Twinky

Yep, JayDee. I have met many awesome Christians (trinis) who live out their faith and their love for the Lord. I have met some non-trinis, far fewer in number, who live out their faith and their love for the Lord. It's not an issue for most people. They just get on with living out their faith and getting on with the tasks that have been assigned to us as Christians. I tend to take the view that it's not an issue for Jesus, or for his (and our) Father. There's been 2,000 years since Jesus was murdered, and since he was raised from the dead. It's been 1700 years since the Council of Nicea presented us with the "creed" and the doctrine of the trinity (which clearly had been around for far longer than that). So, in 2000 years, give or take a century, either (1) there is no God, and possibly no Jesus; or (2) neither God nor Jesus gets excited about this doctrine, as clearly they've done nothing to correct it one way or the other. If it doesn't matter to them, it's inappropriate that it should be such a big deal for Christians now. There's a very great amount that we have been commanded to do, and it would be more appropriate to concentrate on that.

You don't think these rabbit jokes are "warren" a bit thin now?

Wasn't Rome City purchased because it was easier to get accreditation for "degrees" in that state? (Not that any accredited degrees were ever granted!) UL was before my time, so no knowledge of the background there. Wasn't Emporia purchased because the WC was growing very fast at that point? And there was an immediate need for housing and teaching facilities? But you're right. Proper residences for staff and proper classrooms would have been a jolly good idea, not to mention a good use of ABS. The land was available and could have been used. Heck, they could even have (1) paid local builders or (2) set up accredited apprenticeships for staff or in rez corps. (Oh what a distraction that would have been!) And they'd have to pay a proper rate to outside builders.

Could have been an interesting discussion, there's a lot to think about and many different ideas (all "scriptural"), but it doesn't need to be combative. I'm done with this thread and with this poster. No profit.

Rising up was hard this morning. It's cold, and there is a lot of snow on the ground outside. Thawing, though, just: temps will be above freezing today, with less of a windchill, so it may "feel" rather more comfortable. For the first time in its history, the local half marathon has had to be cancelled. Always the first Sunday in March. Usually about 15,000 or so runners, so a lot to arrange, close roads, hire equipment, etc. As at yesterday evening, some main roads locally are impassable; the main route in from the motorway (freeway) had drifts of 12ft and had a number of abandoned cars at the edges. Disappointing for the runners, but better safe than sorry. Still dangerous for spectators, those serving drinks, medics, etc, not to mention all the runners waiting around. Takes a long time to assemble, and to get to the start.

Yeah, I thought that too, Rocky. It was a legitimate (and interested) question. I fancy GoldStar might be in for a surprise come Rev 22 time. In fact, I think we will all be in for a surprise.

You need to define your term "salvation," GoldStar. From reading your initial post, it seems your definition is that there will be a physical body and that the physical body will thereafter dwell upon the [new?] Earth. Is that it, or does your term "salvation" include other aspects? If so, what? Does it differ from "salvation" for Christian believers? Or for Jewish or Hebrew [Israelite] believers?

I guess they might have some fishy friends - who met on the net.

Did you hear about the two spiders who just got engaged? They met on the web.

GoldStar, perhaps you'd care to expound your views on Saved and Salvation. Doctrinal would be the forum for that.

I think BG may have had something like this in mind, from Romans 2: And as for Jesus, did he not spend time with those who hadn't heard of him, with those who didn't believe who he was, and with those who only knew vague whispers about a Messiah? Was not the Promise to Abraham, who'd never heard of Jesus? Does God not want all people to be saved? Unwise to lift Rom 10:9,10 out of context. Get a bigger vision than what TWI taught, especially about these verses. Get a bigger view of "saved" and salvation, too. And note, while you're about it, that BG didn't call people to his own cultic ministry. He referred people to local churches, places in their area, where they could be taught, mentored, guided, not by him but by people who knew the area and culture into which he was preaching. He didn't take all the glory to himself but acknowledged his fellow laborers (local churches) in their work for God.

D'ya know what, Mike? It wouldn't be acceptable a very long time ago. I just googled "history of copyright law usa" and found this little gem in Wikipedia (my emphases in bold/underlined): Thereafter follows a lengthy discussion of various copyright laws in the USA. And this was being talking about then (1783 !!!) because the British Copyright Act 1710 (again, note the date) did not apply to the American colonies. If folks, Americans, were concerned about this in the early 1700s, and definitely discussing it and petitioning about it towards the end of the 1700s, how can you say it didn't matter only 60 years ago? There's no exception, as you claim. It's okay to say you still benefit from the gems. I'm pleased for you that you do. Just give credit where it's due. (Big hint: no name with initial W comes anywhere near). PS do note that I have cited the source of my info! Not too difficult or confusing, was it?

