AssemblyBoard

Well let me relate to you a true story..

I received a knock on my door and there standing before me were two young men . They said they were christians
and wanted to invite me to a bible study.
I was interested ,I questioned them how does one get to heaven and other question to seek out the truth od their beliefs.
Then I found out they were the assembly.

I said hey do you guys know Vince, oh he is a adulterer!!
(Know folk Vince has been out of this group maybe 8 years
which mean these guys were kids when he left)

So I said guys he married a woman who was divorced on
scriptural grounds !
They said there is not scriptural grounds for divorce ???

Then they said Matt. 5 So I read it to them whoever puts away his wife (accept for adultery ) then whoever marry her
commits adultery.. I said guy see accept for adultery ..

They said no if you marry someone who is divorce that adultery..  This shows two things here  The assembly has been talking (gossip) (lies) about Vince for over 8 years!!
And more likely many of you ex-members too !!

Second these men don't read the scriptures they
let the Assembly read in to scriptures !!!
There Leaders tell them what scriptures says or in this case
what they want it to say .....

Thanks for your time...
 (and please excuse any spelling mistakes)

So if a divorce/remarriage occurs before someone is a believer (an assembly big wig from Omaha for example), are they still committing adultery after they become a believer according to assembly doctrine?

Assembly doctrine:

Divorce OK as a last resort.

Re-marriage NEVER OK, unless spouse is dead.

Husband of more than one wife--can't be a leading brother.  Exception?  The big-wig in Omaha.  In Fullerton, there is a really decent guy, who is also smart and balanced, and he can't be a leading brother, because he remarried before his assembly days.

Brent

Out of the blue one day I received an e-mail from an old - um, friend - telling me that because I had been divorced (even though it was on the cusp of coming to faith) I could never remarry.  He also informed me that he would never consider a relationship with me (which again came out of the blue), based on Mark 10.  

I knew he'd joined this organization earlier in the year, and every so often I'd receive some sort of communication, telling me something "new" about scripture  (i.e. Assembly doctrine).  Women should wear a headcovering, Michelle, pray about 1Cor11.  Or, remarriage is unscriptural for you, check out Mk10.  Or, there is some sort of special way to become extra-cool-SuperChristians, "special" sons of God, check out blah blah blah (thankfully, this was the last e-mail I received regarding weird teachings, and I can't remember the particular verse.)

Each e-mail was an affront to me, and to the grace God had shown me.  I had been a Christian for a short time, but even I knew his new "knowledge" was heavily based on Assembly teachings, but I never knew why or how in the world this came about.

His marriage comment smacked me like a 2x4, and wounded.  I felt like "used goods" even though it all happened prior to receiving the Lord.  I approached my church elders and they poured over everything - fact-based - for nearly six months, giving it prayerful consideration.  I am not attending a liberal, take-an-Exacto-knife-to-the-bible-if-you-don't-like-the-verse church, and I sit under very godly leadership (not perfect, just godly).  I felt led to listen to them very carefully, and then test the decision.

After a painful six months (although I was not dating (heretic!) anyone at the time of the question) they determined that I would be free to be married in the church.  I knew they'd put their hearts and souls out to God to determine this, and I was grateful.  I had struggled with how I would react to whatever decision was made, and I'd determined that if God wanted me to remain single, I would, but I would not do so on the opinion of one misguided man.

I would love to read some of Geftakys' materials to see what his doctrine taught/teaches.  It's hard to sort it all on this site.  Some folks are bitter, some are angry.  Some are defensive, on both sides of the fence.   I would also love to be allowed to attend an Assembly meeting - and I'll feel much better about this organization (whatever is left of it) when an invitation could be forthcoming.

I'm sorry to jump in the middle here, but this subject breaks my heart.  I am concerned for those who are judged based on their past, instead of their repentance and the new creation in Christ!  Sometimes doctrine disguised as scripture not only hurts those inside the organization, but has consequences outside as well.

B. Tr0ckman

Sadly you reject what Jesus said and Paul said !!

The Bible says you can remarry a divorce if the person your are to marry divorced a spouse who commited adultery .
Also if the spouse leaves the marriage because they
don't want to be married to a believer Paul say that person
is no longer bound.

The only 2 reason none other !!!

B. Tr0ckman read the Bible not Assembly Laws !!

Can someone then please explain to me Mark 10:1-12.  I see no exception clause there.  And I see Jesus giving the original intention that God had from the beginning (which was one man and one woman and that's it).

