oldiesman

How can anyone think that Wierwille never believed the bible? It's like thinking someone can't believe the bible and also sin. Ridiculous. Happens every day, all the time. Let's talk about walking by the flesh. A biblical example comes to mind, Solomon, he had about 1,000 wives? Talk about walking in the flesh! Many of these wives were foreign, and you know the drill, God forbade Israel to marry into foreign to avoid idolatry. But Solomon didn't obey and instead built shrines to his wifes idols. And, he personally participated in the worship of these idols. Each of these idols were connected with reprehensible practices! For instance, both of the idols Chemosh and Molech required human sacrifice of children or infants in their worship. So if one can say Wierwille never really believed because of his sins, you also can say that Solomon didn't, for his sins. Go ahead and try, have fun, and pass the Kool Aid.

It's obvious God works this way even knowing about all the sinning of mankind. *********************** Do you really believe that Wierwille has done anything close to deserving eternal death? That's what we're talking about. I can't fathom someone actually believing this. Goodness, I'm glad my thoughts are different.

Well we've discussed this one before; regarding Koresh, I still believe the FBI killed those folks in the compound as payback for the BATF deaths. I don't hold Koresh responsible. See the film "Waco The Rules of Engagement" for my belief on this one. Regarding Jones, don't know, can't really say but I still believe that one doesn't lose salvation because of sins after salvation. I still believe what we were taught that once someone becomes a child of God, its permanent. I still believe that Wierwille was born again. I think it depends on the individual and how one feels about it.

Doesn't matter. God in his foreknowledge knew that Paul would murder. So, if murder is a disqualification for someone to receive revelation, it would have applied to Saul of Tarsus. I think this may be a continuation of the religious belief that "God doesn't dwell in an unclean vessel". But bear in mind, the bible says we all are unclean, we all sin. Golly if sinning kept God away from us, we'd all be in the soup.

Easter at White House

It's a rhetorical question in the bible, and unfortunately, it is possible, and does happen. And maybe even by some of us here at GS CAFE..? :o

This information should be provided for free to all ex-way. :o ;)

Actually that's not quite right. Wierwille did good things too, so he had good character. IF you say that he had an evil character because of his evil works, then I can say he had good character, because of his good works. We're even. So, the times he spoke forth the word and taught the word with believing, he was a man of good character.

When I see the word for word comparison in question form, then I agree with you. But I don't see that here.

It appears this is precisely what Wordwolf and you are surmising. He stole a question mark. Or a question format. The man can't even ask a question without being accused of stealing. I can't find any chapter heading in "Are the Dead Alive Now" that reads "An Intermediate State" So it must be the question mark you say is stolen. BTW, did you actually try to read and compare Bullingers paper to Wierwilles book? I can't find any chapter heading in Wierwille's book that says "The Rich man and Lazarus: An Intermediate State?". The closest I find is "Lazarus in Abraham's Bosom". Without the question mark. Maybe he stole the word "Lazarus" too?

This edition was purchased by me from the Way bookstore back in 1973. It's an oldies original! And what I'm suggesting is that the evil surmising of some against Wierwille is so blatant that he can't even use a question mark in a chapter heading without being thought of as a thief. I'm so so thankful that I don't think like some of you!

Wordwolf, you've got to be kidding. Just because he uses a question format for two of his chapter headings, you say it's a stolen format? That's ridiculous. It's stuff like this that leads me to question your conclusions. There's enough clear stuff without surmising stuff that's not there.

Raffy, that quip wasn't meant as a strawman. It actually was a response to one of your recent statements: You would possibly agree had VPW not copyright his books. And I found one, in 1971! I thought it interesting to find something like that. But it's not a strawman. Not even a corn stalk. BTW, your point is well taken.

Interesting little tid-bit here: My "Are the Dead Alive Now" is from 1971, it says: "Copyright 1971 by The Devin-Adair Company. All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher, The Devin-Adair Co..." So it appears VPW didn't even own these rights at that time, it was owned by Devin-Adair.

Here's an interesting question: Are you in favor of a Vermont-style carry weapon law across the country? Vermont Carry Law It may have greatly helped Igor Hutorsky.

That is a proven fact, Belle. Do you remember when firearms were required in Kennesaw , GA? Crime plummeted. Must be a great place to live. :)

I am with you Rascal. Everyone who qualifies should be able to carry a firearm. I have a NY State carry permit, but I can't carry my weapon into NYC. Isn't that insane? And there ought to be state reciprocity. One permit for all the states, like a drivers license is good anywhere.

I would imagine (I am speculating) that JS and others are going to see if they can do it in a "kinder and gentler" fashion. ********************** Have a question, Is PP done only by permission of a person asking for it? For example, in twi, if one asked to be ministered to, someone would do it for you. Is PP like that? One has to ask for it first?

Doesn't look like they are. JS said they were examining the doctrine, but doesn't sound like they're getting rid of it. They should go back to the way we did it in twi, what was wrong with that way? :o :P

Actually knowing me, it probably caused me to fork over less mooolah.

I guess I should have DEMANDED to see it, but being only 20 years old, wasn't as near as obnoxious as I am today... :)

I have to listen to the tape to get the context. Can you mail me a copy?

You certainly are misrepresenting when you claim he copies whole books and put his name on the cover. Who are you kidding? I mean even Dr. Juedes isn't THAT extreme.

Wordwolf, I think you are mistaken. This is why I attempt to get things in writing, because people make mistakes.

Railroader II, this may surprise you, but Craig had nothing to do with that policy change as it happened way way back in the 70's. I like you, heard that it was possible to see twi's financials. So in July of 1976, I wrote hq to find out how I may see this. Here's the letter I got back from hq: