Twinky

Modcat, can you add a few paragraph breaks when you merge his previous threads? Make them readable? (Just joking. You have enough to do already)

Waysider, great clip. I like the Singing Ladies, nice outfits too. Can you see them in the auditorium? Heh heh heh

She'll have a deputy appointed. All of the BoT / BoD whatever they call themselves now, all of them have a deputy. Donna. maybe? J0hn Rupp?

Very funny, John. The only hairstyle that I'm aware was disapproved of was on a younger Corps girl. She came back from Christmas holidays (yeah!) and had had one side of her head shaved from the area just below a "parting line." The other side was still long hair. She looked weird. Maybe there was a reason for it (her baby brother had superglued it? Her friend had spilled paint on it? She'd hung over a gas burner too long? Minor brain surgery over the hols?) She said she fancied something different and (of course) said she thought it looked fine. The Corps Coord told her to grow it out and not to keep shaving it. It might distract people from the Word. Especially if she was out witnessing. (I did agree with him about that.) (I thought it should have been a suggestion/ recommendation, though, not an order.)

Wow. I do remember (from where, I don't know) condemnation of the devilish game of D&D. Maybe Dave A had parted company with TWI by then so they felt free to condemn the game (actually the person, who no longer supported them financially). Invited to special parties. What a long way from our text at church this week, from Luke 14: (BTW I am not saying Dave A gave money so that he could gain kudos or a "higher place.")

MRAP, it is not about YOU "taking care of someone" or even "bringing into the word." YOU are only one individual. It's not (in TWI style) just your responsibility to ensure someone "gets into the Word" and even less that they "accept" the Word (that's their individual responsibility). For a start, you are not the only person in your victim's (?) life. (They were victims when we tried to get them to take the class!) It's egotistical to think that it's all down to YOU. Don't you think Jesus has other people helping the person he wants to "bring into the Word"? Other people that the intended lives with, works with, has as relatives or neighbors, fellow club members, drinking mates... We are fellow laborers with him (Jesus) and not take-over merchants that want the glory all for ourselves. Be thankful if your example or your words does help win someone. But it's highly likely that many others will have played a significant part too in sowing the seed; maybe you were just the last to add a little water or got the privilege to "harvest" - but it's not your harvest, you are still only one of many laborers. There are many ways to witness. Your lifestyle is key. Help at a food bank, with the Salvation Army, in a charity shop, doing something useful in your neighborhood. Whatever. Stand up alongside people who are oppressed. Confront the workplace bully. Don't get drunk but help those who are drunk. DO something, don't knock on doors or simply tell people. Let your life and your actions be the witness. That's the way you will "bring people to the Word." And you will show them right living at the same time. It's NOT lame to help other people. You don't know what simply being kind to someone in a soup kitchen might mean to them. Be prepared, yourself, to work alongside other Christians. You might just shock yourself with what you learn from them. Indeed, you might find yourself being "brought to the Word." The real Word. The Living Word.

A pratt of the first order and not worth engaging with. Great at wasting time, and useless and doing anything constructive. Surely drove that teacher mad.

Good reply, George.

Two too many to choose from, Tzaia.

Wouldn't it be better, rather than getting het up about what language is used, to consider what people's actions say? "Liberty and justice for all"? Can you honestly say that applies - in the USA (or perhaps in any other country)? Do you even want "liberty...for all"? (Freedom from slavery yes, liberty for all no - murderers, rapists, prolific thieves, etc?) Can you honestly say that everyone gets the same level of justice? Does the size of one's pocket make a difference? The colour of one's skin? One's religion? I say this thinking of the spate of police killings of young black males who may or may not have committed an offence. How can you be "one nation indivisible" when many Americans are so very proud of their Irish/Italian/Jewish/Amish/Martian background and stay closely within that racial group with little intermixing with other groups? (Ducks for cover...!)

Sounds a bit like the Special Boat Service training where a team has to carry a boat everywhere during a particular type of training exercise. One fails, all fail. Maybe other Services have similar training. VPW might have heard of such a thing and in his hotchpotch way decided it would be useful for the in-rez corps. I can tell you that WC20-24 didn't do any such thing and I never heard of it from older corps.

