WordWolf

I never said anybody here ever made that claim. The fact remains however: that is indeed a claim people have made regarding the holocaust as to what Nazi Germany did to the Jews. I was simply pointing out a fact I believe many people here (and also people out in the world) are probably not aware of. I am not claiming anybody here ever made this claim, regardless of what "you claim" I said. Gee, for the "intellectual type of person" you want to portray yourself to others, I certainly thought you were able to read better than that.

You made no exception whatsoever. We addressed WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP and did not pretend you hold

positions you don't. You just tossed that in and PRETENDED there's no connection with you saying that-

in MORE THAN ONE POST- and any posts you're responding to.

I'm well-read enough to know when someone's trying to INSINUATE a connection between two things.

HOWEVER ... if I were going to insisit upon anyone here making any kind of absurd claim about the holocaust, then that would be the same claim many people out in the world (those who are not GSC members) have already made and are still making. What claim is that? It is the claim that 6 million Jews were exterminated by Nazi Germany in the manner that "people claim" they were. The "Holocaust deniers" have already respond to that particular claim with:

"It has been proven both scientfically and physically impossible to exterminate 6 million Jews in the manner that "people claim" Nazi Germany did."

I'm aware they make that Holocaust deniers make that claim of their own.

I'm also aware the evidence doesn't support their claim.

Furthermore,

one of the major issues, I've noticed, you've been ducking.

That is,

do you believe SOME Jews were exterminated by Hitler and his Nazis during World War II,

whether that was 100,000 or 1 million or some other number,

or are you claiming there was no concerted effort to round up and kill Jews and other minorities

in Germany during World War II by Nazis as directed by Hitler?

Personally,

I think your persistent refusal to address this from ANY angle is quite telling.

If you DID believe that SOME were killed but the numbers were inflated,

you'd sound less nonsensical to the average poster, and stand to gain by posting it.

If you believe that there was NO such effort, then you only stand to look silly in the face of

all the photographic evidence, eyewitness accounts, and confessions from people who were

there in one form or another, so you stand to lose by posting THAT.

Therefore, ignoring this perfectly reasonable question, and changing the subject,

is quite telling on its own. After all, we didn't presume you held EITHER position, but you

must hold ONE of them- since you've rejected

"the accounts everyone ELSE hold as accurate ARE accurate".

I realize I have repeated myself, but differently - unlike the "pro-Holocaust" people regarding "their claims". AS YOU YOURSELF SO APTLY PUT IT FOR THEM: when discussing the millions of people the Nazis imprisoned, many of them for the "crime" of being Jewish, and the subsequent execution BY the Nazis for that "crime" ... etc., etc., etc.

Yes sir. People everywhere (not just here at GSC) are holding onto that "Holocaust" claim as if it were the truth - just as if it were their daily bread. The Holocaust is not true. The Holocaust is more like this "song" some people started a very long, long time ago. What kind of song is it?

Ok, so are you saying that there WAS no roundup of Jews and other minorities in Nazi Germany

AT ALL, let alone executions of them for being minorities of their particular sort?

Or are you just intending to prevaricate and pretend you said "yes" or "no" whenever it suits your whims?

That's not intellectually honest.......

.......which hardly comes as news....

The problem with that is,

this "when he said 'sinner and saint alike' he meant Christians both times"

thing completely ignores what he said other times-

in the Orange Book, this phrase is written, at least part of the time-

as "Christian and nonChristian alike".

Therefore, he CLEARLY meant sinner as non-Christian,

and saint as Christian,

and claiming he meant otherwise is demonstrably incorrect.

I never could recall dr.wierwilles power hungry ways????

Hello, zarko.

I'll try to fill in a few blanks for you.

(I shall also sum up, so this isn't comprehensive, just the main points.)

Back when vpw was a minister with a congregation, he was always looking

for something bigger-he had ambition. What he DIDN'T have was something bigger-

talent to match his ambition.

That changed the first time in the early 1950s when-in the space of one year-

he got Stiles' book on the holy spirit, and Leonard's class on "Gifts of the Spirit."

By reteaching Leonard's class and claiming it was entirely his own,

and retyping Stiles' book and claiming it was entirely his own,

he began having success more along the lines of what he wanted.

It changed at second time in the late 60s when he travelled to the House of Acts-

a bunch of hippie Christians operating in the Haight-Ashbury area of San Francisco.

