Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Ron the Cheshire Cat


Alas, the Work of the LORD has been thwarted. His Messenger, Ronald Weinland, is finally fading - like the proverbial smile on the Cheshire Cat - from public interest. Ron's website has been overtaken in the Alexa ratings by the Good News website, and the popularity of his COG-PKG website is sinking rapidly.

How can this be, gentle reader? The Two Witnesses can't be allowed to flunk, can they?

Oh well, it was quite a buzz while it lasted Ron, and you and your lovely wife Laura have provided us all with a lot of laughs. Now that the curious onlookers are moving away, the core membe... suckership will also start shedding. Tithes will take a nosedive, the jet-setting lifestyle along with it.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

53 comments:

Anonymous said...

The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
--- Oscar Wilde

Dave Pack knows this. Lots of things directing traffic to his site, so he can claim 'downloads'.

Ron may take a little while to react, but I think he'll take Homer Simpson's advice:

I better do something or people'll think I'm stupid...

redfox712 said...

One can only hope that we will see Weinland disappear into obscurity.

Byker Bob said...

I think that the reason behind the Weinland phenomenon, as Gavin pointed out when Ron first burst on to the scene, was that Weinland was somewhat of a departure from the typical ACOG hedging of prophecy. He hung it all out there for everyone to see, and at least initially claimed that if the things he foretold did not happen on schedule, he would admit to having been a false prophet. In other words, unlike the others, he took personal responsibility for what he said.

I personally never gave him any credence, and was astonished at the size of the cottage industry, blogs and such, that emerged specifically to treat the Weinland phenomenon.

But, I can see where some might have considered this to be a final testing of the Armstrong prophecy scenarios, while others may have thought the man to be a tad dangerous. Bottom line is, we probably should have silk screened up some T-shirts and made a little money off of this thing ourselves.

I think that we'll probably see some additional desperate moves from the Armstrongite camp as time progresses. They've got to be getting just about desperate for their tribulation. This thing has long passed their worst case mathmatical calculations. Funny thing is, most of them feel that God can only work through them because of the sabbath. Up until now, that factor would seem to be about as effective as bad deodorant.

BB

Dill Weed said...

"the core membe... suckership will also start shedding. Tithes will take a nosedive, the jet-setting lifestyle along with it."


To Ron, of course, this will be a test of the membe... suckership by God. Humilty will undoudtedly have something to do with it - the lack of - as evidenced by questioning Ron.

Will Ron go thundering(ly) into oblivion? And how many will continue buying into his failed Witness-ship.

This has the potential to be very interesting. I can hardly wait to chronicle it all.

Dill Weed

Anonymous said...

Yes, ILFPRW is a laughing stock in COGdom. He's almost completely lost touch with any reality. It's sad to think that someone who is supposedly speaking on behalf of God could be so filled with hatred towards his neighbor.

"Ron, will you come on the Edge in December 2008 and explain why your prohecies have not been fulfilled?"

To which he answered: "Well, let's put it this way, if we come to a point in time where what I said doesn't take place, the reality is that I'm just a false prophet, because that's the bottom line, and that's it. Uh, there'd be no other answer. I [unintelligble] cannot say that. There would be absolutely no other answer. I know that other religious people do when they say a certain time, if you want to look at Ellen White, if you want to go back and look at different time, and different people in history, the people who made prophecies, religious people and so forth, and they haven't come to pass, well, they give all these reasons why, uh, it's gonna happen in five more years, we were, God's led us to understand that, and so they go on from one point to another point to another point until they die. The reality is if it doesn't happen, then you're just false. There's nothing else to say, what else could I say?"

Anonymous said...

"But, I can see where some might have considered this to be a final testing of the Armstrong prophecy scenarios"

I think you are correct. So many in in the splinters still think that Armstrong's interpretation of Bible prophecy to be the true gospel. (yes, it really is their gospel message).

I would say, however, that in reality, they go beyond just the sabbath as their calling card since many other groups also make claim to the sabbath (including the Jews). So, they must invent their own distinctives. Weinland came up with 50 of them. Flurry has his own interpretations, others as well. "Believe me because I have something that other COG groups don't have" is their only hope to grow membership and create loyalty.

The only thing that COG leaders can push for is physical success (i.e the building of auditoriums like HWA did) because what they build spiritually has no lasting importance for advancing the kingdom. Never has, never will.

Corky said...