WW, that's a very old thread you've dredged up. Okay, well, here are some new lawyer jokes from a different website: Cross Examination A defense attorney was cross-examining a police officer during a felony trial - it went like this: Q. Officer, did you see my client fleeing the scene? A. No sir, but I subsequently observed a person matching the description of the offender running several blocks away. Q. Officer, who provided this description? A. The officer who responded to the scene. Q. A fellow officer provided the description of this so- called offender. Do you trust your fellow officers? A. Yes sir, with my life. Q. With your life? Let me ask you this then officer - do you have a locker room in the police station - a room where you change your clothes in preparation for your daily duties? A. Yes sir, we do. Q. And do you have a locker in that room? A. Yes sir, I do. Q. And do you have a lock on your locker? A. Yes sir. Q. Now why is it, officer, if you trust your fellow officers with your life, that you find it necessary to lock your locker in a room you share with those same officers? A. You see sir, we share the building with a court complex, and sometimes lawyers have been known to walk through that room. With that, the courtroom erupted in laughter, and a prompt recess was called. Objection A lawyer cross-examined the adversary's main witness. "You claim to have stopped by Mrs. Edwards' house just after breakfast. Will you tell the jury what she said?" "Objection, your honor," shouted the other lawyer. There then followed a long argument between the lawyers as to whether the question was proper. Finally, after 45 minutes, the judge allowed it. "So," the first lawyer continued, "Please answer the question: What did Mrs. Edwards say when you went to her house after breakfast on December 3rd?" "Nothing," said the witness. "No one was home." Bad Neighbours A dog ran into a butcher shop and grabbed a roast off the counter. Fortunately, the butcher recognized the dog as belonging to a neighbor of his. The neighbor happened to be a lawyer. Incensed at the theft, the butcher called up his neighbor and said, "Hey, if your dog stole a roast from my butcher shop, would you be liable for the cost of the meat?" The lawyer replied, "Of course, how much was the roast?" "$7.98." said the butcher. A few days later the butcher received a check in the mail for $7.98. Attached to it was an invoice that read: Legal Consultation Service: $150 Flight Emergency Noticing they were having engine trouble, the pilot instructed the crew to have the passengers take their seats and prepare for an emergency landing. A few moments later, the pilot asked the attendants if everyone was buckled in and ready. "We're all set back here, Captain," an attendant replied. "Except for one lawyer who is still going around passing out his business cards." The Compliment "You seem to have more than the average share of intelligence for a man of your background," sneered the lawyer at a witness on the stand. "If I wasn't under oath, I'd return the compliment," replied the witness. New Client A lawyer opened his own office right after successfully passing the bar exam. Sitting idly at his desk, his secretary announced that a Mr. Baker was there to see him. He told his secretary to show him right in. Thinking that it was a new client he wanted to make a good impression. As Mr. Baker was entering his office, the lawyer picked up the phone and yelled into it…"Absolutely not! You tell them I will not settle this case for less than five hundred thousand dollars. Don't bother me again until that amount has been agreed to!" Slamming the phone down, he greeted Mr. Baker saying, "How do you do Mr. Baker. What can I do to help you?" Mr. Baker replied, "Hi, I'm from the phone company. I'm here to connect your phone." Justice Has Triumphed A lawyer had a jury trial in a very difficult business case. The client who had attended the trial was out of town when the jury came back with its decision, which was for the lawyer and his client. The lawyer immediately sent a telegram to his client, reading "Justice has triumphed!" The client wired back, "Appeal at once!" Suit Settled A young attorney who had taken over his father's practice rushed home totally elated. "Dad, listen, you aren't going to believe this," he said to his father. "I've finally settled that old Whitmore suit." "Settled it!!" bellowed his father. "You bumbling idiot! We've been living off of that money for over five years now!" Jury Duty A man who was chosen for jury duty wanted very much to be dismissed from serving. He tried just about every excuse he could come up with, but nothing worked. On the day of the trial, he decided to give it one more try. Just as the trial was about to begin, he asked if he could approach the bench. "Your Honor," he said, "I feel I must be excused from this trial since I am prejudiced against the defendant. I took one look at the man in the blue suit with those sneaky, beady eyes and that dishonest face and I said, 'He's a crook! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!' Therefore, your Honor, I could not possibly remain on this jury." Glaring at him, the Judge replied, "Get yourself back in the jury box. That man is his lawyer!" I'm fine Farmer Joe decided his injuries from the accident were serious enough to take the trucking company to court. In court, the trucking company's fancy lawyer was questioning farmer Joe. "Didn't you say, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine'?" said the lawyer. Farmer Joe responded, "Well, I'll tell you what happened. I had just loaded my favorite mule Bessie into the......." "I didn't ask for any details," the lawyer interrupted, "just answer the question. Did you not say, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine!'" Farmer Joe said, "Well, I had just got Bessie into the trailer and I was driving down the road..." The lawyer interrupted again and said, "Judge, I am trying to establish the fact that, at the scene of the accident, this man told the Highway Patrolman on the scene that he was just fine. Now several weeks after the accident he is trying to sue my client. I believe he is a fraud. Please tell him to simply answer the question." By this time the Judge was fairly interested in Farmer Joe's answer and said to the lawyer, "I'd like to hear what he has to say about his favorite mule Bessie." Joe thanked the Judge and proceeded, "Well, as I was saying, I had just loaded Bessie, my favorite mule, into the trailer and was driving her down the highway when this huge semi-truck and trailer ran the stop sign and smacked my truck right in the side. I was thrown into one ditch and Bessie was thrown into the other. I was hurting real bad and didn't want to move. However, I could hear ole Bessie moaning and groaning. I knew she was in terrible shape just by her groans. Shortly after the accident a Highway Patrolman came on the scene. He could hear Bessie moaning and groaning so he went over to her. After he looked at her he took out his gun and shot her between the eyes. Then the Patrolman came across the road with his gun in his hand and looked at me. He said, "Your mule was in such bad shape I had to shoot her - how are you feeling?" He's Alive! A noted criminal defense lawyer was making his closing argument for his client accused of murder, although the body of the victim had never been found. The lawyer dramatically turned to the courtroom's clock and, pointing to it, announced, "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I have some astounding news. I have found the supposed victim of this murder to be alive! In just ten seconds, she will walk through the door of this courtroom." A heavy quiet suddenly fell over the courtroom as everyone waited for the dramatic entry. But nothing happened. The smirking lawyer continued, "The mere fact that you were watching the door, expecting the victim to walk into this courtroom, is clear proof that you have far more than even a reasonable doubt as to whether a murder was actually committed." Tickled with the impact of his cleverness, the cocky lawyer confidently sat down to await acquittal. The jury was instructed, filed out, and filed back in just ten minutes with a guilty verdict. When the judge brought the proceedings to an end, the dismayed lawyer chased after the jury foreman: "Guilty? How could you convict? You were all watching the door!" "Well," the foreman explained, "Most of us were watching the door. But one of us was watching the defendant, and he wasn't watching the door." In the Diner Two lawyers entered the diner and ordered a couple of drinks. They then took sandwiches from their briefcases and began to eat. Seeing this, the angry owner went over to them and said, "Excuse me, but you cannot eat your own sandwiches in here!" Shrugging their shoulders the lawyers exchanged sandwiches. The Hamburger Prosecutor : What were you doing on July 15th at 9 o'clock in the evening ? Prisoner : I was eating hamburger. Prosecutor : What were you doing at 9:30 p.m. ? Prisoner : I was taking a bicarbonate of soda. Prosecutor : Do you expect us to believe you ? Prisoner : You would if you had eaten one of those hamburgers. The Lawyer and the Federal Housing Authority A New Orleans lawyer sought an FHA (Federal Housing Authority) loan for a client. He was told the loan would be granted if he could prove satisfactory title to a parcel of property being offered as collateral. The title to the property dated back to 1803, which took the lawyer three months to track down. After sending the information to the FHA, he received the following reply (actual letter): "Upon review of your letter adjoining your client's loan application, we note that the request is supported by an Abstract of Title. While we compliment the able manner in which you have prepared and presented the application, we must point out that you have only cleared title to the proposed collateral back to 1803. Before final approval can be accorded, it will be necessary to clear the title back to its origin." The lawyer responded as follows (actual letter): "Your letter regarding title in Case No. 189156 has been received. I note that you wish to have title extended further than the 194 years covered by the present application. I was unaware that any educated person in this country, particularly those working in the property area, would not know that Louisiana was purchased by the U. S. from France in 1803, the year of origin identified in our application. For the edification of uninformed FHA bureaucrats, the title to the land prior to U. S. ownership was obtained from France, which had acquired it by Right of Conquest from Spain. The land came into possession of Spain by Right of Discovery made in the year 1492 by a sea captain named Christopher Columbus, who had been granted the privilege of seeking a new route to India by the then reigning monarch, Isabella. The good queen, being a pious woman and careful about titles, almost as much as the FHA, took the precaution of securing the blessing of the Pope before she sold her jewels to fund Columbus' expedition. Now the Pope, as I'm sure you know, is the emissary of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. And God, it is commonly accepted, created this world. Therefore, I believe it is safe to presume that He also made that part of the world called Louisiana. He, therefore, would be the owner of origin. I hope ... you find His original claim to be satisfactory. Now, may we have our ... loan?"

