Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Twinky

Members
  • Posts

    5,598
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    210

Twinky last won the day on September 21

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

33,397 profile views

Twinky's Achievements

Rising Star

Rising Star (9/14)

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

Recent Badges

1.1k

Reputation

  1. Perhaps some of us are seeing actual people being "blessed." And none of them know anything about PFAL. But God knows them, loves them and blesses them. As for me, and many people here, we "hang out with" lots of known Christian people. And some non-Christians - for it's possible to have deep and meaningful discussions even with agnostic and atheists. I have NO proPFAL people in my intellectual life's network, because it seems to me that there is no intellectual life in any proPFAL network. I do, however, see the joy in the lives of real, practising, believing Christians across a range of churches and denominations. You will be very surprised, Mike, when you finally see all the joy we Christian people have. I suggest you branch out and get some new ideas flowing regarding Christianity. And in particular, regarding Jesus Christ. I also suggest that you are wrapped up in "intellectual inbreeding" - kinda like being wrapped up in clingfilm.
  2. Too right. No church, no real community involvement, no help to the needy whether "within" or "outside" the "household." Light will only "begin to dawn" when people realise the false dawn of TWI is exactly that - a false dawn. If some parts somehow do draw people to Christ, that's good but only as far as it goes - but when the majority of the false dawn draws people away from Christ, then the falsity is exposed. In fact it's more like the swamp-gas light (will o'the wisp) that leads people into big trouble. Will-o'-the-wisp - Wikipedia
  3. A bit how I feel about my laptop. But actually I think it enjoys the blue haze around it as I curse and practice some of the language I learned in TWI to encourage it to work better (hint: the blue haze doesn't work either!)
  4. When I was in rez, LCM commented one time (lunch time "sharing"?) that he sometimes walked the corridors in Founders Hall, praying for the people there. I'm very much a night owl and there were a couple of quiet but public places I'd go and sit and read or study or write letters. I always hoped I'd see this great "man of God" and be able to speak with him on his perambulations. But I never saw him, was a bit disappointed. I wondered if perhaps he roamed some of the other corridors. Once I learned of his abuse of females (graduated corps, not in rez Corps). then it made sense. I'm guessing he was visiting some female(s) in the other parts of Founders Hall. And his comment was to cover himself if anybody saw him in the Hall at some strange hour of night, when he might be expected to be in that fancy wooden house. And his comment about praying was, I began to assume, misunderstood. He was walking about PREYING on people, not praying for them.
  5. Quite right, WW. Mebbe that's why my optician sent me a reminder recently...!
  6. Cunning, isn't it. As king, all citizens were subject to David. His to command. But not owned by him. Not belonging to him. And that's all citizens - all the men, all the women, all the children. Here's another VPW aphorism: "With rights comes responsibility." Well, David may have had rights to command - but he had commensurate responsibilities to exercise that right, or power, in a way that protected the people. Not in a way that protected, first and foremost, himself. Whether Bathsheba consented or not, what David did was a clear abuse of power. He abused the woman at least once; he abused her husband repeatedly. He also (and nobody has raised this) abused his army and his nation by this selfish act and the subsequent attempted cover-ups. He treated Uriah with contempt, deceitfully trying several times to get Eliab to go to his wife, once after drinking and dining with him [think "salt covenant"], before finally arranging his killing. Bathsheba was in no position to consent. Surely she knew that adultery was wrong. And also what the penalty for adultery was: stoning to death. (Hands up anyone who thinks a one-night stand should lead to a particularly nasty form of execution.) (Wot, no takers? ) Sexual intercourse without consent, both then and now, is called RAPE. To cap it all, VPW claimed that "David was a man after God's own heart" and the clear implication is that this little foible could be overlooked because of the good, or wonderful, or [whatever] things David did. ("It was only a one-off." "It didn't mean anything." "She threw herself at me." And other blah blah excuses.) Check it out: God yelled at David (via Nathan) for the abuse. He "utterly scorned the Lord." God's own heart? I don't think so. Deeply shamed, David repented and seriously humbled himself before the Lord. And as far as we know, although he obviously loved having women around, he didn't rape any other women nor arrange for their husbands to be disposed of. But he did not escape without penalty. The illicit child died, despite David's pleading otherwise. Imagine Bathsheba's grief. Her loving and loyal husband - dead. Her baby - dead. Her king and new husband - a rapist and murderer. And next, imprisoned in a harem with lots of other, probably jealous, women. But David had repented, stayed repented, and it's only that that made him a man after God's heart. 2 Samuel 11 RSV - David Commits Adultery with Bathsheba - Bible Gateway Read the following chapter, too. That should be the model for anyone, especially clergy indulging in adultery. Once: perhaps forgiveable? Twice: perhaps forgiveable, but to protect the congregation, remove such a person from any further temptation - protect the congregation, and the perpetrator himself, from his own weakness - take him away from any role where he might find himself in a position to commit further abuse. Take him away! Put him out! Hey! That sounds very like mark and avoid! 1 Cor 5:11 :But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a brother [yes, even a "clergy brother"] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a verbal abuser, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
  7. Okay, I read more of the bl00dy transcript. And what it reads like, to me, is a list of the people he plagiarised. And the women he bonked in the early stages of his "ministry." (Am feeling a bit jaded and cynical this morning.)
  8. Well done, Chocky. I wish you many more years of happiness together.