He succeeded in convincing a few of them that he had something special to offer

(true) that was unique to him (false-it was the work of others.)

It was once he had these Christians working for him that twi took off. vpw had been

trying for something since the early 50s, but he now had the right people under him

who could expand the organization. He sent them out to both coasts to grow the

ministry as much as possible, as Way East and Way West.

Once these were grown to a "self-propagating" point, vpw announced he was taking

over what were effectively THEIR ministries- the East and West- and all leadership

was to come directly from him, and all moneys collected were to go directly to

his hq in Ohio, with none of it staying locally.

Somewhere in there (early 70s), Peter Wade cut ties with vpw.

That was the time it was EASIEST to see vpw evidencing power-hunger.

We could get into an analysis of the way corps for further discussion along those

lines if you want.

I wish he was stopping closer to me-I'd seriously consider a little travelling to see him in person.

Unfortunately, the JW's are rather pushy around here.

They did not used to be like that. I went to school with a few of them, and they were some of the greatest people I knew.

We've tried to polite "No thank you, I'm not interested" route, only when shutting the door, having it slammed open and a Watchtower shoved into our house. That, and coming just about every other day.

I finally got them to stop coming.

I got a call from one of my neighbors, who said they were on the street. I quickly threw on my black jeans, black turtleneck, and an old black cloak I had. I answered the door, and they gave their usual spiel, to which I replied "HI! You're just in time. We're having a ritual. But we don't have a virgin to sacrifice. You wouldn't happen to have any lying around, would you?"

The woman with them screamed, and they all bolted down the street.

They haven't been back.

Yes, I'm mean sometimes. Don't shove your religion in my face. I had enough of that.

When they're being VERY pushy, there's ways and ways of getting THEM to decide

to leave. Back when I was in twi, I remember one twi'er exploting their aversion

to speaking in tongues- he got one to run away.

Me, back in twi, I used them for Bible practice. I'd listen to them begin on a subject,

then we'd go to a different book and address the same subject.

(At a reasonable pace.) I did that partly for my OWN practice (I think that understanding

ALL the books is a laudable goal, and the more, the better), and partly to test

how well they knew verses outside their own approach. I disdain relying SOLELY on

knowing ONE approach with ONE passage. If that's all you know, you're not ready

to play with the big boys. Read up, and try again in 3-6 months to a year.

It was also a measure of their poise to see how well they dealt with the unexpected.

(Pretty well, mostly.) Anyway, I got some practice and some entertainment in,

and I think they learned something as well.

This approach may not work as well if your locals aren't up to this caliber.

There probably were nicer ways to phrase it,

but overall, I don't think that was impolite in and of itself.

It doesnt sound like they were rude, nor you.

I've had a variety of experiences like that, some of which weren't so polite.

But-they started.

I was awakened from a nap some years ago by a ringing of my doorbell.

(Early morning.)

I went to the door, asked who it was, and the person deliberately mumbled,

intentionally making it so I could not make out a response without

opening the door.

Obviously, their INTENTION was to force a conversation.

Obviously, they didn't think through what type of conversation would result

if they pulled a stunt like that.

So, having heard the mumble, I looked through the security peephole to

look at the person there. I saw a tie, and someone DODGE out of

line of sight of the hole. Obviously, he was DETERMINED I receive no

information about who was bothering me at my door before opening the

door. So, I opened my door, visually confirmed who it was, then

shut my door and locked it as he was opening his mouth.

I now had all the information I needed, and-based on his actions, that's

all the interaction I was interested in.

I then went back to bed.

I heard he stood there for several minutes, but I don't know why.

=========

Another time, a guy tried a new, equally dishonest tactic.

He said he was going around to encourage neighbors to read their

Bible. I thanked him, and said I already did.

His immediate response was "Well, many people SAY that..."

(A bystander asked me afterwards "Did I hear him call you a liar?")

Since he was challenging my reading of the Bible directly, I decided

to accept his challenge....which should have been accompanied by

a "dun-dunn-DUNNN!" in the soundtrack....

We then went all over the Bible in succession. He'd bring up a

subject, and I'd take him to books he was unfamiliar with,

and right to verses relevant to the subject.

Hey, if he really WAS reading it all the time, he should be able

to keep up....

He came back another time, and I told him directly that my

specific disinterest in what he had to say was due to his previous

words to me-which I quoted back, complete with context.

