Raf

Tim Robbins

Mystic River

Sean Penn

(I was going to be mean and put Emily Rossum, but naaaah).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle:

Indeed it was! Who were they? Why did they go to five and then why back to 3?

---

Are you asking? Or is that rhetorical.

Chris Geer had two more trustees installed after POP: Johnny Townsend and Ricardo Caballero. They both got kicked out in the 1989 purge.

To the best of my knowledge, Townsend remained a Geer loyalist. I have no idea what happened to Caballero, or if my info on Townsend is still valid (it was 10 years ago).

Don Ameche

Cocoon

Jessica Tandy

Jude Law is in The Aviator. He plays Errol Flynn.

He was also in...

every other movie released in 2004? It seems that way.

Sky Captain

Alfie

Closer

You might remember him from A.I.

My Real Name is Rafael Olmeda.

Penta Water is bunk.

Thank you.

Ony when we're out to make a splash, Siree.

Precisely. And I would go:

Never Say Never Again

Kim Basinger

L.A. Confidential

next...

I think your joke was closer to the truth than your serious comment, unfortunately.

This was not "another viewpoint" on the topic: it was the viewpoint he accepted and propounded as truth.

Part of the premise of the 13th Tribe is that many modern Jews are not the descendants of the ancient Jews but descendants of a Russian tribe known as the Khazars. Everything you need to know about Wierwille's take on this book can be found in the appendix "Jew and Judaean" in Jesus Christ Our Passover.

DNA testing has proven Koestler's thesis false.

This could be fun...

Some folks were playing this on another message board (not mine) and apparently having a blast. Here's how it works. I name an actor or actress in a movie. Then I name the movie. Then I name ANOTHER actor or actress in that same movie. Theatrical movies only: no TV movies please. This rule added after p.12

The next poster has to name another movie that the second actor was in, another actor in THAT movie, and then another movie the actor was in.

No cheating: rely on your memory.

Please put your entries in bold so we can see them...

It's easier than it sounds. I'll do the first two rounds, so you see the pattern. You pick it up from there:

Michael Keaton

Batman Returns

Michelle Pfeiffer

Tequila Sunrise

Raul Julia

Presumed Innocent

Next round...

Appreciate the assist.

quote:

---

so don't hold me to accuracy.

---

The only piece of advice from Mike you can take to the bank.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

I'm talking about God telling US the answer to your question of "...who's to say?"

---

I know what you meant, Mike.

Here's the thing: where Bullinger disagrees with Wierwille, I go to the Bible to determine who's right. The tattered remnants you so belittle, remember? Why? Because both Bullinger and Wierwille recognize the Bible as authoritative over their own works, whereas you don't.

Yeah, I know all your comebacks. Save them for someone who gives a flying fig.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

Raf wrote: "Interpretational. Who's to say either was right?"

Answer: God can say. But theology doesn't accept revelation... I guess?

---

VPW is not God. Nor were his works authored by God. Stop using circular reasoning.

Interpretational. Who's to say either was right?

I just love the white stuff. I like to take my shoes off and wiggle my toes, or just lie back and enjoy it...

We are talking about sand, aren't we?

Liar, again.

My whole approach insists that if it is true it will follow its own proofs that it is what you claim it to be. SINCE it does not, I reject your thesis. If you were honest, you would too. But something happened in your head that led you away from God to worshipping the brass serpent. It's a crying shame. You're missing out on so much by focusing on a broken cistern.

Keep drinking your formula. Someday you'll grow up.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

I didn't write the book!

---

You and God have one thing in common, then.

quote:

---

If I wrote PFAL then I'd see your point and back off. But I didn't "come up" with PFAL. I simply recognized it as bigger than me, so I embraced it.

---

And that, sir, makes you...

Oh forget it already.

Your postulate has been demonstrated false so many times it's not even funny. Your refusal to admit it just makes this frustrating or amusing, depending on my mood during a particular day.

MY ego? You've got to be kidding.

quote:

---

If it is NOT God-breathed then I'm in a pickle.

---

SINCE it is not God-breathed, then you are in a pickle. Wierwille was a liar (on this point), and you are a sycophantic apologist without the personal integrity to see it.

quote:

---

I think it's anal retentive to insist on citations, and chucking the whole thing if they are missing.

---

More straw man nonsense. No matter how many times we say plagiarism doesn't affect the content, Mike comes back with this mischaracterization.

So, you think it's anal retentive to insist on citations? Tough noogies. Your idol was the "Dr." with the "PhD" who started a "research" ministry.

Steve!

Did the postcard arrive? I swear they were both mailed weeks ago.

Well said, Frankee. I believe you speak for more people than you realize.

quote:

---

Originally posted by What The Hay:

Why do we care? That already been answered on the other thread.

---

It's a question of integrity, WTH.

You see, if Wierwille's work was God-breathed, then stealing from the not-God-breathed works of men would be unnecessary. You and Mike are dancing with the devil on any front possible to deny that what Wierwille did was plagiarism, or stealing, and that is your right. But to those of us who care about integrity, Wierwille's plagiarism is proof positive that the work is not of the God-breathed nature that Mike claims. Doesn't mean the content is to be discarded or dismissed, but it reveals PFAL as the work of man, not the Word of God.

In a similar vein, the existence of actual errors proves not that PFAL is a worthless piece of junk (I've never said that) but only that it's not God-breathed (according to PFAL's own standard of the characteristics of the God-breathed Word).

There is a valid question of "so what" associated with the plagiarism charge. If you don't care about the man, only about that which is taught, the fact of Wierwille's plagiarism need not bother you (just as the fact of plagiarism in the novel Roots doesn't take away from the fact that it's a well-told tale).

What I find amusing is the lengths to which people will go to deny that plagiarism is, in truth, what has taken place here. You could just as easily say "I don't care" and there would be nothing left to argue about, imo.