Of course Ron Weinland's end time prophecy was destined to failure. It was doomed from the start, because those same prophecies are already 2,000 years past due.

There comes a time when even a thousand years being equal to one day to God is stretched too far.

All the writer of 2 Peter meant was that it looked as if the end was going to be a little longer than they had anticipated.

I saw that they had a program on TV last night about worldwide prophecies concerning December 21, 2012 being the end of the world.

Well, that's only 3 years away and not enough time to throw in a 3 1/2year great tribulation. Damn it! I hate it when that happens.

Anonymous said...

BB....They've got to be getting just about desperate for their tribulation....


COGUKs OUTREACH Newsletter (Jan/Feb):

End of the World?

The ‘prophets of doom’ are on the prowl! To my knowledge none of them have a perfect predictive track record, so the LORD said ‘don’t fear them’. (Deuteronomy 18:22). That’s what is required of a true prophet.

But that doesn’t mean one or more won’t at some time burst on the scene. God has set a time limit on human incompetence, and when it is expiring He will give plenty of warning—by the ‘signs of the times’ or by infallible prophets who exercise divine powers.

But is this ‘it’? The short answer: ‘...no-one knows’. For we have throughout the last two millennia been through similar times of ‘distress among nations’.

That awesome day will come—in God’s time and when mankind reaches the end of its tether, and can no longer sustain life (Matthew 24:4-13).

It is for each of us to watch, to be alert, to avoid complacency. And to be spiritually prepared.

Anonymous said...

How about his problems with the IRS?

VonHowitzer said...

BB:

It could be that Pack's followers are now living in their own self-inflicted tribulation, having sent their savings in at his call, perhaps even taking out loans for the furtherance of "the work".

Can't feel too good, sitting there in this world of economic hurt, saddled with extra obligations you may not be able to meet, and having no savings to help you through the hard times.

But then again, maybe Pack has a couple hundred bucks of third tithe assistance for the "faithless".

KMS

Anonymous said...

A small diversion.

John 21:3 "Peter said, I go a fishing".

He doubtless went Netting Yahu along with the other disciples,accompanied by ample Likud refreshment.

Cheers,

Jorgheinz

Anonymous said...

Ron Weiland being a false prophet does not disprove the Bible or prophecy in fact God warns us that there are more of those than true ministers of God. We need to prove who is who

Anonymous said...

Lussneheide scribes:

Any word about the supposed IRS audit of Weinland et al. ??

Anonymous said...

There is a scene from Ghostbusters II that seems to fit Ron's case. An author appears on World of the Psychic to announce his book, The End of the World, which is set to be that year. The host (Bill Murray) tells him that is a bad marketing move, could he set the date 3 - 5 years in the future? He concludes the interview with, "For your sake, I hope you're right."

lnrd said...

Gavin, All are correct on their own. Going back to past, on odd week ends My life mate (wife) and I would gather and solve the religious, political and as well the world problems. We would present our view as we were tough, those others not ingrained saw different and as the night wore on, in the back ground the latest hits serenaded.

Fishing in the dark.

Anonymous said...

"All the writer of 2 Peter meant was that it looked as if the end was going to be a little longer than they had anticipated."

Or, the author of 2Pet. was basically telling his/her/their readers, "Everyone dies, and there's nothing afterwards. You're not gonna know anything after you bite the big one, everything you think that you are is gonna go "poof!" in the night.

"Suck it up, and get to work on making that life worth living while you've still got one!"

Anonymous said...

KMS,

From Dave's latest Update, it sounds like the last harangue worked. Last time it was no more books! No more expansion! That's it! Just the magazines will keep going!

Now -- a series of 8 books, volume one of his bio next month, and a call for ministers to feed the madding crowd come 2010.

And his brother, who he says is a greater chronologer than he, calculated the end of the 6000 years will be around 2020.

Does anyone know who Dave's publisher will be? He repeatedly said his books won some "internal" award, not that it matters to him. Is Everest House still running?

Corky said...

Anonymous said...
Ron Weiland being a false prophet does not disprove the Bible or prophecy in fact God warns us that there are more of those than true ministers of God. We need to prove who is who

Thu Feb 26, 01:20:00 PM NZDT

Why do "we" need to prove who is who? We don't know what is in a man's heart or how to tell "true ministers" from Adam. That sounds more like God's job.

