Are we over analyzing this, should we just Preach Christ and then every thing else should fall into place? If the person is sincere or not, but he is teaching Christ should we be satisfied with that?
maybe so...but maybe we should also first ask if "Christ is being preached" in the first place
Interesting post in response to mine. I disagree with some of your conclusions, though. The verse I made reference to is a plainly obvious "do as they say, not as they do" statement. It makes no sense the other way. The word "but" is in the text, and it's fairly plain that it is setting what they say in contrast with what they do. It's also fairly clear that he's telling his followers to be critical of the scribes and Pharisees, and not to accept anything they say just because they are the ones to say it.
I find it interesting that in 23:3, he says to observe and do "all" that they teach, then makes it pretty clear that "all" they teach is not good. I think (that's right, TWI, I THINK!!!!) "all" is an example of hyperbole, and what he's really getting at is telling his listeners to be critical thinkers when it comes to what is taught by the scribes and Pharisees.
None of this has any bearing on what I think of VPW's character and his integrity as a leader. I will not accept anything just because he taught it. I will not reject anything just because he taught it. In fact, he's not a reference point for me at all in terms of what to believe and what not to believe.
But I'm cool disagreeing on any of this with anyone here.
I don't believe I said that at all JB I said only Truth is Truth and morals of the speaker does not change it. I did not absolve the immoral behavior you made a large leap to that conclusion a wrong one! People can claim anything they want to, it's a free world. If it is true is another issue. NOT one in the same!
That said things that are true do not somehow become untrue based on who says them .That is ludicrous!! Do you really want us to believe that you accept the idea that a truth has the ability to discern what type of person is speaking and then changes accordingly to that .. Pleeeeze.......
I'll say it again 1+1=2 that's truth if a priest or Charlie Manson says it -it is still true. This is not a hard concept to grasp.
And again I say you're missing the point. You keep referring to 1+1=2. That's a mathematical fact, not a truth. One ot the things VP taught you is that there is a difference between facts and truth. That's one of the things I think he got right, but his and our application of it was very screwy.
Facts are hard, empirical pieces of information related to the physical realm. Truth is accurate information relating to the spiritual realm. Truth doesn't always fit the same patterns of logic that facts do. One can know the facts but not be able lto discern the truth behind them. I'll give you an example. The Bible says that Jesus Christ prophesied that the High Priest would witness Jesus' return in glory. It is a historical fact that this did not happen. Are we to conclude that Jesus was a false prophet, a charlatain, a fraud? Based solely on this verse (and some others in the same vein) one might be lead to conlude, based on logic, that Jesus was a false prophet. Is this the TRUTH? Of course not. But I could make a case for it from the Scripture if I really wanted to.
Likewise there are Scriptures that clearly indicate that eternal life is by grace alone, not by works. There are other Scriptures, sometimes in the very same epistles, that indicate that eternal life is by works and faithfulness. Equally capable devout Christians can't agree on which is which. If we take a 1+1=2 approach to the Bible, solving these questions is hopeless because we are approaching the spiritual realm with a carnal mindset. Quite frankly, I don't believe God wants us to be able to figure out what the truth is by reading and thinking. Where's the love, the compassion, the mercy, in that?
You say truth is truth no matter who says it. Technically I agree. But the issue is, if a man's life is not in harmony with Jesus Christ who is truth, does he have any chance of knowing what the truth is, and can he be trusted to lead others to it. I don't think so. He can get them started in the most rudimentary levels, which PFAL did, but eventually we have to leave what we think we know behind and begin to learn with our hearts, not with our heads. That's where PFAL becomes a truly empty, broken cistern.
Raf said:
If you knew my sins, you wouldn't trust what I have to say either.
This is most subtle and devilish, remember the statement "the trick isn't getting someone to accept the counterfeit as real, its getting them to accept the real as counterfeit. That was the goal of TWI, not to teach any thing really "New" but to undermine the "Old" in such a way that it's injunctions and precepts could be ignored.
Hence the plagiarism etc -worked just great for that purpose--since construction of new was not the goal but deconstruction of the old.
Hmmmmm. That requires some serious consideration Mo. It brings to mind a disturbing verse from II Peter chapter two. verse 2 actually.
And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
I believe II Peter chapter two is not referring to "seed boys" as LDM taught, but to the judgment of corrupt ministers. One of the reasons for this judgment is given at the outset, in verse two. The caused the way of truth to be evil spoken of. Maureen says the Devil's goal is to make the genuine appear to be a counterfeit. I think she is referring to genuine Christian virtues like humility (Way clergymen are anything but), sobriety (Drambui anyone?) and chastity (nuff said).
