Goey

Groggy Posted:

This is for Wordwolf and Slick

We should reflect the love we have

with one another, putting off the old man,

putting on the mind of Christ. Sharing manifestations

for the profit of the believers and non- believers.

The Love:

1. John 3:16 For God Loved us

2. Deu 6:5 We should love God

3. John 13:34 Love one another this is where the reflection must come in

Renewal:

1. Eph 4:22-24 putting on the new man and putting off the old man

2. Rom 13:14 Put ye on the mind of Christ

Manifestation:

1. ICor 12:7 Manifestation is for the profit of Believers

All in all

ICor 13 is how Charity is to be performed

Therefore I have biblical evidence for the quote.

Groggy Boy,

I perceive that you are not well schooled in debate, hermeneutuics, exegesis, or even basic logic. Too bad, since you seem to be of at least average intelligence.

When an assertation is made, the burden of "proof" falls upon the one making the assertation not upon those who might question or dispute it. You should have learned that in Jr High School - ( I assume you attended that far ?)

The above quote represents a laughble and feeble attempt at "proof" for such a bold assertation.

All you did was regurgitate some scripture references and declare by fiat that they support your "definition." --- No exegesis, no exposition, no explanation of how these references imply your definition or what inferrences were made to come to the conclusion that "this is the true meaning of Charity" --- a most bold claim, rivaling even some of VPW's outlandish assertations and definitions.

Your "evidence" only shows that the quote is scripture based, (scripture can be foisted) and miserably fails to show why these verses when paraphrased and integrated into a small paragraph communicates "the true meaning of Charity".

No dice Groogo, --- That dog won't hunt. You gotta do much better than kindergarten level proof and a string of assorted logical fallacies to make your case. Otherwise consider doing what some others around here have done and and just delcare that "God told me", which then exempts you from any rational explanation or burden of proof.

Gooey let's say I know nothing and my mentor knows nothing.

Groggy, you've demonstrated that already. No need for hypotheticals.

Then explain the meaning right now and maybe we can learn something today. Since you are so knowledgeable tell us oh wise one the meaning of charity. What is the true definition. You come up with something better than the original post and I will say you are right.

You say we don't understand anything about "real" charity what is "real" charity. Let us in on the secret, show me some scripture to back your opinions.

Typical TWI mentality. Grab some verses from the Bible, intelectualize them, then condense them into a super duper magical formula. -- Ever learning, but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

The "opinion" that I clearly stated, does not require scripture to back it up any more than scripture back up is needed to tell someone that their car is has a flat tire.

Why don't you back up your deception and hypocrisy with scripture? -- How do you and your "mentor" fit deception and hypocrisy into to your magical, super duper definition of charity?

Now don't that take the cake .......

A spiritual "mentor" having his apprentice tell a bald face lie to deceive us about the source of an attempted definition of "love" ...

As I undertand the scriptures, lying and deception are not a part of "charity" . Your deception is a mockery of the very thing you attempted define. You mock God Himself.

Gregg, you and your mentor understand nothing of real charity.

You should both consider a different vocation where dishonesty and deception are the norm. --- Like politics or used car sales.

God first

Beloved Goey

God loves us my dear friend

thank you for better understanding on Aramaic

As for order having no meaning

I believe God wrote the bible with even the order things are listed having a reason and purpose

the reason depends on order but the purpose is to teach

thank you

with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy

Roy, I didn't say that order had no meaning, but rather that in that in that particular section it probably does not.

In any case God didn't write the Bible, people did. Why spend so much time and effort on numerological guesswork and miss the real message?

God first

Languages in the Bible

Wrote unknown - rewrote 09-11-2003

There are three languages that the bible was wrote in, Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek or at least that what most church leaders teach. The Old Testament was wrote in Hebrew than later rewrote in Aramaic but the New Testament was wrote in Aramaic them

rewrote in Greek.

The vast majority of the New Testament was originally written in Greek not Aramaic. Greek being the lingua- franca in the region at the time, the Septuigant ( Greek OT) was the most widely used text by the Jews at the time of Jesus. It was most likely the text that he read from and quoted.

