Larry N Moore

Who's uncle? A monkey's uncle? Are you offering me dinner? Is he precooked?

Hmm . . . I didn't know sharks were that finicky. Being at the top of the food chain they pretty much eat anything. Now, you're telling me you have preferences?

The UNCLE is well-done. Is that acceptable to your palate? :)

Heavens no! I'm a lean, mean, interpreting machine! And sassier, because of the crab? No...probably from the Mojito's tho!

Ok. UNCLE!!!!!

I have to go with Rascal on this one. I am sorry VPW died of cancer in a distant sort of sense, in that I never knew him and always think it is sad when someone died.

BUT, my mother died of cancer when I was 23 years old. I was involved with TWI at that time. My sister, my grandmother and I took care of my mom at home for as long as we could. We had a hospital bed set up for her. We cleaned her, made sure she had her medications, fed her, and even took care of her "bathroom needs".

During that time not one member of my fellowship offered to come by and help. Other people did. The mother of my sister's boyfriend, a few other family friends. But no one from fellowship. They didn't even help with an occassional meal as I saw so often occur afterward. My now ex-husband helped some (he would be the one member, I guess) but he also complained about it a lot. Devil spirits and all.

After she died, no one from fellowship attended the funeral with us, it was a Jewish funeral because that is what the rest of my family wanted and I certainly wasn't going to argue with them about that!

She had two cats when she died. My sister took them both. My ex didn't want them around the house because he was afraid the "cancer" devil spirit might have left her body and gone into one of them and might then come after one of us.

My allotted period of morning was also very short. I was basically quoted scriptures from when David lost his son, I can't remember the verse now, but the basic idea was that I should just get over it.

Abi, perhaps we do share more in common. Words fail me at this moment. ((((hug)))).

Ok I'm confused...

:) Maybe we're re-living the Tower of Babel event. No one is speaking the same language.

Crab...make me fat and sassy? Never! I say again... Never! I was fat and sassy long before I ate all that crab!

Ok. Let me rephrase that. Did it make you fatter and sassier? ;)

I'd get out of the water if I were you ....

:unsure:

Larry, you were out of fellowship... you didn't go far enough in your tongues and you forgot "Shama lamma ding dong."

Which means... you didn't go far enough in your interpretation...

You must be out of fellowship. :biglaugh:

:) Well, if you've got a problem with my tongues and interpretation take it up with management. Freely I have received -- freely I have given and what do I get for my service -- whining. ;)

Hey Eyes! Good to see you back. Did all that crab you ate make you fat and sassy? :)

You were there?...Funny, I didn't mention the year of the roa that I was referring to or the context of when he said and to whom...

...but you were there!

Well, you got me on that one. You didn't mention what year it was, etc. Although I've been to every ROA from 1972 to 1985 I can't say I was back stage or elsewhere that VP might have been and had the opportunity to have heard him say what you claimed he said.

Larry, would speak with your tongue and then lie to us?

meka, meka slamajama, shisto. Part 1 completed.

Groucho, you're funny. (That's the interpretation). Part 2 completed.

Anything else I can do to serve you? :)

I think we've got a bunch of Jeudes worshippers and Jeudes apologists on this thread .

Sorta reminds me of Moses -- He's taking them to the "promised land". It might take them forty years to get there, but that's not the point. ;)

So, according to GOD ALMIGHTY,

it is sensible and recommended, that the testimony of witnesses be considered and weighed,

and when more than one agree, it strengths their testimony.

When 2 or 3 agree, it is to be considered reliable.

Well, if you're going to put it that way (no pun intended) then should the "witnesses" still involved in TWI not be counted as a testimony? I know you would prefer to call them unreliable and deceived but, you can't have your cake and eat it too. ;)

So,

it's wrong for a man of God to address errors and hurts among ONE group of Christians

unless he's prepared to visit ALL groups of Christians,

(as characterized by posting about errors and hurts in twi but not ALL groups),

but it's a perfectly-efficient use of a Christian layman's time to post that a fellow Christian is

"delusion",

and this is either harmless or some version of ministering grace to the hearer.

:) Like I said (elsewhere, if not in this thread) WW I'm not in the rescuing business any more. So I have all the time in the world to participate here. However, if I was to return to actively reaching out to those seeking God -- you wouldn't find me here. Maybe you should start a 24 hr prayer vigil that Larry gets back into his former ministry and then your problem will be solved. ;)

Larry, don`t you find it the least bit incongruous that you defend a lying, adulterous, alcoholic, who treated the people entrusted to him like no more than a resource to be utilized and thrown away when all usefullness was exhausted...a criminal who drugged and raped the young followers who couldn`t be seduced or bullied....

Rascal don't you find it a bit unreasonable that someone should swallow someone's claims without having first-hand knowledge of whether it's true or not?

