WordWolf

YES. They say that God was effectively powerless for 2000 years between the original Apostles and 1942, remember. If that's true, they have a god that's not particularly clever, nor particularly powerful.

I try not to challenge anyone to come up with even stupider quotes from vpw and lcm. Eventually, you KNOW they WILL. I thought a plateau was reached before we could thank the Devil for polio vaccines. Frankly, I don't know if it's a Luddite thing, or if it was lifted from Chrono Trigger or something. ("All of our history..our art and science..all to meet the needs of that...beast."

That's how I called it. That's why the other 6 had a cold, clinical, technical coverage in the Advanced class. You can discuss fiction in that fashion, or things you don't really understand. (I've been in discussions like that of the Harry Potter series, and the Wheel of Time series.) The actual, PRACTICAL coverage of such stuff was NOT covered, and this indicates a lack of familiarity with the PRACTICE of stuff. By contrast, I ran thru "discerning of spirits" with another Christian once. I didn't name it, but my instructions took 1-2 minutes, TOPS. At the end, they were able to use it correctly, the first time. vpw did not have a lot of printed material on the practical aspects to rip off of, so he was forced to choose between no answer and making it up. That's how we ended up with the "definition" of "phenomenon", which amounted to "whatever isn't accounted for in our definitions." Heck, I had a better working definition for that thing while IN the Advanced class, and the knee-jerk reaction one person had for it was "no, we can't add to the Advanced class definitions." (My working definition was something like "whatever is NOT guaranteed".)

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/oldlady.htm

Quick brushup: ckmkeon: "peolpe can not go any further than what they have been taught." A statement. (A statement of vpw's to be specific, which the speaker has not seen the flaws in, unlike many of the GSC posters.) T-Bone is one such poster. Pointing out ONE flaw in mindlessly absorbing such statements without evaluating them, T-Bone said "What if a STUDENT winds up being smarter than the TEACHER or discovers errors in the teacher's doctrine?" (That BOTH happen is a matter of historical record. My high school has a mural right at the entrance. You can see it for maybe 5 minutes as you approach the main entrance. There's a saying directly below it, in big, bold letters. "EVERY ADVANCEMENT IN CIVILIZATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT ABOUT BY A NEW AUDACITY IN IMAGINATION." It's public knowledge that civilization DEPENDS on students surpassing teachers or discovering errors in their doctrine.) T-Bone added "How would discoveries be made or technology improved or even invented- if people can't go beyond what they're taught?" That people DO beyond what they're taught-and often-is common knowledge. That IS how all of these are accomplished. T-Bone's commentary on the above? "Who came up with that slogan anyway? Well....I bet it was from someone who NEVER HAD AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT...In my opinion-the type of person who would believe that slogan is someone that DOESN'T THINK FOR THEMSELVES." So, how did ckmkeon address "What if the student winds up being smarter than the teacher or discovers errors in the teacher's doctrine? How would discoveries be made or technology improved or even invented- if people can't go beyond what they're taught?" ckmkeon's response: "So what" Well, T-Bone's been intellectually thrashed on the debating floor, has he not? The whole of civilization and its advancements? "So what?" They don't matter. Mind you, they don't matter to a person using a computer-which was developed in thousands of steps of design, improvement and manufacture- and it was posted on the internet-which was developed in hundreds of steps off of ARPANET, which itself was developed in hundreds of steps. And both were powered by electricity, using principles invented by Nikola Tesla, who wound up being smarter than his teachers, and invented a process which is STILL the standard for electricity in the US and worldwide? Nikola Tesla went beyond what he was taught. However, to ckmkeon, the internet, computers and electricity, without which he'd starve in the dark, bored to death, they're irrelevant. "So what?" ck continued to "address" this issue of students surpassing teachers. "So what, and what happens if the teacher is smarter than the student and the student thinks he/she is smarter...there are more instances where the student THINKS they are smarter and they are really not. Then they close off all teaching from there teacher." This is called "dodging" and "changing the subject." Since ckmkeon didn't have an intelligent response surpassing "so what?", he pretended there WAS no unaddressed issue of students surpassing their teachers as a cornerstone of society and changed the subject, intending to turn it into a "subtle dig" on the posters here. They surpassed the man who claimed to be THE Teacher. How dare they think for themselves and challenge the suppositions of a man who was born with an overabundance of brains and brawn, who made the earth shake when he walked? However, he did make an attempt to make a partial answer. To "How would discoveries be made or technology improved or even invented?" ck replied "By revelation by either God or the Devil." So, we owe computers, the internet, electricity, toilet paper, etc, to either God, the Devil, or both- NEVER to the ingenuity of an inventor thinking differently from everyone and making something that lasted as a result-NOT ONCE. T-Bone has asked him to support this claim. Will ck support his bald assertion? My prediction is we'll see more of the above, or a variation of what we've seen before- 1) changes of subject 2) ducking the question entirely 3) belittling the question 4) insulting the questioner and that's about it. Might ck actually attempt to support his statement in some way? It's possible, but I just don't consider it LIKELY. Whenever he does-like this "God & Devil made all technology" thing- he raises a bigger question than the one he answered ("How did humans ever invent ANYTHING if vpw's ridiculous claim is true?") It's straight out of the "there was an old woman that swallowed a fly" school of answering questions. (Each answer was worse than the previous question.) ===

