WordWolf

Acts 16:16-18. (KJV) "And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour." ==== Luke 4:9-11. (KJV) "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone."

[WordWolf in boldface and brackets.]

Oh, he's just throwing insults and saying that to attempt to hide the fact that tl posted official doctrine that says the OPPOSITE of what he did, and that they haven't endorsed polygamy for OVER A CENTURY, Allan notwithstanding. Allan either missed that, or has decided to disregard it and post the opposite afterwards.

Yes, that was my point.

Why is it almost always the same half-dozen posters who post and display an ignorance of the topic at hand? TempleLady, please give an official citation on the subject of polygamy.

vpw himself refuted the idea that benefits were necessarily God-breathed. He pointed out how some people get a good feeling off the Psychiatrist's couch.

And in the early 90s, I spoke to one of the "left in 89" ex-twi leaders, as he brought up the subject of helping out in the local community. He was telling me this like he was bringing up this subject I'd never heard of-since HE'D never heard of it. The incredible irony of the situation: at the time he'd mentioned this, I'd ALREADY logged HUNDREDS of hours of community service, in 40-hour blocks, not counting TRAINING and other RELATED subjects, all over New York City and OUTSIDE NYC. I just didn't do it IN TWI. Of course, if leadership training OR community service was not done with their approval and at their direction- which mine wasn't, this was the first he'd heard of it- then it was some sort of dirty secret I'd been keeping. Oddly enough, at the time, one of our local denominations, at the time-and I expect now as well- had people my age also doing community service AS A GROUP. What was revolutionary to twi-actually HELPING OTHERS, or-as JESUS would put it, being their neighbor- was old hat with them. (Luke 10:27-37) To them, this "go and do thou likewise" thing was more "we should do this" than a joke illustrating the foolishness of other Christians. (i.e. "Read a verse at random, and that's your guide for the day.")

When you get a chance, PLEASE post the list. Not everybody here ever got that list. Not everybody here STILL has that list. I'll reserve my opinion until I have a bit more information.

Actually, the original poster, from what I've seen, asked this MONTHS AGO as an honest question of genuine curiousity. (It's like when I asked about that robes thing.) Someone (CK) decided to drag the thread up just so he had a place to post an insult. Once in a while, the dates on a thread are relevant.

Acts 16:16-18. (KJV) "And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour." ==== Luke 4:9-11. (KJV) "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone."

Ok, let's see... [WordWolf in boldface and brackets.]

That's faster than my way. I entered the Search menu and specified the member name and that it had to be "exact match", and usually specified a forum and a searchword. My way does have its uses, but so does Belle's.

Your peeps have responded! And here they are! :)

I'll take a wild swing, and guess that this is an extended version of some kind, of Neil Young's "Ohio."

All browsers are either based on IE or Mozilla. Opera and Firefox are both Mozilla-based, and are considered the best Mozilla-based browsers. (Maxthon's touted as the best IE browser to-date.) The main differences between free Opera (there's pay versions and ad-supported versions) and Firefox is that Opera has all the extensions "it" wants pre-loaded, and Firefox allows you to pick the ones YOU want to load. So, if you want a fast, small, lean browser, you just add a few things. If you want lots of developer gadgets, you add those. If you want lots of news and the like, you add that. And so on. BOTH are fundamentally superior to IE in terms of lean code and security. Firefox has ANOTHER advantage in that it's continually under improvement. (Last time I checked, it was on 1.0 builds, now it's up to 1.5.) They tinker with possible improvements ALL THE TIME, thus the term "NIGHTLY BUILDS". Further, when a security flaw is detected, a patch is generally released within 2 days. (And that's not often.) Compare that to IE. When one flaw was announced to IE, they did NOTHING about it for MONTHS. When the Federal Government then made a suggestion that users consider using another browser until it was fixed, IE suddenly had a fix in 3-4 days. Me, I'd keep a version of IE handy as a backup, and use Firefox most of the time. I'd say "never use IE", but sometimes you need to access a Microsoft site-like for updates- and some sites were never standards-compliant, so the lazy designers just made them IE-compliant.