Now let us look at the group of people that were at the day of Pentcost, who were they and what language did they speak.

We read in Acts 1:4 "And being assembled together with them commanded them that they, should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me."

They the apostles were at Jerusalem at the day of Pentcost. Now lets move on who was there to witness what was spoken and what languages they spoke.

In Acts 2:7-11 "And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold are not all these which speak (Galileans?") All the apostles spoke the language of the Galileans.

But in Acts 2:8 "And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" Look the people all heard the apostles speak in the own language but the apostles were Galileans.

In Acts 2:9-11 " Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God."

While many of these may speak the same language its easy to see not all spoke the language of the apostles the language of Galileans but each person heard they home town language spoke.

Who was here at the day of Pentcost Galileans, Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mesopamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, Libya, Cyrene, strangers of Rome, Jews, proselytes, Cretes, and Arabians.

Then in Acts 2:14 "But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:"

Here we have all that dwell at Jerusalem added to the nineteen listed above.

---1 Galileans - used as number one shows unity

---2 Parthians - used as number two which establishes

--- 3 Medes - used as number three complets

--- 4 Elamites - used as number four relates to world

--- 5 Mesopotamia - used as number five shows grace

--- 6 Judea - used as number six relates to man

--- 7 Cappadocia - used as number seven relates to spiritual perfection

--- 8 Pontus - used as number eight refers to new begining

--- 9 Asia used as number nine refers to judgement

-- 10 Phrygia - used as number ten refers to perfection of divine order

--11 Pamphylia - used as number eleven refers to falling short of goverment perfection which ends in imperfection

--12 Egypt - used as number twelve refers to goverment perfection

--13 Libya - used as number thireteen refers to eight plus seven,

new begining with spiritual perfection

--14 Cyrene - used as number fourtheen refers to established spirit perfection

--15 strangers of Rome - used as number fiftheen refering to complete grace

--16 Jews - used as number sixtheen refering to established new begining

--17 proselytes - used as number seventheen refers to spiritual perfection of divine order

-- 18 Cretes - used as number eightheen refers to divine order of new begining

--19 Arabians - used as number nineteen refering to divine order of judgement

-- 20 all that dwell at Jerusalem - used as number twenty refers to established perfection of divine order

Lets look at them in groups of languages which they spoke.

(1) Gaileans - Aramaic language they were set aside by beginning the speakers at Pentecost showing unity.

(9) Asia spoke Greek at the time, Asia had (8) Pontus, (7) Cappadocia, (11) Pamphylia, (10) Phrygia, and (5) Mesopotamia which is one county with five cities, this shows unity of grace.

(16) Jew one group of people speaking Hebrew which are (6) Judaea, (19) Arabians, (17) Proselytes, and (18) Crete, one group of people with four cities they live in or unity of the world.

(14) Cyrene one language that is a language that's not around today there are scrips of the language but noone understands, which shows a tongue of unknown origin with unity of God.

(12) Egypt and (13) Librya two country of the same Language which establishes the day of Pentecost.

(

2) Parthians was a language of three groups of people (3) Medes, and (4) Elamites

(15) Strangers of Rome the language of this people could be many which shows languages of unknown origins with unity of God.

(20) All that dwell at Jerusalem the men of Israel this is setting these people apart by unity of God.

There are seven groups of people or languages here with show spiritual perfection of Pentecost.

Twelve languages showing government perfection or four times three which is the world that's complete.

Twenty groups here which is established divine perfection or five times four which is grace over the world.

Twelve groups with seven languages spoke but it takes seven and six to make twelve or spiritual perfection over man with government perfection.

This old study shows us how perfectly God works to even have the people come in a way to teach how God works to teach us putting keys to his love in the many groups of people who were there at the day of Pentecost.

I think you are putting unwarranted "spiritual weight" upon the order of a simple list of peoples/countries. It is just a list of who was there --- and it may not even be all inclusive. The order is most likely meaningless.

While numbers do many times have spiritual significance, it is an interpretational mistake to always ascribe spiritual qualities upon things listed in the scpriptures, based upon the order in which those things are listed.

Thank you, with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy.

