Larry N Moore

Oh brother! Whether he was insincere about the stated purpose, does not change what he said the purpose was. Like I said -- the real question is: Can you believe what he said? Obviously you can't so it would be a waste of time telling you what he said.

Sheesh! You can ask me the same question in as many different ways as you like and the answer will still be the same. I don't have to know his mind to know what he said. Additionally, your pointing out his plagiarism is nothing more than a red herring. It has nothing to do with his stated purpose for PFAL.

Well, I certainly hope they didn't teach you grammar, for if they did they obviously failed. Maybe it is but, I'm too old to change my style just to accommodate you. Besides, I've always thought a person who was really interested in understanding what another is saying would be smart enough to ask for clarification instead of insulting them. Good grief. I don't have to be VP to know what he said.

Bolshevik, don't blame your inability to understand what I'm saying with my ability to say what I mean. Can I "say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was"? Sure, I can. The question is: Can you believe what VP said was its purpose? I seriously doubt you could.

How was the Rod Stewart concert Whitedove? I first saw him when he was in Small Faces. Did he sing any of the classics from his latest record?

Yeah, I can see your point here. Surely God was going to have to protect Mary while Jesus was in the womb and He does "work through" men to achieve many of His purposes. However, you do realize that if you're correct then Joseph would have had to be married to Mary prior to the conception or there would have been a period of time when she was unprotected. Hmm . . . it's been awhile since I've studied these things but, don't you have to be married in order to be considered an "adultress"? Possibly. Or possibly God would have had to figure something else out. As it was, though, Joseph proved to be of the "right stuff".

Damn! $98.00 for a single book!!!!! I think I'll have to pass on that one. Thanks for the replies. I always liked Walter. He seemed like such a "down-to-earth" sorta fellow. But, if he's charging $98.00 for a single book perhaps he's got his head stuck up his . . .

It's always helpful to hear (read) the perspective of others on just about any subject. From my observation that would make you an exception to the rule. I don't mean to imply that everyone who ever sat through PFAL or was involved with TWI "worshiped the ground" that VP walked on. I'm just saying from what I observed -- many -- did. That's reasonable. However, lacking a working knowledge of what qualifies a person teaching God's Word -- How would you possibly know anyone is qualified to teach anything? What qualifies a person to teach science? If the criteria for doing so is having gone to all the "right" schools and receiving all the "right" diplomas, then certainly such a criteria would prohibit any of us here from "teaching" anything the Bible says. From my perspective I don't expect anyone to live up to their own billing. I only try to live up to my own. I've always been a skeptic for as long as I can remember. That skepticism had gotten me into "trouble" on many occasions so I learned very early how to keep my mouth shut on matters which really didn't amount to much in the "grand scheme" of things. That might explain why TWI started their own University. I was there once (for an AC). Beautiful place. Nothing wrong about that. I don't see it the same way. How can you possibly start with a clean slate unless you do what he claimed to have done and throw away ANY books from ANY source and also stop listening to what people here as well as elsewhere have to say about the "Truth". In other words you would have to go back to the Bible. Unfortunately, unless you're fluent in Greek, Aramaic, and so forth somewhere along the line you're going to have to read what someone else says the meaning of the text is. Wasn't that the purpose of PFAL anyways?

You're right (in my estimation) about Christ having what he needed to fulfill God's will. However, if I'm not mistaken, Mary had little to do with choosing Joseph to be her husband. Marriages were arranged back then. Nevertheless, we can assume (especially if you're a Calvinist) that the marriage was pre-ordained by God -- meaning God somehow put it in the minds of Joseph's and Mary's parents that the two should be married. That theology can get a little illogical when you follow it through. Well, being a Catholic prior to my introduction to TWI (which was when I was young) I do remember hearing a lot of about Mary's status in the Catholic Church. Statutes of her had a very prominent position in most altar arrangements. But this line of discussion would again take us off topic, I fear. Fathers during that time were responsible for providing for the needs of the family such as food and shelter. In today's culture that's not so true. So it's not so difficult to imagine how their minds would be focused on that side of raising the family whereas the mother would have the time to nurture the children. Well, one of the things you can learn from what little is recorded about his siblings is -- bite my tongue -- doing God's will takes priority over doing the will of your family if their will happens to be in opposition to God's. E-mail notification of replies to a topic of interest makes it easier to respond quicker. Being a multi-tasker it's a handy feature to have.