We have something called "the in-ter-net." We can use it 24/7 (that means 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, or "always", to look up anything we want. If we wanted to know what any church teaches, we can find the reference in less than a minute. (Or less than 10 minutes for some of us.) So, it was always "out in the open", but some of us who cared were too lazy to look it up. If they said that Allan was born less than 50 miles from a whorehouse,would that make a kind of sense as well? Hey-you were the one who said geography meant anything.... I'm sure templelady is aware of the perspective from which she's posting, and you are posting. So are the rest of us, and, so far, if all of Christianity was divided between "templelady's church" and "allen's church", and I had to pick one, I'd say I like hers a lot better. I can pass on the unfounded attacks and rudeness when I'm looking for people who claim to represent God. In fact, having been there and done that, I've no desire to go there and do it again. ======== As for the rest of you, if you see benefit in this thread and post friendly, hey, more power to you. I expect to be bowing out, but my conscience bade me make that post. (I reserve the right to return if attacked.)

Actually, I expected that your fundamental dishonesty would cause you to see NO DIFFERENCE between the two. So, I shall spell it out so that you have NO EXCUSE. See, Templelady minds her own business. Then Allan comes along and says "templelady believes in selling children!" Then templelady responds, with a quote from an official source saying "we deplore the vile practice of selling children! Sincerely, Manchester Jones." Then Allan comes along with "so you always believe what Manchester Jones says is equivalent to Scripture!" So, here was the process (spelled out for Mike's benefit.) 1) templelady minds her own business 2) Allan attacks templelady by making unfounded accusations about her beliefs 3) templelady responds by proving Allan's accusation was unfounded 4) Allan ignores that he was proven wrong and skips apologizing for his rude behaviour in step 2. He pretends the discussion just started and that he is given carte blanche to just attack anything she says, then he finds something, and makes any accusation he feels like, skipping any process like "logic" or anything along those lines. So, when this is pointed out, of course, Allan is unapologetic. (Might even be said to pretend it was never pointed out.) Now, let's compare this to Mike, since Mike is under the delusion that some comparison can be made. 1) Mike-rather than minding his own business, comes along and infects EVERY thread he can find a pretext to with his belief-system. His entire purpose for being here IS his belief-system. He continues this until the staff stops him to a degree. To make this simple (for Mike), is this what templelady did in Step One? No-she was minding her own business. 2) Mike now has entire threads dedicated to his belief-system. He's determined to keep using the GSC as his podium as long as he's permitted to. So, Mike posts his material, and others, seeing it as unrepresentative of reality, incorrect, and error-ridden, REPLY to his posts. To make this simple (for Mike), is this what happened in Step Two with Allan? No-Allan went out of his way to OPEN an attack on templelady, whereas Mike-who has already passed judgement on all the other posters-has presented his beliefs, which he asserts are superior to the beliefs of all other posters. Those beliefs-and those posts- are challenged the same as they would be ANYPLACE IN CYBERSPACE. (The exception being that Mike would have earned a kickban years ago on any OTHER board.) 3) Mike replies-usually-by calling his responders "unfit workmen" "crybabies" "a busload of bozos" and other terms that suggest they did not document their positions, and that Mike was somehow superior. He sometimes responds with responses to little points cherry-picked from larger posts with ironclad documentation. (Example: Mike said once that the "LAW" of believing was being misrepresented. So I myself included a LENGTHY set of quotes from the Blue Book. I then grouped the list of relevant sub-quotes FROM what I posted directly underneath for easy reference. (Look up, you see EVERYTHING, look down, you see the sentences that we discussed. Simple AND complete.) Mike's immediate response to the post? "Wasn't that set of quotes from PFAL great?" Several pages later, Mike made a reference to the same post, and claimed it was just a list of several sentences isolated from their context. This was true if you looked at the later list- but COMPLETELY IGNORES A PAGE-WORTH OF QUOTES DIRECTLY ABOVE THEM which gave their entire context. Honest reply to my post? Hardly. Then Mike keeps comparing himself to the lone voice crying in the wilderness, and the rest of us-quoting the Bible and quoting vpw's books and quoting vpw ABOUT his books, all showing that there's no comparison between the Bible and vpw's books, as unfit researchers. Again-in deference to Mike-I'll make this simple. Is that what happened to tl in Step 3? No-she simply responded to the unfounded attack that one poster went out of his way to make out of the blue. For Mike, let's see what a Step 4 looks like. Actually, I already outlined it- he misreads replies to him, attacks the character of the posters, and generally pretends he's the sole logical poster when his approach REQUIRES one ABANDON logic to even seriously consider it-as Mike himself has admitted. Was this what tl does? No. Other than Allan, she seems fine with the beliefs and the posts of everyone else here. tl doesn't mind that others disagree with her, and that she disagrees with others. She NEVER started threads saying "my position is the sole truth from God and all of you best agree with me!" Mike, however, exists entirely on such threads. Can a FAIR comparison be made between Mike and templelady? Hardly. Mike comes here to instigate and to prostelytize. templelady comes here to discuss, and NOT to prostelytize. Can a FAIR comparison be made between Allan and WordWolf? Hardly. Allan goes out of his way to instigate attacks against templelady. WordWolf waits until Mike has posted error before replying- and that with substance and logic- and even then, not ALWAYS replying to Mike. (Don't believe me? Check the CURRENT Mike thread and count how many pages-total-WordWolf has replied on.) ====== So, to summarize-to make this simple, in deference to Mike- For Mike to compare himself to a lady who is attacked out of the blue, and to compare the churl who goes out of his way to instigate attacks to people who reply to posts that Mike VOLUNTARILY has instigated- misrepresents himself, his message, his detractors, the lady, and her posts. It is ungentlemanly of him to suggest there's a comparison, and wrongs the lady. It is dishonest, as it ignores the differences that show one's nothing like the other. It is tacky, since he went out of his way to attempt to draw attention OFF the churlish behaviour of her attacker to try to imply that he was doing the right thing when he did the online equivalent of ambushing her. Repeatedly. In short, Mike's attempt to shoehorn in a similarity to himself and templelady is ungentlemanly, dishonest, illogical, and tacky. So, any later attempts to cut-and-paste my reply will have all the dishonesty of his isolations of individual sentences from entire books of vpw, claiming that didn't completely distort THEIR meaning. It's typical, dishonest Mike, which means I'm expecting him to do it eventually. (Which I would have even if he hadn't replied- except I expected him more to suggest it rather than cut-and-paste.) But, hey-that's Mike, so, whatever. =========== BTW, it is churlish to go out of one's way and instigate attacks on a poster's beliefs, on threads that had NOTHING TO DO with their beliefs. That's what happened here, and-if Mike meant to draw attention FROM it- I beg to differ.

