WordWolf

Rascal, wait, he's got one for you, too! "Oh, Rascal... I see some sort of difficulty with a family member. No matter what, remember that they still love you. That health issue that's concerning you: God will deliver you from it in due time. Be steadfast and of a good courage. You can relax concerning money. He has said that-so long as you plan carefully- all will be well. You might wish to make a few career changes, however. Things could use a bit of a shot-in-the-arm. He is proud of you for all the personal growth you've done in the last few years. He is pleased with you." *goes back to his seat*

No, wait, he's got another message! *crawls back to the microphone* "I was stricken with a powerful message from God Almighty! He was warning that scoffers will come, as in the days of Noah! They will claim that my messages are not truly of Him who has sent them! They will try to turn you away from my message! Do not turn away from the messages of God Almighty- for the alternative is the outer darkness of ignorance, where there is no direction, and those in ignorance seek to drag you down to their level of ignorance! Pay no attention to them! Only in perfect obedience to His Will is safety! You must follow Him without question! And I will continue to give you His messages, of course!"

Raf, The Most Reverend is signalling me that you have a long, successful future as an extrapersonal prophet. Or something. Wait-he's signalling again. He's pointing to Belle. Most Reverend, has God sent you a message for her? "He has indeed! Oh, Belle, he is sending me a warning for you! I see betrayal! People close to you have taken advantage of you! Oh, dear Belle! You have suffered for your basic honesty! You have been offered opportunities that you have had offered to you in the past have had to be surrendered because you refused to take advantage of others! You have refused the temptations of filthy lucre! On the bright side is your hunger for knowledge. You like to read books and articles to improve your mind. In fact, if you're not already in some sort of personal service business, helping people, you should be. You must be-I see you helping people in an office. You have a deep, deep capacity for understanding people's problems and you can sympathize with them. But you are firm when confronted with obstinacy or outright stupidity. Your sense of justice is quite strong." *breaks down crying* I think we'll need to give MRR GGG a few minutes here. And a glass of water.

The Most Reverend G. Gordon Godfrey, are you getting a message for Raf? "I am indeed!" *steps down and places his hands over Raf* "The LORD, He is showing me something-He is showing me your past. Yes, you have always been a sensitive person, in tune with events around you. You chose well for a career, didn't you? When you were younger, you were different from other people that you knew. No, you did NOT fit in. You have always been a little on the outside of things. Your intuition is strong. Yes, you have always been a bit sensitive to God's Will in your life. You have occasionally dreamed of things before they happened, or at least had a strong sense of 'deja vu' under certain circumstances. In fact, you YOURSELF might have the calling of an extrapersonal prophet! You are also a caring and honest person, too much so at times. You've had difficulty in letting people get to know the real you. When you finally do let someone inside, you keep him or her close to you for a long time. In fact, right this minute, there is someone that you are close to that you are concerned about right now. Fear not. You worry too much. You can best help this person by continuing to be a positive influence in their life. Remain constant in prayer and remain ready to bless them. God Almighty has SPOKEN!" "Oh, and don't forget, I've prepared a DVD on hearing God's Will in your life. You can buy it at the door when you leave."