drgremlin69(38), lao(39), formkansas(39), jar1122(50), larryao(39). Interesting that three of you not only share the same birthday but, the same age as well. Hope you all have a great day and if there are any presents you receive not to your liking -- send them my way. ;)

Ya know, Chatty, I'm not so sure Joseph's "character" had much to do with God's choice to plant the seed in Mary. Not much is written about Joseph -- for that matter not much is written about Mary either -- other than knowing he was "righteous" in God's eyes and happened to be a carpenter. Sure, we can surmise that he was a religious man, but it's somewhat odd that in the records surrounding the ministry of Jesus only Mary and his siblings are mentioned. I wonder -- was Joseph dead by this time or did he simply not believe or care about who Jesus was -- meaning the Messiah. In any case, I think it's possible that even if Joseph turned out to be a creep it would not hinder the purposes of God. That would imply that men had greater power than God and capable of thwarting the will and purposes of God. I don't know -- do you think men have that sort of power?

Oakspear, I'm aware of what you were talking about. The focus is generally about that but, I don't consider a person's skill in communication to be a "bad" thing. How many of Don's (Wierwille) teachings did you sit through or listen to? He had a knack for putting people to sleep. It's important -- at least imo -- in communication that you're capable of capturing your audience's attention. However, if you focus on the style, rather than the substance, then you can be considered one who has "itching ears" and having them scratched doesn't exactly say much about your desire to actually learn the truth. You more or less just want to be entertained.

Jean, I believe the last post that even remotely addressed the topic was in this one (I'm assuming the link will go directly to the post but if not it's post 212, page 11). The DNA aspect of the birth of Christ is an interesting thing to consider. I think you mentioned it in an earlier post. Do you have any more thoughts on it?

MichaelBayouth. May you have many more.

Shame on you!

You could try sharing your abundance with others. Would you like my address? I will accept paypal contributions. :) Nope. Will it make me rich? I'm not interested in becoming famous.

No, I mean the result of tithing is a promise. You have read the Bible, haven't ya?

Yeah, well, I realize it's one of those OT promises but I thought it was addressed to God's people. You are one of them kind, aren't you?

If the promise "that (you) will be there" is found in the Bible why would you rely on that one and not the other ones also found in the Bible. That seems to be a tad bit like cherry picking to me. For instance: is the promise of God opening the windows of heaven and pouring you out a blessing if you but tithe one of those promises you don't rely on?

Well, (if I understand you correctly) the future we can plan for is the one God promises us. I think He's laid out the detail of how we are to plan for it in so far as how we are to live from day to day. Living from day to day as He would have us live is in a sense planning for the future, isn't it?

Sure it is but, I don't think anyone will make an issue out of it. ;) Oakspear, you're only confirming (in hindsight) what I thought in foresight concerning my observation that many members of TWI put VP on a pedestal. I sometimes wondered how much they were paying attention to what VP said in PFAL. Seemed they only heard what they wanted or needed to hear and not much more.

Mark, that's a very interesting and logical look at the verses in Romans. I've often thought about this myself and long ago I came to the conclusion that the key to understanding the verses lies in determining what Jesus is Lord of. I had always heard that that confession was pertaining to how we were to act as if Jesus was our Lord and therefore serve him in that capacity. However, I had come to the conclusion that (at least in my opinion) it means we confess Jesus as Lord of life, being the first one raised from the dead to everlasting life. In other words I'm not sure you can separate the belief from the confession just because there is that little word "and" between the two. It would do no good to confess Jesus as Lord if he didn't get up from the dead. Just my two cents worth.

You may be right (at least from your perspective) but, from mine I would disagree. I don't think you have to be a member of TWI to have known that forgetting the past, yet planning for the future is a Biblical principle.

I understand that. I sorta "grew up" in TWI myself. Not in the same that you're implying. I've seen much -- both pain and joy in the lives of believers. The pain many experienced saddens me but, I've always thought God is a big enuf God to see them through it. How long it takes for them to come out on the other side of their pain will vary I'm sure and it's not my place to tell them -- "GET OVER IT!" for like dealing with death each must deal with it in their own way.

Me too! In fact if he had asked for them I would of said --- You're on your own buddy! another spot -- got your PM. I was touched and will respond in due time.