That's a big cat, Allan, a Bengal male. Must be about as big as the fox. Must have given "Reynard" a fright :o/>

Well. My newly black-and-white cat is now nearly a black cat again. She has done an amazing job of chewing off all the white paint. It was thickly on her front legs and less thick on other parts, and she has chewed and torn nearly all of it off. Her front legs are nearly bald on the insides, from elbow to toes. Her belly - well, she tugs at bits of it for a while then leaves it and goes back to it later - I guess it gets tender. It looks like dreadlocks hanging off her tum. Her left flank is now clear of paint and the right side mostly clear. My carpets have been covered in fragments of paint-hardened hair from where she's pulled it off and spat it out. She does not seem to have been affected by her unusual diet - perhaps she didn't lick as much off as I'd feared. She was still eating her kibble the night it happened, and begging for her treat (fragments of ham) at treat-time at 11pm. She hasn't been sick, and doesn't seem at all bothered in any way. So, if you prayed for her, thanks, and it's a great result. I still wouldn't recommend emulsion paint as cat food, though. :wacko:/>

I now have two black and white cats. Crypto (the all-black one) has has an encounter with a can of white emulsion paint. It seems to have been knocked over and has spilled on the floor. She walked through it, and then squeezed her belly through/along the floor where the paint had been spilled. As far as I can tell, she has paint on both flanks, undoubtedly on her belly, and thickly on her front pads and on both front legs from the shoulders down. Her head, face, and back appear unaffected by paint. Top of tail still looks black. Can't see the underside. Don't know what the back legs are like, either. I was alerted by her retching under the dining table. I thought she'd been grazing on my lawn, not uncommon. Went to chase her to be sick outside but she ran off up the stairs. She has now run over all of my carpets including two flights of stairs, over the coconut matting, over my nice couch and other furniture, and other places besides. I know this because there are white pawprints everywhere. This is the cat that I cannot catch or pick up. She lets me stroke her a little, a very little, nowadays, but she won't be picked up. The thought of trying to catch her and clean her up is immensely problematical; my plan had been to catch her and take her to the vet to be sedated and then washed. I am very worried about this. The people at the vet's have been nice and assure me that she may feel ill as she tries to clean herself but emulsion paint is not poisonous and there should be no long-term effects on internal organs (like liver damage, or mouth or throat injury). At the moment she has fled to the garden and is hiding under a bush, from where she peers out at me very suspiciously. She doesn't look happy. I stand no chance of catching the cat. Better go and see if anything, anything at all, can be done for the carpets and furniture. I wonder if my house insurance company would consider buying me some new ones? Please pray that my pusska really is well and suffers no long-term ill-effects.

Don't think my neighbours believe in anything. I'm involved in various Christian activities locally. The trinity is something I simply never raise or discuss with any of them. Interestingly, my Mum has recently decided for various reasons to become an Adherent (=decided to join/become a member) in the Salvation Army. The joining form requires applicants to affirm their belief in the trinity. She declined to sign this and asked the membership sec to come and see her to discuss, and raise with his/her superiors. In between times, however, the form has changed and now requires wannabes to simply affirm they hold to SA beliefs, with none spelled out specifically. She doesn't mind signing this. I applied for a job recently (which I didn't get) with a Christian organisation. That application required a declaration that I agreed with their beliefs, first of which was the existence of the trinity. I pondered this and did sign the declaration, because I figured that the work done would exceed the lie (that they believe!) but I had and still have qualms about that. I've always thought that if the trinity doctrine was important to God and the Lord Jesus, they would have done something about this lie before, in the hundreds of years since it was first promulgated. As they haven't I conclude it can't be that worrying to them and there are bigger issues that they concern themselves with.

