text:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
For example I don't understand why using the refrigerator for fermentation below 24 hours. This does not make sense to me. The only reasons that would justify this, would be a very wet dough (110% flour to 100% water) like the one they make in Rome for pizza al taglio or pizza romana.


text:
Skip to comments.Kerry Camp Seizes on Probe of Halliburton (be sure to read the last paragraph of article)
Posted on 10/29/2004 2:10:11 AM PDT by ambrose
Kerry Camp Seizes on Probe of Halliburton
Friday October 29, 2004 9:16 AM
AP Photo OHLR108
By CALVIN WOODWARD and TOM RAUM
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) - After days of making hay over lost Iraqi explosives, John Kerry's campaign is seizing on an expanding FBI probe of Halliburton Co. as evidence the administration gives ``special favors'' to special interests. President Bush received affirmation of his wartime leadership in a very public salute from his former war commander.
Fresh off a World Series win with Kerry's hometown Red Sox, Boston pitcher and Bush fan Curt Schilling was stumping for the president Friday in New Hampshire, with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in the wings for an appearance with Bush later in Ohio.
But the stars that counted for Bush on Thursday were those earned by a lineup of retired military officers who joined him before a crowd of more than 10,000 in suburban Cleveland. Chief among the brass, retired Gen. Tommy Franks, who oversaw the combat in the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns, saluted Bush on the stage and said Kerry ``disrespects our troops.''
``God bless you, Tommy,'' Bush said as he took the microphone from him.
Kerry bolted the Midwest for Florida, his campaign sorting through a series of unwelcome developments for the other side.
This late in the game, any miscue is ripe for exploitation, and the Republicans committed a few - in one instance watching former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani explain himself after seeming to blame troops in Iraq for the missing explosives.
Kerry's running mate quickly went on the offensive when word came out that the FBI has begun investigating whether the Pentagon improperly awarded no-bid Iraq reconstruction contracts to Halliburton Co., the Houston-based company formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney.
``At every turn for the past four years, George Bush and Dick Cheney gave out special favors and looked out for their special interest friends,'' Sen. John Edwards said.
He told 3,000 people at a Davenport, Iowa, rally, ``You cannot stand with Halliburton, big oil companies and the Saudi royal family and still stand up for the American people.''
The Bush campaign, seeing an unusual opportunity to make gains in exotic Democratic turf, said Thursday that Cheney would go to Hawaii for a rally Sunday night, a striking investment of time and travel for a state Republicans rarely think they can win.
``We are competitive in the state; this is a very close race,'' spokeswoman Anne Womack said, attributing growing GOP support to fears of terrorism in the tourist haven.
Democrats long have accused the Bush administration of showing favoritism to Halliburton, but had trouble making the charges stick after congressional investigators found the company got no-bid contracts in part because no other firms could do the work.
Still, the matter is far from closed. Documents obtained by The Associated Press show FBI agents sought permission this week to interview Bunnatine Greenhouse, the Army Corps of Engineers' chief contracting officer who went public with allegations that her agency unfairly awarded contracts worth billions of dollars to Halliburton subsidiary KBR.
Almost everywhere that counted, polls found the race exceptionally close. Internal campaign polls found it closer still.
New battleground surveys suggested Kerry was leading in Ohio and Michigan, Bush was ahead in Florida and the two were tied in Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Oregon. Kerry was sending his daughter Alex to campaign in Hawaii, which Democrat Al Gore won by nearly 20 points in 2000.
Bush told USA Today he hasn't spent any time worrying that the campaign could end with no clear winner, as the 2000 race notoriously did.
``It's important that everybody vote, it's important that the elections be fair, and it's important that the election end on election night,'' he said in an interview published Friday.
Kerry, also speaking with USA Today on Thursday, said he believes the outcome will be known Tuesday night, ``just like I believed the Red Sox would win the World Series.''
Bush launched a stinging character assault on Kerry, telling thousands in Saginaw, Mich., ``a president cannot blow in the wind, a president must make tough decisions and stand by them.''
Bush advisers said their candidate was making gains in internal polls until Kerry's relentless attack on the disappearance of nearly 400 tons of explosives from an Iraqi weapons dump - an occurrence dating from the fall of Baghdad last year that both sides acknowledge is not fully understood.
Franks counterpunched, saying troops have destroyed 240,000 tons of Iraqi munitions, control an additional 162,000 tons and have cleared 10,000 ammunition and weapons sites. He said Kerry has no standing to label Bush as negligent on the missing cache.
``He cannot lead troops to victory in a war when he has made it perfectly clear that he does not support the cause,'' Franks said of Kerry.