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-who1.htm http://www.listeninglib.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20000512

As usual, he ripped these off as well. That painting was a ripoff of the cover of a book on dog-training. It was either "Hunt Close" or another book's front cover design that was completely copied, down to the pose. *checks* Yup, it was "Hunt Close." From the "Hunt Close!" thread... Hope R: "Gawd- do you remember that painting called 'The Trainer'? It looks just like the cover of that book, except it's VP and one of his dogs! Another TWI rip-off of someone else's original idea!" And the caption of the painting was "Training with love breeds loving obedience." Now then, as for his "I'm just like Martin Luther" kick, he staged a pitiful ripoff of Luther. Luther officially announced an attempt to open dialogue and discussion on 95 topics when he nailed his 95 theses to the door of Wittenburg Cathedral. Each addressed something very specific, and all were sensible. vpw announced-at the end of ROA '77- that he was going to do much the same thing. He claimed he was going to catalog (with full verses) all the anti-Trinitarian type verses of Scripture, and nail them to all the doors of the local churches. What DID happen? They ran around in a "Way coach", and posted a notice on a bunch of church doors. What did the notice say? Was it the list of Scriptures? Was it an appeal to logic, like Luther did? NO. It was a big sign: "Jesus Christ is not God-never was and never will be" and he placed an autographed copy of JCING at the foot of the church door. As I said, more of a bad photocopy lacking toner. BTW, I recommend the "Hunt Close!" thread. It's got some FASCINATING stuff.

A lot of people never heard of this book, or forgot about this book. Here's a reminder.

Correct, as you knew! And Kevin Bacon was also in... no, wait, nevermind. Your turn again.

It's good to cover all the bases. This gives everyone a chance to vote their conscience.

No, you also said that MANY people here have a specific position that- so far-nobody's come up and claimed as their own. Goey called you on it, and asked where these "MANY" people are. With no documentation, the evidence supports the idea that you just pulled this claim out of your burro. It's called "supporting your claims so it doesn't look like you made them up out of whole cloth." You failed to do it. Goey called you on it. Your reply-rather than support your claim OR admit you may have exaggerated a tad-was this post's dandy ad hominem attack. "F* you!" is NOT a logical defense of one's position. It DOES, however, suggest there IS no logical defense for it.

What's your opinion?

Some people felt the story straightjacketed the reader and pushed one viewpoint. I thought it was worth watching and RE-watching, but I wouldn't have nominated it for any awards. (I'm hard on most nominations.) Now, how about naming the movie so we can move on?

I said I thought it was a good idea- not that I have arrived at the answer. My current thinking, pending a better explanation, is that Judas Iscariot died from a successful suicide attempt. Frankly, that's as much detail as I really need.

[The Koran was written several centuries later. "Gospels" written 300 years later are generally acknowledged to be of inferior authority. Many books written 300 years later appear to have a specific axe to grind, and a doctrine to push. Mohammed specifically wanted to discredit Christianity AND Judaism, and likely would have resented any claims his book was "from the Judeo-Christian perspective." AND it was written centuries after the "other gospels". That the Koran claims the Gospels have it wrong is no surprise to me, neither does it impress me. "The Da Vinci Code" and "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" claimed the Gospels have it wrong as well. However, since they're centuries too late to be party to the events, AND they've their own agendas to push, they don't impress me either. So, that ANY book written centuries later can claim Judas was crucified, slipped in a tub and broke his neck, or was run over by a team of racing camels all strike me as NON-ISSUES. I mean, I can write a book saying he was pushed out a window. Because my book would be in "the Judeo-Christian tradition", would that make my book authoritative?] [Or maybe it was invented in the intervening centuries bysomeone who didn't like the Biblical accounts.] [i do agree that attempting to harmonize the accounts in the Gospels and Acts 1 is a good idea. Either they fit together and are one event, or they do not fit together, and one describes Judas' death and the other only looks like it does.] [i'll agree. I find it the least bit strange. I'll keep that one filed next to my questions on the grapegatherers, which also strikes me as strange.] [You noted that YOU would expect it. Me, I would "expect" a more thorough account of the hard sciences in the Bible. Looks like we were both disappointed. You can always lodge a complaint with God Almighty- after all, He didn't consult YOUR opinion before setting things in motion. ("If you want to know what God thinks of your opinion, just ask yourself when the last time He asked you for it was...") Priorities can differ between a dozen cultures across 20 centuries. What seems "a glaring" omission to you can seem superfluous to include to someone 2000 years ago. You're reading THEIR texts with YOUR mindset, and see a disparity. This is a surprise? There's hefty debate over the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and that's only 200 years old and in the same country!] [if you don't trust the Gospel accounts of the eyewitnesses and those who interacted directly with the eyewitnesses, whether or not you think the Gospels are God-breathed, what makes you think that speculation centuries later is any more reliable?]

