Raf

Cybil Shepherd Chances Are Robert Downey Jr.

One of the definitions of insanity is trying te same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. JAL has been confronted by people closer to him who know him better than I do. He's also been warned about personal prophecy. His answer, consistently, is, "we have this book..." I was a telemarketer once, but I had to actually call people to try to pitch things to them. If you think I'm going to make a call so that the recipient of the call can try to sell me a book, you're nuts.

JAL does not see the profit in coming onto this board and engaging in public dialogue about personal prophecy or the problems with CES. Likewise, I do not see the profit in calling him to tell him words he would not accept. In reality, my comments are not directed at him. They are here for all to see and comment on. JAL does not see the profit in GS. That's fine. I do not see the prophet in CES.

I dare him to come here and read and post.

You know, this line in John's letter has been bugging me, and I've been trying to figure out why. Then it hit me. John, The woman's known you for decades. It doesn't take a vision from the Lord to make an observation about a close friend. However, it does take a truly devious heart to convert painful observations friends might make into "revelations from the LAWD-uh" that are not subject to scrutiny or even disagreement because they're coming from the creator of heaven and earth. Get it? She did not speak prophetically into your heart. She told you crap she figured out on her own after knowing you for years upon years. By the way, the above didn't come from me. It came from God, so you can't argue with me about it. Take it up with Management. Oh? You don't believe me? Well, guess what? I don't believe your self-appointed prophetess. And based on the lack of wisdom and discernment in what you've posted here, I don't believe you either.

I don't know that JAL's behavior has been contemptible. It would appear that way, based on one side of the story that's been made public. But I don't know what it was like for these two human beings to live with each other. There are intricate reasons for divorces. Two happy people don't divorce based on the ludicrous visions of some SELF-APPOINTED (there, I said it) prophetess unless one or both are highly mentally unstable. What I'm trying to say is that the Lynn marriage is not the point, and criticizing Lynn for accepting the SELF-APPOINTED prophetess over his wife is presuming that the prophetic visions were the sole or the major reason behind the divorce. I don't know that this is true, and I'm not prepared to criticize John for it. (Neither am I saying that it is untrue. I'm saying there's so much to a divorce that to get to the truth of that question, for me, would involve me getting into something that is entirely none of my business). What disgusts me about all this is that, corporately, CES/STFI allowed a SELF-APPOINTED prophetess to insinuate herself into someone else's marriage to begin with. This malicious behavior was accepted, condoned, and encouraged. For that reason alone, the watchmen should be on the walls with bullhorns. And if they EVER try to personally prophesy into my life, I'll slap them with a slander suit so fast they won't know what hit them. Oh, by the way, YES, I am saying that if JAL was otherwise happy but allowed the SELF-APPOINTED prophetess' words to corrupt his marriage, he is highly mentally unstable.

Oh my God! GREAT clues! Waking Ned Devine

Awesome! I've been elfed too!

I'm gleeful. Primarily because I refuse to allow the goings on in Indianapolis to have an impact on my heart and life.

Interesting man, to say the least. May his family find peace.

CK, I don't mean to say you're stupid or anything, but you'd be hard pressed, after scouring the country or the world, to find a million people who remember ever HEARING of TWI, much less getting blessed by it. Let's be clear: it's a ....ant wannabe religion that never, ever got the kind of traction it pretended to get. AND, let's not forget that the majority of people who ever got involved in TWI are now OUT, including (brace yourself) YOU! So if you really want to sing its praises, I'm sure you're still welcome at TWI. Don't let the abuse hit you on your way in. ck and twi. Perfect together.

The king and I Yul Brynner The Ten Commandments

Ah, thank you sir. yes.

To anyone who accepts and practices this doctrine: If you ever see me show up to church wearing a shirt, hat or a sign that says "Please take advantage of me: Abuse me at will," then and ONLY then should you feel free to subject me to one of your personal prophecies. Because Personal Prophecy, as explained repeatedly and CERTAINLY as practiced, is the most blatant invitation to personal abuse and manipulation I have ever seen. Already on this board I can document one time when an individual, referring to a prophecy he/she delivered, told someone else that they were arguing with God if they disagreed with him/her. The person who did this is someone I respect, and the conversation was none of my business so I didn't say anything. But how satisfying it must be to have a disagreement with someone and be able to say, "well, you're not disagreeing with me: you're disagreeing with the God who showed me that vision of you." That's not dialogue: it's a dissent squelcher. Personal prophecy has NO WHERE TO GO BUT DOWN. It's vain imagination plus flashy title.

Considering the dishonesty with which their doctrine was practiced and accepted, I ain't ordering this book or anything else from CES for a good long time. I've seen the fruit: I ain't buying the seeds.