The Democrat voted to authorize the president to go to war with Iraq but, through a series of labored explanations, said he did so based on flawed intelligence and Bush's assurances that he would build a true coalition and use his warmaking power as a last resort.
In an interview Thursday with ``NBC Nightly News,'' Kerry said that if he'd been president then, ``we might have gone to war,'' but he would have done so in a way that ensured ``the American people weren't carrying the burden and the entire world understood.''
Of Saddam Hussein's fate, Kerry said: ``It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied (with U.N. demands), we might have had to go to war.''
Such a decisive leader.
Uh, then why did you vote against the 1st Gulf War? If Brokaw had the guts, he would ask that question.
Ummm . . . Is it just me or does it seem like they're grabbing onto everything and anything? I'm not sure whether this indicates victory is at hand for them and they're keeping up the attack as to take no chances, or whether this is grasping desperation.
A real candidate, the kind they should have chosen, would be talking about his own programs and visions and changes with details, trying to motivate and enlighten people. All Kerry can do is react to each negative story that hits the news, or make something up to change a neutral event to a negative one. He is the worst candidate I've ever seen on any level. Is this the way he ran his Senate campaigns too?
The guy is a pure, grade A political whore.
"He might be gone."
Then I guess the current flap of the RDX/HMX nuclear triggers doesn't really matter, because Saddam would still control those. We feel safer now, don't we?
They are throwing every little piece of negative information at Bush. But I think it will backfire. And when it does, they will have lost even more credibility.
It's WINNING AT ANY COST.
Yep. They are in full panic mode, running around like chickens with their heads chopped fun.
So true, Bonnie. Sadly all Kerry has to offer in the way of programs and visions is a meaningless catch phrase - "I have a plan!" He's probably as tired of saying it as we are of hearing it.
Early am Boston CBS news... Halliburton FBI investigation trumpeted...'no bid contracts worth millions may have been awarded...Cheney used to be affiliated with Halliburton. Any favoritism would be illegal.' This reported after two Bush bashing ads aimed at MA.. The only thing diverting their attention from Bush bashing is the Red Sox.
So,kerry's saying Bush did the right thing, just didn't hold his tongue right?
The lame thing is it's all recycled stuff.
I'm awaiting Larry Flynt's Halloween appearence.
The woman that is the whistleblower: Bunnatine (Bunny) Greenhouse happens to be a black lady that gives PowerPoint presentations on the needs for minority-owned businesses and women-owned businesses getting a "piece of the pie".
Yep it's all old news. And since Kerry can't win on his own merits, they have become desperate. Halliburton comes up about every two weeks and every time the public doesn't give a damn. It's just politics.
I'd wager that Kerry quote is incorporated into Bush's stump speech before day's end.
In a kerry administration Hussein "MIGHT" have been eliminated. In the Bush administration, Hussein IS gone. As for me and my house, we vote for certainty.
He's an abomination, an embarrassment to be leading a major political party at the Presidential level.
Now that I'm seeing names under consideration for his cabinet... DAMN... why not just ask the entire Democrat Senate to keep him company in the Oval! Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Graham and maybe McCain. This is definitely not the way to run America but fits perfectly with the UN-loving prism Kerry tries to fit everything into just like how he can't see Iraq, he only sees Vietnam no matter the conflict, no matter the facts.
Yes. I have to wonder why he voted against the first
Gulf War. Hussein had actually invaded and occupied
another country and was headed for more if he wasn't
stopped. - There was Kerry's purported "world"
coalition and passed global test.
"Because if he hadn't complied (with U.N. demands), we might have had to go to war."
Uh, to the best of my recollection, they didn't and we did...
What a jackass.
Good gad.
Of Saddam Hussein's fate, Kerry said: ``It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied (with U.N. demands), we might have had to go to war.''
Rush will be all over this - I hope!
Spineless nitwit.
Thanks Johnny. You've said exactly what President Bush, a real Commander in Chief, did.
Isn't Halliburton the only company that does this sort of work?
There can't be more than two people who believe that Kerry could have persuaded the French and Germans to send troops to Iraq.
It would seem that the Kerry crowd has a great deal of self interest in keeping the Halliburton story going.
(I'm on a friends dial up so searches are difficult....here's some "dot connecting" so far.)
"While she has been critical of Halliburton, liberal columnist Molly Ivins notes that "Democrats are involved in similar dealings." She cites former CIA director John Deutsch, who serves on the board of Schlumberger. <<<<< A French competitor of Halliburton.
She also failed to note that another board member of Schlumberger is Jamie Gorelick, deputy Attorney General under Clinton. She was accused by Bush Attorney General John Ashcroft of erecting the "wall" that kept U.S. intelligence agencies from cooperating to discover and prevent the 9/11 terrorist plot.