I think you'll find that Bro. Andrew didn't claim that the Bible was his own work. Therefore, he didn't plagiarise it. That's what this thread is about: plagiarism. End of.

So what you're saying, Mike, is that TWI was never academic, despite (1) its purported "degrees in theology" (and a degree is a recognized level of education - it's a bit more than a school leaving cert) and (2) the Research Dept was no academic thing, either. If TWI had really thought its product was any good, it would have circulated it widely. After all, that's what most authors do, isn't it? And anyone who has researched God's Word would (by your argument) want to share it because it belongs to every person, or is it every believer? I can't remember your "qualification" from other threads. And some of the authors sell into an academic market, and some, like Ortberg and Yancey, sell to people who want more readable material. But that isn't what TWI wanted. It would be embarrassing (at best) to be found out in plagiarism. And even any original works (like the collaterals - if indeed there were original material there) couldn't sell in a wider market; there's so much better stuff available in an already over-provided market. Never mind being "peer-reviewed," these things wouldn't stand up to being reviewed in any other than a captive market. I think your comment, "It was a rural farmer country church family. Plagiarism doesn't matter there" rather belittles the abilities of rural residents. I think if they knew he was stealing other people's intellectual property, they'd be outraged at the idea that he was passing such off as his own material. There's probably a higher level of trust among country folk, and they don't like the theft of their own machinery and equipment; stock, crops and animals. Whilst they'd probably gladly share ideas on production, etc, with their own kind, they'd probably be pretty upset if someone took those ideas, patented them, and tried to sell the ideas back to them.

Tell you what about the video: it burns well. I thought at the time it was a great production. When I came to sorting through a load of Way stuff decades later, I had a quick look and watched the first 5 or 10 mins, felt terribly embarrassed at my previous Waydaze opinion, and decided to toss the tape in the woodburner.

Oooohhhh! Conspiracy theory!!!!!!!!

Hello, annio. Welcome and stick around! I met G33r quite a few times when he was at Gartmore involved in the Way of GB. Arrogant and soooo puffed up. Cold, heartless, and mean. There's a few threads about him here. In the meantime, a warm, hearty welcome to you, and someone will be along soon with some coffee for you to settle down with. Seems like my signal for a waiter summoned the wrong kinda coffee.

Hah! You cracked it, T-Bone. So we can legitimately call him "doctor" W.

It was never going to go far, no matter what forum it's in. As you can see, people found it and posted on it. So why complain?

I haven't done curling, but I have done lawn bowls (rink bowls), which is a little similar. The bowler has to be very aware of the line, the weight of the throw, positioning, how to block opponents and how to "blast" them. A lawn bowling ball is not perfectly spherical, but slightly flattened on one side, which can affect the way it rolls at the end. I would think a similar thing applies with a curling stone, as to how much curl is put on it. Geometry, if you like, comes into it, too - if you hit one bowl or stone, where will it go, what else will it hit, and so on - a bit like snooker, which also appears to be a bit of a boring sport. I saw the UK/Japan women's curling semi final yesterday. I thought it very exciting. Both teams, all players, were so skilled and totally engrossed, concentrated. We need to be ready to appreciate the skills of all the competitors, no matter which team they're on. One's own favored team wouldn't show so well against a bunch of doofuses (unless it's the Korean hockey team - I do feel sorry for the S Koreans, who had real potential). To be a great team requires a great opponent. Iron sharpening iron, and all that.

T-Bone, I watched a very exciting women's semi-final today. It is a game that requires a lot of skill, and there's a lot of strategy. Now as for the idiot Russians who were caught doping... after being allowed in under a special arrangement... I feel a bit sorry for the wife of the Russian curler who got banned - but at least she gets to keep her medal, as I understand it. Only he has lost his. Have you watched those snowboarders? Man... talk about no fear! Scary!!

That's so funny, RottieGrrl.

Astounding! In response to SoCrates’ question Mike replies: For one, it wasn’t “strongly urging” – it was mandatory. For two, and this really riles me: in my opinion, these are far worse (to name but a few). And they're not just "wrong," but mostly illegal: raping young women drugging them breaking up marriages enforced abortion Not to mention > theft > bullying > outrageous hypocrisy Set against those, forbidding to marry is small beer. By the way, can I bring this to mind:

Mike, you said this:

Okay, well, contact lenses won't work. Very different problem. Prisms sometimes help, but they are weird to get used to. Pray for healing??