WordWolf

I just zeroed in on the page-hit#s as well. I know what those mean.

Could also have something to do with twi's site lacking CONTENT, whereas the ex-twi sites have documents and active forums and up-to-the-minute information on things twi keeps trying to sit on and conceal. Plus, twi (I suspect) still pushes the "internet is evil" stuff, whereas possible prospects the current twi'ers approach go online and look up twi, find the other sites, and my, my! What interesting information they find! :D-->

BTW, AdAware's latest version is AdAware SE 1.5...... You will probably need to update to be really on the cutting edge.

It retained my Bookmarks. Now, if they can just finish redoing all the Extensions, so I have my dream-browser again, I'd really be running cool.

I thought this was worth repeating.

WOAH! To hear them talk about how they make decisions you'd think they were perfect decision makers because they did think things through thoroughly, almost to the point of "analysis paralysis", and, of course, God was telling them the right decision. I always heard they accounted for every penny and spent our abundant sharing oh so carefully and wisely. Yet another myth debunked by first hand testimony. Geez, we were so stupid on the field. I know I believed everything they told us. --> Just pass the kool-aid this way, would ya? Slowly the truth rears its ugly head.......

Nope! It automaticaly imports all of your IE bookmarks. :)--> I have no idea as to whether you have to delete any previous versions of Firebird or not; I went ahead and overwrote mine. *sighs* IE has "Favourites", FireFox has "Bookmarks." I know it imports IE "Favourites" and makes them "Bookmarks". What I want to know-and, from your post, you know the answer- is, if I install it over a previous FireFox, will it retain my FireFox "bookmarks", or will it delete them all?

It's already on my "to-do" list. One question: I'll need to re-enter all my bookmarks all over again, right? (I'm ok with reloading all the "extensions", but I don't want to re-enter all my bookmarks.) Another question: If I do have to re-enter it, can I keep both side-by-side as I do it, or do I have to delete previous editions of FireFox to complete the download? I didn't see that answer when I was looking this up.

When it identifies stuff, right-click on the menu of what it found. You can then select things like "delete all" , which it will confirm as you proceed.

*reads* Really good link, there. Says it all better than I could.

Steve Lortz in normal text. [WordWolf in boldface as usual.] Please reread your post. You're pretty consistent with painting Darby and others as being evil beings who shoved a pretribulation rapture down people's throats and frustrating the grace of God. From a "character" point of view, it's dishonest, and it reads like a smear campaign. It becomes WORSE when one notes that DARBY DID NOT PREACH A PRETRIBULATION RAPTURE. It appears to me that you're spending energy painting Darby as the scourge of modern Christianity that would be better spent actually checking if Darby taught what you're claiming he taught. At least you're not making that ridiculous claim that Darby invented the concept of a rapture based on a vision of Mc Donald, who ALSO did not believe in a "pretribulation rapture". ]

From what I can tell, with a few notable exceptions, everyone says something vaguely similar to this.... "When I first showed up, everything was idyllic. Then things went slowly legalistic, and eventually I left (or was kicked out for failing to cower in a prostrate manner before a mog or moglet.)" That suggests that it got steadily worse, slowly, and what the late arrivals thought was pretty good was what the early exiters would have considered a pale imitation of what THEY showed up for. ========== What was "good" in the good old days also seems to vary, based on how far from a root locale you were, and how well-connected your family was. (In other words, humble peons who lived a few hours' drive from a root locale were up against it.)

MJ, I'm reasonably certain that nobody here is saying the following: "I bear zero responsibility for my actions when in twi, and I bear zero responsibility for deficiences in my child/children's upbringing while in twi, and I bear zero responsibility for their exposure to those who would verbally or physically abuse them, and I bear zero responsibility for carrying out instructions on how to raise children that were damaging to them while in twi." NOBODY is saying that, but I get from you that you're saying that speaking against evils of twi in this category is to abrogate one's own responsibility. From a legal standpoint, all twi members who had achieved their majority (18 or older), bear responsibility for their actions, and are responsible for their children. I don't see anyone arguing against that. ======= Look- every day, there are new people online. Every day, someone is tricked into giving out their passwords. Every day, someone is tricked by some new scam online. Every day, e-mail inboxes are flooded with warnings about imaginary problems, forwarded by well-meaning people. We're talking about some people who lose a few seconds of their time, and some who lose thousands of dollars. On top of their monetary loss, some people speak out against internet scams. Would you tell them that they should not blame the people who intentionally scammed them-that it was their own fault? Well, they DID choose to act, but that makes the scammer no less a criminal. ================= I frequently liken the GSC to an Alcoholics Anonymous-type of board. Both boards deal with ruined lives. Both boards deal in recovery. Both boards sometimes deal with harsh events. I think you would NOT go to an AA board and post "You all CHOSE to buy alcohol. Get over yourselves and get on with your lives." However, that's approximately what you did here. Something to think about, I suggest.