Step Right Up, Folks, and be the first one on your block to get your own Personal Prophecy! The first thing we need is the "right" personal prophet. Let's see... I introduce Rhea, the Medium! *stereotyped gypsy woman enters and does an elaborate salaam* Well done, Medium Rhea! However, in this PARTICULAR crowd, you don't have the "right" look, the look that they will accept. So, scram. *leaves* So, I introduce the Most Right Reverent G.Gordon Godfrey! *WASP enters with perfectly-ironed suit, and Brylcreemed hair* Perfect! We have the look, now we need the messages! Now, when practicing "curious arts", this process begins with what is called a "cold reading" or a "cold-read". That's when a person claims to use some supernatural power to divine a message, but instead uses their skill at studying people to figure out what the subject wants to hear, and then tells it to them. Next, we will need to package the message properly. MRR GGG will demonstrate. *steps forward, eyes clenched, face toward heaven, enraptured* *raises holy hands* "Yes, I see you reading this right this minute-God has shown me this. You have doubts about His messages that He is delivering to you via my ministry. Therefore, he has bidden me to give you this PERSONAL message, this message DIRECTLY to you from GOD ALMIGHTY, in which I am only a humble messenger. Here is the message. The Spirit of the LORD is upon me. He has anointed me with his message to you. At this hour, the LORD wishes you to know how He has a PERSONAL interest in your life-yes, YOUR life. He has followed you through ALL your days, and will now speak to YOU. He wishes to tell you that He is aware that some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. He sees you, and knows that at times you are extroverted, affable, sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary and reserved. The LORD sees that, and this is as it should be. Further, The LORD has seen your disappointments and broken trusts of the past. They have made you cautious in revealing yourself to others. You take pride in your ability to think for yourself, and do not accept others' opinions without satisfactory proof. As to satisfaction, you prefer a certain amount of change and variety, and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. Fear not. When you follow His will, which I will reveal to you, you will ALWAYS make the right decisions. You need no longer be worried on the inside, maintaining your control on the outside. Now, as to your personal life, your sexual adjustment has presented some problems for you. This is nothing you need concern yourself about unduly. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. Remember that in your weakness, His strength is made perfect. You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to your advantage. He is aware of this, and will present you opportunities to do so at the appointed hour. Be vigilant. You have a tendency to be critical of yourself. You have a strong need for other people to like you and for them to admire you. Neither of these should concern you, for The LORD, He sees you and accepts you, and as long as you follow His instructions-which He will give you through me, you will always please Him." Well, done, Most Right Reverend! Now then, you've seen his personal prophecy to you who's reading this right now. Are you convinced now? How else would he have learned all that about you if God hadn't revealed it to him? Ok, who will step up to receive a personal prophecy face-to-face from him?

So, in short, Belle, you're saying that twi insinuated itself into your personal life and marriage, and that twi and its practices and doctrines were the reasons for your divorce, since you wouldn't just blindly follow them, but your husband did, even when they badmouthed you... ....and you see a similarity in this and how the other divorce we are discussing fell out, correct? That Elizabeth was placed in a position where following her conscience resulted in CES/STFI insinuating themselves into her personal life and marriage, and invented and magnified problems- like inventing these so-called "personal prophecies"- specifically to either intimidate her into silence (forcing conformity), or to convince JAL that God Almighty has decided he should divorce, correct? Is that what you're saying?

Well, it's believed (with reason) among the ex-twi community that Jesus Christ had an earthly ministry of about a year, and it had a specific purpose with a specific goal. Contrast that with the apostles he chose, and the disciples who follwed him (about 120 at first) including Paul whom he chose personally, who had years to put things into practice. That's not to say that studying how Jesus did things when here is without merit- FAR FROM IT. However, it's easier to find examples of practice in Acts, to find recommendations or reproof in the Epistles, so chalk that down partly to practicality, and partly to laziness. A separate issue is the disdain for the Gospels inculcated by vpw, which penetrated deep into the twi mentality, and has affected all the twi survivors and their teachings, to greater or lesser degrees. (Some have made concerted efforts to overcome that, many have not.) So, those are reasons. They may not all be GOOD reasons, but there you go.

Oh, the part addressed to Mark was really nice and heartfelt. The part where he blew us off-that showed his heart as well, but not in a manner I'd call "great".... Caught that too, did you? But labelling us provides the excuse to skip the dialogue, and just release letters that just happen to appear here inexplicably... I addressed this above, and I hope you caught it.... I AM glad he said something-that I agree with... This bore repeating. Seems when someone took him up on his word here, his actions have NOT matched his words.

