Twinky

Well dunno about you lot but I'd think it was a lot more balanced if it had books and music by other than VPW and LCM. Even stuff done by other banned ex TWI (Walter Cummins, for example). And ex-TWI songs like say Acts 29...or anybody. Obviously still plugging LCM's book - so he's obviously not a "possesso" and his work not banned or burned as so many other people's who have fallen out of favour with TWI. Make of that what you will. That's without promoting any decent non-Way stuff. Sad. Can't somebody post a link to GSC on their board?

Frumpy is hardly the word. Men and women. They could dress better from the local charity shop. They (well, the women) are hardly this: PS 45:13 All glorious is the princess within her chamber; her gown is interwoven with gold. or this: Prov 31:22 She ... is clothed in fine linen and purple What a sad "advert" for God's abundance.

Two great beating up weapons: 1. You lack spiritual understanding 2. You are not meek to the Word. Probably many of those who "lacked spiritual understanding" were a sight further on in understanding and meekness to what the Word really says, than those doing the beating up. The bullies were/are all puffed-up with their understanding of the WORDS of the Word, not the meaning of the words. Too busy admiring the cloth to consider that it should have been turned into clothing to be worn.

Still thinking about this, Ex10 invited me. Sounded so much fun last year. :) An ink pin (pen)? As opposed to a what? A writing in blood pen? (Always thought that was a funny expression. Maybe Texans should learn to say "pen". Oops, there goes my invitation...)

Sure they do! Can you imagine if even half the Cafe members turned up en masse to seek forgiveness? Can you imagine Forgiving Father Rosie welcoming us with open arms? Any of 'em?

Hello Tom, are you joining us now? I think most of the Europeans are getting on with their lives. Who out there knows some non-Brits? I wonder if there are any E Corps out there?

Bless you my son ... consider yourself absolved. You saved a lotta heartache there. Nothing to feel guilty about then or now. Even though you felt it so.

..or ABused ! (It's the light shined by posts like those of Dot and other women who have been abused, that has exposed the wickedness of others and enabled healing to take place. Got the dirt out of the wound, so to speak.)

Some startling news: I was informed at lunchtime today that there are still apostles, prophets, etc, walking this earth today. This I agreed with. I was astonished to learn that there are in fact 12 apostles, only 12. As for prophets… Yes, I was accosted by two young men of about mid 20s bearing neatly engraved name badges announcing themselves as Elders of the Church of JC of Latter Day Saints. One did most of the speaking and the other nodded in assent. Me: “Only 12 apostles? That’s not many for the whole world.” Them: “Yes, that’s how many apostles Jesus had when he was on Earth, and not much has changed since then.” Me: “Only that JC was murdered, and now does not live on earth as he did then but is alive in the heavenlies. He wants everyone to know all over the world, not just a select few in the middle east." Them: “It’s his church and that’s the way he wants it.” Me: “So where are these apostles?” Them: “In our church.” Me: “What about other churches – Methodist, Baptists, Catholics, Anglicans, to name but a few?” Them: “This is the only true church. All those are just started by men, of their own authority, not with the authority of Jesus Christ. That’s why there are no apostles in those groups.” Me: “Don’t you believe God works in other churches? Don’t you think he wants them to know too? Why would there not be apostles to those churches too?” Them: “This is the true church. This is what JC set up. This is what he wants.” Me: “And what’s this about prophets?” Them: “There is only one prophet alive today. His name is xxx. He is in our church. But the head of our church is JC.” Me: “Do you not think that JC cares about other people, in other churches?” Them: “This is the true church. This is what JC set up. This is what he wants.” Me: “If you cut yourself off from other Christians, you are simply a cult and putting God in a box and putting JC in a box. Do you think JC wants that?” Them: “We are not a cult, we are a church.” Me: “If you cut yourself off from the rest of the Body of Christ, you are making yourselves a cult.” Them: “We are not a cult, we are a church.” I asked them about speaking in tongues. Did they believe this existed? If so, what was it for? Them: “So that if you can’t speak another language very well, the Holy Ghost can give you better ability to speak to people in another country. Also, if you only know a few words in another language, it can make you fluent in that other language if you need to speak to somebody.” Me: “What about prayer and praise to God?” Them: (nervous smile) “Yes, so that you can speak to other people.” And this: Them: “Do you think the church is built on the Bible?” Me: “What sort of answer do you expect me to give?” Them: “We don’t just read the Bible. We have other books too that we study. Our church is built according to those.” This only lasted for five minutes or so. I left feeling sad and deeply sorry for these young men. They do not understand the wedge they are building in their own lives; have no idea of the hurt that lies in wait. I thought of all the WoWs over the years, all the WC, the Lightbearers, and their cult-head attitudes. Is this what we sounded like? We couldn’t see it then; these young men cannot see it now. They are into a MOGdom of their own and holding fast not to the Head of the Church but to their prophet as his spokesman and the 12 apostles in whatever their role is. No doubt the young men have a desire for God and the lord Jesus Christ; I pray that they will sort out the truth from the error before they are themselves sorted out and hurt. (For the avoidance of doubt: I comment not on the beliefs or doctrine of this organization; just on the blinkers on these young men’s hearts.)