I let him consider that for a moment, and formulate his response.

Now, HAD HE accepted responsibility for his words, and apologized

as an adult, I might have reconsidered-which is why I paused.

(He was older than me, and should have SOME maturity.)

His response was right out of some people's twi playbook of

"never admit you're wrong."

He began saying that IF he said such a thing,

and continued with a further evasion.

I pointed out exactly what I was thinking- HAD he accepted

responsibility, I MIGHT have listened to him further, but it's

clear to me that whatever I need to hear, he doesn't have

within him.

I think the person travelling with him got the lesson, whether

or not he did.

No, not everyone is like that, but approaches of those kinds

will receive what I deem to be responses appropriate to them.

My apologies.

I was under the impression that cg had boiled the subject down to its essence,

rather than leave all the artificial titles and unnecessary categories in place.

I gave him more credit than he earned.

My mistake.

(snip)

Once I realized that God had provided a way out of the wilderness I had to let go of the choices that kept me sitting there.

(snip)

THERE'S an ugly truth we all had to face....

I believe the title of this thread is: "What gives Holocaust denial such an appeal?" Actually that is a very good question that very few people today have an answer for - and why is that?

[Here comes yet another misdirection off of the title, right after looking like he's going to

actually address it. However, this should surprise no one at this point.]

Because the more appropiate question to ask is, why do people still need to believe in the Holocaust?

[because it happened.

Why do people still need to believe the Declaration of Independence was issued in 1776?

Because it happened.

It would be unhealthy to deny the historical evidence of things proven beyond a REASONABLE

DOUBT to have happened.]

Yep. WE need to believe the Nazi's murdered and exterminated 6 million Jews - despite the fact it has been proven to be both scientifically and even physically impossible for them to have done so.

[it's been proven that it happened-therefore any claim that documented history

was "impossible" is error. There are eyewitnesses, there are confessions, there are

people-both Jews and non-Jews- who were imprisoned by the Nazis for extermination

and were rescued before the Nazis got around to killing that SPECIFIC person.

(I met one and saw his branded number. I'm inclined to accept his EYEWITNESS

TESTIMONY like they do in court. There's photographs and film evidence.

They found some of the bodies that weren't incinerated.

It's been proven beyond a REASONABLE doubt.]

WE need to beleive that the Germans turned human beings into "human soap" and "human lampshades" - and by golly, we'll damn all those who dare to question any of our incongruent and absurd conclusions about it!

Apparently,

some of us are so desperate to deny the historical facts of the Holocaust that they need to

completely make up a pretend position that the rest of us supposedly hold (a "strawman")

so they can try to look more reasonable compared to what we never claimed.

Has anyone here ever said anything about "human soap" and "human lampshades"

when discussing the millions of people the Nazis imprisoned, many of them for the "crime"

of being Jewish, and the subsequent execution BY the Nazis for that "crime"?

And yet, WTH keeps insisting we DID make such an absurd claim,

then suggest we are holding an absurd position for claiming it.

All to damn those who dare to accept the preponderance of the evidence and not ignore

it all in favour of a handful of tinfoil hat pseudo-experts who speak on matters they

are not trained in.]

Ok, get your GPS navigators ready, we're going to get lost now....]

There will always be those people who try to lock the barn door long after the horse has bolted. Why is that? Because locking the barn door gives them a sense of security even though the "horse" is no longer there. Forget about talking "horse-sense" with them or even into any of them, because it's not about someone having any "horse-sense" anymore - what it's really about today is: whatever makes me feel secure! SO I BETTER BE SURE TO LOCK THAT BARN DOOR!

Yes, being and feeling secure is certainly one of our basic human needs. We all need to feel secure and have a certain sense of security. But the question that is hardly ever asked is - where does one derive their sense of security? Does your sense of security come from believing the truth. or does it come from believing a lie? If your sense of security comes from a lie, then you'll hang on to it and hold on to it like it was your daily bread. And that's the reason why some people's arguments never seem to die or go away, because behind that argument is usually a lie that helps them feel secure.