And while your at it, explain to me how Abraham had an affair with Hagar and David with Bathsheba yet Abe was know as the "friend of God" and Dave "a man after God's own heart."    :D

I don’t believe that Brent was rejecting anything.  I believe he was describing assembly doctrine without mentioning his own views.

Now do you have the double doors or just the one???  Did they knock or ring the doorbell???

JohnMaloneFan

I assume that you are referring to Matthew 5:32.  This references fornication, not adultery (which is one form of fornication).

Matthew 5:32
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

But elsewhere we do not see this exception:

Mark 10:11
And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

Luke 16:18
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

There is no exception in these two verses.  How could this be?  If you take a look at the original Greek word for "fornication" used in Matthew it is "porneia" .  This is not the same word used for adultery which is "moicheia".  Porneia can include adultery (moicheia), and we have to carefully consider context, and whether the meaning is in agreement with the rest of the scriptures.  One possible interpretation of porneia in this verse would be for an unlawful marriage as described in Leviticus 18:6-18.  The items listed in Leviticus definitely qualify as porneia.  If this is true, the marriage could not have been considered a lawful marriage in the first place, and a man would be free to "put away his wife" in this case, since she would not be his lawful wife in the first place.

The only way that I can see GG approving of the second marriage of  the "big wig" in my earlier post, is if it was an unlawful marriage as based on Leviticus 18.  But I don’t believe that is the case.  So once again, I am not able to understand the Geftakys doctrine. ??? Then there is of course that "husband of one wife" issue, unless George sees this as being one at a time...

Just curious -- who in Omaha's leadership was divorced and remarried ????

I have to say(and this probably isn't scriptural) that the teaching concerning divorce in the Assembly and elsewhere I always found to be confusing. It seems that divorce is the one sin God will not forgive in this life. "Let what God has joined together not be torn asunder"--but what if God wasn't the one responsible for the marriage at all? What if two people made a bad mistake and both realized it a year later? "Why did we do this?" Would God really say "Sorry---you both have to stay together all of your lives and suffer for your mistake, and you can never serve in a church as a leader because of this error done in your young years". I know what the Bible appears to say, but would God really say and do that? Would he really want two people to be miserable the rest of their lives, and never be able to remarry because it would be considered "adultery". Even if they both agreed that the marriage had been a mistake? Is divorce worse than denying the Lord? Peter denied the Lord but became an elder. Why should divorce be a reason for a man not to be able to become an elder?David had a man murdered and remained the King. I guess it's something I could never understand. I remember someone telling me Bob Ford could not be an elder because he had been divorced. But he had been divorced BEFORE he became a Christian. "If any man be in Christ he is a new creation, ALL things have become new". I could never understand it. This is all just my biased point of view, and not Biblical, I realize it, but I wanted to share this.


---Joe

Sadly people like Joe Sperling

Have decided that the Bible means nothing and
Joe Sperling words mean truth...

First divorce is as any sin forgiven if you seek forgiveness .....

But Paul said because we have Grace is that a cause to sin...

Joe Sperling need to see that if your in a bad marriage
than ask God to help you....

Divorce is not the answer, God Is !!

But to many people like Joe say, God doesn't want me to
be unhappy ????????  
God wants you to honor him and trust him ....
Marriage is good sometimes and bad sometimes it's life ................
Joe if you divorced just because you didn't like the woman anymore ,then you have Sinned.
God will forgive ---
But doesn't mean he changed his mind and said it's ok to remarry !!!!!!!!!

You Joe put self before God and put words into his mouth
he has never said !!!!!!!!!  That's  Sin also !

Sadly retread rejects Jesus words because he only said
it in Matt....

Matthew 5:32.

Retread has now taken the place of Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) and said in Matt. Jesus is wrong but in Mark Jesus was right..

The writer do not and are not written the same
why would they be?
If you had word for word in each writers writting you
wouldn't need these other books ????

Also the HOLY SPIRIT Told them to write each word !!

Is the Holy Spirit wrong too!!!!!!!!

Also Paul addressed divorce too...(Holy Spirit there too)

Dan,

You appear not to understand what I said.  Please read it more carefully.

I NEVER rejected God's Word!  I NEVER said that Jesus was wrong!  I NEVER took the place of Jesus!  My belief in the Word of God is 100%.  My entire point was that Matthew, Mark and Luke ARE in agreement.

You stated that adultery was a legitimate reason for a divorce.  I stated that the Bible says that fornication (porneia) is a reason for a "putting away ones wife", not adultery (moicheia).  I would hope that you would agree that the verses that I quoted in Mark and Luke were true.  Now if they are true, then there is no exception for what I would consider a legitimate marriage.  This should give us a little bit of insight as to what Jesus meant by "fornication" (porneia).  Fornication can be used to describe something other than adultery. I would also hope that you would agree that Matthew 5:32 was true.  But for it to be true and not contradict Mark 10:11 and Luke 16:18, then Matthew 5:32 must be talking about a marriage that was not lawful in the first place (i.e. not a real marriage).  And strangely enough, the word "porneia" can describe those acts from Leviticus 18 that would describe a marriage that is not legitimate in the first place.   Please read what I have to say more carefully, and read what your Bible says more carefully before making any false accusations.

And NO, the Holy Spirit is not wrong.  Yes, Paul did address divorce, but Jesus was specifically talking of remarriage in Matthew, Mark and Luke. Paul was addressing if a non-believing spouse left, and not remarriage.

I tried to make this a simple explanation. But Dan, if you are still having difficulty understanding this, please let me know.  It is not good for you to make such false accusations.

Proverbs 21:28
A false witness shall perish: but the man that heareth speaketh constantly.

Please hear what God has to say.  He has given us his Word.  Please cherish it.

Thank you Joe,

   There always be critics, but it takes courage to step outside of the assembly box like that.
 
                       Nate

Dear Joe,

If you were divorced and you were told that you shouldn't remarry, would you be miserable for the rest of your life?

Isn't God still alive?  Can't being single be a happy thing?  I mean, there were a lot of Christians that remained single and they were quite happy just simply following the Lord.  

A Brother in Christ,

Luke Robinson

Now what kind of doorbell is it...is it the bells or the chimes???  Possibly custom-made???  I think if I had the my choice of doorbell it would definitely be one of the louder ones...One that just shouts..."I AM DOORBELL, HEAR ME ROAR!!!"  And wait...exactly how many times did they press this doorbell???

Now what kind of doorbell is it...is it the bells or the chimes???  Possibly custom-made???  I think if I had the my choice of doorbell it would definitely be one of the louder ones...One that just shouts..."I AM DOORBELL, HEAR ME ROAR!!!"  And wait...exactly how many times did they press this doorbell???

BrentTr0ckmanFan

Joe was openly and honestly expressing a question that he had and was showing some common sense and vunerability.  I don't read his post as if he is trying to lead us away from the Bible into his own opinions.  He is trying to understand how the Bible needs to be applied in various situations.

There are many things that I wish I had the Apostle Paul here to consult.  "What exactly were you thinking about this head covering thing?  Were you dealing with something specific in Corinth or is this something that transcends culture?  If so when should they put the head coverings on and when should they take them off?"

"And also Paul, I know that you say that women shouldn't teach.  I assume teaching children is OK, is that right?  What about the college groups?  Their adults right?  Can women teach a college group?  I know you didn't have para-church organziations when you were ministering, but what do you think of Kay Author?  Should she be doing what she is doing?  Can a woman write books?  Is that teaching?"

If you go to your local seminary (or possibly your local Christian book store or online bookstore) and look at some books, you will probably find that there are several views in the body of Christ on the divorse and remarrage issue.  Some argue, as Joe, that a divorse before becoming a Christian is not looked upon as a disqualification for being an elder.  Some argue that if a husband leaves due to her wife's faith, the wife is not under the restriction not to remarry.

You may want to read why some of these teachers argue their view on the issue just so you know where they are coming from even if you ultimately decide to disagree with them.

This is how it works, by the way, outside the Assembly.  We don't look at a teaching we disagree with and assume that the person is teaching it because he "doesn't want what God wants" or "he is too immoral or stupid to embrace the obvious".  What we do is listen to to their argument, understand their assumptions, try to ask the right questions and decide if the argument is sound based upon it's weight and reason.

-Dave

P.S.  I have been married for 16 years and never been divorsed.  So please don't use the argument that you think I am being soft because I want to justify my immoral lifestyle.

P.P.S.  If God indeed has this "one mistake and you are out" rule concerning divorse and remmarage, He is indeed sufficient.  But, that wasn't the question.  The question is whether or not God indeed has this rule in the first place.