Guys, haven't you learned by now, until the future, there's only one way to handle a ck post: Wipe and Flush. In the future, we'll have three seashells, but for now, wiping and flushing will have to do.

I only have one thing to say to all this: If any self-appointed CES/STFI prophet tries to interfere in my marriage or engagement, they can kiss my disenchanted ...

Not to malign CES as a cult, but you do not need a charismatic leader to have a cult. Most JW's would be hard pressed to name their "leader."

Very funny. :) Anyway, no guesses on my movie? It's an easy one, I think.

Lotsa spoilers in this thread, but really, if you're worried about spoilers in a 26-year-old movie, I don't know that I can help you all that much. ;) If you don't know the back story, here it is. Superman and Superman II were supposed to be filmed back-to-back, the way Lord of the Rings was done. But the original director was fired before everything was done, and the new director changed some things around for part 1 and, with more impact, for part 2. This movie, now available on DVD, attempts to give the "vision" of the original director for Superman II. If I had known this would have been the end result, I would have barged into the Warner Brothers offices and cried out, with passion, NO! DON'T DO IT! THE PEOPLE! This movie is a mess. I'm not even talking about the worst of the worst scenes (the confrontation between Lois and Clark at the honeymoon suite is taken from two different screen tests, with Christopher Reeve looking dramatically different from shot to shot. The result is nothing short of jarring, even if you're willing to forgive the fact that they never got around to shooting the scene with high production value). The real travesty in this edition is the fact that for some reason (arrogance? stupidity?), Richard Donner felt he had to fix things that weren't broken. Result? Punch lines with no set up. For example, Clark promises to get Lois orange juice, "freshly squeezed." But the previous scene, in which Lois explains her newfound obsession with orange juice, is not in this edition. So there's no gag in the "freshly squeezed" line. And the Lois/Superman romance is gone. I'm not saying the fact that they are in love is gone. I'm saying the chemistry has simply vanished. There's a poignant moment in the original where Lois says she's in love with him, and he responds, "We'd really better talk." Gone. The fact that these two are ridiculously in love with each other is not apparent until he's with her in the fortress of solitude. And what's a woman to say when Superman comes onto her at his home in the north pole? Looked like a classic case of date rape to me. Which brings us to our villains. Most of their work is the same (though there's a MUCH cooler explanation about how they broke free from the Phantom Zone). The beginning of their terrorism at the small town of East Houston, Idaho is not shown. I'm going to say that again: They don't show the scene where they first get into fights with locals in town. No arm wrestling sequence. No tossing someone out the front window. No shot of Non trying to figure out how heat vision works. You DO get the scene where Non figures OUT heat vision and uses it successfully. He's got the same smirk on his face, the one that says "look what I did!" But, like the freshly queezed orange juice scene, it's got no setup. Dumb. Simply dumb. And someone, I don't know who, turned the volume on the music down real, real low. This is most evident in the scene where Superman makes his triumphant return. Well, it seemed triumphant in 1980. This time around, it just seems matter of fact. Hey, look, he's back. And why, dear God, why did they ruin (that is, omit), one of the best lines in the movie? "General, would you care to step outside?" Gone. The. Line. Is. Gone. Unforgivable. Replaced with, "General, haven't you ever heard of freedom of the press?" Not a bad line, but really, the 1980 line is so much better because it's a real, honest to God, let's throw hands NOW challenge! Now, how does Superman get Lois to forget who he is? Simple: he presses the rewind button and takes us back to the beginning of the movie. Dear God, I'm not kidding. He turns back the clock. Never mind that the events of the movie are about to happen again (perhaps now according to the original film's superior execution). For curiosity's sake, this is an interesting movie to have. But the original release is the better one. At least in that one, unlike the Donner cut, Lois and Superman will always have Paris.

I'll have to figure out what to do with my websites. In the meantime, I'll put a placeholder pic up.

I'm one of the few people who did not hate Rocky 5. I mean, it was not a great movie by any stretch, but it was watchable and a lot more true to 1 and 2 than the fourth one was. Rocky 4 was a cartoon. I like the third one, too. Haven't seen this last one yet, but I will...

CK, What you have is not commitment or even something as gentle as a closed mind. You have a seared conscience, one that does not know love, God or Christ. On top of that, you have written by far some of the dumbest posts on this message board. Since you will not listen to reason or reproof, the best any honest Christian can do with you is shake your grimy, muddy crap off their shoes and walk away from you. May the power of God in Christ someday break through to your closed, dank and demonic heart. The only thing you have in common with Christ is the letter C in your name.

Mike knows that I have little to no respect for him, that I think he espouses a dangerous and hateful doctrine. I say that because I would rather spend a year with no one to talk to but Mike than spend a few minutes having to deal with ck. Of course, if I ever have a choice like the one outlined above... put the bullet... right here ---> :blink: