Larry N Moore

Which came first? The chicken or the egg. :)

WOW! For someone that's obsessed with John Lynn (and CES) I'm amazed that you had enuf time on your hands to do this. How much time did you actually spend researching the history of Larry N Moore in bordieland? An hour. Two. Three. Tell ya what -- why don't you tell me everywhere you've been and done in your past so I can return the favor for you. ;) P.S. Dan I responded to your latest "missile", but you'll have to wait to see what I said. :) P.S.S. rainbow! P.S.S.S Have a great day Dan. I have to get ready for work.

Happy Birthday Mr. Squirrel. I see someone already offered you some nuts so, what else do squirrels like? :) Have a good one!

I do. I would say that it's not a matter of being afraid of "going public". I would say it's just simply none of the public's business. John has invited those who care for him to email him with questions. Even so, that is no guarantee that all your questions will be answered. Some things are just no one else's business. I don't know why some of you don't "get it".

Danny -- Happy Halloween! -- to you likewise.

Absolutely amazing! At first I thought he was painting a dragon.

Oh I can imagine quite easily the pain associated with being used and abused. I've suffered it. Can you just for once try to understand that no one (at least not myself) is calling you a liar. I'm simply an agnostic. Ask an agnostic in relationship to the belief in the existence of god/s what that means and then maybe you'll understand my position.

No surprise here. If I was permitted I could point out in PLAIN ENGLISH (you must not have learned it so I'll go slow for your benefit) how mistaken you are. Unfortunately, even in PLAIN ENGLISH I have my doubts that you're be able to see it. Just as you might not see how making such a comment is condescending and arrogant, but PLAIN ENGLISH must not be the language you speak.

Fair enuf. I really didn't think you were.

Funny (not really) that you would say this seeing as how YOU happen to be one of the first ones I've engaged here that treated me in a condescending and discourteous fashion. Of course you don't see it that way, but if you were to take dan's suggestion and re-read my posts from the beginning you (or others) might see where I just got tired of your arrogant and condescending tone in your responses to me. So I slapped you back. I suppose that's something you just can't get over -- having someone stand up to your bull.

Dan, here's a quote from that thread. Re-read the whole thread again and maybe (just maybe) you might see where I made an effort to be reasonable and even tried to lighten up the discussion but continued to be attacked personally.

Dan, I took your suggestion and started reading through my posts (from the beginning). I'm currently looking over the thread A Few Big Things I Learned Taking PFAL. If that's the one you're referring to I will have to respectfully disagree with your point of view. I was NOT the first one to "cast stones". I know, I know -- Two wrongs do not make a right -- but singling me out while ignoring who started the "fight" is -- well -- it's bs.

Christian has (graciously) given me permission to post excerpts from his books on this thread. He has told me that he's appreciative of the kind comments people have expressed here. You can see what he says here. He went on to say (in his latest email to me) that he thinks the books might spark some intense conversation -- negative or positive -- it would be interesting to see nevertheless. I'm currently half way through his book and I must say it's one of those kind of books that you just don't want to put down -- at least in my opinion.

Although you might be right about some people I don't think you can paint everyone into the picture you have in your mind with such a broad brush. You have no idea of what I personally have dealt with. Dwelling on the past obsessively and negatively doesn't allow you to move forward in life.

Rascal, you're simply wrong in your accusation of us. If you're including me in this generalization I would simply have to say that I'm an agnostic concerning your claims. Having never seen direct evidence of what is claimed I simply don't know if they are true. That's NOT the same thing as calling you a liar. If you don't understand the difference I suggest you speak to an agnostic (concerning belief in God/s). They would tell you that although they don't consider people who claim there is a God liars, they just don't know if there is just because you say so. Your words are not enuf to convince us (agnostics) that there is a god/s.

Oh. So you do see it that way. Then why didn't you show me a little common courtesy? ;)

Funny, I was thinking that if many of the members I've engaged would have shown me a little common courtesy none of this might have happened. Of course, I don't expect you to see it that way.

I find it ironic that for a group of people who think it's their business what the leaders of TWI and CES do, someone would make this kind of argument. For a group of people who complain that they weren't allowed to question the decisions and policy of leaders of the same two groups to say that I have no right to challenge the policy of the leaders (moderators and/or administrators) of Greasespot imo seems hypocritical. Paw if you want to know why I came back it's really simple. I have the freedom of will to change my mind. And I have the freedom to voice my opinion about what I believe to be wrong. If you don't think so, then the whole concept of Greasespot is a lie. To call me a troll because I don't share the same opinion that the majority does is pure crap. I think it's wrong for you to voice your opinion of why you did what you are doing without affording me the opportunity to defend myself publicly. If I'm wrong (in my opinion) then at least have enuf confidence in the intelligence of the members of Greasespot to make up their own minds. All they're hearing is your side of the story. I can't believe you are so insecure about your actions that you aren't willing to defend them -- PUBLICLY. P.S. This post was edited to draw attention to what I told Paw in another post (which is not intended to be viewed by the general populace. Funny I thought if some of the members of Greasespot had shown me a little common courtesy, then perhaps I wouldn't be where I am today. Of course, I'm sure you and many others won't see it that way.

Well done Abi! I'm very pleased to know you'll finally be able to take a rest. Of course being a mother might limit just how much of a rest that will be. Did I ever tell you my theory of how kids seem to have so much energy? They take ours! :)

The relevancy lies in whether the first occurrences of VP having sex outside of his marriage came about as a result of certain women seducing him. If that's true then (even though it's not right) VP succumbed to the temptation of the Devil and with that temptation it's very possible that the road he was traveling on became more deviant. Who can say they've never been tricked (seduced) by the Devil? Who can say they might not still be suffering from his seduction in some cases of behavior?

Shoot! I can't remember if I already responded to this post. That happens when it takes hours (or a day) before your post are submitted for public consumption. Did I respond to it already Paw?

I'll take that bet! Although it's possible that you're right -- possible -- I think she really did have a heart for the ministry. Many people choose to stay (as long as they did) for the same reason. I did but, eventually gave up the "fight". Some continued on because they thought the "fight" was worth it. And then some I've talked to told me: "Larry, where else is there to go? I just want to serve the Lord. You're not going to find a perfect church."

That's nice but you . . . . . . should have stopped right here. Even though I'm sure you didn't mean to -- everything else you wrote comes across as a feeble attempt to rationalize what you said. When I first read your "apology" I had to make a choice -- Seeing as how Dooj did apologize should I ignore her attempts at rationalization? I decided (obviously) that although it's admirable of you to do what I doubted you would I'm disappointed that you found it necessary to say anything other than: "I'm sorry Oldies. It was wrong of me to infer that you were a pedophile. Please forgive me."

Ex, I'm 52 and no I would never think of harming a young (or old) woman (in a sexual or otherwise way). Well, I have thought about spanking my grand-daughter. Does that count? ;)

You "think he said"? Unless you can submit evidence (the actual quote) of what John said, what you say (or think) amounts to nothing more than bull. Next I expect it to be said that he actually said he did hit his wife.