Dan----

I wasn't saying that my word is above God's word. My question was why divorce is considered so grave as a
disqualification for being a leader. As I mentioned, I heard that Bob Ford could not be an elder because he was divorced before becoming a Christian. Moses MURDERED an Egyptian before he became an Israelite---but he became the LEADER of God's people----is divorce so grave that if Moses had been divorced before he became an Israelite God would not have chosen him?? That was my question---I'm not questioning God,I am simply asking a logical question that puzzles me. Is divorce a greater sin and disqualification than murder? It's just a question. Is it possible that the interpretation of certain verses could be taken out of context? The Jehovah's Witnesses use a verse about not eating blood as a basis for not taking blood transfusions. They let their little children die rather than displease God---but would God really be pleased to see the death of a little child because you obeyed a verse of Scripture(That has been misinterpreted in the first place)? As Jesus said to the Pharisees--that they had forsaken mercy in order to keep the rules of the law. As Dave Sable said I too wish the Apostle Paul was available to answer some questions----because what is it that causes divisions and cults and sects? Misinterpretation of the Word of God. And by the way Dan the very problem with the Assembly for all of these years is the Word of George(and HIS interpretation of the Bible) being taken over the very Word of God. It was GEORGE'S view on divorce, GEORGE'S view on heade coverings, etc. that was the law of the land. Being able to question things, and yes, even the Bible itself is healthy, not a sin. You could not question anything in the Assembly, especially George. I love the Word of God and truly want to understand it, so I ask questions---I don't want to overthrow God's Word--I want sincerely to understand it and get as many views from as many teachers and ministers as I can. But thanks for your input Dan--I see your point of view also, and respect it. God bless you.  --Joe

Yeah, Moses the murderer and how many other screwups in the Bible? Rahab the prostitute was in the lineage of Jesus.  And anyone want to tackle this question?

How was it that David was still king after murder and adultery?  In I Tim 5:19-20, it doesn't say that an elder no longer becomes an elder when he sins but that he is to be rebuked before all, interesting.  This is kind of hard to agree with, but hey there it is in black and white.  Where's the Bible Answer man when you need him?

As far as Abraham and David: the issue is repentance in
acknowledgement of the Sovereign Lord. David also numbered
Israel and brought judgement on the nation. You, me and every
other person reading this and otherwise can be a "Friend of God".

After some things yesterday, I need forgiveness too - just keep
short accounts with our Lord.

hello everyone! i've been having a good time reading posts and such and it is such a blessing to see you guys getting into the Word to see what it says for yourselves. i'm curious though...what kind of stuff was said about vince after he left fellowship? you see, there weren't many vinces in omaha and so i'm assuming that it's my dad that is mentioned in the first posting...i love the people in the assemblies dearly and am thankful that they were faithful to preach the gospel to me but there were always things that bothered me, especially once i was out and could look on it from a different perspective...God is definately doing a mighty work, change is under way. blessings to all!  ;D

Dawn,

This thread has nothing to do with Omaha, so your dad is not being talked about at all...

DanFan

ah, thanks for the clarification.  :)

dan,

make more of an effort to understand what people are trying to articulate before you make inflammatory accusations. if you think what someone is saying implys a contradiction with the bible, try to clearly explain why you think that, rather than just accusing them of contradicting the bible and sinning, etc. the resulting discussion will be much more profitable. all the exclaimation points would imply you are getting kind of worked up over this topic. just try and take it easy. neither you nor God is being attacked here. we are all learning together.

and paul: try to keep your posts remotely on topic. play in the play areas. people are trying to have a serious discussion here.

Master Administrator,

If you look at the dates that both dan and I posted (the posts that you are responding to)...you'll see that they were posted about two weeks ago...I haven't posted anything off topic for a while (except for this next paragraph)...

Secondly, since when does anyone take this BB seriously?  I am only keeping it REAL here, bringing-this-thing-back-down-to-earth-it-ain't-the-end-of-the-world-time-to-move-on... C'mon now...if one is looking for serious Biblical debate or even answers to their personal questions they are definitely in the wrong place...NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE COMES FROM THIS BB...even if someone thinks they are having a serious discussion, nothing changes...everyone thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong...no opinions will change, no perspectives will change, it is a total free-for-all with little agenda...GA.com is for sole informational purposes (people will decide for themselves whether or not to believe any of it and if they do what they will do about it) and as for this BB, it is just short of sheer entertainment purposes...thank you for your time and effort...it gives me something to do in my spare time...