Why can't God just strike them down dead like he did with those who opposed Moses or Ananius and Sapphira and many others?

Seems that God lost his powers along about AD 70 doesn't it? But actually, discounting the so-called NT, it seems that God hasn't really been active or done anything at all since the Babylonian exile.

He certainly hasn't intervened on anyone's behalf since the first century, definitely not any amputees - ever! God hates amputees - that's evident.

Sick of Dagon said...

One of the many anons said this about false prophets:

"...God warns us that there are more of those than the true ministers of God. We need to prove who is who."

Boy, I'm glad to learn that! Which of the many ministers then and now would you recommend I find and follow?

Anonymous said...

"We need to prove who is who..."

Well, given that every false prophet has follwers, it seems that there are very few who can make the discernment, even when given the biblical criteria.

What? No, I am afraid the Holy Spirit is of no use.


Paul Ray

Anonymous said...

Ronnie Weinland is one of the NUTS and DOLTS of COG-GERY.

But sadly his misguided flock could keep him in the decadent lifestyle to which he is accustomed.

I could not see him deigning to wear vestments of sackcloth.

Ah well, another will rise in his place.

Cheers,

Anonymous said...

Amos 3:7 tells us that God will do nothing unless He reveals it to His servants the prophets.

So where are the prophets? Or where is the prophet?

I doubt that there are any now. They are all false as I see them. The true prophets have already told us all that we are to know, it's in the word of God. How can we trust any of these yahoo Bible thumpers now?

Anonymous said...

"He certainly hasn't intervened on anyone's behalf since the first century, definitely not any amputees - ever! God hates amputees - that's evident."

God hates amputees? Really. Oh come on. Really.
The favorite atheist amputee argument 1)does in no way disprove the existence of God nor 2) prove that God hates amputees. I wonder-- if we had irrevocable proof now that God exists (which couldn't be chalked up to an anomaly of science) then could one really come to Him in faith? I think not.

Anonymous said...

Who is Paul Ray? Was he part of the WCG at one time. Who is he now? Atheist, Agnostic? Emotionally hurt by a religious organization? Come clean and tell us who you are.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:07 said: "God hates amputees? Really. Oh come on. Really.
The favorite atheist amputee argument 1)does in no way disprove the existence of God nor 2) prove that God hates amputees. I wonder-- if we had irrevocable proof now that God exists (which couldn't be chalked up to an anomaly of science) then could one really come to Him in faith? I think not."

--> That is a cop-out and one of the worst arguments I have ever read on this blog. Try this little exercise: If your parents never told you God existed when you were a child, how would you go about proving God's existence as an adult when you should be experienced enough to not accept things simply because you read a book or heard it from another person? If you quote bible scripture, you've already lost.

As a believer in a God, your post offends my intelligence.


Anon 2:40 - You are posting anonymously and demanding another poster that publishes his name to come clean and tell us who he is?

Define 'Irony' in your world.

Byker Bob said...

I believe that what all of us are trying to accomplish is compensating for all of the ridiculousness that was inherent in WCG. Some do go totally to evolution, and science. There is much to which we could point in both Armstrongism and fanatical fundamentalism that is demonstrably falacious.

But, what I've found over the years is that science and evolution cannot totally explain what we see around us, either.

I like radio carbon dating. I think it's brilliant. It's based on the principle of all living things imbibing radioisotopes during their life cycle, ceasing doing this upon death, and the radioisotopes losing their radioactivity in a measurable fashion thereafter. However, this is based on the assumption that the earth's atmosphere allowed an equal presence of these radioisotopes throughout its entire history. Some theologians believe that the earth was once surrounded by a vapor belt, a vapor belt which changed permanently around the time of Noah's flood. Whether or not this it true, it does provide a scenario under which radio carbon dating would become inaccurate, as fewer of the isotopes would be present. We'd still have the same fossil remains to deal with, but their relative ages would be unmeasurable, unless you could establish computer models of what the earth's atmosphere might have been like under vapor belt conditions. And, the vapor belt is only one scenario under which the earth's atmosphere might not have been constant.

BB

Anonymous said...

"As a believer in a God, your post offends my intelligence." "If you quote bible scripture, you've already lost."

Really? Really. I think not. I don't think you are a believer in God. You say you are a believer in God, but don't want to hear scripture. Really? Really? Come on. If your "intelligence" is offended, then I can't really help you. Really.

Anonymous said...