It was Jesus Christ who said, "Leave them alone, for they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, shall they not both fall into the ditch?" But nobody's listening or taking his advice too much at all. I know that for a fact, because people today are still pretty much stuck in the same old ditch that Jesus talked about over 2000 years ago. But one day you might wake up and realize that Jesus Christ indeed spoke the truth. You'll come to realize that when you see people who are still stuck in the same old arguments that they have had with one another and with their neighbor - day in and day out - day after day, week after week, year after year, and they have only gotten and gone nowhere. But let's forget about the fact that I'm still stuck in the same old ditch (the same old argument) that I've had with you and with my neighbor for decades. Let's not talk about me or focus solely upon me. Let's talk all about you, shall we? I wonder just how far we will go this time.

[Can anyone find ANY relevance to the last few paragraphs,

concerning why WTH finds it necessary to deny the Holocaust?

It's a real simple question, WTH.

Is this fake or do you just really not care about what happened to all these people?

He really doesn't care about what happened to all those people,

and if he has to claim it's fake to not care about them, he will,

but in the meantime, he's just going to pretend you didn't ask him.

Bear in mind that the corps was a training program, and as such, one would come to expect some bullying from time to time.

Bear in mind that the corps was presented as teaching to apply the Bible and serve God.

As such, one should come to expect bullying to be rare and accidental,

mis-steps by the one who bullied.

This FICTION that the corps was supposed to be some sort of paramilitary organization

where Christians were sent through some sort of Boot Camp and were expected to

be some sort of soldier/athlete Christian is not reflected in anything anyone was

handed before joining, nor part of what they signed, nor in the official comments

made verbally for those interested.

It was supposed to be some sort of Christian education-partly in the classroom,

partly outside the classroom by doing, but an education overall.

That's one reason why the "graduates" got a DIPLOMA at the conclusion.

If the corps was supposed to be some sort of military training,

then it was an INCREDIBLY poor model of one- partly because vpw designed it,

and vpw's knowledge of the military came second-hand AT BEST, and primarily

from movies and television like many of us have seen-

but we at least admit we don't really know about it.

If it HAD been based on some sort of military model- and not a CHRISTIAN EDUCATION model,

(which would have been news to most of the students, especially the Family Corps who

never planned to take their families into military training)

then-at most- the opening few weeks should have been when any high-pressure

activities took place.

However, based on what I've heard from people actually IN the military-

the bullying is seen in MOVIES and possibly when applying for elite units like

Navy Seals, Special Forces, etc, and is not seen in actual training, neither during

a normal tour, nor in boot camp. It's more like Sergeant Hulka in "Stripes"- where

he tells the men they're going to learn how to do everything the army's way, and

he's going to be their instructor. This whole "yell-at-the-trainee" stuff is reserved

for when a trainee does something SPECIFIC and STUPID.

(For example, when a trainee at the firing range stands up, and carelessly points

his rifle at someone, with live ammo in the gun. THAT's worth yelling over- and he

got yelled at over it.)

Movies show sergeants screaming at cadets, calling them worthless,

and commercials show sergeants yelling at length over a small ketchup stain on an undershirt.

That's FICTION, not reality.

However, vpw really didn't seem to have anything more substantial than that

sort of cinematic background when considering additions to the program

that were supposedly "military".

That's CARELESS, and IMPROPER PREPARATION on his part. He should have been

FAR better prepared when proposing a multi-year training program.

If one can't take some bullying, criticism and hard knocks, one may not have the right attitude. "its the stones in the brook that make it sing" ... its all attitude. Not saying that you didn't have that attitude, just commenting...

one may not have the right PROGRAM.

Criticism-of PRODUCTIVE KINDS- are healthy parts of ANY training program,

no matter how inconsequential the program.

(Trainees at fast-food restaurants receive constructive criticism as well.)

The disciples were beaten by the religious authorities of their day, and rejoiced

to be counted worthy to suffer in Christ's name. Didn't mean the beatings were

correct. Their attitude was healthy- but they were responding to something

UNhealthy, and UNgodly-but dressed up as something godly.

After all. "it's the stones in the brook that make it sing" makes a dandy

rationalization for "I yell because I care" and "I yell because you can take it",

but of those three sayings,

all three are from vpw,

and NONE of the three are FROM SCRIPTURE.

The first one, "it's the stones in the brook that make it sing" bears a resemblance

to "what doesn't kill me only makes me stronger",

which of course is from Frederich Neitzche,

the same man who said "God is dead."

Neither of those, of course, appear in Scripture, either.