God is love.

Charity (love) can no more be defined in a few lines than you can define God himself.

With both however, you know/understand when you see and experience them.

I doubt "manefestations" have very much at all to do with true "charity" seeing as how they can be used/operated without it. ( 1 Cor 13)

The main problem I have with "church" is the priority put upon the sermon - like it is the focal point or crux of the worship service. Listening to a sermon is not really "worship" at all. I think that many churchs are in a rut in this. The sermon is a dogmatic sacred cow - part of the church ritual.

Think about it. ... Usually about half or more of the service is dedicated to having one man or woman preach to a captive audience. It is one way communication only.

In that it is no different from the TWI and offshoot fellowships I was around --one way communication to a captive audience. TWI called it a "teaching" instead of a sermon. Little difference. Still a sacred cow and ritualistic part of the "service".

However, unlike my experience in TWI and offshoots, most churchs that I have atteneded have other functions, like sunday school/clases where you can ask questions, offer opinions & even share your heart -- and generally not be looked down upon for doing so.

Mrs. Wierwille or anyone else who knew about VPW's abuses of women and did nothing, is guilty of complacency. This complacency helped allow VPW's abuse to continue for as long as it did.

These people made the choice (for different reasons) to be complacent.

Was Mrs Wiereille a victim? Sure she was, but being a victim in one thing doesn't make complaceny in another the right moral choice. People suffered because of this complacency.

These complacent ones (Mrs Wierwille included) allowed women to suffer VPW's sexual abuses so they themsleves would not have to "suffer" the consequences of not being complacent. Young women were "sacrificed" to VPW's abuses for a perceived greater cause -- whether it was continued personal comfort, advancement in leadership, loyalty to VPW, or even as expected collateral damage in "moving the word".

This kind of complacency can not be justified - only explained. It was dead wrong.

Would speaking out or confronting VPW have stopped it? -- I don't know, but to have tried and failed is better than not to have tried at all.

TWI Hierarchy ?

..........The Way Tree

God willing, I'll be there. I'll even help with the dishes and stuff.

I'll stay at my uncle's house in Conroe which is very close to the Woodlands.

Just let me know when.

Hi Folks,

By definition, barbequing is slow cooking at low fairly low temperatures (200 - 240 degrees F), with indirect heat, using either wood, charcoal or both for the heat source.

Sometimes grilling is mistakenly called barbequing, usually by unlearned backyard cooks. These are usually the same folks that smear grocery store "barbeque sauce" over a good piece of meat and then cook it over a too hot gas or charcoal grill until it is burned black and crusty, and then call it "barbeque". Gad !

Grilling is cooking directly over the heat source, using wood, charcoal or (God forbid) natural gas/propane for fuel. Steaks,burgers and chicken are usually grilled. You can barbeque chicken, but the meat ends up reddish in color and a some (ignorant) folks think this means it is not properly cooked, so you end up having to explain to them that it is the smoke that causes the red color not blood. Fish (catfish, snapper, salmon, redfish, flounder, tuna steaks etc.) can also be grilled. The trick to keeping it from falling apart is to quicky sear it in a skillet before putting in on the grill.

Just about any meat, (not just beef) can be "barbequed". Sorry David, but barbeque is not defined by the cooking of beef, even though beef brisket is my favorite. Some excellent barbeque is done with pork ribs or a pork butt. However, you are correct that roasting a pig over direct heat is not technically barbeque, even though it can be quite tasty.

Sometimes barbequing is errantly called "smoking". True smoking is done at temperatures below 130 degrees where the chemicals in the cool smoke "cook" meat instead of heat.

Hope this clears things up a bit.

The original question was:

My guess is probably none, depending upon how you define scholar.

A true "scholar" could not have lasted in TWI under either Wierwille or Martindale unless they sold out their scholarship for loyalty to VPW or LCM. What real scholar would have supported or endorsed the sloppy and kindergarten level research done by VPW or LCM ?

I don't know much about the actual Research Department at TWI under VPW, except that sources have told me that all research had to conform to VPW's teachings and any research findings that contracdicted or disagreed with VPW's was summarily squashed or discredited without evaluation. I find it hard to believe that any true scholar would continue under those conditions.