"I wonder-- if we had irrevocable proof now that God exists (which couldn't be chalked up to an anomaly of science) then could one really come to Him in faith?"

There would be no need for faith, if there was irrevocable proof.

(How would a world like that even work??? It would probably be creepier than a Neil Gaiman novel, and bloodier than a Stephen King book........)

And, Bob, they may have been preaching that form of "maybe-kinda-sorta-radiocarbon-dating-might-PROVE-THE-FLOOD" nonsense prior to '75 in Prophecy flunking, but in the get-the-church-back-on-TRACK years, they rightfully went after radiocarbon dating as evil, Satanic, etcetera --- because they knew they had no plausible defense against the rock-solid science.

Besides which, why are you suddenly a believer in a worldwide "flood" event? I thought you said earlier that you agreed that "the flood" in the bible was confined to the "known world" at the time of the OT canonization?

Flip-flop, flip-flop, Bob, you're changing your tune almost as much as Weinland.

lnrd said...

To all past wcgers and present cogers. This is for your consideration, now that you have embraced the science (evolution)as the answer to your existence.

Could you explain how the year 1.5 million was arrived at!

foot prints past.

lnrd link will take you to the footprint.

Could it be possible that the dating correctly should be 1.5 million 277 years 2 weeks and 3.5 hours after sunset.

The god of atheism said...

Back off, Paul Ray is my servant.

The other anons I know not.

Anonymous said...

BB - vapor belt

Years ago I read in a book of scientific oddities that lack of atmospheric pollutants would cause a rising mist as described in Genesis. Although I haven't looked into it, the claim was that in a "pure" atmosphere, conditions would not allow rain to form.

Corky said...

Anonymous said...
BB - vapor belt

Years ago I read in a book of scientific oddities that lack of atmospheric pollutants would cause a rising mist as described in Genesis.


Baloney

You must have that book mixed up with some comic book or other. I doubt it though.

Shouldn't christians at least make an attempt at being honest with their evidence?

Byker Bob said...

Why Purps, I'm surprised at you!

You are quite right that I believe it is likely that the Genesis flood was a local Mesopotamian event, affecting the known world at the time.

However, in your haste to stereotype, you must have failed to notice that I'm a different kind of Christian, one who often indulges in the testing of theories, and even in occasional speculation. This is because I believe we don't have all of the answers, and probably won't have some of them until death, or the rapture, which ever occurs first.

What I was trying to express in the above post was that radio carbon dating is based upon the assumption that the earth's atmosphere has allowed a constant and precise rate of radioisotope penetration throughout the entire history of the earth, and this, through ice ages, volcanism, and a host of other turbulent events. Astrobiologists have even speculated (on PBS's "NOVA") that water on planet Earth was introduced via comets and meteors. Invoking the vapor belt hypothesis was simply to point out one factor which could have existed at some time in the last several billion years. I used it because just about everyone with a WCG background would be familiar with it. And, it does legitimately and logically point out one possible fly in the r/c dating ointment.

I notice that instead of offering evidence to refute what I'd posted, ya just poo poo'd me, gal. But, that's OK, I've noticed that on your own "protected" blog, you even get on Paul Ray and Corky's cases, and Corky is just about the most mild mannered gentleman in the ACOG dissident underground!

BB

Byker Bob said...

Anon 12:41, Some preachers, like Dr. David Jeremiah, teach that it had never rained on earth prior to Noah's flood. I don't find that credible, though, because the Great Sphinx predates the era of Noah, and there is evidence of considerable and prolonged rain erosion evident on the stone. Climatologists estimate that for this to have happened we'd have to look back to about 10,000 BC for wet and rainy seasons in Egypt.

BB

Anonymous said...

This statement:

"You are quite right that I believe it is likely that the Genesis flood was a local Mesopotamian event, affecting the known world at the time."

And this statement:

"Some theologians believe that the earth was once surrounded by a vapor belt, a vapor belt which changed permanently around the time of Noah's flood. Whether or not this it true, it does provide a scenario under which radio carbon dating would become inaccurate, as fewer of the isotopes would be present."

Contradict themselves. In the same comments thread. That was the only point I was making Bob. If you're going to spread the stories of your self-created god around, at least make the plot somewhat consistent, hmmmm?

Anonymous said...

"Anon 12:41, Some preachers, like Dr. David Jeremiah, teach that it had never rained on earth prior to Noah's flood."