We've noted many times how mainstream churches and ministers are rididuled by TWI folk. VP laid the foundation for that in the foundational class. In at least one instance I've seen, he went out of his way, ignoring context to do so. Perhaps the "way of truth" that The Way caused to be evil spoken of--at least among us Weirwillites-- was the truth that it is more important to have an honest and humble relationship with the Lord than it is to know about figures of speech and Orientalisms.
I'm not saying that's the whole answer, but I think Maureen's comment bears consideration.
You say truth is truth no matter who says it. Technically I agree. But the issue is, if a man's life is not in harmony with Jesus Christ who is truth, does he have any chance of knowing what the truth is, and can he be trusted to lead others to it. I don't think so. ...
I agree.
And it is for this very reason why I believe Dr. Wierwille's life was in harmony with God and Jesus Christ, when he was in harmony with them.
When he wasn't, he wasn't.
When King Solomon was in harmony with God, he was blessed and produced tremendous revelation from God.
When his life was out of harmony, he was disfavored and produced the most flagrant transgressions imaginable.
When King Solomon was in harmony with God, he was blessed and produced tremendous revelation from God.
When his life was out of harmony, he was disfavored and produced the most flagrant transgressions imaginable.
hmm there's more to that story then meets the eye
then what we were taught in twi
just what did God mean
Deuteronomy 17:14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. 16But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 18And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: 19And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.
And it is for this very reason why I believe Dr. Wierwille's life was in harmony with God and Jesus Christ, when he was in harmony with them.
When he wasn't, he wasn't.
When King Solomon was in harmony with God, he was blessed and produced tremendous revelation from God.
When his life was out of harmony, he was disfavored and produced the most flagrant transgressions imaginable.
Let me be sure I understand what you are saying OM,
The things in PFAL that were beneficial and true, were on those occasions when VPW actually was "following Christ"
When things got distorted, changed etc that was when he chose not to "follow Christ"
So IF this is actually what you are saying, would it not be possible, ascertaining how often what was taught was in error, to ascertain how often VPW was "out of fellowship"
In my opinion, this is getting very confusing – trying to determine the validity of PFAL by math analogies or "backward engineering" the content of the class by analyzing his behavior behind closed Motor Coach Doors [for fear of the news]. I think it's a lot easier to analyze the class content all by itself.
The way I see it [in other words my stupid opinion] there's a bunch of truth and error in PFAL and it sometimes takes a serious effort by way of critical thinking to distinguish the two. To say "truth is still truth no matter who speaks it" or the math analogy "2 + 2 = 4" is to make a gross assumption. I mentioned this in an earlier post – PFAL is a patchwork of various theological systems and that the class isn't just straight Bible – VPW quotes parts of it and then makes comments.
If I were to use the math analogy I would liken the class to a physicist presenting a thesis. He would present mathematical equations [truth] along with his theories, findings, conclusions, etc. Someone good at math could check the physicist's math…In regards to doctrinal error in the class – we need to check the verses [truth] that he refers to in proving his argument – and look at them for ourselves – and ask questions to analyze his theories, conclusions, etc. For instance – just because VPW shows a bunch of verses to suggest there exists a "Law of Believing" – does that make it so? What are the implications of this idea?...I venture to say –I don't think PFAL would stand up to very close scrutiny by any serious Bible student.
i think that because pfal has its own sort of structure
its gives the impression of soundness
which impresses people who are in need of sound, simple concepts
but this soundness only stands up when it is not compared to concepts outside of itself
just as a well thought out fiction world will be a good story to the degree that it doesnt break its own rules
Well said Todd. That's exactly why PFAL seems to be such a great Bible class, but is, in fact, full of error. It is its own system. When you examine it by itself, it looks wonderful. But when you compare it with the Bible in in amore comprehensive examination, it becomes obvious that the class is not what it claims to be. The problem with grads continuing to run the class for each other and for new people is, that comparison doesn't get done and the discrepancies between the PFAL system and the Bible never become apparent.
Let me be sure I understand what you are saying OM,
The things in PFAL that were beneficial and true, were on those occasions when VPW actually was "following Christ"
When things got distorted, changed etc that was when he chose not to "follow Christ"
So IF this is actually what you are saying, would it not be possible, ascertaining how often what was taught was in error, to ascertain how often VPW was "out of fellowship"
Just curious what that would show
Not sure Mo, I doubt anyone could be that exact.
I was just using some reverse logic from J. Barrax's post.
The impression I got from his post, was that because of Dr. Wierwille's sins, he could not know the truth, and/or be trusted to teach others with it.