Now that you've joined the ranks of us Firefox users, you'll discover that you can dramatically increase the fun by adding "EXTENSIONS." Those are add-ons to the browser that add all kinds of useful or fun things. Here's some of my personal favourites, and what they do. (Hit Tools->Extensions->Get More Extensions for the Extensions site.) IEView. This will allow you to open a page in IE that isn't working so well in Firefox. Nuke Image & NukeAnything. This allows you to click on an image or anything, and remove it from the displayed page on the screen. (This also affects any printout of the page as well.) AdBlock. Allows you to click on an ad and tell the browser never to display it. It's great avoiding blinking ads. Fasterfox. It allows you to tweak settings to speed up the performance of the browser. PDFDownload. Helps with downloads of PDFs. :) OpenDownload. Helps with normal program downloads. FlashGot. Helps with downloading Flash videos. Also adds a button to start Flash videos on the video (so it doesn't just start when IT feels like it.) ImageZoom. Allows you to "zoom" in on images. :)

Actually, since her DIRECT answers to you never satisfy you- you just pick something in the reply and formulate a new attack- I don't see why she should entertain endless permutations of your attacks. No matter how you phrase anything, it's ALWAYS an attack on her beliefs. That's dishonest, ungentlemanly, and tacky. But hey, that's you, so whatever.

The idea that we invaded Iraq for reasons involving OIL, thereby shedding U.S. blood, isn't that far-fetched and has some weight. The idea that we invaded Iraq because Dubya had something personal out for Hussein and Iraq, thereby shedding U.S. blood, isn't that far-fetched and has some weight. I'm sure there's other possible reasons as well. You pick that one as the MOST viable reason for invasion, and that's the ENTIRE rationale for your statement?

"Why is protecting Israel so bad?" Last I heard, we've lost lives in Afghanistan, and we're currently losing lives in Iraq. Have we been sending troops into Israel when I wasn't looking? I thought we didn't have the troops to SPARE at this time....