OM... thanks for bringing that up... that "stones in the brook" thing... just another fine example of the indoctrination process of the CULT that we were in that convinced us that "it was good for us" to be subjugated to bullying and abuse... we were in the corps to learn how to become better servants to God and His people... in no way did that require that we be treated like rubbish... you're still a TWI apologist, you always will be.

I dunno, I guess one would have to ask then, what constitutes a stone?

Rape, abortion, forced sexual servitude, humiliation, degredation. intimidation, perpetual hunger...I just don`t see those as legitimate tools to be used in foraging the character and ability to become a minister for God....much less a training program for God`s elite crack troops.

[This doctrine was in need of an overhaul-

so much so that when cg-who virtually worshipped vpw at the time

he wrote this- worked on this subject, he completely overhauled

the categories,

reducing them from 5 categories to 2 easy-to-follow categories:

1) believing-trusting information received-from whatever source- and acting on it. A verb.

2) "The right way of believing",

which makes it the canon of doctrine we are to follow.

In short, a noun.

THIS makes sense. The pfal one added categories where none were needed.

I shall clarify.]

OK. More false doctrine here brought to you by Lucky Strikes and me.

The five catagories of the word 'Pistis'.

Senses Faith (believing) : The believing used by senses man. We all use it. We believe if we sit in the chair, it will hold us up. It's typically conditional on circumstance (we won't believe the chair will hold us up if it's broken...but we will believe a new chair will)

[This is category 1.

This category is whenever anyone trusts information they receive,

whether they received that information via their 5 senses or via Divine Revelation.

It's a verb-meaning it's an action.]

Faith of Jesus Christ: This was taught as being innate within the believer and synonymous with being born-again, filled with the spirit.

[Jesus accomplished his tasks using the first category's believing (verb),

and in doing so, he gave us the right path to walk, right doctrine (noun).]

Manifestation of Faith: This is the one with the Advanced Class definition. The manifestation of faith is your God-given ability to bring to pass the impossible at your command once you have ascertained the neccessary information by Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom or Discerning of Spirits. It also inspires believing in others. examples: Moses parting the Red Sea, Jesus walking on the water, turning water into wine, and healing people.

[Category 1: trusting information received-in this case, received from God-

and acting on it. The SPECIFICS of how to act on it are irrelevant.]

Fruit Faith: Listed amoung the 9 fruits of the spirit in Galatians. As close as I remember it, it was a result of walking by the spirit of God.

[ Galatians 5:22-23 (KJV)

22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

This is not a new type of love. This is not a new type of joy. This is not a new type of peace.

This is not a new type of longsuffering...

However, we're supposed to buy that this is a new type of "faith" other than the types

mentioned in the other verses not in this passage.

Ever consider that the "fruit" of the Spirit- not being literal, as the Spirit (nor the spirit) is not

a tree or plant- is a FIGURE OF SPEECH? (One of 217 in the Bible.)

This verse addresses trusting God-which is the first category. You do what God wants, and

you'll grow in trusting God. This is not complicated until men ADD complications.]

Family Faith: This is the believing within a group of people as seen in Acts when the earthquake opened the jail doors for Peter. Acts has a lot of examples of this. Example:People getting healed at the passing of Peter's shadow.

[When one Christian believes, it's the first category. When 2000 Christians believe, it's the first category.

It doesn't change in type just because more people are doing it.

If you're addressing the people as a category- like "the family of faith"-

then this is the SECOND type- you're referring to the adherents to the correct doctrines.

As you can see, this is not complicated-unless one is determined to maintain artificial

demarcations and distinctions where Scripture places none.]

In the Bible, the only times when it was possible to believe for someone else or in their stead was if the person was mentally incapacitated or if they were dead.

I never knew Chxxs Gxxr published a work on this. To my knowledge, these are the only catagories taught by VPW. I never thought of it as 'doctrine'.

[but, apparently, vpw did-and flipped out if someone dared question it, even if it was in a small

way like asking how "needs and wants parallel" worked. We were EXPECTED to swallow it whole,

and teach it exactly like vpw did. That's doctrine- to be specific, that's dogma.]

I just thought of it as a huge deal to know the boundries we have to work in. IMHO these boundries assist us to walk in the unlimited grace of God.

[Well, some of those boundaries we had to work in because they were IMPOSED ON US.

We had difficulty working with God unless God agreed to conform to the vpw/pfal/twi paradigm.