It was brought up in the GSC at some point....I don't remember details beyond that. I wasn't at WayDale but remember this coming up.

twi: "The Word takes the place of the absent Christ." Therefore, we'll lead you until you meet him. WordWolf: Bible says if any man sins, we have an advocate (defense attorney) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. (That's shooting from the hip. I'm running around and will find some clear verses when I can.)

I think it's Thunderbird that's the mail-widget for FireFox. Microsoft made a point of integrating IE and Outlook into its operating system. That way, when you try and operate under Adam Smith's invisible hand, and use a different browser or mail-server, you can't be sure there isn't some sort of connection to IE or Outlook or something. Of course, now they're using this as an excuse against releasing their systems with various "options"....

I know a guy who thinks the ONLY terrorists trying to damage things in the US went down in those planes. Apparently, there WERE no other terrorists in various attacks across the years since then and before them, some of whom are periodically arrested. He thinks that eliminating that handful eliminated their entire structure, support network, and any other attackers. ===== Did twi eliminate a few people recently?

waysurvivor, I hope you're seeing a mental health professional. If most of what you're saying is true, you need to be seeing one for the next decade, at least. If most of what you're saying is NOT true, you need to be seeing one for the next decade, at least. Unless you're deliberately lying, which is more than wrong, and does a disservice to all the REAL survivors here. So, in conclusion, if you're not getting professional help, get some.

Well, CES can remove logos and still have their material. If vpw removed all Leonard's stuff from pfal, the class would be less than 6 sessions long. Remove all of Leonard, Stiles and Bullinger, and it would be done in a short session. With songs.

You're referring to Revelation 12:4-9. In regards to the other 2/3 being loyal, I think it is not a big leap to say that saying 1/3 rebelled means 2/3 stayed loyal. If one were to complicate the subject (I've done that thinking on my own), one might imagine that the 1/3 that rebelled were not all entirely composed of the 1/3 originally under the dragon when he was in office. I would expect some of his subordinates to stay loyal to God, and some of them would be replaced by disloyal malcontents serving in the other 2/3. Either way, it is speculation and how I imagine it in my mind. I also think it's not a critical matter, or else it would have been outlined for us. Some stayed loyal, some rebelled. Period. The only place I've seen numbers on anybody was the garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus said at his arrest that he could call upon reinforcements of "over 12 legions of angels". If that can be taken literally, that means "72,001 or more angels". I do not believe Jesus was speaking of every single angel currently serving under God, but only some of them. (Since they outnumber devils 2:1, that means there's a minimum number of 36,000 angels on the planet, including the ones in prison who were disobedient at the time of the Flood in the Noah's Ark incident. I don't know how many of THOSE were imprisoned, either, but they're part of the original rebelling 1/3.)

AFAIK, The doctrine that there were exactly 3 angels in charge of all other angels comes from Revelation 12: 4 and 7. The doctrine that Michael is one of them comes from his mention in Revelation 12:7-8. Further, it's substantiated with references from Daniel, which refer to Michael as "one of the chief princes". Referring to Michael as "archangel" comes from his being called that when disputing over the body of Moses. =========== I don't know of documentation that settles that Michael runs 1/3 and Gabriel runs 1/3. Gabriel passed along the announcements of the coming Messiah in the Gospels, and he "stands in the presence of God". Generally, it's taken as assumptions that: -Michael is in charge of 1/3 the originals-the warriors -Gabriel is in charge of 1/3 the originals-the announcers -all spirit-beings under God are called "angel" ("messenger"), regardless of their function. -Archangel is the title given to exactly 3 angels in history -the 3 angels (Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer) mentioned in the Bible are the 3 ruling angels=Archangels. ======= I'd be THRILLED if anyone here can provide documentation disproving me about those last points being "assumed" and not DOCUMENTED.