Most of us here have been wounded, often very deeply, by TWI. The isolating way we were dealt with usually meant it does take years to get over it since there may be no supporting network. Lk 7:41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. 42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? 43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. Does that mean you need to have big debts forgiven, to be able to forgive? Does it mean you have to have had big hurts, to be able to forgive? You can forgive - you just have a greater and deeper understanding of what it means. Doesn't mean the smaller debtor isn't grateful or doesn't understand. Simon above lived in a very senses-oriented way. BNIS, are you suggesting forgiveness from people not deeply hurt is only "senses" forgiveness, a matter of expediency but not from the heart? Or is it that "Their version of forgiveness" might relate to how far the victims have so far managed to deal with their wounds? You can get over it: but doesn't mean that you want to spend any more time in contact with those who hurt you, if they have not shown that they repent of their behavior. It doesn't mean where appropriate that you shouldn't warn others or expose the abuse. Biblically there are many exhortations to beware of certain people who have caused harm.

Oh yes I remember that stuff. The expression now comes to mind, "straining at gnats" or "nit picking". (Perhaps some of the purported difficulties could have been avoided by using expressions like "confidence" instead of "believing". We could even have referred to different versions of the Bible by way of comparison, to see how these "usages" were translated elsewhere. But no, we have to engineer difficulties so that we can get puffed up in our special knowledge of the Word.) Not sure where any of these fit with: • "Believing to see Johnny Jumpup at fellowship/work/the park tomorrow” • “Believing for Bill to pass the exam” • “Believing that Maggie will one day come to the Lord” but the nearest definition is the first (senses based). Still not convinced it's other than sloppy use of language. Believing verging on plain wishful thinking...

Five categories of believing? Don't remember this one, did I forget it or was it never beaten into me? Remind me, someone. And is one of them "believing to override someone else's free will"?

Funny, if one is inclined to use certain other expressions. But sometimes you can stop people's mouths by smiling very sweetly and saying, "God bless you!" in a kind manner. Makes the curser think a bit about what they said. Oh, and to return to the subject of this thread, "OMG" and "Jesus/Jesus Christ/Christ" and permutations thereof tick me off too. Odd, isn't it, how the most powerful Name above all names has become the most debased, in modern life.

Forgiveness is as much for oneself as for another. Like AD's quote about non-forgiveness being a poison. It is when we start to forgive that we get healed. Lack of forgiveness is an open sore in one's own heart. We are to bless those who persecute us. Pray for them. Read how Job prayed for his persecutors. To truly pray for someone you cannot hold unforgiveness against them; you have to let it go. Refusing to forgive someone because they haven't shown they are repentant or haven't apologized to you is Wayspeak. That's what LCM taught, as an excuse for getting people to grovel to him (him!)when he had M&A'd them, humiliated them and slandered them vilely. "Be ye kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you." Where does this say, only if they seek forgiveness first?

(Straight from the randi site) 'Sright, didn't you guys know this? ;) And doesn't this thread belong in Just Plain Silly?

New Zealand beer ad:

Well I don't ever think of myself as a cat owner, just as a cat carer. I am permitted to share her bed (a large comfortable double) as she only requires a small bit of one corner at the foot. However she comes and goes at will. She comes in every night, but at times to suit herself and generally in the wee hours. She is considerate and does not wake me. I am permitted to share the couch as long as it isn't her seat. If I sit in the wrong seat she will sit on top of me and also hasten to put herself in the same place should I vacate it for any reason. I am required to serve particular meals. If she doesn't get what she fancies, she goes to another restaurant and is quite shameless about this. If my service is unacceptably poor, I am given a smack or a scratch. However, I am occasionally given a small reward. Nonetheless - I do love this cat. :) :) :)