You're playing theological Slip 'n' Slide again, Bob. So tell us the truth, for once, if you're capable of it:

Do you or do not believe the flood allegory in the Old Testament was literally true? Yes or no?

And for the last time, will you quit snidely referring to me in every post as a chick? It may make you feel even more superior to me, but I assure you Robert, you are not.

Byker Bob said...

Slip and slide, PH? I'm processing and analyzing a collection of facts, beliefs, science, religion, and sometimes even myths, just like non-believers do. And, I can do this, because I am an independent Christian, as opposed to being one who swallows some subset of denominational bias. I know this confuses you, because you like to put believers in one nice, neat little box, creating artificial vulnerability. You like to portray us as not even thinking, as if somehow atheists held the patent on that.

Yes, I do believe that some manner of flood happened, probably localized, in the time during which the Jewish geneologies indicate that Noah lived, and I also believe that some sort of Gilgamesh flood had also occurred centuries earlier.

Regardless as to whether a hypothetical vapor belt had anything to do with any flood, it does provide one scenario under which fewer radioisotopes would be absorbed by living things.

As for the term "chick", I try to avoid that term because I've found that it offends the majority of the female population. Honestly, I could care less who is superior or inferior. Truthfulness and quality of discussion are what is important to me, and as I said earlier, you had poo poo'd me rather than addressing my challenge to radio carbon dating.
Seems like you can't refute the ideas I'm throwing out, so you attack my methodology, and even falsify the instant replay by accusing me of using a pejorative word on you that I did not use.


BB

Corky said...

Byker Bob,

Radio carbon dating is not used to date things that are extremely old. It is used for things in the thousands of years, not millions.

It is known to be 100% accurate for longer than things existing in the Bible story of only 6,000 years. This is because of tree ring dating that can go back to above 8,000 years.

You can kind of depend on science, Bob, but you can't depend upon a wisp of smoke and a pipe dream at all.

Byker Bob said...

Right, Corky. RC dating is accurate for the half-life of the ingested isotopes themselves.

Beyond that, estimates are used, based on hypothetically concurrent natural processes.

I used to study much of this, both in school, and then later as an independent project in order to reason with current WCG members.
I still watch NOVA whenever I get the chance on PBS.

To me, science gives ua a fuller comprehension of God and His natural laws. The problem with WCG was that they often attempted to use what they called "true" science to validate all of their bogus doctrines. "True" meant that they'd frequently make unauthorized corrections to the science along the way. Then it became just as error fraught as the rest of their teachings.

BB

Byker Bob said...

One more clarification, Corky. If there had been such a thing as the vapor belt, and if this were prior to the flood, which the Bible tells us destroyed some really weird human spawn (Noah was pure in his generations), the lack of radioisotopes could make it appear that the fossils from the hypothetical vapor belt era were outside of the range of radio carbon dating. Depending on just how weird or corrupted the destroyed ones were, the scientists who discovered bones and other remains thousands of years later could be calling
them Neanderthal, Cromagnon, etc.
If they were demented, primitive artifacts would surround them. Heh Heh: "Are we not men? We are Devo!"

It'd be nice to have a time machine, because all we can do now is follow an evidentiary trail, and make educated guesses. One day, we'll know.

BB

Anonymous said...

"As for the term "chick","

I used the term chick. You used the term "gal". Should I have literally repeated your words, or are you just continuing to be evasive?

Anonymous said...

Anon said: "Really? Really. I think not. I don't think you are a believer in God. You say you are a believer in God, but don't want to hear scripture. Really? Really? Come on. If your "intelligence" is offended, then I can't really help you. Really."

--> I don't need or want your help. I'm doing just fine and no, I don't want to hear scripture from you. My belief in a God is not based on the bible. I enjoy reading the bible but I do not derive any measurable comfort or spiritual direction from it. It is a great reference for oral traditions that predated the written word for part of it, the rest is a mish-mash of what the writers WANT you to believe...Just like the news, and a lot of other things. You have a filter on pal, but it needs changing. If your belief in a God is based on a book, you a few sandwiches shy of a picnic.

Byker Bob said...

Purps,

I'm going to have to ignore your posts and challenges from now on. It would be different if we could actually discuss ideas. Gavin has a good blog going here, and I for one don't want to clutter it up with a bunch of garbage.

Bon voyage!
BB

Corky said...