  9. Well done, Rocky. Sounds like your activity was with equals, and not, from your quote, as an abuse of leadership power. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing.
  10. There will always be those stronger males who appear more attractive to the opposite sex (or their own sex...!) and some are not perhaps so attractive but their role in society is. Clergy, doctors, etc, fall into this category. Perhaps politicians, too. Office bosses. Do groupies still hang around pop groups? Some are "alpha males" (and wannabe alpha males) who think it's a recognition of their physical beauty or power. What would Jesus do? He loved women! Surrounded himself with them. Boosted them up against the cultural norm that saw them as second-class citizens (or less). Women followed him, tended him, helped fund his ministry, hung about devotedly with the band of followers and apostles. But show me the report where Jesus abused women, or slept with any of them. I missed that. Or where other males in the company abused such women. Other males in his company had wives, who may or may not have travelled with the band. Jesus did not. Was he asexual? Unlikely. He was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. (Heb 4:15) Therefore, it's possible to resist sexual urges, throwing yourself at women, women who throw themselves at you, etc etc. We all need (yes, really need) food. In a foodstore, do you help yourself to what's available? No! You recognise that it must be paid for, otherwise it's theft. You have the willpower to avoid pocketing that tasty-looking cake or chocolate bar or whatever. You don't steal a bottle of beer - well, maybe, if you're an alcoholic (=sick, ill) - you pay for it and consume appropriately. You don't nick your neighbour's car and go joyriding in it (unless you want a spell behind bars). You have the willpower to resist doing all these things. So why nick your neighbour's wife, daughter, mother? Do you really need to announce to the world how weak you are? How very far from being the strong man you fancy yourself as? Aha! Here is the answer (1 Cor 7:1ff): It is good to abstain from sexual relations. 2But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife. 5Do not deprive each other, except by mutual consent and for a time, so you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again, so that Satan will not tempt you through your lack of self-control. Lack of self-control is acknowledged, but hey! Here's the solution! And males who consistently show their weakness and lack of self-control in this area should take themselves away from temptation. Find another job. Never be alone with a woman. Wear a chastity belt. Get themselves castrated. Get psychological help/therapy. Give up your power and ego trip. Your problem - you do what it takes to fix it (developing willpower is a start). (And yes, I write this as one who loves delicious cakes and fine chocolate.) (I cope by avoiding cake shops and the choccy aisle.)
  11. Thanks for confirming that, Rocky. Others, bear in mind that, as well as regular posters here, there are lurkers who read and don't post. I'm not going to tell.
  12. I had a private message concerning this topic and I want to use an extract to highlight something else. (I'm not telling you who PM'd me. If that person wants to "out" themselves, that's their business.) I noticed while in High School a strong human dynamic that pops up in all human organizations and all ages: the Captain of the Football team get his choice of the hot cheer leaders. ... so many ministry leaders were like Football Captains and so many girls threw themselves at their feet, just like in High School and College. Just in case anyone had the idea that the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting were high school cheerleaders and "threw themselves" at Eli's sons, can I just remind them that Moses had, not that long before, firmly prohibited adultery. (D'ya remember? The ten commandments?) Who's the "guardian" of those commandments? Eli and his wicked sons. Even if (and there is no such inference) such women had crept naked into the sons' beds, it was still the sons' responsibility to say NO! and not to abuse the women. Eli knew, and half-heartedly rebuked his sons. There were big OT penalties for illicit sexual activity. It's clear those penalties were still in force (albeit laxly) in Jesus's time, and that's a long time later, centuries - over a millennium. There are many admonitions in the epistles; Paul wrote about sexual matters several times. And yet here we are. Two millennia later. Still dealing with clergy abuse of the women of the congregation. It's not limited to TWI. But it is - truly - the modus operandi for TWI. If male clergy feel "tempted" by the women in their congregation, whose fault is that? No, it is not the women's! It's the men's fault, and their weakness, if they cannot resist. And they should do what it takes to remove themselves. Never be alone with a woman not your wife (as Billy Graham is said to have insisted - so as to avoid any possible faint inference of impropriety). And never, never, never hunt down vulnerable women to take advantage of them.
  13. That paragraph jumped out at me, too, WW. But for a bit different reason. And here we go, perhaps a derail of the subject right at the beginning (but I got bored reading the article about 1/3 the way through) - I cannot remember ever hearing said that VPW himself tithed. Lotsa classes that he put together; lots that his minions later taught; but did he himself tithe? Ever? To his old church in Van Wert? To any other churches that he had belonged to? Mocked the alleged ministers in the above paragraph; pretty much made it compulsory for everyone in his own super-shiny new ministry. Mebbe you will say (or he did say) that he didn't draw a salary. I don't know - but he certainly got lots of benefits in kind. A home to live in. Vehicles to drive or be driven in (who paid for the fuel?). Food, both provided and prepared for him. Willing workers, ready to maintain the extensive grounds of his home. Healthcare. Who knows what other benefits? How did he pay for the cigarettes and the booze, if he didn't draw a salary? (Hardly legitimate ministry expenses!) Did he quantify these many and varied benefits and "tithe" off their value? Or did he just all accept it as "love offerings" because he was so deeply committed (oh, soooo deeply committed) to "working the word" that he didn't have time for a paid job?
  14. The "promise" didn't fail - for the simple reason that it never existed.
  15. And here we are again, back in the sidings of despair, way off track, not discussing at all the original subject.
×
×
  • Create New...