Ooo, an eeeexxxpppeerrrttt.... People-and newspapers-are largely the same all over. There's a lot more non-twi kids to REPORT on. Furthermore, they're usually the ones doing something noteworthy. A kid running from home to school to "fellowship" and permutations thereof does NOT an exciting story make. Furthermore, all these kids are suddenly transformed into "USHERS". Has anyone peeked into the Auditorium and checked if it's loaded with teenagers in semi-formal guiding people to their seats? According to what they told the reporters, that's what they're ALL doing all of a sudden... Giving that poor reading comprehension ability a workout again, are we? That's not what any of us said. In fact, I said something notably different 2 posts before you. Not going to let a little thing like what I said stop you from making your claim about what you DECIDED I said, no? No-if that happened, then statistically, the students who havebeen doing good ALL ALONG would have been interviewed- those honour students who HAVE BEEN helping in their communities- not just the past few months. Since that did NOT happen, something bumped these twi kids to the top of the stack. Now, I could speculate that someone in twi has juice and pulled some strings. However, I won't make such a claim-especially since numbers are so low at twi. I could speculate that money changed hands, and someone took a straight bribe. However, I won't make such a claim-especially since reporters get paid better than twi staffers, have more integrity than twi staffers, and reporting about a bribe attempt would be MUCH more interesting.... So, I go with the most obvious method of how the reporters found these students: the students called up and TOLD them. "Hi, I'm a local student who's doing well in school, and I'm helping out all over the local community. And I'm photogenic." The step BEFORE this, of course, is that the student must actually fill those definitions to a degree. So, first the kid has to make sure their grades are up to scratch. Not the BEST, but good enough that the reporter can say "they're doing well." Second, the kid has to do something in the local community. Not the MOST involved, but good enough that the reporter can say "they're doing SOMETHING." So, why's the kid doing all this? The orders from the Powers-That-Be USED to be "avoid the outside world and if they need help, recommend they take the class. Otherwise, screw them." Since the kids are now doing the OPPOSITE of this, that means one of two things: A) the kids are now doing the OPPOSITE of what the P-T-B say. Not and remain in twi, that's for sure. B) The orders from above have now REVERSED. Unable to generate any interest in themselves, and desperate for some POSITIVE press, they passed down an unfunded mandate to their peons: "get your kid to do something in the community, then harass reporters until they report on it." What's the reporter's motivation? That's easy-laziness. A story just dropped itself in his lap. It's a human-interest story. It may not be the BEST human-interest story he can run, but it's good enough to print, and it's warm and fuzzy. So, he has an easy day's work. Human, understandable, and-in and of itself-not wrong, he IS doing his job. I spun a story more credible than your "all these reporters suddenly DECIDED to report on twi high-schoolers that are not as newsworthy as the kids they skipped over to report on them" tale. Yours was FAR more "fantastic." But, of course, the content of my posts has been eluding you of late. Feel free to review this a few times, slower. It won't hurt my feelings-in fact, seeing you put forth the proper effort is something I'd applaud...

Belle knows that good kids makes a human interest story. DUUUUHHHH. What's the issue HERE is that the group that always exhorted people to remain APART from helping in their community- who, in their MILDER days, looked at MY community service experience as "he's GOT to be exaggerating"- suddenly now has its handful of teenagers suddenly pushing themselves to the front and SEIZING a story. Knowing how twi has been, and what it's taught its kids, this means they switched from "screw the community" to "do something good in the community and make sure EVERYBODY KNOWS ALL ABOUT IT." Right now, the most dangerous place to be in the US is NOT Manhattan, it's any location between a twi teen who's just done community service and a microphone. Kids with a LOT more recommending them aren't getting stories, because they aren't SEIZING THE CAMERA. There are over 300 college campuses at this time, with tens of thousands of students, in all 50 states, doing community service projects all year. Rarely are they reported on, despite being EASY TO FIND. Insulting Belle won't change that, and your inability to see it won't change it either. We had an entire discussion that included EXAMPLES. I take it actually READING would have been too much work when tossing an insult is SO much faster.

A) If you really, really must use IE, IE users often say the best IE build is MAXTHON. Free downloads of Maxthon (formerly known as IE2) are here: http://www.maxthon.com/download.htm B) If you want to be the first kid on your block, you can download the BETA (test-version) of Internet Explorer 7.0 (the rest of us are on 6.something) here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/ie7/betadirect.mspx C) For GOD'S SAKE, USE FIREFOX! http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/ The current build is 1.5, and it kicks IE's keister in almost every way, ESPECIALLY security.