I can only imagine the frustration of those that truly wanted to do good research under VPW while hoping againt hope that someday TWI would change. Then they got LCM ....

It is a sad state of affairs when the most acclaimed research that came from someone out of TWI was a paper condemning adultery -- like it takes a PHD to figure that out.

In all fairness though, I agree that scholarship, degrees, etc, (like sincerity) are no guarantee for truth, neither do they necessarily result in faith. So it seems that TWI and its top MOG's were lacking in all of these.

Christian faith should be in God, Christ and the Word, not in blind loyalty to the teachings of a certain man or denomination. Give credit for deliverance to God and Christ not to Wierwille or any other man/organization.

Men do not deliver people, God does.

Haven't seen the film, but there is no doubt that there is something going on. The ice caps are melting and the permafrost line is moving further north in many areas. There has been a measurable increase in golbal average temperature. These are indisputable facts.

I agree with George that is is impossible to tell what the cause or causes may be. There are too many factors involved and some of them may even be unknown.

I think it is bad science and foolishness to conclude that the cause is strictly due to human activities that result in "greenhouse gases", although these could indeed be major factors.

There are other things that could be major factors as well -- things like volcanic activity, solar spots, the Earth's changing magnetic field, phytoplankton levels,. etc. These, among other things must also considered along with greenhouse gases.

But ....even though human activities may not be the sole cause of "global warming", these are the things that we do have some control over, so I think it is equally foolish to ignore these things or not take prudent and appropriate action because we aren't completely sure of what's going on.

sharing an experience is not "proof" . this is an open public forum in which anyone can write anything they want about anyone.

There are different levels of "proof".

In a many civil cases, the level of proof is called the "preponderance of the evidence". This is when the judge or jury is persuaded that the facts are "most likely" in favor either the defendant or the plaintiff.

There is also a bit higher level that is known as "clear and convincing evidence" which is used in certain civil matters.

In a criminal case, the rules of evidence are stricter. The evidence must pursade the judge or jury of the guilt of the defendant ... "beyond a reasonable doubt". Hearsay evidence is generally not allowed.

I know this is not a court of law, but an eyewitness account (experience) is considered "evidence" in a court of law -- and sure, the credibility of the witness(s) must be considered.

So in regards to VPW, it depends upon level of proof that you demand in order to "convict" him of the things he has been accused of. Do we want a criminal conviction or a civil judgment ? --- Or do we just want to know what most likely happened?

As for me, the evidence I that I have seen and heard is "clear and convincing." However, in a strict sense, some if it could be considered "hearsay", (he said, she said) and would not be allowed in a criminal case.

I was just WOW slime.

I was pretty happy just being slime. Never really had the desire to upgrade to scum status. You know, all that floating on top business...

However, at times I kept pretty busy doing the bidding of some of you scum.

I believe along the same lines as Abigail. Some of it is metaphor and some quite literal.

For example, when it says God created the heavens and earth, I take that literally. When it refers to the tree of life, I see that as figurative.

I see Genesis as much more than a parable, although I agree it has some deep figurative and symbolic language.

I agree with Mr. Campbell about getting wrapped up in geneogies and timelines as opposed to being absorbed in the heart of the message. When I approach the scriptures, I try to ask myself, what is the heart of the matter? What is the idea or concept that is being presented, and how can I apply that to the here and now?

If your computer goes in to automatic shutown and the timer starts, you can prevent it from shutting down by:

Start > Run > then type "shutdown -a" .

This will abort the automatic shutdown and let you keep doing stuff.

Exie,

Download Hijackthis

Unzip it to a folder or to the desktop then run hijackthis.exe - saving the log file.

Then cut and paste the contents of the log file into a new post. It's probably a good idea work with just one person at at time, so John should probably take it from there.

If you deleted the registry key that loads the trojan and it comes back, the actual cause was not taken care of. Deleting the registry key doesn't kill the process that may be still running in memory. Along with deleting the key, you also have to stop the running process before you restart the PC, and then find and delete the maliscious executable or dll file(s) as well.