This is a letter (position paper) from John Lynn. Posted with permission. As I see it, this is JAL managing to write a reply to the GSC without changing his position of"I don't reply to the GSC." "Oh, this is information I want to get out publickly, and you should ask God before releasing it in any format." I detect a distinct "wink-wink" in that. Either JAL wrote this with the express purpose of seeing it appear here, or he didn't. A) If JAL wrote this with the express purpose of seeing it appear here, he did so with the little disclaimers at the beginning and the end saying "I don't communicate with people on the GSC" while writing a response he expected to be communicated with the people on the GSC. This doesn't strike me as particularly HONEST and without ARTIFICE. If I was paying money to CES/STFI, I'd question why leadership would feel the need to be intentionally less than honest in their dealings with me or anyone else. Does God sanction dishonest dealings with the family? How about when they're not in OUR ORGANIZATION-does it become sanctioned then? B) If JAL did NOT write this knowing that it would appear in THE single biggest avenue of communication where the CES/STFI people are getting information about the inner workings of their own group and the sole venue for discussing it (and personally, I think both of THOSE are important points in and of themselves) then he demonstrated a lack of understanding that I think makes him unsuited to leading a group in anything more detailed than a song. "Oh, I had no idea it would end up at the GSC when I wrote it." Give me a break. I find it hardly credible he's that obtuse. (Others may disagree with me, and simply think he was HONEST, but LACK VISION.) ================== And here's the part that's directed directly to us. But not by name. Because he's not talking to us. He's just using a megaphone to carry on a conversation right near us. Let's look at this a bit. "A brief p.s. to critics of Spirit & Truth Fellowship:" Translation: 'This is to the GSC, whose only purpose in here is to attack us with critical statements.' Or, in other words, 'the GSC has nothing positive to offer in this discussion, which we've been forced to have largely because of them opening up communication we were trying to close.' "Given the way that documents such as this somehow wind up on the Internet, " Translation: 'I don't write this with the INTENT it ends up on the GSC, but it might SOMEHOW end up there anyway. SOMEHOW.' Or, in other words, 'I write this with no plans to see it on the GSC, but I'll address them anyway in case it "somehow" ends up there.' Honest? What do you guys think? "let me say a few things to our detractors who will use this current situation in STF to say “I told you so,” take potshots at us, and magnify our flaws above the good we are doing for people." Translation: 'Let me make it clear that discussion at the GSC does nothing but magnify our flaws, and especially take cheap shots at us.' Or, in other words, 'You guys have nothing to offer here other than complaints.' "First, God bless you, I love you." Translation: 'Since saying negative things about you would detract from my image that I'm a heckuva nice guy, I'll follow up my initial disguised shot at you all by saying something pious.' It reminds me of a complaint I saw once about a poster on one messageboard. At the end of lengthy posts talking down to all other Christians, they posted their signature, "God bless you." People found that hypocritical at the time. How genuine THIS is, I leave to each reader to decide. Me, I do not think it is 100% false, but I find the evidence makes accepting this as 100% to be unsupportable. "Second, be sure you know enough truth about the issues to make a rational judgment." Translation: 'I'm going to state the obvious-know the truth before making any decisions, so as to demonstrate I'm a reasonable man. Of course, I hardly wanted anyone to HEAR the truth on any of this, but that's not important right now.' Personally, I find the timing of this statement rather convenient. It's a good idea in general, but at this moment, I see it going somewhere. "Third, get close enough to the nucleus of STF leadership to see their hearts before you impugn them." Translation: 'Stop criticizing us as making bad decisions or ungodly decisions or harmful decisions until you get to know us PERSONALLY over an EXTENDED period of time.' Meant to quell discussion by the majority of people, it's as sensible as saying we can't ever discuss Paul the Apostle since none of us know him personally-only by his writings (and one side-comment from Peter, whom we don't know personally either.) Knowing "their hearts" on a subject may help explain WHY they make a boneheaded decision, but is irrelevant to whether or not a decision IS boneheaded, which is one of the main things we're discussing here. I also find it ironic that harmful talk of people, called "personal prophecy", was sometimes given to people who the speaker did NOT know, and that was fine for years, but to say so is "impugning" the speaker. I might consider there to be an element of hypocrisy present. " Fourth, take an honest look at what we teach from the Word about whatever subjects are pertinent to this matter, like prophecy. Prophecy is prophecy, and to criticize “personal prophecy” as unbiblical, in and of itself, is contrary to Scripture. We have a book on Prophecy that deals with this subject in depth from the Word, which you can get from www.stfonline.org." Translation: 'Our doctrine is correct no matter what you say. 'Personal prophecy' has ALWAYS been correct, and we will continue to defend it as true no matter what. Our position on 'personal prophecy' is sound doctrine. Oh, and buy our book.' I never heard the leadership apologize for Momentus, or admit it was a bad idea or harmful to the brethren. It was just quietly dropped, and ANY inquiries were stifled with the famous "talking evil" party line. Now 'personal prophecy' is being defended with fervor. Leadership seems to find it approaching impossible to admit to the possibility of making bad decisions as a whole. Considering what's on the table now, that strikes me as mildly ironic. "In that vein, the reason I remain totally committed to Spirit and Truth Fellowship International is because I can find no one else with the “package” we have to offer, and I know the true heart with which we present it, as well as the liberating impact it has had on people around the world during the past 20 years." Translation: 'Be loyal to the ministry that taught you The Word. If not for us, you'd wander in darkness without any accurate Word.' Fine, that's a SLIGHT exaggeration. But it's only a small step from here to there. Plus, it says that the people who were HARMED over the past 20 years are an acceptable consequence for defending 'the ministry', since this thing seems to ONLY have positive results on people. "You will have to judge for yourself whether what we teach is sound doctrine, and whether we practice it in love." Doesn't this contradict where he JUST DECLARED 'personal prophecy' was sound doctrine? "But you cannot do that from afar. I encourage you to dig into our work, and I exhort you to “stay tuned” and see if the hand of God is on us. Watch and see where He takes this ministry in the days ahead. I do hope that among the millions whose lives we hope to touch, we will be able to bless you, the only you God has." Translation: 'You can't judge our doctrine by just reading it and comparing it to Scripture- you will need to interact with us for months in detail, and buy our stuff, before making any judgements. Did I forget to mention you're a fabulous human being?' I'm getting whiplash! First I was scum for even DISCUSSING error, then whether or not it's error is up to me, then I'm a great guy! "As to what is flying around cyberspace about me and my personal life, my email is jalces@aol.com and my home phone is 317-849-5707." Translation:'I only dialogue with people in private, so I can control the discussion.' " If you know me and care about me, I’ll be glad to communicate with you." Naturally, I remain the final arbiter as to whether or not you know me and care about me, and reserve the right to refuse private discussion with you entirely. " I will not, however, dialogue with anonymous people who lack the love and courage to identify themselves in interacting with me." Translation: 'And those people who use screen-names, they're scum and have nothing to offer. The only reasons they can maintain anonymity are because they lack love and courage.' Gee, wasn't I a great guy a few sentences ago? One might think that JAL was exercising the tactic known as "poisoning the well", attempting to label a source of information so that its genuine merits would be ignored.