Thank y'all very much! Appreciate your concern. Funny song. Except we weren't trying to get rid of Twinkle. She is being kept in for a time while her wounds heal up. She thinks this is a bad thing and wants to go out (and have some more adventures?). Next collar if any is going to be easily removable/breakable. Miaow for now. Twinky

If they meant "hope to see you there" why not just say that? Why adopt instead an unusual way of speaking?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Gt 22 but would have got 23 if I could spell prpr right and used an " " not a " "

What does it mean when people use “believing” as in to do something or for something to happen? As is: "Believingto see you [let’s say, Johnny Jumpup] at fellowship/work/the park tomorrow” “Believing for you [let’s say, Bill Bludger] to pass your exam/get your money together” “Believing that [let’s say, Maggie Muggins] will one day come to the Lord” Seems sloppy use of language to me. Believing? It’s a desire (and “whatsoever things ye desire,” etc…) but there are surely other factors at play. Like the other person’s free will. What if Johnny doesn’t want to go to fellowship tomorrow – other commitments, perhaps, or just plain doesn’t want to go? Doesn’t the other person’s “believing” put a burden on Johnny? What if Bill simply didn’t bother to study for the exam, or to make any effort to look after his financial affairs? What if Maggie really doesn’t want to know God? Where does that leave the other person’s “believing”? If the other person doesn’t want to do something or puts in no effort? In the first example, non-Way people might say, “hope to see you” or “look forward to seeing you” or even “would like to see you”. A person raised with Wayspeak would only rarely use “hope” in that way. But neither would they use a word like “expect” – which actually might seem too demanding! (“I expect to see you at fellowship…!”) In the second example, if the “beneficiary” of the believing doesn’t do anything towards what’s necessary, does s/he really want anything? In the third example, one might be “praying” for such an event, or, again, desiring, and might even take committed action to try to bring that about (by words or demonstration of God’s lovingkindness) and by praying. There are lots of NT records where Paul and others “pray” for the believers of their day and time and Christians are frequently exhorted to “pray” for one another – to come to a knowledge of the truth, to be established, to be strengthened, to understand, etc (eg Eph 1:16-18) – but “believing” for this to happen? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not knocking prayer and commitment to other people – I’m considering inappropriate terminology. It seems to me that it’s a sloppy use of a word, a fear of using the word “hope” in its modern usage, and perhaps even disrespectful of other people and their own free will and beliefs. What do you think? (Believing I’ll get some replies to this) (tongue in cheek)

Somebody sent me this a while back and my first thought was, a more honest representation of Athletes of the Spirit. What I didn't like about it was that when the girl looks to him after she has played with the gun and as she tries to get back to him, "Jesus" stands helplessly messing about on the sidelines waving. It isn't till quite late on that he actually kicks into the fray and beats off all the baddies. He's not with her in her initial struggles to get away despite her keeping reaching back out to him. Nonetheless, it's short, to the point, and keeps the focus very definitely in the right direction not on the pseudo-savior.

Thanks, all. Dooj, too right. The vet says she is fine. She hass given Twinkle a shot of something and she has to have another on Sat. Antibiotics, I guess. Twinkle has a sore on her neck and under her "armpit" where the collar rubbed. The collar is all chewed at where she has tried to get out of it. Must be made of tough stuff - as is she. The vet in her exam found a growth in the cat's abdomen which apparently is common in older cats and will eventually constrict her insides too much. But at the moment T is in fine health despite her holiday, and the growth does not bother or pain her. So the growth either needs to be prayed away (and why not?) or the cat may need a colostomy bag. So glad she is home again. ...How much more glad our Father must be when we return from our wanderings in the dark and sh1tty places.

Just got to share this good news with you. Twinkle, my cat, has been missing now for just two weeks. She went out on Wednesday evening and did not return. Extensive searches and enquiries - no sign of her. Also prayed for her safe return. And this morning, Thursday two weeks later, she miaowed outside the door at breakfast time. She had one foot through her collar and clearly it had been like that for a while because the fur was rubbed off and the skin beneath a little sore. She smells of cat excrement and her fur instead of being soft and fluffy is hard and sticky (guess what?!). Other than that, she seems well. Can’t tell you how happy I am. Praise God for His goodness and loving kindness in restoring her to us, healthy and uninjured. (I posted a bit about this on ExCathedra's thread about her cockatiel. So encouraging! Many thanks for those of you who also prayed for Twinkle's safe return.)