Twinky

And here is the same song in the original Ukrainian.

Deut 27:17 “Cursed is anyone who moves their neighbor’s boundary stone.” Then all the people shall say, “Amen!” Do you remember in PFAL where he went on about that meaning not just physical boundaries, but the boundaries of the mind? VPW's porn movies, the bad language, LCM's overripe descriptions of what homosexuals do, the hugs and touching at twig (introductory) level - all designed to move the boundaries of one's mind. All a bit of priming, here and there, for what might "be available" later.

Okay, I'm minded to start a brand new thread (again) and repeat my Empathy post. Perhaps we can all leave the first page and a half to Mike for his ruminations. And then we can all jump in. And Mike. No one great long screed. Anything you post will be in small chunks. Bite-size. If you want to make a long post, break it up. Like: Answer ONE paragraph with ONE OR TWO paragraphs of your own. Then move to your next post. And no bloody jargon or fake terminology, either, Mike. Anybody up for this?

You've given him enough, OS. He listens not to you, to the Bible, to words of wisdom from other posters. As the saying goes, "There's none so blind as those who will not see."

OldSkool, I really wonder why Mike has to compare collateral with collateral. I don't care how many edits are made. In Christian terms, what is the relevance? The importance? How does it actually result in any improved Christian walk? So what if it redeems the filthy Way Ministry from dense jet black to a slightly less opaque smokier black? Isaiah 42:6“I, the LORD, have called you for a righteous purpose, and I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and appoint you to be a covenant for the people and a light to the nations, 7to open the eyes of the blind, to bring prisoners out of the dungeon and those sitting in darkness out from the prison house. Does it say anything about those sitting in darkness sitting in less darkness? Anything about those abandoned in an oubliette (look it up) being transferred to a less stinky underground cell? No - the Lord wants his people out of darkness altogether. Comparing collateral versions is simply busy-work to avoid actually doing something productive. Like studying his Bible and doing things based on it - helping the unfortunate, looking after the sick, looking out for his neighbours - even, it appears, loving God. Of course, I could be wrong. If there's a verse that says "study the collaterals to show yourself approved unto God" then I must be stuffed. But I understand 2 Tim 2:15 to mean rather different things. https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/2-15.htm Comparing bull--- to heifer--- is just busy-work. A bum job, you might say.

This truly is one of the most laughable posts that Mike has ever contributed. No footnotes, and "lack of pointers" to error-ridden outside sources protects new students from error??????? "Why expose new students to error?" Why, indeed, Mike. Great idea. Let's completely can all versions of PFAL. That would be a great protection. I'm not even going to try to pick apart all the other ridiculous statements.

Despite what a certain poster says here, I love that we have the internet. Because I can read all sorts of things, and learn all sorts of things. As I've said before: I even use the net in my gardening work - how? to find out how to tend a new-to-me plant; to find out what kind of disease a plant may be suffering, and how to treat it; to find the best way or time to prune something, and so on. Furthermore, I "travel" around the world and see places I've never been. Find out how to fix my car. Find out about an illness someone is suffering. Learn Biblical archaeology. Learn how to fit things together in new ways. I go much further than any one person "taught" me. Reading! Wow, been doing it since a very tiny girl (probably nearly 3; well before age 4 I was reading, and writing. It's dictatorships that want to ban reading, curtail what outside knowledge a person has access to. Censors books, limits access to non-approved websites. Despite that, I don't disapprove of VPW's "suggestion" that new grads of PFAL "put aside all other reading material for the next three months, and just read the epistles." It does serve to immerse the new Christian in facets of the Christian lifestyle. It might have been better if he'd encouraged reading the gospels, or any place in the NT on a systematic basis. (In fact, it was that exhortation, to read the epistles, that "hooked" me - not the crappy class - no church I'd ever attended encouraged that - epistles as entire pieces of work were all new to me.) Read, people. Read widely and carefully and not just from one source. See how this ties in with my thread on "Consider the Evidence"?

Anyway, it's 4.30 in the morning. I've not long since come in from being out on the streets, helping homeless and drunk people, police, and other night workers, and generally making known the name of the Lord and his love for the people of my city. Christianity is nothing if not practical. I have no time at this hour of the morning to further waste on impractical argument. Good night, all.

And now he resorts to name-calling. You just demonstrated how you've lost it, Mike. May I call you "Mr Procrastinator"?

MIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Speak English. Your stupid "digital decision" might be what others would call "a quick decision." Your stupid "analog decision" might be what others would call "a considered decision." People understand those terms. They don't understand your choice of weird terminology.

Just to bring things back, Mike has spent FIVE PAGES avoiding answering this, from page 1, that he keeps claiming he has no time to deal with. See how he's once again managed to shift the conversation from "empathy" to his pet, the collaterals. Some might think that his refusal to address the quoted post shows ... a lack of empathy.

What's this business of comparing one version of the collaterals with some other version? That's akin to comparing bull manure with heifer manure. Have you considered comparing the collaterals with what the Bible says on a subject? And I don't mean just looking at the words of, and occasional verses noted in, the collateral kid's-essay, but at the depth of what the Bible says about a topic. Which will include very, very much more material than in a few badly written pages of a kid's-essay.

"Digital Decision"? "Analog Decision"? What the f*** is that supposed to mean? And NO, I don't want a Mikean answer. Mike, just bloody well use proper English. Stop inventing phrases to disguise what you mean / so as to appear more ?intelligent ?intellectual ?erudite / because you want to confuse things further. Try choosing normal English expressions. Then nobody will have to keep asking you questions - oh wait, that is what you want... to be the centre of attention. [A few minutes later] Oh lordy me. And now he's abbreviating his bizarre wording. Now I see "DD decision" (=?digital decision decision?) just to be even more confusing. Speak English, Mike. Or Chinese, if you like. But be coherent.