Correct! That first quote and last long exchange was from the episode "KITT vs KARR", when the Knight Industries Two Thousand met his evil predecessor, the Knight Automated Roving Robot. The second one included the name of the inventor. Go, George!

"Remember Zeno and that immovable object thing? We're about to find out that answer." "Your lives mean nothing to me!" "What the hell was that?" "A Pontiac!" "Whats all this?!....looks like Darth Vader's bathroom!" "I bet you're tall and dark and handsome." "I'm definitely dark and handsome.I'm only tall when I'm climbing a steep incline." ""You are about as much fun as a divorce, which is not a bad idea!" "I want custody of me! " "I mean, you're a regular - real thing. Not just something out of a nightmare, like you looked last night." "Nothing has changed since last night." "Oh, yeah. That's easy for you to say. Wh-Where did you come from, anyway? And how did you get in that building?" "That edifice was the laboratory... where I was first activated... and where I was also... deactivated." "Deactivated? You mean somebody turned you off?" "My creator, Wilton Knight. He brought me into the world and then turned on me." "Aww. Take it easy. Take it easy. My old man - same way." "Yeah. You can't count on nobody 'cept me and Tony." "Interesting. I will enter that information in my databanks. I am indebted to both of you. You have reactivated me. How may I serve you?" "Serve us? What do you mean, serve us?" "I have checked my data on basic human desires. Therefore, I understand your needs." "Come on." "You wish to eat?" "Well, yeah." "You wish to drink?" "Yeah." "You wish to reproduce?" "Yeah." "Which one first?" "How about a couple - couple of eggs, sunny side up?" "I have no eggs. Perhaps you can direct me to a chicken." "Ah, what are you? A comedian? "

"Remember Zeno and that immovable object thing? We're about to find out that answer." "Your lives mean nothing to me!" "What the hell was that?" "A Pontiac!" "Whats all this?!....looks like Darth Vader's bathroom!" "I bet you're tall and dark and handsome." "I'm definitely dark and handsome."

My favourite scene like that was when BA watched them, switched milk with Murdock, watched Murdock fall asleep, drank Murdock's milk, laughing, then fell asleep as Murdock got back up....

It would be nice to hear from everyone. However, they are well aware of this discussion, and obviously have elected not to participate at this time-not even to issue a press release. (This may of course change at any time.) So, the refusal to make a response is IN ITSELF a response. They prefer to keep their position NON-SPECIFIC, nebulous. They prefer to keep their position OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. The prefer to have people SPECULATE as to their position. That in itself is an answer.

Congrats and congrats! (Plus the guts to admit to the karaoke...)

If you were a teenager when it was airing, you missed a lot. It was a fun action show with some McGuyvering elements (they often improvised very effective technology from what was at hand), and they fired guns and rockets and all kinds of stuff, and managed to stop their pursuit without even one casualty to them, the military, or the episode's villains. George Peppard was Hannibal Smith, who was a disguise expert, & tactician. "I love it when a plan comes together." Mr T was BA "Bad Attitude" Baracus, strongman, driver, and technician. He never wanted to fly. Dwight Schultz was HM "Howling Mad" Murdock, pilot and presumably insane resident of a VA Hospital, and the reason BA hated to fly. Dirk Benedict was Templeton Peck "Faceman", con artist and technician. They had a few different people, not from their original team, who joined as fifth members during the run of the show.

On a different subject entirely, I read a different Christian (Tim LaHaye addressing a pre-Tribulation Rapture) mention this gambit. He considered it a particularly cheap ploy: to claim that noted proponents for one position made a deathbed conversion to the opposite position, known only to one person, and never anyone close to that. He gave an example where one theologian was claimed to have changed his belief in one position, and the only proof was an off-hand comment supposedly made to a near-total stranger, years before he died, whereas he actually continued to teach his PREVIOUS position for several more years, and even his family heard him to hold it til his death. It's an old gambit, to claim soneone SECRETLY held a position different from one he publickly has held, and there is no documentary evidence for, to have him support your position from his grave.