When God wanted us to do something different, our man-made boundaries shackled our thinking,

effectively hobbling our believing (first category) and hampering our ability to walk according

to the right path of believing (second category.)

But if, after reading this, you still want to insist that the pfal model is THE correct doctrine

(or dogma or teaching), then that is your privilege.]

The misuse of doctrine was wide-spread. I remember the Advanced Class of '78, VP offered to open the floor up to any question. It was the first time anyone had seen him do it at such an event. Somewhere around the third guy asked the question about Needs and Wants being parallel. VP went nuts! ! ! VP & Me refered to this incident.

He started rantin' and ravin' about how the students in the AC should know this stuff. It was foundational! ! ! About eight years later, as I graduated the Corps, I asked some of my Corps buddies if they understood it. Not one understood it.

Point: Things were taught and some never got it. The natural thing to do was to accept it as gospel truth and go out and run a class. That was disappointing.

It WAS disappointing.

It was also EXPECTED and MANDATED by vpw, who-as can be seen in your OWN story-

demanded his positions be embraced whether or not they were understood.

Someone had the guts to ask a question that SHOULD have been asked all the time-

and vpw punished him for it. Then again, vpw's position-as came up on another thread-

was that, in his OWN WORDS,

"...So, when I teach, I expect people to understand what I teach, ‘cause I try to make it so simple that

nobody is stupid enough to miss it. You just can’t miss it when I teach. ‘Cause nobody would be that stupid."

Nope, can't remember anymore.

If no one guesses this weekend I let you know!!!!!

http://www.google.com

put the name of the series in quotation marks, and the word "quotes" in quotation marks,

and you should find at least one good site with some more quotes from the show.

Usually they're pretty accurate-at least, sites like IMdb and wikiquote tend to

have more accurate ones, as do some others.

Ok, it's been long enough.

This was "Starship Down", which bore a resemblance to "Disaster" in that it was about

the main ship being damaged and the crew managing along.

A Kareeman businessman caught Quark cheating him, and Quark kept trying to

convert him to gambling and to taking risks-and part of that was when they had

to disarm a Jem'hadar torpedo.

Kira tried to keep an injured Sisko conscious by telling him a folk tale.

(According to Phil Farrand, that tale is a local tale in the Philippines.)

Bashir and Jadzia were trapped in a room for a short time, and had a candid talk

while they were.

My main recollections of the episode were of Worf and Miles O'Brien. Worf needed

to adjust his style of barking specific orders to the engineers' style of being given

a problem and figuring out the specifics themselves. That's him telling them

"I need a weapon" and them working out how to give him one with 1/2 the systems

damaged or not working right in that atmosphere.

My most vivid memory related to one of the quotes. Right after a major announcement

of using an "active" scan-one that generates a "ping" that others can detect, giving away

your own position- they said they'd need to alter course completely immediately after

each "ping"-since their position was given away.

Of course, the ship then proceeds to stay CONSTANT after each "ping".

And, of course, the Jem'hadar said "thanks for telling us where you are" and shot the heck

out of them while I was calling them idiots for not changing. I really am baffled what

that was about in the episode. I mean, the explanation was so obvious, and they FORGOT

to do the best thing to keep them un-shot?

Anyway, whoever's got a quote can go next- whoever it is.

This would be a GREAT chance for a lurker to take a turn.

A quote from ANY episode from ANY Star Trek series.

(Although some of us are spotty on our Voyager and Enterprise stuff.)

Nice analysis Tbone, kind of reminds me of my slogan on the bottom.

Words and works I would be especially interested in your commentary on this:

and anyone

Since God has foreknowledge this we know, but wants a rest from his works, (this we know from the bible) Is in not possible that he established things like righteousness and justice so that he didnt have to stand around and busy himself with foreknowledge and in so doing; enable people the capacity to have works that are judged in a righteousness setting?

This certainly makes sense to me. I mean who would want to stand around with a bottle and a diaper and do this forever? Looks to me like there is a reasonable method to the endpoint.

Brother,

you're thinking of God as an incredible human, rather than a transcendant being.

Mark 2:27-28 (New American Standard Bible)

27Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

28"So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

Remember,

God communicates in a manner that fits our little brains,

even if it's not the most technically-accurate manner of explaining something.

Jesus-who knows what he's talking about-said outright that the Sabbath was

made FOR MAN, not for God. God ordained a Sabbath for man to rest and

to remember God. That wasn't because God needed it-it's because MAN

needed it.

