Leaderboard

Thanks Rocky. As I said last night, I knew right after I sent that reply to Mike that I had wasted my time and words, in other words casting pearls before swine. I thought it better to let him live on his own little island with his beloved collaterals than engaging with him any more. I even wondered why he bothers to post on GSC for the same reason - he's wasting his time and words. However, after reading the posts this morning to Mike from you, WordWolf and OldSkool, I fully understand what you mean when you say Mike is hijacking "threads for a purpose diametrically opposed to the website's purpose." It's so he can still promote twi and pfal which is why people have to then confront and correct his false and evasive posts so no one will fall for them. I also can see the ploy he uses by "agreeing" with some things on GSC and saying how he sincerely wants twi to change in these areas (with his help of course) when what he really wants to do is keep a foot in the door so he can continue his spiel.

So, just from the social angle, it can cost one a spouse, friends, and/or family. Quite a risk for something that has already been disproven. But, horse, water.

So, are you suggesting that vpw ACTUALLY wanted you to check his work and leave if it didn't measure up, or was this just another ploy to make you think he was confident it would stand the test of time- in other words, a BLUFF? If it was NOT a bluff, why, then, was this buried in "ONE" teaching and not something he said all the time, increasing the chance people would check up behind him? It's like the ONE time I heard him joke that you can take money OUT of the ABS rather than put some in if you needed it. If he said it a lot, people would take him up on it. He made the comment a few times, separated by years and audiences. It was SHOWMANSHIP, not scholarship. Also, don't pretend the 1942 promise MIGHT be true by calling it "unproven." It has been DISproven. It's not "well, we can't know for sure" - we CAN know for sure, and it has been DISproven beyond any REASONABLE doubt. Nice try sneaking that one past, though. We DO agree that if pfal really is error and it's adhered to, the adherent is screwed. Furthermore, if one's doctrine that is BASED on a VARIATION of pfal is really error and is adhered to, the adherent is screwed.

Yes, getting through boundaries in relationships is all about finding angles through media.

Right right right . . . using the focus with the lens we see things how we want to and not how they are.

I saw more posts came in while I was writing this. Thank you to everyone who cleans up the "crap" laid by twi. You guys rock.

To answer the last question, I once listened to a video of Thomas Sowell discussing how organized crime actually reduces total (violent?) crime. Since the organized crime does need some order and doesn't benefit from loose cannons. Individuals who might commit crime and disregard the establishment may be less likely to commit the same crime knowing a mob boss runs the area. Maybe a cult organizes unwanted individuals who otherwise might be more dangerous as individuals without the cult consuming their time energy? If a person can't do something terribly productive put them in a hamster wheel to keep them occupied?

Jeepers! You'll never get a class together at that rate.