Deutsch, who also served under Clinton, could have been prosecuted for mishandling classified information. But Clinton gave him a last minute pardon before he left office.
Jamie Gorelick is a partner at Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr
She also serves on several boards, including the Fannie Mae Foundation,<<<<<<<<< the head of Fannie was appt.ed by Clinton and Fannie is under investigation for overstated profits) United Technologies Corporation, Schlumberger,
Limited, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Harvard College Board of Overseers<<<<<<< Harvard is a big contributor to Kerry Camapaign???
From http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.asp , http://www.tray.com/fecinfo/ and
Gorelick, Jamie S
3/26/2003 $1,000.00
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Fannie Mae/Vice Chair -[Contribution]
Gorelick, Jamie S
5/23/2003 $1,000.00
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Fannie Mae/Vice Chair -[Contribution]
Gorelick, Jamie S Ms.
5/4/2004 $1,000.00
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
United Technologies/Member Board of -[Contribution]
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE <----- competitor???????
Gorelick, Jamie S. Ms.
4/28/2003 $2,000.00
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
United Technologies/Member Board of -[Contribution]
Andrew Gould Andrew Gould is chairman and chief executive officer of Schlumberger Limited
Jean-Marc Perraud Jean-Marc Perraud is Executive Vice President and CFO of Schlumberger Limited.
Research help needed for #34!!!!
Ummm, Mr. Kerry? What was that about "It's ok for Red Sox Fans" to not be grounded in reality???? Yeah, you believed, my ass. Liar.
They were the only ones who were able to get to the place they wanted work in the amount of time available.
When I worked at Pratt Whitney we competed with GE and Rolls, but we got no bid contracts because of logistics.
Same thing here. Halliburton was ready and in place.
And contrary to rats claims, Cheney stepped down so there would be no conflict of interest claims by the dems.
Of course, Gorelick's "wall" memo while Assistant Attorney General, contributed to the denial of the search warrant for Zacarwi's (? right name) computer in Minnesota that might have unraveled the 9/11 plot in advance.
In short, Gorelick is just a high-rent version of a welfare cheat, who sees the government as a rigged slot machine that will pay off for her every time she gets to pull the lever.
Did I miss anything?
Congressman Billybob
"'no bid contracts worth millions may have been awarded"
Because there was no one else to bid or capable of doing the work !!!
And in a strange coincidence, they're both on the Democratic ticket.
Moussaui. Good observations about Gorelick. Another member of the Party of the Criminally Insane.
I believe Halliburton got into this sole-source relationship with the government for a specified period of time, and through a bidding process. The thing is, like you said, the Pentagon doesn't have time to go through a bidding process everytime they need something. So they go through a renewal every five years or so.
And Halliburton admitted they paid more than low bid for the fuel oil. It was from a source that made it safer to deliver, I forget the details. But they were paying for a premium on safety. Something the democrat and bureaucrat pinheads will never understand.
Cheney sold all his retirement investments in the company to try to satisfy the rats. Did it help? Heck no.
Well, her sitting on the commission that investigated the results of her glorious "wall" was rather spectacular hubris.
Individual Halliburton employees who have contributed to Kerry.
Gorelick serves on several boards, including the Fannie Mae Foundation, United Technologies Corporation, Schlumberger, Limited, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Harvard College Board of Overseers, America's Promise, the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Local Initiatives Support Corporation, and The National Park Foundation.
Didn't Halliburton's original no-bid contracts come from the Clinton administration?
My military brother says that Halliburton really is the only company with this sort of capability, and that they also took care of all the bases in Kosovo during the Clinton administration. FWIW.
The problem is that it takes days to sink in...and there are issues that are still up in the air and not settled. We're so close to the election that things will not be finished sinking in until after the election - quite aside from early voters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
No legislative activities on smart grid have been identified for Alabama.
Alabama's Public Service Commission (PSC) began looking at Distributed Generation in the form of standby generator capacity prior to 1996. Time-of-use rates, hourly and interruptible accounts were evaluated as early as 2000. By 2006, Alabama Power, one of the largest electric suppliers in Alabama, had moved to real-time pricing for industrials, followed by critical peak pricing for residential consumers in 2008, but with time-of-use service only offered to a limited group of businesses. Starting in 2009, Alabama went from only demand-based rates for industrials to residential customers having access to direct load control. [2, 3]
"In June 2007, the Alabama Public Service Commission decided not to adopt PURPA Standard 14 ("Time-Based Metering and Communications") as enacted in EPACT 2005. Its decision, which followed its Staff's May 2007 recommendations, states that EPACT 1252 is unnecessary as Alabama Power Company (1) already offers TOU rates to "all available customer classes, as required by the standard in Section 1252"; (2) provides "appropriate meters, as also required" by EPACT 1252; and (3) is deploying smart meters." [1]
The demand response for industrials started with measuring only the fifteen minute capacity at the meter and allowing the customer to control their capacity between a set maximum and a minimum that is based on the previous eleven months.