BrianTuckerFan

P.S. "Play areas"?????  There's a difference???  Where can I find this "play area"???

P.P.S. Plus, what WOULD John Malone do???

Is divorce ok or was there a provision made because of the hardness of hearts?
Was the purpose of this thread divorce or something ealse? ???

Perhaps Paul the women who have posted stories, in tears, of years of physical abuse?

Perhaps Paul, the people who have posted stories of needing psychiatric care as they come out of this system.

Perhaps Paul, people in Springfield who have finally seen this work as it is, and decided to close the doors (see Tim Souther's early post)

Perhaps Paul, saints on the East Coast that weren't told a thing about this whole scandal, and as they started reading the true stories, they have now pulled out of this work.

Perhaps Paul, people who have spent their entire adult lives in a system of condemnation that has done great damage to their marriages and their children.

Perhaps Paul, some that have spent their ENTIRE LIFE, growing up in this work and realizing what a lie and deceit it has been.

Perhaps Paul, people that have been swindled out of tens of thousands of dollars over the years.

I know Paul you're enjoying being nothing but an antagonist on this board.  And I am ignoring playing your game until you make an absolutely idiotic statement like you did.

PEOPLE'S LIVES have been marred, people have been hurt and slandered, people have been kept from marriage and families, people have made foolishly antagonistic statements towards close family members and are now trying to amend those, people are repenting for years and years and years of ill counsel they have given, people are searching for what is real anymore.

PEOPLE'S LIVES HAVE BEEN RUINED BY THIS WORK PAUL.

Some DO take it serious.  

Perhaps Paul, you would do well to take it serious.

my bad - i saw the new posts here and didn't look closely at the dates on the rest of them. i'll respond to the rest of what you wrote on the other thread you started concerning this topic.

Paul needs an attitude adjustment, yeah.

  I haven't educated myself much on the divorce/remarriage issue, so I don't pretend to have a solid opinion. If someone asked me if it was ok, I would honestly say I don't know.
  However, . . . how often did the Pharisees confront Jesus about the letter of the law?
<GASP> LOOK! JESUS' DISCIPLES ARE PICKING FOOD ON THE SABBATH!!
<GASP> Jesus is doing a WORK of healing on the sabbath! Doesn't He know God specifically commanded not to work on the sabbath?!?

  Is divorce another kind of "sabbath"? Aren't Christians supposed to follow the spirit of the law rather than quibbling about words? Could that mean Jesus would allow remarriage in some situations besides the ones that are "scripturally correct"? I don't believe Jesus would condone abandonment or cruelty--but what about the victims of abandonment and cruelty?

  With hope for healing,
  Heather

Dear Ken and Everyone that comes to this website,

Well, I don't deny that my brother got a little out of control with what he had to say.  There is a lot of serious issues that have surfaced and are being surfaced.  But I totally understand what he is saying.  It might have come out the wrong way, but he has a point, and it is not an "assembly" perspective or a "geftakysite" perspective but a simple, personal one.  Seems to me that aside from the informational side and the meeting all kinds of people side, this forum has lost its central purpose, whatever that may be.  Topics are brought up and then discussed, and each view is critiqued and blasted, and everyone is standing firm on what they believe to be true.  And that is good!  Because a lot of these issues come down to what God has shown each individual on a personal basis.  But the point is, why keep trying to argue and bring about another person, when maybe God is speaking to them in a whole new way.  Maybe God has shown one divorced person to not remarry while He has shown another to remarry.  Maybe God has shown one person to stay in the assembly while He has told someone else to go somewhere else.  Stop this "You're wrong", "You're decieved", "God never spoke to you".  Because we have no idea what any other person has gone through with their walks with the Lord.

It is time for this to end.  All of this bickering and constantly pouring salt in your wounds to feel the pain once more.  We need to get on with our lives.  Get on with our walks with the Lord.  Don't let the sun go down on your anger.  Wow, we didn't know all that went on.  Now we do.  We were confused and lied to.  Now we know the truth.

We are free in Christ Jesus.  Let us walk in that liberty and let us not look back but continue forward, willing for whatever God has in store for our lives.

You may disagree with me.  And that is fine.  But don't let your disagreement get into five more pages on this thread.  We can all walk away from this and start afresh, rejoicing in all that the Lord is doing.  

