology that the righteous prosper but the wicked suffer – this attempts to vindicate God – theodicy . Wisdom accounts of innocent suffering are found across the ancient Near East – which shows a universal concern from olden times and is still a contemporary issue.
End of my reposting - thanks be to God
~ ~ ~ ~
What’s all that got to do with your question “What if all three of them lived inside us - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?” That’s just my typical verbose way of admitting I don’t know
that's the challenge of a lot of deep theology...trying to explain the metaphysical...doctrine of the Trinity is one attempt to explain how the Farther, the Son and the Holy Spirit relate to us...…but keep on exploring…it makes for an exciting journey!
Edited by T-Bonetypos
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
https://thewayinternational.com/operating-the-gift-of-holy-spirit/
In the third or fourth paragraph, Dec 26, 2022, it's the great principle. (GP)
But it IS lower case.
The article goes into freewill decision making . . . after being told we have power and decide to do it.
That's how you make things happens. Someone puts a thought in your head about your freewill. So you're all like "I have the POWER", cause you thought it.
Ok, so the Giver gives a thought . . . and you have that thought . . . which is a He-Man image inside you . . . and that dopamine hit results in a manifestation of fruitiness . . . which is why you have to keep putting on The Word . . . cause dopamine crashes . . . and new thoughts are needed . . . and your dependent on the source, The Giver.
Kata Kratos Karate! (KKK)
*grabs more string and thumb-tacks*
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Like the collaterals (BS), Mike's assumption (postulate) is not even close to being accurate.
Based on observations from objective investigations, my conclusion is there were many problems but one SOURCE.
That one source is the thief come to steal, kill and destroy, victor paul wierwille.
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes, to the website. I was at a large local TWI meeting for the 80th Anniversary video live-feed last October. They had all these people on stage, but most who were in charge were new names to me. I think I got a photo of some of them in the mail as their follow-up on my taking the PFAL-T class. Still, no real info on who is who. Donna was not on stage, I don't think. But I hear Donna's sister was? The only one in the new administration I recognized on the video was Joe Coulter, but I rarely spoke to him when I was at HQ. He worked on the farm, and I worked in the town of New Knoxville.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ok, I am happy to hear that. Honest.
I must admit that there are many posters here with names that blend badly in my mind together.
Rocky has made a similar point months ago. Those posters who have pictures, especially of their face, are easier to remember and easier to treat as a human. I only vaguely remember, Rocky, what you said, but it made sense to me at the time. Sorry if I got it wrong.
But, waysider, I have noticed that I tend to merge the people behind the posts if they have names that are all in lower case, and no picture.
I apologize if I lumped you into what I perceive is everyone's point of view, that VPW was never in fellowship and never walked with God and never blessed many very much.
BTW, I use my real name and an artist friend drew my cartoon face. But that was drawn 20 years ago, and I don't have that much hair any more.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
"The nine manifestations of holy spirit operate under a basic principle that can be seen in the following verses, which record Jesus Christ prophesying of the gift of holy spirit. Referring to the gift of holy spirit, John 16:13 says, “…for he [it] shall not speak of himself [itself]; but whatsoever he [it] shall hear, that shall he [it] speak….” This implies that your spirit, the gift, hears and learns from God and obeys what He tells it to say. We can see this again in verse 15. Jesus Christ says, “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he [it, the gift of holy spirit] shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” This is the first part of our basic principle—God, Who is Spirit, teaches your spirit."
===========
I see now.
It's kinda like "scripture build up." It's a rhetorical tactic. It establishes the principle as basic (fundamental) before revealing its greatness. Just tremendous!
It's also like a wallet forgotten.... kinda...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
"Great Principle"
"Greatest Secret in The World Today"
No (scripture) build up of where the ideas came from. Just presented like one were learning the alphabet as a toddler. This is an "a", Don't ask questions, just accept it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
"The Greatest Problem in the World Today"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Doubt, the Great Virtue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
C'mon, Mike. Your inability to pay attention to small details like people's names is --- rather telling about your attention to detail elsewhere.
And your ability to conflate experiences and opinions shows you just don't care, despite your protestations otherwise.
Wouldn't matter if we all sat around here in the Cafe with paper bags on our heads and drinking our coffee through straws. You'd still hear the different voices and opinions, and manage to distinguish those.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Fiery Fart. Renew your Mind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I will manage. I mentioned this because sometimes I have some difficulty, due to the large number of people I debate with simultaneously.
I imagine other people, like new readers, may have similar difficulty. Putting a face to a poster's name will increase that poster's individual impact, and assist memories in an impersonal medium as a text forum.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
What did you accomplish by calling Mike out in this comment? (rhetorical question)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
What do you accomplish by engaging in Mike's narrative? (rhetorical question)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Do you have any data to demonstrate that you actually lead "new readers?"
Do you accomplish anything worthwhile by "debating ANYONE" let alone a "large number of people you debate with simultaneously?"
Do you even reflect in whether the activity you engage in on GSC accomplishes anything worthwhile?
All three are rhetorical questions. You will not accomplish anything worthwhile by considering any responses/replies to me to be debating about anything.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Will you, really?
Wiil you, or do you actually accomplish anything here?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.