Yet you are relentless in your attack of the people who were decieved, used, and suffered at his hands and under the policies that he enacted?

Like I said Rascal, if it bothers you -- simply put me on ignore. But don't show yourself to be a fool by personally attacking me. It's a well-known fallacious argument called -- Two wrongs don't make a right.

Doesn`t that strike you as wierd that your contempt is resereved for the people endured the mistreatment, rather than the creep who perpetrated the acts?

I have no contempt for you. That's called self-projection. You're delusional, my dear.

Yeah, I am guilty of being decieved and following the doctrine of a false prophet...So what?

Oh, but did you get other people to follow it?

I never misrepresented myself as a minister ...God`s spokesman. I never utilized that as authority to steal kill and destroy from the innocent......

Well, if you at any time got someone else to follow it then you weren't speaking for God -- you only thought you were.

This is about false prophets and ravening wolves dressed in sheeps clothing that devour God`s sheep.

Yes. So was John a sheep or a wolf in sheep's clothing when he took the PFAL class?

But hey, if you want to dig up old threads to prove pointless points, be my guest. I ain't gonna stop you. It's a waste of time, but not a waste of mine.

And this attitude is exactly why I won't waste my time. I'm quite certain that even if I were to bring to the table an example of what I speak of you'll most likely ignore the implication of it or "spin" it to justify the comments.

Well I do recall it, friend.

The fellow you defend was scum. According to scriptures, the guys that do what he did were not of the spirit....this makes his doctrine highly suspect.

Well, I suppose if you at one time followed "his" doctrine then that makes you guilty of being scum also. But now that you've been delivered from the cesspool of iniquity called TWI you now are a saint.

I think your defense of him and need to attack the people who reveal his sickness makes you of questionable character as well.

I'll let the over hundreds of guests who don't post here make that judgment. Your opinion doesn't bother me in the least.

No, because it wouldn't prove your point (if your point is that Juedes was belittling Wierwille for failing to follow his own teaching).

If you don't think Juedes has had any influence on those people who belittled and/or ridiculed VP in the thread I speak of, then you're a bit naive.

I have no problem with you questioning peoples recollections and perceptions, what I have a problem with is you labeling those recollections and perceptions as lies because they don`t line up with that which you wish to believe.

My dear, I really don't care what you believe. And I don't recall calling someone a liar. I can only do that if I happened to have been a witness to events that they claim occurred. Having doubts about claims made is not the same as calling someone a liar. I just don't KNOW if the claims are true.

The scriptures convict wierwille of being a false prophet....that is good enough for me.

Before you can accuse someone of being a false prophet you first have to define what a prophet is. The TWI's definition was/is: A prophet is anyone who speaks for God. Do you agree with that definition?

You are the one attacking innocent people in defense of the criminal wierwille like some kind of bottom feeding attorney

I have done no such thing, my dear. You simply don't understand what I'm doing. I'm questioning people's perceptions and recollections. If that bothers you then do the prudent thing -- put me on ignore.

Larry,

He's not belittling Wierwille for failing to follow his own teaching. You're doing that. J

Oh, I don't know Raf. I think there's a thread somewhere here where VP's cancer was/is being discussed and if I'm not mistaken many of you turned the discussion into an opportunity to belittle and ridicule VP. Shall I take the time to find it and bring into this thread some of the comments to prove my point?

Who are you to decide who and what A minister or God should spend their time on and who or what is a waste?

Who are you to judge that VP was a false prophet?

News flash Larry, we are living breathing souls on the other side of these screens. In spite of your opinions....We are of value, our lives of merit, and John`s input is bringing deliverance to many from the false doctrines of twi wolves.

Praise John!!!!!! Still, I wonder -- When John took the PFAL class was he a "sheep" or a "wolf" in sheep's clothing?

Same old same old though, you cannot handle the information presented, so you must attack the poster, their motives, their veracity and character....while the man you defend is scum that drugged and raped our sisters in christ...(among other things) and his doctrine made it allowable and now excusable.... <_< .

My dear, if I couldn't handle the information I wouldn't be addressing it. You simply don't like the fact that I have an opinion that differs from your own and are having a hard time handling it. Thus you resort to attacking me personally. :)

VP`s ministry was a farce, but rather than come to grips with the deception.... in not being able to accept the true fleshly nature of this man...you have to demonize genuine christians and their ministries that are bringing healing and deliverance to those wounded by the viscious predators of TWI.

I'm all for people being healed. I'm not for people denigrating others in order to do so. That takes God out of the equation. Instead of praising God for people getting healed you praise John. Well, excuse me but, I find such praise misdirected and therefore questionable.

Oh! Are you saying this is a recreational moment for John?

I don't know.

