Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Twinky

Members
  • Posts

    5,490
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    200

Twinky last won the day on May 13

Twinky had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Twinky

  • Birthday March 30

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Out of the box
  • Interests
    Cat whispering,
    Gardening,
    Bath City Pastors,
    St Andrews Community Church (StACC),
    Good red wine and cold dry cider

Recent Profile Visitors

33,054 profile views

Twinky's Achievements

Community Regular

Community Regular (8/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare

Recent Badges

1k

Reputation

  1. Good to see that the Mary figure is obeying covid mask safety.
  2. Was that meant to be sarcastic? He didn't have a "research ministry." He had a deceiving ministry. Now, who would that be from? The father of lies, perhaps.
  3. "Consulted" could just be a gloss on "read a few books that they wrote" [and that he subsequently plagiarised]. "Worked with" could mean he laid out the chairs for their meetings . Or chopped wood or washed the dishes. I doubt he "chopped Word" and discussed theological issues with anybody. Y'know. Like his association with the baseball lot. Giving you to understand that he'd been a hotshot player, when he probably only sat on the bleachers. He doesn't mention the people he really poached his classes from, nor Bullinger (dead before VPW born) whose works he also plagiarised.
  4. Now that is a very good point. And it puts the face-meltings and slanderous remarks that were so commonplace in TWI in perspective. If VPW can "face-melt" and pour scorn upon Jesus in this way - hey! those of us that suffered face-meltings for from him (or in my case from his protege Craig) are in very good company! I heard many such slanderous remarks about "cop outs" and other perceived transgressors, usually well after they'd been ejected. I used to wonder how such evil people could possibly have hidden in our midst - I knew some of the slandered people well and found the allegations hard to even begin to fathom. And over a decade after M&A-ing me, I was told about slanderous comments that had been made about me at the time. Absolutely no basis in reality. They were so slanderous they were hysterically funny, as anyone who actually knew me would know. (At least, I hope so! Unless they were wearing PFAL-coloured glasses.) Perhaps we should see such face-meltings as a badge of honour?! Jesus, now. Had plenty of unprovoked and vile attacks, both slanderously and physically, in the time he walked on the earth. His ministry disparaged at every turn. Others apparently using his name in vain. No doubt Vic's insults would just have elicited a shrug from him: not important enough to bother about. Jesus would have swatted away the fly that was VPW and just gone along on his way.
  5. Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time. It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant. It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise. And for the angel to have words with Joseph. If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour. It was considered rape. But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc. In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother. Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up. You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.
  6. Mike, I ask you this question in all sincerity. Do you read The Bible? Do you sit down and just read it? Like a book. Like a favourite novel or history book or whatever. Take off your "thinking brain" that runs off in particular directions when you read certain verses, and just read for the pleasure of it? Do you pick up the Bible and read, say, the gospel of Mark, or one of the epistles? Or more esoterically, a chunk of Numbers or Leviticus or Jeremiah, or Micah or Hosea? Do you read the Bible, or do you just read books about the Bible?
  7. Retemories... now there's a great jargon word. Does it interpret itself? Does anyone outside TWI have a clue what it means?
  8. I think, Mike, that you'll find many of us focus on the good we got FROM THE BIBLE, not from PFAL in any of its forms. That's where we get our peace. We're at peace with what GOD wrote. I doubt you'll find anyone here who has a driving need to "be at peace" with what you wrote.
  9. Amplified can be very good, because it tries to include words that nuance the meaning of the bare English word, which is probably an inexact translation. Yes, probably that's where he pinched most of his "expanded literals according to usage." I'd noticed that before. Just like I'd noticed how often Bullinger's Companion Bible had found the same things that VPW had. Strange that - since VPW was being taught the word as it hadn't been known since the 1st century - and yet, here was Bullinger, a century before VPW, finding exactly the same thing... hmmm. I think VPW's claim was along the lines of how he put it all together. The big thing that he forgot was: putting it together includes living it. Because the whole point is to live as God wants us to. Not to become knowledge experts, but to become living-it experts. It would be nice to think that those teaching this new class were "living it" but I strongly doubt it. The only one I got a sense of reality from was the man OldSkool names as Lynd0n $uml!n. The others look like puppets. Which they are. TWI really should get a class together on motivational speaking for their presenters. There's loads of stuff available on YouTube, TedTalks, etc (all free!!! that should be appealing!), not to mention paid-for specialists who could give individual tuition.
  10. This is precisely why Mike and his bloody "Easter eggs" that "doctor" hid in his various books annoys me so much. Who the h3ll needs to hide "God's secrets" when God himself wants to reveal them to us and so states, very plainly, very many times?
  11. Not only was VPW self-contradictory in what was taught in PFAL (which hopefully this latest class will have sorted out by now, unless they're still practising the same particular type of double-think), his grammar was absolutely terrible, he didn't understand the English language well at all (not even the US version of same). So those folk here who want to nitpick about grammar had better start with him and his books - not with people here. And not only were his English and his grammar poor. His knowledge of the OT was poor, too. That I find particularly surprising. He did get a sort of divinity degree, which I think was sort of legitimate (unlike the papermill doctorate) but it's as if he'd never really read or deeply considered the OT apart from the bits he used to bolster his take on the NT. I'd've thought that he needed to have read and studied part if not all of the OT at divinity school. But perhaps not? Without a decent knowledge of the OT, much of the NT is reduced in its richness. There's a depth that comes from reading and understanding the OT and in all honesty, I didn't see that depth in VPW. Not once I'd got into and studied the OT, thought about it looking backwards and forwards and in context of later NT knowledge. Perhaps that's why he never taught much from the gospels? Didn't understand even them? I wonder if there is more depth in this new class? Are there "teachers" who have actually read the OT? Or are they just reciting VPW's words and least egregious errors, without engaging brain? Do I care enough to pay $xx to find out? No, I would not pay even one cent. Indeed, not sure I'd sit through their class even if they paid me!
  12. Joke: “A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air. "Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife annual and tosses it over his shoulder. "I'm a panda," he says, at the door. "Look it up." The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation. Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.” Book: Eats, Shoots & Leaves eBook by Lynne Truss - 9781101218297 | Rakuten Kobo Available from various sources. Book description: We all know the basics of punctuation. Or do we? A look at most neighborhood signage tells a different story. Through sloppy usage and low standards on the internet, in email, and now text messages, we have made proper punctuation an endangered species. In Eats, Shoots & Leaves, former editor Lynne Truss dares to say, in her delightfully urbane, witty, and very English way, that it is time to look at our commas and semicolons and see them as the wonderful and necessary things they are. This is a book for people who love punctuation and get upset when it is mishandled. From the invention of the question mark in the time of Charlemagne to George Orwell shunning the semicolon, this lively history makes a powerful case for the preservation of a system of printing conventions that is much too subtle to be mucked about with.
  13. Well, that was a waste of 4-1/2 minutes of my life. The only one who seemed remotely interesting to listen to was the black guy in the middle. The others were so boring and - and where was the New? the Today? If I cast my mind back (which I don't care to), I reckon I could recite what they're going to say. I thought they might put something more - titillating? - today-ish, in, to tempt people along. And to start the bloody video with a clip of VPW... Yikes! Needs to come with a special "health warning" !!!!!!!!
×
×
  • Create New...