We can't agree that half were. All Kenyon's books were NOT. All Bullinger's books were NOT. "Are the Dead Alive Now?" was from books like ""The Rich Man and Lazarus: An Intermediate State?" and "Saul and the Witch at Endor: Did the Dead Rise at Her Bidding?", complete with the question format. THOSE were SURELY known to vpw-he read ALL Bullinger's stuff. But they were left out when he saw to it the Companion Bible was in the bookstore. Stiles: the casual references to him say NOTHING of the complete transfer of the contents of Stiles' book into "vpw's book", which doesn't even name him ONCE. Further, the early editions of "vpw's book" say a man taught vpw, and later ones say he learned it all without a teacher. Finally, the ONLY reference vpw made to LEONARD was buried in one book and said the man was "not good with The Word", which is a GUARANTEE that twi people will have no interest in him. This was a deliberate lie, as Mrs W later pointed out that he taught them plenty of "Word", and that the "original pfal" class was Leonard's class with vpw's name on it, NEVER MENTIONING LEONARD. Why take Stiles' name off Stiles' book and put your own instead? Why bind 2 books of Bullinger together, strip his name, and put your own instead? Why take Leonard's name off Leonard's class, and put your own instead? INTENT.... INTENT.... (edited to correct the name "Leonard".)

No, that's BA Baracus from the "A-Team." They always had to trick him to get on a plane, usually by drugging him, occasionally by hypnosis ("Eclipse!") or something else.

Sniper got the target with one bullet at range! Sheriff Bart replies to a whispered suggestion from Miss Lilly Von Shtupp with that line. Go, Ca Dreaming!

Correct! Descent PART ONE. Troi got to say the dangerous "I've found something" line and not die (unlike the old redshirts of ST:TOS), Picard revisits his old "Locutus of Borg" name when interrogating a Borg (unsuccessfully), and Data has a poker game on the holodeck with Albert Einstein, Sir Isaac Newton, and Stephen Hawking. Stephen Hawking becomes the only person to play HIMSELF on an episode of ST, AND wins a poker hand against Albert Einstein. :) Go, Raf!