God described Himself as resting once His labours were complete- not

because He was tired, but because it was done-and because He was going

to use this to explain why man was to have a Sabbath.

I think God told us the right things to do because He WANTS us to do them-for our

own benefit as well as other reasons. I think He's PROUD of us when we do them

without him dragging us by the scruffs of our necks- but that He's not diminished

even if we don't do it.

It's a shame that they had God confined in this little box and they consider Him

only accessible to THEIR church.

Please note that those young people are young (duh), and remember how wise you

were at that age-you might have been in twi at the time, and convinced

God was confined in a different little box and considered Him only accessible

to YOUR church.

Please also note that they were on their equivalent to the wow field, and so they

were singleminded and persistent- which shows in how they answered your

questions.

Jesus trusted the word of his Father which He had spoken to him.

He considered it to be reliable information from a reliable source,

and he acted accordingly.

You do the same thing whenever you decide to carry an umbrella or not

after checking a weather report.

The details of the information and the action vary, but the principle is

the same for both, and is strikingly simple.

This need to slap labels and numbers on it is understandable, human,

unnecessary and an excellent method to encourage MISunderstanding

what happened.

Looks like you stumped us.

Want to post another, or should the next person ready send one up?

1:"Unfortunately, we've found there's little profit in trading with the Federation.

In order to comply with your commerce laws, we've had to pay a series of taxes and fees that have made the cost of doing business with you too high."

2:"What sort of taxes and fees are you referring to?"

1:"For example... on a recent shipment of Karemman Fleece, a four percent surcharge was added to pay for inspecting the cargo for 'changeling infiltrators.'"

2:"What?"

3:"You never know where they might be hiding."

1:"Another three percent of the shipment's value was lost due to 'unforeseen' currency fluctuations."

3:"There was a run on the Bolian Credit Exchange... played havoc with the markets..."

1:"A six percent tariff was imposed to help offset the 'lost income of Tarkalian sheep herders.'"

3:"Hardworking people... you have to feel for them..."

1:"Should I go on, Captain... ?"

2:"No... I think you've made your point..."

"Sensor range was limited, so we learned to use an old active-scan system to navigate."

"It works by echo-location... we send out a modulated tetrion pulse, and if it reflects off the hull of a ship, we can approximate its location."

"Won't these pulses give away our position as well?"

"We'll have to alter course and speed after each one."

"Helm, take us to a higher altitude."

"We're gaining altitude..."

"How can you tell?"

"I've got the lobes..."

"You've got them, too.

It's a Ferengi expression. Usually, when we say someone has "the lobes," we mean they have a keen business sense. That's you.

I'll admit it. You fooled me. I thought you were just another easy mark. But you saw right through my little scam, and taught me a thing or two about doing business in the Gamma Quadrant.

I guess I've gotten lazy. I'm used to dealing with the Federation. You think I was cheating you, you have no idea what I was doing to them. They still haven't caught on. And if someone like me can put one over on them, think of what someone like you could do."

"Someone with my... lobes?"

"Exactly. And I'm just the man to help you do it. we could become rich, rich beyond our dreams."

"You... are despicable."

I hate the Gamma Quadrant... "

"... but then the brothers started to argue about how to divide the money they got for the kava root. The oldest said that since it was his idea to bring it to the city, he should get more. The youngest objected, saying he was the one who'd tended the field where... "

"One of these diodes connects the warhead to the power source... the other is the firing mechanism."

"How do you know that?"

"I saw a design schematic once."

"Where?"

"At the Ministry of Trade on Karemma.

We sell these torpedoes to the Jem'Hadar."

"You're kidding."

"No."

"I thought you said you'd never sold substandard merchandise...

It was supposed to explode on impact, wasn't it?"

"Maybe I should offer them a refund..."

"How do you feel?"

"Terrible..."

"That's not surprising considering that you took in a few lungfuls of Fluorine."

"Next time remind me to hold my breath...I take it we're stuck in here..."

"I need a weapon."

"We still have one atmospheric probe."

"If my plan is to work, the probe will not be available to use as a weapon. I need something else."

"Phasers are out of the question, the emitters are completely fused."

"But the phaser generator is working fine."

"The Deflector Array."

"With a few modifications, we could use it as a phaser emitter."

"It may not be what you had in mind, sir..."

"And there is one problem... It'll overload after the first shot."