I'd like to be awarded the title "Doctor". Since accreditation, apparently, is NOT critically important to some people, I've decided to save myself the expense and extra typing and research that normally goes into this process. After all, once you've achieved a certain level of Biblical understanding, it's as good as a Doctorate from most universities, as some people used to say (often). So, I turn to you. Normally, I would have to turn to a college or university, but since I don't need accreditation, I can skip that step. I submit as proof of my coursework, the entire body of my writings to date here at the GSC, including my digests, psychological and sociological analyses, commentary on religious movements, and general Bible knowledge. I further submit that my demonstrated abilities to date are at least comparable to those demonstrated by at least one person who was issued a Doctorate from Pike's Peak Seminary. Moreover, I've cited my sources when applicable, which, apparently, exceeds the standards of allowable conduct, per that same graduate of Pike's Peak Seminary. Now, none of you are registered with a legal accrediting agency, but, apparently, that's not very important. So, I ask you all... Who amongst you all would judge me to have warranted a Doctorate? Who amongst you all would award me a Doctorate? Those who would, please let me know on this thread or in a private message. Please also let me know the name of the field of study you are issuing me the unaccredited degree in. In case it's not obvious, I've no intention of using the title outside of the GSC. Most places outside the GSC make SUCH a big deal about accreditation.... Thank you all for your time.

Since some have been pointed out before, and Mike didn't see them, I suspect the answer is "No". He hasn't even thanked me for helping him with the chapter from one of the collaterals featuring "the Amazing Morphin' Man"...

[WordWolf in boldface again.] Just what did VPW do? That's the all important question everybody wants answered, isn't it? Despite his human frailties and weaknesses, VPW did his best to help people with the Word of God he knew. [Actually, a strong case has been made that he did NOT do that. In order to make things look original, vpw made some changes here and there, accidentally diluting the product. This was an acceptable result for him, since he was more concerned about presenting it as HIS best and GOD's best at the same time, and NOT with making sure the people got GOD's best in truth no matter WHO wrote the books. So, I say he did NOT do his best, certainly not of what it can be proved he KNEW. ] That is what he did. [ That is what you say he did. ] What I fail to see is how Mike is minimizing, downplaying, misrepresenting and mischaracterizing that aspect of VPW's life, and he's got the tape and written records to prove it, or so he says. [ Well, your failure to see something is no guarantee of its nonexistence. Ever seen Death Valley? Antarctica? The Dark Side of the Moon? Not with your own eyes you haven't. ] Well big deal, I say. All that that has ever done is spawned some of the longest threads here in the history of GS Cafe. The only people excusing their idolatrous ends are the antagonists. [ Your entitled to your opinion, even if it is contrary to the facts presented here. ] Since VPW can't live up to some "god-like image of Jesus Christ" it is that fact which justifies their all important, self-righteous (and spiritually erroneous) criticism of him. [ No, it is vpw's failure to refrain from drugging and raping members of the congregation, squandering money for the ministry on luxuries for himself, and lying and misrepresentation (among other things) that we object to. We expect a human who masters his lusts as a CHRISTIAN leader, not one who makes occasion for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof. Most other ministries and churches get to have those-why shouldn't we have gotten one? ] Just the possibility that they may have to share a spot in heaven someday with the likes of VPW - man oh man, that alone must completely terrify them to no end! But what of the scriptures which say, "Therefore let no man glory in men" and also the scripture: "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgement; yea, I judge not mine own self." Well you should just forget those scriptures, huh? After all, they want you to believe it is _MY_ job to bring to light the hidden things of darkness and make known all these evil's in the heart of VPW. But this is not what my bible says. My bible says this is the Lords job, not any of yours! "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God." 1 Corinthians 4:5 That's all I'm going to say about this subject - which is the Word of God itself. Bye. [ Of course, taking your twisting of those verses out of their context, and following them to their logical conclusions, we should release all murderers and rapists from prison, since it was unjust to "judge" them. In fact, the criteria given in Timothy-and TAUGHT BY WIERWILLE HIMSELF AS CRITERIA FOR JUDGING MINISTERS- would be null and void. Hear that? That's the sound of "your whole Bible falling to pieces", since you said part of it doesn't work.... BTW, Joel Steinberg's out of prison now, the guy who beat that child to death? Interested in offering him a job, or have you decided to "judge" him? He's having trouble finding work and a place to stay....]

UH, you missed something. If Mike thought that the Pauline Epistles were of equal authority as the Orange Book, that would work. Mike thinks the Orange Book is of superior authority to the Pauline Epistles. Mike claims the original Epistles have somehow lost some ineffable quality-despite 2000 years of documentation. He also refuses to believe in 2000 years of documentation, but DOES believe vpw's claim of the snow on the pumps.