Mike, I didn't say that AT ALL. Learn to read.

VPW put his name to all the collaterals, whether or not anyone else contributed to them. It's his name on all the books. No-one else has attribution. Ps 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, And give thanks unto thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. Or, in the MikeBible: Mike will worship towards the VPW auditorium, and give thanks unto VPW's name for his {???} and for his "truth": For Mike has magnified VPW's word above all VPW's name. And that's not idolizing VPW?

I like his enthusiasm. Perhaps many of us were as enthusiastic, too, when we first learned of God's goodness. Please don't let this keen newbie remain in the state of delusion too long. Hope Oldies can redirect him.

I just posted a lengthy post about empathy. I am intrigued how Mike might respond. (a) He will read bits only, and say it's too long (b) He will accuse me of being a "Corps Nazi" and thereby prove my point (c) He will ignore the whole thing - thereby also proving my point (d) He will take a fragment and use it to go off in some completely random direction (e) He will read, acknowledge, and agree that he does not show empathy for others here Of these, seems to me that (e) is the least probable outcome.

Mike on another thread is determined that we should see him as "empathetic." Right. Really. What's empathy? Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within their frame of reference, that is, the capacity to place oneself in another's position.[1] Definitions of empathy encompass a broad range of social, cognitive, and emotional processes primarily concerned with understanding others (and others' emotions in particular). Types of empathy include cognitive empathy, emotional (or affective) empathy, somatic empathy, and spiritual empathy.[2][3][4] [Wikipedia] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy (In nice big font, Mike, so that you can't miss it.) The article is lengthy, so it may take you some time to read, but you may learn quite a lot from it. Here's another much shorter article. Please read it, Mike. And carefully watch the video at the end (and learn from it). https://takealtus.com/2020/06/empathy-1/ Why is that relevant to this thread? Because Mike persists in shrieking about "Nazi Corps" without ever thinking about how much some people have given to enter the Corps program; what it has cost them physically, emotionally, in relationships; in other opportunities. Without doubt everyone tried their best to do the program as directed. Unfortunately, that included being stomped on from great height, repeatedly, for the most minor infractions - and for that same behaviour to be mimicked by trainees (in rez Corps). The joy of service and the enthusiasm for service was crushed nearly out of existence, for many of the "Nazi Corps." And who "Nazi'd" them? The man who set up the program. So in condemning "Nazi Corps" Mike is, in effect, condemning VPW, the man who had empathy for none and understood none who had empathy for others. Now he has a different target in his sights: Charlene. Charlene, who as a young woman, heard the word and received it with joy. It filled her heart with enthusiasm and she wanted more and more of it. In Mikeology, she "snapped." Because she didn't hang around for 20 years "thinking about it" before she made a decision to follow the Lord (except, unfortunately, it wasn't the Lord but the Liar that she followed). Mike condemns her for this. She was too hasty. I wonder what he knows of her circumstances, that made this choice attractive to her? Where's his empathy for Charlene? Did I miss something? Mike, how long did the first disciples take before they joined Jesus on his mission? Did they take 20 years? Or did they hear, make a quick decision, and leave their nets and follow him? Gave up their businesses and their previous lives, and went with someone they'd come to trust because he spoke of the God they longed to know? Did they "snap," too? What about Lydia in Acts 16? She immediately received the word and set about witnessing to others, her whole household, and wanted Paul to stay with her. Did she "snap"? Paul writes very well of her later and she did much to fund his ministry. What about the jailor that Paul and Silas witnessed to when they were falsely imprisoned? Verse 34 tells us "The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole household." Did the jailor "snap"? There are many records in the book of Acts where it appears people were able to make a quick and lifechanging decision to follow the Lord. Mike, just because you can't make a quick decision, doesn't mean that you have any right to condemn those who did. And just because you have zero empathy for anyone else, doesn't give you any right to condemn or criticise anyone else. Go walk in someone else's shoes for days, weeks, months, or even 20 years. Come back and tell us if you learned anything.

Who here cares if it's the 80th anniversary? Mike maybe; Johniam? Nobody else. Personally I'm shocked that after all these years this sham of a religious organisation is still hanging around (though fading away) after 80 years. I suppose they'll be having their NY Eve "watchnight" event to celebrate the new year. Or more acc'rately, to celebrate the founder's birthday.

Could be, Bolshe. But it could be that there are genuine people who truly want to serve God and succeed (despite TWI). I have known some truly awesome Corps, wonderful people. I can't say that I've met any truly awesome Revs, though. Well - not in TWI. Plenty outside TWI. I'm forgiving Mike the "extremely blessed" terminology. He probably doesn't know a better way to put it. I suspect he means "genuinely helped" or something along that line.

I think this is the single most intelligible post I've ever read from Mike. As to the rest of that long post -pfft!

Soccer, what's that? Oh, do you mean FOOTBALL? Why do Americans call it such a silly name? Anyway, I hear Argentina won, worthily so. And France got their nose pushed out of joint. Exciting at the end, I gather. Is that it for four more years?

Okay, while we're in "Another Take" land, here's a different view of King David. I know one person here will object, because it looks at academic and scholarly sources! (How dare it!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David

No, I gave only one example, one commonly known to GSC residents. There are many other records of men having multiple, contemporary, wives. It's what men did. It doesn't anywhere say that it is right with God except in context of preserving the name of a deceased male.