"I only need one shot."

"Major... ?"

"Yes, captain?"

"What... happened... ?"

"The Jem'Hadar hit us pretty bad... Worf went down to the Engine Room to -- "

"No, no...

What happened to the three brothers?"

"They gave the money away, and went back to their farm where they belonged."

Any hope for another quote?

Figure out what your interests are, then look for messageboards that cover that.

There's usually at least one for almost any SPECIFIC thing, and dozens, hundreds or thousands

that cover the GENERAL subject.

For example, there's over a thousand Christian messageboard, but few for

Christian heavy metal fans.

Gotta be something I picked up by osmosis.

Is this "Reba"?

Then again, there's forgiveness, and there's atonement, and there's reinstatement.

I can forgive someone of wrongs done to me, but that doesn't mean I let them do it again.

If someone stole money from me, I can forgive them, but forget any chance of me

leaving any money near them again.

If someone abused authority under me, I can forgive them, but forget any chance of me

letting them anywhere near responsibility again.

That's just ASKING for trouble.

Demonstrated remorse is important- it shows a person knows they did wrong, and is

at least claiming they will attempt to correct their wrong, or at least not do it again.

However, that doesn't mean they get reinstated to any previous position that they

used TO do wrong.

1 Corinthians 2:7-9 (King James Version)

7But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

========

I've heard I Corinthians 2:8 taught where someone suggested that one reason for God to make all

those promises and issue prophecies of the coming redeemer was so that the princes of

this world would look for him, and do their best to kill him-

and in doing so, would guarantee his victory.

I haven't decided if I agree with that.

However, IF it is true, it's an interesting example of freewill serving God's purpose.

(Even if it isn't, the phrasing makes a sufficient argument by itself.)

After all, God didn't do anything to MAKE them try to kill Jesus-they decided they

wanted to do that all on their own.

However, their decision served God's purposes.

WW did you not ever get your score back from your exam? You should have had a percent score for each part and a overall % for the test. I know some people who were advised to wait at times and retest the next year. I took the exam in 75 or 76 but as you said I did not feel I did as well as I wanted to and declined to take the class. Silly me I thought that I would be better prepared with some additional learning. It was years later we were talking about it one day when we were doing the Advanced Class Grad Meetings /training for the state. I mentioned it to Jonny Townsend he told me that my scores would have been perfectly acceptable and in likelyhood were better than most who probably took it. What a goof I was , I really wanted to be at the best level of understanding to receive the most from the class. He thought it was pretty funny that I thought I did not do well on the test.

They always said that the scores were an indicater VP to which areas to teach more on , but I have my doubts that it really was the case. I don't recall much time difference between subjects in various classes ever changing. Maybe in some of the early classes that may have been the case.

No, I never got my scores back. However, in my PARTICULAR case, they weren't exactly

critical information. My exam was composed of 3 parts, each of which had 90 minutes

alloted to it.

Part I: Foundational class

Part II: Foundational-class collaterals

Part III: Greek word-study

Part I I completed very quickly. I was only limited by how fast I could write the answers.

With the exception of the Ready-Reference part- which was arbitrary-

I was done, and had triple-checked my scores before I announced I was completely done.

That was 27 minutes into the 90 minutes.

Part II I completed fast, but not QUITE as fast. I actually had to think over a number of

answers. I still completed it confidently and within 45 minutes (triple-checking again.)

Part III I deliberately fitted to nearly the entire 90 minutes. I liked to do Greek word-studies,

and this was the first time I was TIMED for one. So, I paced myself to match the timeframe,

and enjoyed it.

Frankly, I enjoyed the exam, and could have kept going for another section or two when

we were done.

So, in my PARTICULAR case, it wasn't that important, since I really did know the material

on the exam cold. (Except for the Ready Reference.)

===============

As to the exams being an indicator of what to teach more on, I seriously doubt that.

Remember, this is the same man who also said that he laid out subjects so well that

if there was a problem, it was in the student, not his teaching method, since that came

from his abilities, which came from God.

That strikes me more as someone filling in a likely explanation later. I heard a number

of those back in twi, myself- such as how lcm was chosen.

It occurs to me that this was certainly POSSIBLE- I've used feedback on things to

do a post-mortem and find areas to focus improvement for later-

but I don't think he in particular was doing that.

It's even possible he said that at some point, and just never followed up on it.