But I believe the reverse.
I believe Dr. Wierwlle knew the truth and was trusted to teach it, which also leads me to believe he was in fellowship with God and Christ and had a connection with them to do that .... multiple sins during his life, notwithstanding.
To get to that belief, I look at the blessings received in twi, believe they were genuinely from God, and believe God thru his grace and mercy worked with folks like Wierwille to get people the truth.
I'm not saying everything he taught was truth, but lots of it was.
Also...following on from the statement that pfal had its' own system etc.. that would be true of just about ANY of the churches or religions that are attended by, say for example, some of the GS posters.
I think of say, the Catholic, Mormon, heck even the Baptists, Lutherans etc..
They all have their own 'systematic' way of thinking the way they do and yep..they all think 'their' system is true, I mean, can Mark O' say that there are no glaring errors in the Catholic teachings ? Can Mo come out and say that the book of Mormon is not 'infallible'.
I mean, like, VP's statement of 'snow on the gas pumps', is that any better or worse than saying an angel appeared and showed you where some 18 ct Gold tablets containing 'new revelation' is buried and then goes and hides them again ??!! Is the statement that the pope is the link between God and mankind true ??!!
Just about all religions, churches have their own 'systematic' beliefs and way of thinking.
I am comfortable with my belief system and I dont mind 'dumping' on other beliefs, which I think if gs'ers were honest, they would admit to as well; heck, thats what Greasespots about isn't it ??!!
p.s. I've started back at the gym and have felt an almost immediate increase of energy, (I'd forgotten what it feels like to be fit !) I'd like to encourage fellow gs'ers to think about exercising some..coffee and donuts in 'moderation' ay !!
The deceptions and errors of some religions ( Catholic, Mormon, Baptist, etc) do not justify those of others (TWI/Offshoots). For example: The Catholic error of papal infallibility does not make the snow appear on Wierwille's gas pumps.
However, it certainly is an interesting concept to be comfortable supporting lies and error because we believe others do the same.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
16
16
32
Popular Days
Mar 24
58
Mar 23
35
Mar 26
33
Mar 25
23
Top Posters In This Topic
Tom 19 posts
Belle 16 posts
CoolWaters 16 posts
WhiteDove 32 posts
Popular Days
Mar 24 2006
58 posts
Mar 23 2006
35 posts
Mar 26 2006
33 posts
Mar 25 2006
23 posts
rascal
I dunno Free Lady...how does the explicit condemnation of false prophets and wolves in sheeps clothing figure into that scenario?
I didn`t see anybody praising them in the scriptures :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
maybe so...but maybe we should also first ask if "Christ is being preached" in the first place
i mean....how can we even know?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Mr. Heller,
Interesting post in response to mine. I disagree with some of your conclusions, though. The verse I made reference to is a plainly obvious "do as they say, not as they do" statement. It makes no sense the other way. The word "but" is in the text, and it's fairly plain that it is setting what they say in contrast with what they do. It's also fairly clear that he's telling his followers to be critical of the scribes and Pharisees, and not to accept anything they say just because they are the ones to say it.
I find it interesting that in 23:3, he says to observe and do "all" that they teach, then makes it pretty clear that "all" they teach is not good. I think (that's right, TWI, I THINK!!!!) "all" is an example of hyperbole, and what he's really getting at is telling his listeners to be critical thinkers when it comes to what is taught by the scribes and Pharisees.
None of this has any bearing on what I think of VPW's character and his integrity as a leader. I will not accept anything just because he taught it. I will not reject anything just because he taught it. In fact, he's not a reference point for me at all in terms of what to believe and what not to believe.
But I'm cool disagreeing on any of this with anyone here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
And again I say you're missing the point. You keep referring to 1+1=2. That's a mathematical fact, not a truth. One ot the things VP taught you is that there is a difference between facts and truth. That's one of the things I think he got right, but his and our application of it was very screwy.
Facts are hard, empirical pieces of information related to the physical realm. Truth is accurate information relating to the spiritual realm. Truth doesn't always fit the same patterns of logic that facts do. One can know the facts but not be able lto discern the truth behind them. I'll give you an example. The Bible says that Jesus Christ prophesied that the High Priest would witness Jesus' return in glory. It is a historical fact that this did not happen. Are we to conclude that Jesus was a false prophet, a charlatain, a fraud? Based solely on this verse (and some others in the same vein) one might be lead to conlude, based on logic, that Jesus was a false prophet. Is this the TRUTH? Of course not. But I could make a case for it from the Scripture if I really wanted to.