Bob,
You need to go back to school. Carbon 14 dating is not used for fossils and a vapor canopy big enough to cause a worldwide flood would raise the earth's temperature and pressure too much for anything to live.

And no, estimates are not used in lieu of radio carbon dating. Other isotopes are used for things in the millions of years and they have to agree with the geologic column.

Science does not just "guess" at this stuff, you should know better than that - being a college educated man and all.

Anonymous said...

Try this for size (ie critique it).

The six days were each 24 hrs during which God created eack kind perfect and complete.

Each day was separated by an indeterminate length of time, during which earth dried out, variation took place in all nature including man - including Cro-magnon, Neanderthal etc.

At some point (6000 years ago?)man became God-conscious - a divine act.

Byker Bob said...

Corky,

In responding to your latest message, I actually found myself attempting to go into greater depth explaining my understanding of radio carbon dating to you. Suddenly it dawned on me that that is not the problem, and I deleted it.

There are random and exceptional factors which can skew the results of r/c dating. Contamination of, and natural shielding of the specimens are two such factors. As a Christian who believes that God uses evolution as one of His creative tools, I not only acknowledge the usefulness of radio carbon dating, I also allow for the possibility of skewing or false results. You apparently don't.

BB

Corky said...

Don't worry about it BB, I think everyone knows what you are saying.

Yes, scientists make mistakes and then another scientist comes along and corrects it - that's the way it works.

If you are looking for "the truth" especially the one true truth which is truly the truth, you are never going to find it.

Anonymous said...

"If you are looking for "the truth" especially the one true truth which is truly the truth, you are never going to find it."

There is no spoon.

Anonymous said...

"Come clean and tell us who you are."

Dear ANONYMOUS 'Strongtard:

To cut to the quick- I don't care. I don't care what my friends and family in the COG's, or out, think about me or my rational view of reality. You have nothing to hold over me. I am not the quivering ex-Armstrongite who fears what his family and friends may say.

I remember meeting an "independent" minded COG minister at a Feast. I introduced myself for the purpose of passing on a message from a friend. He said:
"Oh, I know who YOU are."
It was a puzzling statement, to say the least. Then I caught on. He was trying to intimidate me in the old WWCG fashion.
This idiot thought he was back in the Old Days and I was a WWCG member. Fool. He didn't realize that those days are dead (for most) and even if they aren't, I wasn't a citizen of his little domain. I was Paul Ray, human being. I shrugged and left. My last Feast. I remember reading Romans in the parking lot while this jackass was preaching the Law.

Anyway.


Your little "request" reminds me so much of that man and the WWCG ministers in general. Little worm, I have nothing to hide. I have always used my full name, while you hide behind ANONYMOUS (let your answer be Yes, selah). I am proud of being a rational, normal human being. Do try harder.


Paul Ray
Yes, that Paul Ray

Byker Bob said...

Corky and PH,

It's too late. I've already found the truth. Only it's not a specific denomination, religion, or collection of rules or rituals. It's Father God, and Jesus Christ, and, a wonderful, wonderful gift: the relationship we get to have with them.

Knowing the truth gets us past all of the confusing issues, such as whether or not God used evolution as part of His plan, although some use evolution, thinking that they are "disproving" God.

PS: I have nothing against atheists or agnostics. An atheist or agnostic is simply someone who does not yet know God. And, since God is the One who opens and closes minds, hardens or softens our hearts, it's not anyone's fault if they don't yet believe.

BB

Corky said...

Byker Bob said...
Corky and PH,

It's too late. I've already found the truth.


Oh yeah? what is "the truth"? Be as specific as you can please and with no christian assumptions or speculations.

Anonymous said...

I remember quite clearly the church doctrine that used to be preached to us from the pulpit, in the mid-80s:

How "only God calls people to The Truth", and how "God will open the minds of the truly converted". (Weinland also preached quite heavily along those same lines, last year.)

Not sure why I flashed on that, but I just did, quite strongly.......

Byker Bob said...

He does, PH. But, where this differs from ACOG dogma is that He does it on an individual basis from the bottom up, not through self-aggrandizing religious charlatans. People who get "called" through a guru, or to be given special understanding of what a particular guru teaches end up having a very disillusioning and bogus experience.

It's a difference not unlike that between legitimate love making and rape. Love is involved in one, and force and control are involved in the other. Remember the hymn "Gently and Tenderly Jesus is Calling"?

BB