15 years? And in that time, a good many lives healed. Thanks for being here when I needed y'all. Even though some of the posters who were most help have now moved on.

Naw, suppose it were for real. I fancy a zip wire somewhere. Maybe in the woods across the road. Kids' archery, zip wire from target to target. (Naughtily, she thinks: zip wire and become the target.. oops). Paintballing, perhaps: that'd work with a zipwire.

"Work the Word" ... does anybody outside TWI use this expression? I'm sure if I used that expression in any of the Christian groups I'm associated with, other people would look at me strangely. "Read" the Word (or the Bible) - "study" the Word (or the Bible) - maybe, at a pinch, even "research" it. But ... "Work the Word"?? What does that mean, anyway? Wouldn't it mean "working out" what it meant/said and then doing it? Does it mean ... working signs, miracles and wonders? (But these don't necessarily come to order). I'm jolly sure Bible study means more than pretending to find out dubious meanings for ancient Greek or Hebrew words (especially when you don't know any Greek or Hebrew) and then building a philosophy upon those meanings. That seems more like "procrastinating the word" than "working" it.

I doubt it will be about TWI. But about cults in general, yeah. The directors fancy it'll be this: "a provocative take on a controversial, dangerous and thrilling world." Which tells me that whatever it is will be sensationalised, and will completely miss the slow erosion of "self" and personal boundaries, and their replacement by group norms. It's that word "thrilling" that sets my teeth. Scary...neurotic...isolationist...all of these. Even exciting, at times. But thrilling? :confused:/> The early followers of The Way were known for their generosity and openhandedness, and care for one another. That's not very "cultic" or dramatic. You could make good drama out of looking at the cult "experience." But drama is all it'll be.

If you think there is something of particular interest, why not post that section in Doctrinal and invite comments?Don't slam anyone who points out where it is apparently incorrect or inappropriate or doesn't keep some other principle in mind. You might even find some who find that your chosen passage is "new light." If you want to learn, to discuss, to make enquiry, then keep your own mind open to change. Most of us, however, have had enough of people who dissect the Bible and point out minutiae of supposed word meanings, without there being some resulting actions (ie, it's not enough to know a dozen words for being kind or compassionate, if ultimately there is no kindness or compassion in the way you treat people).

And Jeffsjo gets a starring role in the article you linked to, Hap. Good for Jeff.

There's good news!! :)

:offtopic:/> Mark, cats are doing fine, and one has now started to jump on my knee occasionally. Other has decided she likes being fondled, that is, I hold my hand at her head level and she rubs against it. Only 8 years old and finally discovering people don't always eat them, LOL. Back (just a little more) to the topic, I've "tamed" them by "holding on to the head," and when I can control their heads I can control their bodies. I figured that out from learning that I too need to hold on to The Head, and when I do that, it helps me settle and stay focused and not be overly concerned about what comes next. And all servants of whatever hierarchy definitely need to hold on to the head of their household and serve them well; otherwise, it's the exit door for them.

Presbuteros means basically an older person. Older, therefore (one hopes) wiser. Such people were often accorded seats on councils - because of their perceived wisdom. Not because of any ranking system (their degree in theology, ability to play the lute, collect more money, etc). This gives an explanation: BibleHub - Strongs Only later did it become a sort of title. As to episkopos, the same site gives this explanation: 1985 epískopos (a masculine noun, derived from 1909 /epí, "on/fitting contact," which intensifies 4649 /skopós, "look intently," like at an end-marker concluding a race) – properly, an overseer; a man called by God to literally "keep an eye on" His flock (the Church, the body of Christ), i.e. to provide personalized (first hand) care and protection (note the epi, "on"). "Though in some contexts 1985 (epískopos) has been regarded traditionally as a position of authority, in reality the focus is upon the responsibility for caring for others" (L & N, 1, 35.40). Easy to see how these became "titles" but it appears that this was neither the original meaning, nor the intent. If anything, I can see these as marks of respect. A bit like when you were a kid, you might have called your Mum and Dad's friends, or the neighbours of parental age, "auntie" or "uncle" even though there is no familial relationship. Perhaps "watchman" might have been a good name for an episkopos [often trans. overseer] and you can see a watchman quite easily as being a servant of a city, tasked with guarding and protecting the walls or city entrance and thus the inhabitants, the citizens.