Likewise there are Scriptures that clearly indicate that eternal life is by grace alone, not by works. There are other Scriptures, sometimes in the very same epistles, that indicate that eternal life is by works and faithfulness. Equally capable devout Christians can't agree on which is which. If we take a 1+1=2 approach to the Bible, solving these questions is hopeless because we are approaching the spiritual realm with a carnal mindset. Quite frankly, I don't believe God wants us to be able to figure out what the truth is by reading and thinking. Where's the love, the compassion, the mercy, in that?
You say truth is truth no matter who says it. Technically I agree. But the issue is, if a man's life is not in harmony with Jesus Christ who is truth, does he have any chance of knowing what the truth is, and can he be trusted to lead others to it. I don't think so. He can get them started in the most rudimentary levels, which PFAL did, but eventually we have to leave what we think we know behind and begin to learn with our hearts, not with our heads. That's where PFAL becomes a truly empty, broken cistern.
DITTO. :-)
peace
JerryB
Edited by JbarraxLink to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
1+1=2.
Except when 1+1=3 or more.
Think about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
Hi EVAN!!
So nice to see you here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
Hmmmmm. That requires some serious consideration Mo. It brings to mind a disturbing verse from II Peter chapter two. verse 2 actually.
I believe II Peter chapter two is not referring to "seed boys" as LDM taught, but to the judgment of corrupt ministers. One of the reasons for this judgment is given at the outset, in verse two. The caused the way of truth to be evil spoken of. Maureen says the Devil's goal is to make the genuine appear to be a counterfeit. I think she is referring to genuine Christian virtues like humility (Way clergymen are anything but), sobriety (Drambui anyone?) and chastity (nuff said).
We've noted many times how mainstream churches and ministers are rididuled by TWI folk. VP laid the foundation for that in the foundational class. In at least one instance I've seen, he went out of his way, ignoring context to do so. Perhaps the "way of truth" that The Way caused to be evil spoken of--at least among us Weirwillites-- was the truth that it is more important to have an honest and humble relationship with the Lord than it is to know about figures of speech and Orientalisms.
I'm not saying that's the whole answer, but I think Maureen's comment bears consideration.
Thanks Mo
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
You're welcome Jerry
I learned several things in TWI
but this has to have had the most practical long term benefit in my life on a physical as well as a spiritual plane
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Or when 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
You all, of course, understand that under the right circumstances, 2+2 can equal 0, right?
When? If you are using binary addition with a two bit register.
and of course with the same logic, 2+3 can equal 1...
Sorry
my geek was showing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Galen! :D
Mark! :D
Gotta love you guys!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
"The value of the counterfeit is increased by its likeness to the original"
"They (false ministers) give you just enough truth to get your trust and then they proceed to corrupt and destroy you with their lies."
These are things I remember from DTA. Sounds like we were being warned by vee pee that that's what he was doing.... <_<
When I looked back at all they taught us about false ministers and "seed boys" it seems that those teachings are describing vee pee and lcm to a "t".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
good shot at it sirg, it will be heard in due time
while some think that truth is some sort of unmoveable state of mind
or an end in itself and thus saith the lord-stop thinking now
and like a stop sign saying aawww i found it-
i think there was a bumper sticker with that on it "i found it"
but in a different sense of the word truth
it would be more like a barrier being blown down
to see what actually is and is truth
and then still that would make you search
for other barriers that have stopped one from learning
cause really how big is it and how far can the truth be seen
shoot i can read the owners manual of my truck and see truth in it
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I agree.
And it is for this very reason why I believe Dr. Wierwille's life was in harmony with God and Jesus Christ, when he was in harmony with them.
When he wasn't, he wasn't.
When King Solomon was in harmony with God, he was blessed and produced tremendous revelation from God.
When his life was out of harmony, he was disfavored and produced the most flagrant transgressions imaginable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
hmm there's more to that story then meets the eye
then what we were taught in twi
just what did God mean
Deuteronomy 17:14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. 16But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 18And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: 19And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Let me be sure I understand what you are saying OM,
The things in PFAL that were beneficial and true, were on those occasions when VPW actually was "following Christ"
When things got distorted, changed etc that was when he chose not to "follow Christ"
So IF this is actually what you are saying, would it not be possible, ascertaining how often what was taught was in error, to ascertain how often VPW was "out of fellowship"
Just curious what that would show
Edited by templeladyLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
In my opinion, this is getting very confusing – trying to determine the validity of PFAL by math analogies or "backward engineering" the content of the class by analyzing his behavior behind closed Motor Coach Doors [for fear of the news]. I think it's a lot easier to analyze the class content all by itself.
The way I see it [in other words my stupid opinion] there's a bunch of truth and error in PFAL and it sometimes takes a serious effort by way of critical thinking to distinguish the two. To say "truth is still truth no matter who speaks it" or the math analogy "2 + 2 = 4" is to make a gross assumption. I mentioned this in an earlier post – PFAL is a patchwork of various theological systems and that the class isn't just straight Bible – VPW quotes parts of it and then makes comments.
If I were to use the math analogy I would liken the class to a physicist presenting a thesis. He would present mathematical equations [truth] along with his theories, findings, conclusions, etc. Someone good at math could check the physicist's math…In regards to doctrinal error in the class – we need to check the verses [truth] that he refers to in proving his argument – and look at them for ourselves – and ask questions to analyze his theories, conclusions, etc. For instance – just because VPW shows a bunch of verses to suggest there exists a "Law of Believing" – does that make it so? What are the implications of this idea?...I venture to say – I don't think PFAL would stand up to very close scrutiny by any serious Bible student.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i think that because pfal has its own sort of structure
its gives the impression of soundness
which impresses people who are in need of sound, simple concepts
but this soundness only stands up when it is not compared to concepts outside of itself
just as a well thought out fiction world will be a good story to the degree that it doesnt break its own rules
also, concepts are never the same as the territory they describe
and until we can get off our arse and get beyond mere conceptualizations of God
we are subservient to our own minds and thoughts
in an a$$backwards reality
men, mostly, have this problem, it seems
stuck in our head as if it matters more than the actual felt realities of the world
and pfal had us more focused on the past (fall of man) and future (gathering together) than the present moment
which is where God lives, imo
yep. because the intent and awareness of the one doing the speaking, changes everything about what is said
if i say "God is love," or you say "God is love," or he or she says "God is love"
well...there can be 3 or 4 different truths going on behind the same wording
and more questions need to be asked of the speaker's intended meanings
(if the speakers can even handle people asking them questions)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
Well said Todd. That's exactly why PFAL seems to be such a great Bible class, but is, in fact, full of error. It is its own system. When you examine it by itself, it looks wonderful. But when you compare it with the Bible in in amore comprehensive examination, it becomes obvious that the class is not what it claims to be. The problem with grads continuing to run the class for each other and for new people is, that comparison doesn't get done and the discrepancies between the PFAL system and the Bible never become apparent.
Peace
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Not sure Mo, I doubt anyone could be that exact.
I was just using some reverse logic from J. Barrax's post.
The impression I got from his post, was that because of Dr. Wierwille's sins, he could not know the truth, and/or be trusted to teach others with it.
But I believe the reverse.
I believe Dr. Wierwlle knew the truth and was trusted to teach it, which also leads me to believe he was in fellowship with God and Christ and had a connection with them to do that .... multiple sins during his life, notwithstanding.
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
To get to that belief, I look at the blessings received in twi, believe they were genuinely from God, and believe God thru his grace and mercy worked with folks like Wierwille to get people the truth.
I'm not saying everything he taught was truth, but lots of it was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Also...following on from the statement that pfal had its' own system etc.. that would be true of just about ANY of the churches or religions that are attended by, say for example, some of the GS posters.
I think of say, the Catholic, Mormon, heck even the Baptists, Lutherans etc..
They all have their own 'systematic' way of thinking the way they do and yep..they all think 'their' system is true, I mean, can Mark O' say that there are no glaring errors in the Catholic teachings ? Can Mo come out and say that the book of Mormon is not 'infallible'.
I mean, like, VP's statement of 'snow on the gas pumps', is that any better or worse than saying an angel appeared and showed you where some 18 ct Gold tablets containing 'new revelation' is buried and then goes and hides them again ??!! Is the statement that the pope is the link between God and mankind true ??!!
Just about all religions, churches have their own 'systematic' beliefs and way of thinking.
I am comfortable with my belief system and I dont mind 'dumping' on other beliefs, which I think if gs'ers were honest, they would admit to as well; heck, thats what Greasespots about isn't it ??!!
p.s. I've started back at the gym and have felt an almost immediate increase of energy, (I'd forgotten what it feels like to be fit !) I'd like to encourage fellow gs'ers to think about exercising some..coffee and donuts in 'moderation' ay !!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
The deceptions and errors of some religions ( Catholic, Mormon, Baptist, etc) do not justify those of others (TWI/Offshoots). For example: The Catholic error of papal infallibility does not make the snow appear on Wierwille's gas pumps.
However, it certainly is an interesting concept to be comfortable supporting lies and error because we believe others do the same.
Glad you are comfortable Alan.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Goey,
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.