All Activity

So, Raf is up. George

"To love is to suffer. To avoid suffering one must not love. But then one suffers from not loving. Therefore, to love is to suffer; not to love is to suffer; to suffer is to suffer. To be happy is to love. To be happy, then, is to suffer, but suffering makes one unhappy. Therefore, to be unhappy, one must love or love to suffer or suffer from too much happiness. I hope you're getting this down." "You are the greatest lover I've ever had." "Well, I practice a lot when I'm alone." George

WW is up. George

A Room with a View Denholm Elliot Trading Places George

A Study in Terror A Midsummer Night's Dream Wetherby George

Sesame Street? George

I now see the ambiguity in my sentence. To be clear: The reputations and finances of victor wierwille, his top acolytes, and the Ponzi scheme they built were at risk.

True! But what risk in particular?

Frankly, I don't believe the idea originated with Kirk. I concur w/ the edit.

Let's ask Johnny LaRue...

I think that The answer to the question is yes..

We need something to get us out of all of this gloom..

This one is a real treasure.. heh. Half (drunk?) clueless (expletive beginning with B) looking for God in all of this mess.. heh. I have grown to love and appreciate Cheryl.

I think this one was earlier.

Thank you dear Oldiesman..I enjoy your Saturday Night. here is my new Saturday night.

All By Myself

I GOT NOTHING.

Calvin J Candie is what gave it away.

If their pro-abortion stance would be problematic for today’s movement, their John-Birchy flat-earthiness might just be enough for a second look and possible seat at the theocratic table.

Pro-choice? Hardly. It was never about a choice. Pro-abortion is a more mathematically accurate and scientifically precise description. Abortion was merely a rational and practical method deployed to mitigate risk of reputational and financial loss.

Thank you WordWolf. Please explain what the error in doctrine is. If you like, please post what iAsk says what Mary veneration actually is, so we may proceed with the same frame of reference. Thx.

I didn't believe in striking the guy's name since it was his idea in the first place, but whatever Raf wants to do with this thread is fine by me.

Yes. Among the other names was the eponymous character in The Great Gatsby.

(Yes, I think it was crazy to post this in the sub forum in which it started. That was just BEGGING for a flame post...which would have been on subject for the sub forum. I think there is a False Dilemma at work, and I am going to identify it. Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that. My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best. I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem. It seems ridiculous to have to say it, but Christianity needs women, and Christianity has room for women, and there is a lot for women there, both to offer them and for them to do, if action is the goal. We do not need to address that by embracing error. (I'm not aiming this at any posters here, just at the doctrine. Please try not to see offense in it. If I've offended in passing, I'm sorry.)