Hm. The magic of the internet at work..... ==================== http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/august/10.72.html "Bad Judgment Ruling imperils faith-based programs around the country. Just when you think you've heard it all, along comes an even more distorted public characterization of evangelicals. According to a recent critic, the belief held by evangelicals and Prison Fellowship (PF) in the "substitutionary and atoning death of Jesus," reflects "a legalistic understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus, [which] is not shared by many Christians." So much for the central tenet of every historic creed and confession of the Christian church. Where is this critique—in The New York Times? No, it's the finding of U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt in deciding on June 2 the lawsuit against PF brought by Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The judge declared unconstitutional the InnerChange Freedom Initiative in Iowa, a program started by PF. Startlingly, the judge devoted a dozen pages to analyzing evangelicalism and PF's statement of faith, apparently determined to separate evangelicals from other Christians. Evangelicalism, he wrote, is "quite distinct from other self-described Christian faiths, such as Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, and Greek Orthodoxy." It is also "distinct from other … Christian denominations, such as Lutheran, United Methodist, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian." Evangelical Christianity, he found, tends to be "anti-sacramental," downplaying "baptism, holy communion or Eucharist, marriage, [and] ordination" as "appropriate ways to interact or meet with God." (The charge of downplaying baptism will surprise my 20 million fellow Baptists.) Moreover, we are "contemptuous" of Roman Catholic practices, a conclusion sure to amuse my colleagues with Evangelicals and Catholics Together. To sum up: Evangelicals are a fringe cult inherently discriminatory, coercive, and antagonistic to other Christians. Ironically, just days after the judge's decision, the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America's Prisons reported a desperate need in prisons for "highly structured programs which reduce misconduct in correctional facilities and lower recidivism rates after release." This is precisely what InnerChange does. It has a proven record of rehabilitation—8 percent recidivism for graduates, according to a University of Pennsylvania study of a similar program in Texas. This compares with more than 60 percent recidivism nationally. The commission understands the urgency of these programs, because this year, 600,000 prisoners will be released. Within three years, more than two-thirds will be re-arrested. Bad enough that the judge ordered closed a program that has proven successful, imperiling thousands of faith-based programs. Even worse, he expanded the Supreme Court precedent in Lemon v. Kurtzman. A careful reading of his opinion leads to the conclusion that even if state funds are not involved, any close government cooperation with "pervasively sectarian" groups is unconstitutional. Such a broad standard could easily be applied to church services or evangelistic events not only in prisons, but also in hospitals, military bases, or any government facility. But the most alarming question is why the judge chose to write a sociological analysis of evangelicalism—something I've never seen before in any case. And why would he so inaccurately characterize evangelicals as a fringe cult? After all, we make up between 33 and 40 percent of the American population, drawing from scores of denominations, including many millions of Catholics. Whatever the reason, by distinguishing evangelicals from all other Christian groups, Judge Pratt supported his finding that we discriminate and coerce conversions—despite the fact that every inmate testifying in the trial denied any coercion. InnerChange is voluntary; at any time, inmates can drop out. Many participants are not Christians. Think of the consequences if this definition survives on appeal—enshrining in federal law a definition of evangelicals as a narrow, mean-spirited minority. This ruling could be cited in cases where pastors publicly denounce homosexuality or pray in Jesus' name on public property. What will prevent a court from deciding what is and is not legitimate theology, according to the trendiest, most politically correct standards?" (snip) ================== This is under appeal. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/j...y/128-52.0.html "Imprisoned Ministry The future of Prison Fellowship's rehabilitation program, and other faith-based social services, are in the hands of an appeals court." "Last month's federal court decision declaring unconstitutional a prison ministry run by Prison Fellowship has placed the status of other faith-based initiatives in question. Fallout for other Christian social services is limited for now while Prison Fellowship appeals the ruling. The appeals process could reach the Supreme Court. • Related articles and links In 1999, the state of Iowa partnered with InnerChange Freedom Initiative, a biblically based rehabilitation program designed by Prison Fellowship (PF), to reduce recidivism rates. Inmates from nine state prisons are eligible to apply for a transfer into the two- to three-year program. U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt issued his verdict in a 140-page decision following a three-year trial that included a personal visit to the facilities of the disputed program. He ordered InnerChange to disband within 60 days and return about $1.5 million in funding it had received from the state of Iowa. PF president Mark Earley said the organization is preparing to post bond and file an appeal with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, where he is confident the judgment will be overturned. PF says that advocates of InnerChange and its upcoming appeal include Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Ted Haggard, James Dobson, and Rick Warren. Earley said Pratt overstepped his constitutional bounds by ruling the program unconstitutional even if it accepted no state funds. Earley said the judge ignored the voluntary nature of InnerChange, which allows inmates to quit without punishment. "Based on this judge's ruling, the only way to improve this program is to move it out of the prison," said Earley. "And there are not many escapees that we can minister to." Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) filed the lawsuit in 2003 on behalf of inmates who said InnerChange discriminated against non-Christians. "It certainly makes sense that Christians want to help prisoners," said AU executive director Barry Lynn. "What does not make sense is for the state to pay. The government simply cannot support and promote programs that are essentially religious efforts to provide service and convert people to a particular religion at the same time." Secular service, faith-based approach InnerChange embraces a transformative—rather than therapeutic—model that was developed by Charles Colson. Inmates who participate in InnerChange can attend Bible studies and worship services along with non-religious classes such as substance abuse counseling, and academic and life skills training. In 1997, when President George W. Bush was governor of Texas, he oversaw the introduction of InnerChange in his home state. PF leaders met with President Bush in the White House in 2003 to discuss the results of a University of Pennsylvania study that concluded InnerChange graduates were half as likely as non-participants to be reincarcerated within two years of their release. But when the study sample was broadened to include both graduates and those who dropped out of the program, InnerChange participants were reincarcerated at the same rate as the control group that did not participate in any rehabilitation program. (The program has a 58 percent dropout rate.) After meeting with PF, Bush told then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to look into the possibility of implementing InnerChange in federal prisons. Bush also proposed a $400 million, four-year initiative to reduce recidivism in his 2004 State of the Union address. The Bureau of Prisons is currently running a multi-faith rehabilitation program in five federal prisons, but it has temporarily withdrawn its request to implement a single-faith rehabilitation program in six federal prisons, for which $3 million had been appropriated. Separating out the sectarian Charles Haynes, senior scholar of the First Amendment Center, believes the InnerChange case is "the most significant case to date" for faith-based initiatives, because it may lead to legislation in Congress that will mandate additional oversight. Haynes says state authorities should perform "audits" to make sure faith-based programs are not using state money for sectarian purposes. "Right now, there are a lot of religious organizations that fall into this gray area," Haynes said. "There are programs where it is really difficult, if not impossible, to determine what is the religious and what is the secular part of the program." The state of Iowa funded 40 percent of the InnerChange program. Those funds paid for InnerChange's designated "non-sectarian" expenses such as office supplies, an employee appreciation dinner, and 82 percent of the program director's salary. InnerChange programs in Arkansas—dedicated one day before the Iowa ruling—and Texas are privately funded, while programs in Kansas and Minnesota receive some state funding. About 1,100 inmates are currently enrolled in InnerChange programs. Earley said that the recent ruling strikes a blow to the religious liberty of inmates and emphasized that Muslims, Wiccans, and Druids have all graduated from the program, which does not require inmates to convert to Christianity. "Governments don't have the money or the willpower to provide rehabilitative services for prisoners that work," Earley said. "By definition, their programs are secular. If they are denied the opportunity to partner with faith-based organizations, we are in for a darker future when it comes to the prison system in America."" ================ Prison Fellowship responded. http://www.pfm.org/generic.asp?ID=2416 (PDFs and stuff.)