The future is bright but frightening.  We must step out in faith, on to the water where Christ has called us to walk.  The wind will howl.  And the waves will become enormous.  And sometimes we will get drenched to the bone.  But as long as we stay close to Him, we are safe.  

My prayers are with you and with this website.  It has been a big help.  And now it is time to go.  Go forward.

A Brother in Christ,

Luke Robinson  

Ken,

Thank you for your response.  I do want to clarify one thing.  When I said "since when does anyone take this BB seriously?", I was speaking only about the "BB", not the GA.com website or any information coming from that site.  That is NOT what I was talking about.  I think everything that was brought to the light on GA.com is extremely serious and I COMPLETELY agree that many people have been hurt and decieved, families have been torn apart, money has been taken, etc...and I would also say that at the start of this BB it was taken seriously........BUT, I do not think that now this BB is included in that...

Secondly, (and I am not being disrespectful...this is an honest question...) when you say "People's lives have been ruined by this work", doesn't that detract from the very healing power of God...do you actually believe that a simple human life with a desire for the Lord can be "ruined" by the work of a man?  Sure, many horrendous things have happened...but isn't it time to look forward to breakthroughs and changes instead of dwelling on the hurt that we have felt???  Maybe it's just me that feels this way...I feel like just about everyone on this BB is doing everything in their power to bring back legalism and bondage into their lives...But as for me and myself, we will move on...

Thirdly, I don't think it was an "idiotic" statement...is it just "idiotic" because it differs from your views?  I'm sorry...

Fourthly, yes, I am enjoying being an antagonist on this BB but it's all in fun.  Ken, I love you as a brother in Christ and I have absolutely no intent of offending or hurting ANYONE on this BB...I am just speaking my mind in a humorous way...but I am not changing the way I look at this BB...I simply don't see any reason too...and I respect other people's views as well...if anyone feels that I am too negative (such as you, GUEST...who are YOU?????) or whatever, just let me know and I will follow John Malone out the door...

Fifthly, Luke...I don't remember hiring you to soften up my posts...I am NOT out of control... ;)

Thank you.

KenFullerFan

COOL !!!! I FINALLY HAVE A FAN !!!!!

Paul (and Luke, and everyone else reading this board)

It actually was VERY good to read your response Paul.  I really wasn't sure what you were saying when you said no one takes it seriously.

Actually, I do take the board seriously, and there are others that do too.
And I also realize there's also a time for humor (remember who it was that started the "secret confessions" thread).  

A couple of points to make (for everyone):

1)  There ARE some serious threads that take place.  I wish these we could take seriously and keep to the topic.  Save the personal bickering and nonsense for other spots.

For example -- when Susan opened a thread about her abuse, and then John and others turned it completely off track into some petty argument over who's right and who's wrong.  That is the kind of thing that makes the bulletin board look like a joke.

2)  Some of the doctrinal topics aren't necessarily "arguing" over who's right and who's wrong.  
I personally, am interested in reading different people's thoughts (something we can do now that we've been 'liberated')
For instance, I opened a thread about baptism, curious what people think about children being baptized (not infants) -- I know what I believe, but I was actually interested to hear what others do (I wasn't looking for an argument, I didn't even post my views).

To some extent, the doctrinal discussions are healthy.  I suppose they become unhealthy when they turn into "I know the truth and you don't" kind of arguments (and we all have been trained very well in that)

As far as can God heal .... well Paul, you know enough about me to know I certainly KNOW God can heal.  I suppose when I said "ruined lives" that wasn't the right words to choose.  "Damaged" may have been a better word.  God CAN and He IS healing -- and this bb is full of "serious" posts witnessing to that.

I guess my only suggestion out of all this is that people learn when to be serious and when to be humorous (there is a time for both)

I wish threads could stick to the topics, but that's a major flaw on Al Gore's grand design.

Thank you Ken.

KenFullerFan

Dear Andrea and everyone,

I forgot the "y" in front of "our".  Not to say I haven't been wounded or haven't felt pain in all the years, but not as bad as many of the people on this website.

Secondly, I am not saying that people can't discuss things.  It is just that 90% of the conversations have dwindled into pointlessness with new topics brought up that people that are already rock hard on their stances.  And a lot of these conversations are becoming sad, little cat-fights where everyone is trying to get the upper hand.  

Thirdly, Paul, thank you for your post.  But come to think of it, I have a thousand better things to do than to soften the posts of your sorry behind.  But thanks for telling me. ;D

Ciao.  God bless you.

Luke Robinson