Well, you're trying to justify his time spent here. It seems to me that you implied he comes here during his "down-time" from actually ministering to his flock. I consider that to be the same as saying -- he does it for recreational reasons.

You questioned the suitability of a full-time minister to have any time to post here at all.

Yes, I am. I don't see anything in the Bible that justifies what he's doing. He believes it's part of his ministry and I'd like to know where in the Bible does it speak of Christians having such a ministry.

So I replied that "ANY" time is a rather absolute standard that is hardly fair to hold people to.

I'm sure you're aware of the passage that exhorts us to redeem our time because the days are evil. Was that an exhortation to expose false prophets or an exhortation to reach out to those who haven't heard of and accepted Jesus as their Lord?

So, whether this is recreational, solemn, both, neither, or somewhere in between is a non-issue.

Obviously, it's not to you.

I was pointing out your INSINUATION that levelled an accusation.

I pointed out it wasn't relevant to what happened.

Noted, but was this what the topic was about? :)

I pointed out it didn't apply to him at all, despite your interest in INSINUATING it did so.

Well, I've got to admire your passion to defend him. :)

If you're really interested in exposing false doctrine and reaching out to those who have succumbed to it -- then obviously you're overlooking cults that have a great following.

No, we're just not focused on THAT at THIS website.

Oh, so you're a bit selective in who you wish to help escape from the clutches of false prophets and doctrine. Fair enuf. :)

Feel free to go to THOSE websites and discuss THOSE topics at THOSE websites.

Or even to make a website that focuses on all three.

Or participate at an existing one that does all three.

Nice dodge! Translation: Why don't you stfu!

I'm free to do all of those as well-but I exercise my freedom NOT to do them instead. :)

Sure you are but, let's be honest about it. You're not interested in rescuing people who have been hoodwinked and blinded by false prophets and doctrine. You're only interested in . . . hmm . . . denigrating TWI because of what it DID to you. It's a personal thingy.

Any person, no matter how busy, can usually fit in a few free moments across a week.

I suppose so. Personally, if I was still in the ministry of reaching out to those who are seeking God I wouldn't waste a moment of my time here. How did that saying go about the goats and the sheep?

Any minister who just bulls on infinitely without any downtime will be unable to help his

congregation due to insufficient rest.

Oh! Are you saying this is a recreational moment for John? :)

I would like to know what scriptural support such a full-time minister has for justifying a ministry of attacking any ministry which has a doctrine contrary to his own.

Interesting, but it has no relevance to this discussion.

WW, make up your mind. One time you speak of the flexibility of these discussions going on in different directions and then you speak of it being important that we stay on topic.

After all, we don't have any full-time ministers here who have "a ministry" of "attacking any ministry",

let alone one for "a doctrine contrary to his own."

:) If you are speaking of those who are "ordained" ministers I'll agree with you. But don't kid yourself. Some people here have made it their "ministry" to attack other ministries. In particular TWI.

We do have many posters who are discussing doctrinal errors or what they think are so-

and many posters who expose the practical evils of supposed ministers.

This site is dedicated to only exposing TWI. Now ask yourself this question: Of all the cults out there which one has the greatest following? The Mormons. The Jehovah Witnesses. If you're really interested in exposing false doctrine and reaching out to those who have succumbed to it -- then obviously you're overlooking cults that have a great following.

I also would like to know when John had determine that PFAL was full of errors. Was it before he took the class or after?

Perhaps it's worth asking.

I wouldn't ask it if I didn't think it was worth asking. Something John has said on his cite actually brought the question up in my mind.

Far from a double standard, he's exonerating Wierwille as far as the cancer is concerned.

How is it "exonerating" someone when you belittle them for being unable to follow their own teaching. Instead of saying how sad it was for VP to have died from cancer most people I seen here have used it to denigrate the man. It reminds me of those people who went to the funeral of a fallen soldier to protest against the Iraq war.

I find it interesting that a full-time minister gets blamed for not being here all the time continually countering

the attempts of people to discredit anything he says that they don't like.

I find it interesting that a full-time minister has ANY time to be here at all. :)

I would like to know what scriptural support such a full-time minister has for justifying a ministry of attacking any ministry which has a doctrine contrary to his own.

I also would like to know when John had determine that PFAL was full of errors. Was it before he took the class or after?

Larry

This is a simple statement of fact.

Rather than assign a personal aspect to it and then try to assert that the man is not fulfilling his ministry, why not deal with that statement first and calmly explain why you disagree with it?

Well, waysider, I don't know that it's a simple statement of fact. I know it to be a simple statement of opinion. I imagine there might be some people who do have that mindset that he speaks of but from what I seen here I don't know of any. Let's not confuse people who disagree with his opinion with those who think he shouldn't be sharing it.

I find it interesting that John stirs up the pot and then let's others defend him. :)