"How do you think the Yankees will do against the Redskins this year?" "The Yankees are a baseball team. The Redskins are a football team. Personally, I think the Redskins would kick the sh* out of them." "I was the weapon-but I ain't no killer." "I'd rather die than go back there!"

wasway, totw, if one of you doesn't post something, I'll post another song...

I'll answer what I know. AVG and Avast (free) are approximately as good as the pay versions. One guy I know switched from Norton (which he paid for) to AVG (free) and found it an improvement. Plus, it took up less memory. I'd also recommend using a registry cleaner as well, at least once a year. (More if you do a lot of downloads and deletions of programs.) One thing you didn't mention was a FIREWALL. There's reliable free firewalls, too. Are you using one, or just the SP2 thing?

Robin Hood:Men in Tights Cary Elwes the Princess Bride

"Your Mileage May Vary." Like with cars and exactly how many miles to the gallon you get when actually driving the thing.

Personally, I found that the image was less offensive than the concepts it lampooned. It was harsh, but made its point. Do I think that it would have been made without the image? Well, we've been discussing it for years, and some people still find it too subtle for them, so a clue by four might be warranted, IMHO. I agree with Mark that-if there's a different, equally effective image, we can use that. However, I don't have one. Those of you who are offended, PLEASE brainstorm up one. I'd be glad to help find images to match the concept, if you've got a coherent concept to use.

Tom, please put Linda out of her misery.... Never mind, wasway posted it.

[untrue in general, and grossly exaggerated in the specifics. However, if not for this convenient fiction, this tail to wag the dog, there'd be no excuse for rewriting the Bible, and thus, no "pfal is the new Bible" Mikean doctrine.] [This is another exaggeration.When reading Machiavelli, one frequently funds names of places and historical figures interrupting explanations. One can choose to go to an encyclopedia and look them up, (or a history textbook.) One can also simply continue to read, and let the context make the main points clear. I've never had to look up the figures to understand the points made. And Machiavelli's LOADED with names compared to most of the Bible.] [None of the former make any difference on the basic understanding, the basic meanings, a basic reading of Scripture. Not one figure of speech is needed to be identified to receive Jesus as one's Lord, know that God is Love, and so on. As to administrations/dispensations vs covenant theology and other stuff, the jury's out as to whether they even apply at all. Please also correct your numbers. vpw quoted 212 figures of speech, but he was quoting Bullinger, and doing so incorrectly. (Or perhaps misread his notes.) Bullinger identified 217 figures, not 212.] [Also misrepresentative, but it's an excuse to dragout the "I'm thankful vpw failed to footnote any of his sources!" excuse for vpw's failure to cite sources.] [if a plain read of a plain version is opaque to you, then the Orange Book will be equally cryptic. The Bible's not a laundry list of names and places.] [And there we have the "footnotes are evil! Citing sources is evil!" sneaking in the back door as promised. Please note that a simple NEW King James Version is clearer for the average person to read than the old KJV, and vpw insisted on the OLD version despite the availability of the new. Making this easy on the readers was NOT high on the list. Nowadays, the New American Standard is even easier on the modern reader AND retains the italics, so-to be consistent-a pfal fan should recommend the Bible student switch to THAT rather than the KJV. I like Elizabethan English, but most people aren't big fans of Shakespeare. To refuse to do so is to be wedded to TRADITION ("vpw used the outdated KJV, so I will use it too!") rather than adjusting for superior performance (the NASB is superior to the KJV in everything but popularity.)]

"How do you think the Yankees will do against the Redskins this year?" "The Yankees are a baseball team. The Redskins are a football team. Personally, I think the Redskins would kick the sh* out of them."