WordWolf

The airplay thing really was a rule so that we have SOME kind of shot at answering even the tough ones. It also leaves out a number of songs I really like, but NEVER heard on the radio. With all these fightin' words in mind, I offer this for the "toss-up": "When my fist clenches, crack it open, Before I use it and lose my cool"

Let's see how "Christian" everyone is here... (Those of you who are not Christians are "completely off the hook" on this thread- it is not addressed to you, but you may consider the posts "for your information." ) It has been claimed that the only appropriate thing for a Christian to do is to forgive all Christians for sinning, categorically. So, I'd like to see how far the Christians here are willing to extend their Categorical Imperative. Jim Baker (of PTL fame) lied, embezzled, and covered up sex acts that may or may not have been consentual, and committed adultery. He was also convicted of fraud, tax evasion and racketeering. Does he get forgiven by other Christians now? Does he get returned to his position as the leader of PTL? Jimmy Swaggart spent church moneys on consentual sex acts with prostitutes. When he was caught, he was willing to make a partial confession-that he sinned, but not what his sins were, and compared himself to King David of Israel. Does he get forgiven by other Christians now? Does he get returned to his position as the leader of PTL? Oral Roberts, finding his ministries' financies in dire straits, announced that God was taking him hostage for $8 million. He spent large amounts of their finances on expensive clothes, jewelry and a private jet. Does he get returned to his position as a church leader? Peter Popoff was publicly exposed by James Randi (the Amazing Randi) & Johnny Carson. The apparent healing miracles and prophetic acts performed by Popoff were in fact part of an elaborately stage-managed setup, including planting of audience members and broadcasts to an in-ear radio receiver. Does he get returned to his position as a church leader? In 1991 ABC’s Primetime Live announced that prayer requests sent along with financial donations to Tilton's organization were being thrown away without being read. Do we resume handing over the loot to him? Jim Whittington spent 10 years in prison for money laundering, mail fraud, conspiracy, and interstate transportation of stolen property from his evangelist crusades and direct mail business in the 1980s. He had high-speed boats and a Rolls-Royce. David Koresh ran the controversial Branch Dividian group of Christians, which was considered controversial. After a raid of their hq near Waco, Tx, they all died. Among other things, Koresh claimed that, technically, all the women in his group belonged to him. Does his name get restored to respectability now? Herbert W. Armstrong was the leader of the Worldwide Church of God. When alive, he committed sexual acts with his parishioners, including-and this was never challenged by him when it was asserted-serial incest. He spent God's money on planes and all sorts of luxuries. He plagiarized "his" work, and claimed it was revealed to him by God. He claimed it was revealed to him ALONE in this century. He claimed his "ministry" was the sole "one true church" today. He promised that financial success and an "abundant" life were there for people who followed his instructions. He died never having offered reparations or apologies to even SOME of the Christians whose lives he ruined. Shall we call him a wonderful Christian now? Shall we gloss over the hurts he inflicted on his congregation?

D'OH!!!!!! Sorry, forgot. Ok. Next movie. I've really wanted to use this quote. "Boy, that escalated quickly. I mean, that really got out of hand fast." "It jumped up a notch." "It did, didn't it?"

Gee, he seemed so nice during the few minutes I met him. Could it be that he's manipulated his image, and the man he really was when "no one was looking" was very different from the man we were shown in public? Hm, sounds familiar...

"The Integrity of God's Word-Man's Greatest Spiritual Problem." He also claimed "the Greatest Secret in the World Today" is "the Bible is the Revealed Word and Will of God", which obviously was wrong because-if no one else- thousands of pfal grads knew it, but NOBODY knows the date and time of Jesus Christ's return. Now THAT's a secret!

That's what vpw said, because that's what Bullinger said. It looks neat on a chart, and sounds learned. However, I question whether there's sufficient evidence to say that with authority. One could just as easily argue it's the doctrinal epistle of the manifestation of the spirit, or declares the doctrine of the "Gathering Together". I agree, it does. This does not make this a "reproof" epistle necessarily, since discussions of what something IS often include what it is NOT. pfal did this at all 3 levels when discussing the 9. pfal was not a class of "reproof." It was supposedly "a class on keys", if you believe itself. Limiting yourself ONLY to the explanations in pfal means you limit yourself ONLY to the answers and understanding of pfal.

I'll explain it for you. I was continuing the discussion. We were discussing someone's claim that averb required ACTION, but there are "passive verbs", verbs that do not require action. I was pointing that out. Someone's definition of "verbs" limited their understanding and left out some verbs that didnt fit their neat little definition. This was addressing your original post, where you asked what people thought of your definition. I was saying it was not bad when used as a "rule of thumb", but it was needlessly restrictive if you wanted to make it the SOLE rule for defining "love". I also pointed out that people making any "rule of thumb" into the DEFINING rule for ANYTHING tends to lead to misunderstandings. Life doesn't fit in neat little definitions like we were taught it does, and God does NOT live in any box or remain confined to any definition we can find for Him. Got it now?

Are you saying it would take rodeo school to make them clowns, when in this day and age they're still willing to pay twi $cashola to "teach" them how to perform manual labour? Whether or not they wear the jester's motley, or paint their faces, I think they're still playing the fool....

Well, children count so long as they'll also be doing the manual labour around grounds, and going on potentially life-threatening activities like hitchhiking to LEAD, rock-climbing without certified instructors, and bullfighting. Knowing the heartless, inhumane machines in charge of the programs, it would not surprise me to hear they'd SEND 8-12 year olds to do any or all of the above. Do they still ship the corps by bus to a farm to pick peppers and onions or whatever? And if so, is that still obviously unpaid manual labour that they're PAYING for the privilege of doing?

Then there's verbs like "seems", "appears", or "be", "is", and "was", none of which need necessarily burn any calories or require deep thought. ===== As for a "working definition" or a "rule of thumb", Greg, that sounds fine. Please keep in mind that the thing is ADVISORY and not an UNCHANGEABLE RULE. So, you're not compelled to make everything conform to it. The forcing of square pegs into round holes is lazy, damaging, and typical of much of the "education" of a "good" wayfer. (Not even getting into what the corps endured.)

I agree. Like some other resources, I find it a good thing to read through your paper from time to time, to refresh my memory. (I don't agree with every single word, but I find even what I disagree with to be instructive in its own fashion.)

I've heard that "raptures of the deep", also known as "nitrogen narcosis", has produced hallucinations as well. I think most of us have heard something to that effect, actually. I was unable to find documentation of this in a quick search, but this is what I DID find. http://www.wikiscuba.com/wiki/index.php/Nitrogen_narcosis I think it may prove useful when discussing what astronauts experience, since there may be similarities.

Lolita Davidovich Intersection Sharon Stone

I'll skip the most obvious possibility, and guess "Love, Sidney."

To say nothing of the fact that he skipped when I addressed an error he made.

I myself had a complete stranger, back in my twi days, invoke this verse as "proof" of the Trinity.

Did they really? When was this? It's almost silly to ask with these guys, but was there any announcement anywhere, or is it a secret as usual?

Correct. The Borg are attacking, the Enterprise, ineffective, is hiding, and Commander Shelby is concentrating on her career track right now.

There's more than one issue here. Here's how I see it. Did satan know the full results of the crucifixion? I believe he did not, and that the verses show this. Let me know if you need me to run through it. Did Jesus know the ramifications of his sacrifice? I question whether he would have carried out his instructions without an extreme REASON. So, I don't have a verse saying he absolutely DID know, but I see know verses saying he did NOT, and my OPINION is that his knowing was the only sensible justification for enduring what he did. As to the Gentiles thing being a surprise to satan, ALL of it was a surprise to him. As to the Gentiles thing being a surprise to Jesus, I see no reason to even suspect it, let alone support it. If vpw taught this-and judging from some of the responses, it seems he did- I find this to be error.

That it's supposed to be "which" is easy to check- just grab an Interlinear. It's "which", not God. So, on that, I'd say Johniam was correct. However, the "forgery" statement was completely unsupported. I myself have taught on this before, and am convinced that it was an ACCIDENTAL MISTAKE by a translator going from the Greek to the English. IIRC, Walter C made the same claim in the Fundamentals of Biblical Research "class" (that it's easy to see it was a mistake, that is.)

"When it comes to this ship and this crew, you're damned right I play it safe." "If you can't make the big decisions, Commander, I suggest you make room for someone who can."

..and, lest we forget, this MLM comes complete with keeping expenses secret, which is the OPPOSITE of nice, healthy non-profit organizations, but is often found among conventional businesses- organizations specifically structured to value MAKING MONEY as opposed to SERVING GOD. Which business model is a trustworthy one for CHRISTIANS? You can answer that for your own consciences, but I have my answer.

Must be the end of "the Naked Now", Tasha Yar to the fully-functional Data. :blink:

I'd bet money none of them's read it in the last 3 years, especially after any discussion of the actual events that are vaguely alluded to in PoP. Every time I look it over nowadays, it just gets more and more surreal, as 20/20 hindsight kicks in.

USA= Reagan + Bush + Clinton = 3 gods Great Britain = Churchill + Thatcher + Major = 3 gods Taco Bell= Mexi-Melt + chalupa + burrito = 3 gods Do you have a SOURCE for your sets? I made mine up just now, but I think that's obvious to everyone. I took 3 names that weren't really connected and called them "3 gods" and suggested they were connected as some sort of "trinity." I know "Babylon Mystery Religion" tossed out a few names and claimed they were Trinities, but those were SO made-up that the author repudiated them in the sequel, and put the blame on Alexander Hislop for just inventing whatever connections he WANTED to see in his hunger to invent every conceivable charge to blame the RCC for.