I expect (and would appreciate) the admins moving this to the DECAF forum in a day or so. "..a Federal Judge ruled Evangelicals not a legitimate branch of Christianity in September.." I can't ask the person who made this comment, since they don't read or post here. However, I ask YOU guys. Has anyone HEARD such a thing? It sounds like nonsense to me on the face of it. I'd like whatever news or even vague second-hand reports any of you can pass along.

I have nothing useful to add here. I hope you consider at least some of us here "family", but I'd expect you to maximize your remaining time with your (genetic) family. I'm glad you at least have some time to reach closure on a few things, since not everyone has that chance.

If JAL was REALLY unaware of this discussion UNTIL YOU E-MAILED HIM, my view of how well-informed he is of things he should be aware of would drop again. As it is, I think he was already aware of it, and you've prompted a response, which is to the better. Maybe THIS time he'll stay and DISCUSS, rather than make a "drive-by post" like he did the LAST time, announcing that he would refuse to engage us in dialogue here or on any other board, and only communicate PRIVATELY. JS, I have no knowledge of him on which to base a comment, and he has never posted here. (Or at least not under his own name if he HAS, which is his privilege.) Looks like JS is refusing to engage in dialogue as well. This does NOT reflect well on them OR the organization. What's his explanation so far (which looks to be ALL the answer he's giving?) "Don't believe everything you read, and buy my book." We also have confirmation that they really WERE running the railroad by means of this "personal prophecy" thing at least for some time, since there was a "Prophetic Council." Complete with an acronym. They've been using it for HOW many years, and NOW it's being studied more closely? I have an off-topic question that I will spin off into a new topic (not CES/STFI related.) You can examine the letter of how a doctrine is defined. You can study the accounts in Scripture (to see if they apply AT ALL and/or are being applied CORRECTLY.) You can review how a doctrine is being disseminated. You can review how a doctrine is being PRACTICED. And BEFORE putting one into practice, you can examine its official definition, study the accounts in Scripture, state how it is to be taught and practiced. Seems THOSE steps were glossed over in CES/STFI regarding personal prophecy- or else we wouldn't be having this discussion..... This bears repeating.