Raf

I ended up posting the 5000th on the THE thread.

Actually, I planned it this way. Strange just caught me in the act. :)-->

My 5,000th post on GSCAFE!

4,999....

4,998

4,997

Okay, here goes.... 4,996

Mike: "PFAL is God-breathed." VPW: "No it's not." Mike: "God oversaw the editing process." Editors: "No, He didn't." Mike: "PFAL says it's God-breathed." PFAL: "No, I don't." What's it gonna take?

Steve! I'm going to take a chance here and guess that with Teen Wolf, you've managed to stump us. I think we need some kind of sequel rule (linking from Back to the Future II to Back to the Future I is hardly difficult). So let's say this (and if you disagree, let me know): you can only link to a sequel or prequel if the actor you're linking to is unique to that sequel. Examples: Linking from Back to the Future II to back to the future I is okay if you're moving to the "original" Jennifer or Crispin Glover, who is not in part II or III (not counting recycled footage), but it's not okay for any of the principals in the cast (because Marty, Doc, Lorraine, Biff and Strickland are in all three movies). Linking from the Godfather to Godfather II is okay to get to Robert DeNiro, but not to get from Al Pacino to Diane Keaton. Likewise, you can go to Part III to get to Andy Garcia, but not Talia Shire. Is that okay? And since Teen Wolf (more than likely) has us stumped, Steve!, can you restart from Christopher Lloyd? if anyone objects to this rule suggestion, say the word and I'll delete it.

David, A couple of things here. First: the fact that you're willing to put your name behind your testimony, as opposed to a handle like "bluzeman" or "zixar" is unimpressive and proves nothing. Second: Lawyers like eyewitness testimony in some regards because it is unreliable and can veer a jury away from the provable facts of a case. I covered a trial involving two vehicles, one of which was going in the wrong direction on the highway. Accident reconstruction experts established beyond any shadow of a doubt which car was going the wrong way, but the eyewitness testimony was conflicting (some agreed with the experts; some did not). The jury acquitted the guy who was going the wrong way because the eyewitnesses did not agree (never mind that it was scientifically impossible for the defendant to be innocent: God bless the eyewitnesses)! All of which is designed to say this: Penta Water is bunk. It doesn't work because it can't work. The science you've quoted to us is flawed, and dispassionate people who've looked at this all come out saying the same thing: it's bunk. The only people saying otherwise are the people selling it and the people who desperately want to believe it. Your appeals to scripture are irrelevant. I can get 5,000 people to swear on a stack of Bibles that they saw David Copperfield turn a monkey into a swatch. All it means is they all saw the same illusion: it doesn't make the illusion real. My name is Rafael Olmeda. And Penta Water is bunk.

JFK Kevin Bacon tee hee hee Hollow Man

Mike: "PFAL is God-breathed." Wierwille: "No, it's not." Who you gonna believe?

AWESOME!

Psycho Anne Heche Volcano

skyrider: by searching Wierwille's works, Mike thinks he IS searching the scriptures. I cannot think of a bigger waste of time than ferreting out the uses of exception and distinction in the works of VPW to determine why he made what any third grader can tell you was a stupid mistake. Correction: I CAN think of a bigger waste of time than ferreting out the uses of exception and distinction in the works of VPW to determine why he made what any third grader can tell you was a stupid mistake. A bigger waste of time than ferreting out the uses of exception and distinction in the works of VPW to determine why he made what any third grader can tell you was a stupid mistake would be convincing Mike that there's no bigger waste of time than ferreting out the uses of exception and distinction in the works of VPW to determine why he made what any third grader can tell you was a stupid mistake.

Bullinger was more clear than Wierwille on the topic, but it really was much ado about nothing. I received my copy of PFAL after Wierwille died, and it still had "all without distinction." I cannot speak for later editions. JCING has "all with a distinction." SINCE Wierwille did not consider his works God-breathed, it was never an issue, and "you know what I meant" is a perfectly satisfying answer to me.

Mannn, this is gonna be GOOD!

Just a note: I looked up cessationism and realized that, although I personally prefer the term, it is incorrect for this discussion. Annihilationist is the correct term. A cessationist believes the "gifts of the spirit" (or manifestations: let's not get into that here) ceased with the first century. An annihilationist believes that hell is not literal.

The Gathering Together. Oops, I meant... The Rapture David Duchovny Evolution

Babylon Mystery Religion, by Ralph Woodrow. Retracted in "The Babylon Connection?" (the ? is part of the title. I'm not asking).

Is that right? Hmph. I'll have to give those tapes another listen. Or i could just discard them entirely. :)--> My name is Rafael Olmeda And Penta Water is bunk.

Harvey Keitel Red Dragon Ralph Fiennes

Ever come across an interesting tidbit of info that you just KNOW would surprise the bejeezus out of people? The lady who played the Irish woman on Titanic, the one who puts her kids to bed while the ship is sinking, is the same lady who played the tougher-than-tough Vasquez in Aliens. I'll bet you didn't know that. What do you know?

Oh yeah? Well, what's his name?