Also, some viruses/trojans load from the registry as a "process" and msconfig is pretty helpless there - as it only looks a a few of the common places where programs are loaded from.

Some trojans (like certain variations of this one) can actually load from the virus chest or from the quarantine folder - depending upon the antivirus software you have. I know it can from Mcaffee, not sure about Norton. I use Avast and it has not let me down in 3 years.

The only way I know to truly get rid of this kind of trojan.

1. Make sure system restore is off.

2. Boot in safe mode

3. Delete the registry key that loads the trojan

4. Delete the infected executable or dll file(s) -- (there may be more than 1. )

5. Delete all temporary internet files (precautionary)

6. Delete all "temp" files. ( precautionary)

7. Delete all files in the virus chest or quarantine folder. Don't skip this ...

Then do a virus scan again, It should not be detected by the antivirus program.

Restart normally. It should be gone.

If it is initially gone and then comes back later on, there is a program still on the system that when run manually, rewrites the registry key, and recreates the malicious files. This program needs to be removed/deleted. The problem will keep coming back forever until this is done .

But if all went well in 1-7 it should be gone and should not return.

Turn System Restore back if you use it. I don't use System Restore as it has seldom been helpful to me, but you may want to keep using it.

Consider using Firefox as your Internet Browser - it is much more secure than IE is customizable with some really cool and useful plug-ins or "extensions".

This is the politics forum .........

Goey,

Wasn't even speaking to you, perhaps you should just listen.

If that is true, then why did you address me by name? (Assuming you refer to your previous post) If you refer to the post prior to when I asked what you meant, it does not have to be addressed to me for me to ask a question. That's how forums work. If you want to talk and tell your ideas in a doctrinal forum and and have folks "just listen" that is probably not gonna happen here (as much as you might like it to.)

Whatever I say is taken as a shot from you.

I'm tired of it and you.

Like you can't receive anything from me.

Well you won't, cuz of you not me.

I'm tired of your treatment of me and will not take it anymore.

You think I'm attacking you when it's what you believe that is on the table.

And I could care less at this point what you think of me.

I have to give and that includes you giving and it ain't happening.

So go trail someone else who exposes the darkness in your head.

I have enough to deal with in my own head.

I think I have treated you pretty well actually. I am not "trailing" you. And if you have assigned yourself as the great exposer of of the darkness in my head or anyone elses, then you are just like that poster who assigned himself to expose the "conspiracy" between you and Todd and your "evil" doctrines. Think about it.

Clay, you have not exposed anything but your own unwillingness to communicate or civily exchange ideas with others.

Your arrogance and high mindedness and everything has to fit into your thinking attitude is getting pretty old tiresome and down right annoying. So if you lack understanding ask God.

And you do lack as well as I. And I speak from what I know unless I say I don't and am willing to be corrected by those who love not those who look for fault to exploit.

I offer no defense against your accusations because it might appear to qualify them. Why don't you go back read Tom's post to Allen about the speck and the beam.

And no i don't take it personal, that's just the way it is. I've seen it from you to me and if you don't see it, let me be the first to point it out.

Let ME point out that your reactions do not seem to reconcile with your claim that you "don't take it personal."

And i will continue to post what I believe and the changes that occur in me.

That's a given Clay. Except possibly for one poster, no one has ever suggested that you don't contine to post. Just understand that others have the same right as you do to post what they believe, even if it disagrees or appears to disagree with your beliefs.

There is no book or forum that i could write or post in that can fully show anyone what God can will and does work in the heart. And yes He does work in people not dead letters from dead men and people who try to make the dead word alive without the Spirit of God as promised.

I agree with you that God works in the hearts of people. I also agree that you cannot write or post in a book or forum to fully show what God can do in hearts of men. That is God's job, not yours or mine. And I think He and those he appointed did a pretty fair job with the Bible to put in in words. But of course it has to be experienced, does it not ? For the record, I have always included the Spirit of God in my approach to biblical understanding. Posted it here many times over the years. So to whom do you refer ?

Where did anyone here suggest or imply that God works in "dead letters from dead men" ? Maybe you refer to "scripture worship" or "bibliolitry". I say those folks are few and far between here at GS -- that is unless you want to label anyone that way that does not follow your particular inward/within hermeneutical approach to biblical interpretation.

So sorry if you take offense, it's not my intent, but to unload on you. I hope to God you can take it.

Seems intentional to me .....But yes, I can take it.

We are to be meek to each other, and as much as i've tryed with you, there is still this thing that you got up your butt about me for some reason.

Again I refer you back to Tom's post on the speck and the beam. (Use "butt" instead of "eye".)

And whatever it is i ask for forgiveness and let's move on and find the things of God that he has already given, that we may have fellowship with Him and each other.

Clay, you are a dichotomy. You attempt to tear me down, telling me I am arrogant and high-minded, that I have darkness in my head and stuff up my butt. Then you ask for my forgiveness for "for whatever it is"- And all in the same post?

Somehow I find your asking for forgiveness to be a bit less than sincere.

sheesh, just a general statement goey.

Like all the books in the world couldn't hold it like it says in John.

Get so defensive, lighten up. Gsc is a forum with words.

The mind is the only thing that can hold "it".

Everyone is ready to pull a gun or a something around here.

Really beginning to suck.

Clay, I was simply asking for clarification - no more, no less. (and in a nice way I thought). But it seems that even asking for more clarity offends you. It shouldn't. It's called communication.

You answered well in you second sentence -- "Like all the books in the world couldn't hold it like it says in John." That answered my question. But then you went on a unnecessary and unwarranted tirade about defensiveness and gun pulling. Who is really being defensive ?

Clay, since when is asking for clarification or meaning to something said here - equivalent to "ready to pull a gun" ? I suggest that your gun anaolgy is quite misguided.

But, you know what really sucks? It is when people refuse to communicate - or cry foul everytime someone tries to communicate with them (unless it is for the purpose of support & agreement) Sometimes I wonder if you actually want to "communicate" at all.

I think it may be you that needs to lighten up a bit.

"... Doubt if gsc could hold it."

What's that supposed to mean Clay? To whom are you referring? ... GSC as a whole or certain individuals?

May I kindly point out that it is not GSC's purpose to "hold" to any particular doctrine, concept or teaching.

Vulgar language bothers me a bit. especially when it is used in front of my daughter.

It wasn't too long ago when I ran into a local guy that I used to work with -- James. He sat down at that table next to me and my daughter to talk a bit. Every other word out of his mouth was f* in some form or another, along with GD and assorted others expletives.

I politely pointed out that my 7 year old daughter was present and to please stop the vulgar language. He did for a while then it came right back out. I asked again. He apologized, but in just a few minutes it started again.

So I stood up and got right next to him and asked him how he would like it if I slapped his mouth shut. His eyes got big, and he said to me. "Bill .... man .... you don't have to get ugly about it ..."

++++++++++++++++

Here's another story ......

Last year, I was at Samm' Family Restaurant in Florence. A young couple ( early 20's) came in and sat down to order food. The man was wearing a black T-shirt that read in 6 inch bold white letters:

Well, a rancher type guy and his family (wife & young kids) who had already ordered food, were sitting one booth down from this couple. I watched this rancher guy getting redder and redder in the face till he was almost fuming.

He finally got up and went over to the young man and told him that his shirt was offensive to him and his family, as well as offensive to the state of Texas. Then he went up to the cashier and told her that if that fellow stayed in there with that shirt on that he was leaving with his family - and never coming back - and to cancel their order. The cashier was kinda wishy-washy and not really wanting to make a call.

Thats when the owner, David, came out and saw what was going on. He then asked the man with the shirt to either change it or leave. The man said something about it being a free country and something about freedom of speech. Thats when David told him, "let's see how free you feel when the cops get here and throw your butt in jail. ( Small town Texas)

That's when the T-shirt man's girlfriend said to him. "See Bob, I told you this fu**ing town was all f**ed up." They left in a huff, slinging rocks from behind the tires as ther pick-up truck peeled out of the parking lot.

Is there a point to all this ? I dunno .... maybe you can find one.