Direct load control allows for 50% cycling of controlled equipment during the summer at the company's discretion up to 120 cycled hours per year.
Time-of-use rates break the cost for electricity into periods on a seasonal basis with either on-peak, intermediate, or off-peak pricing.
The real-time pricing is based on the quoted hourly price available to the consumer eight hours in advance of the day the power flows.
The standby generator capacity allows the utility to take control of the consumer's generator and fuel supply for up to 240 hours per year.
Alabama Power
- Alabama Power Residential Rates
- Alabama Power Business Rates
See the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) for information on consumer-owned Cooperatives: http://www.nreca.org/members/MemberDirectory/Pages/default.aspx
Alabama has production incentives for renewable energy generation for both commercial and residential production as well as a state loan program for schools and the local government on renewable energy generation.
More information can be found in the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE): http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?re=1&ee=1&spv=0&st=0&srp=1&state=AL
State Energy Office:
- Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs Energy Division
State Authority Dealing with Energy Regulation:
- Alabama Public Service Commission
- Docket Search: http://www.psc.state.al.us/SearchOrders.asp
Code of Alabama
Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE): http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?re=1&ee=1&spv=0&st=0&srp=1&state=AL
[1] Demand Response and Smart Metering Policy Actions Since the Energy Policy Act of 2005: A Summary for State Officials, Prepared by the U.S. Demand Response Coordinating Committee for The National Council on Electricity Policy, Fall 2008. URL: http://www.oe.energy.gov/DocumentsandMedia/NCEP_Demand_Response_1208.pdf
[2] Alabama Power Business Electricity Pricing. URL: http://www.alabamapower.com/pricing/al_rates.asp
[3] Alabama Power Residential Electricity Pricing. URL: http://www.alabamapower.com/pricing/bestpricing.asp


text:
Which job should I pursue? How do I spend this money? Which person should I marry? What church should I attend?
Big or little, we're making decisions every day, and many times throughout the day. The choices we make as free agents demonstrate a major outworking of the imago dei; it's one of the main ways we bear God's image. And as Christians, we are constantly mindful of our mandate and greatest desire to live every moment for the glory of God.
But do we? How do we know we're living for the glory of God, making the right decisions?
It seems increasingly common to hear of Christians who profess a desire to live for God's glory, but also seem relatively unconcerned about knowing if they've followed God's will. They seem at ease, unperplexed, and confident about decision-making. Why? Because, they say, God is speaking to them, telling them what He wants them to do.
Now that the rabid subjectivism of charismatic theology has thoroughly saturated the broad but shallow ground of evangelicalism, it's bearing some ugly fruit. It showed up in Blackaby and King's Experiencing God books as a mystical approach to decision-making. Rick Warren chimed in with his first blockbuster, The Purpose-Driven Church, instructing us to catch God's wave, and ride it out. (Cowabunga.)
But those guys are complete amateurs compared with this younger crop of mystics. It has become fairly commonplace nowadays to hear how God told someone to plant a church, make a strategic decision, and even leave a church. Here are a few recent examples:
The sad thing is, those men are all shepherds, influential pastors who are leading entire congregations into the darkness of their own subjectivism. Would they advocate the same approach to personal decision-making they've used to make ministry decisions? If not, why not? If so, doesn't anyone see how reckless that is?
All that aside, here's the good news: you can make decisions with bold confidence, knowing you stand on the firm ground of objective truth. God's Word is clear, and it has a lot to say about knowing His will.
You want to know how to follow God's will and live for His glory? Stick around, and don't touch that dial—"Following God's Will" is coming up next on the GTY Blog.
Travis AllenManaging Director
You have 3000 characters
remaining for your comment. Note: All comments must be approved before being posted.
Email me when someone posts a comment.
Cowabunga? Stick around, and don't touch that dial? What is this, the 50s?!
Maybe if you don't learn from the theology of these guys you insult, you could at least learn a little bit about how they reach this generation. I know the Word is what this generation really needs, and I think these guys know that too. None of the men you've insulted here would tell anyone to throw out their Bibles and listen to God's voice outside of the Word.
One thing of note is you haven't once used God's Word in this post to either correct your "opponents" or to back up what you're saying. If you believe what you're saying, I'd prefer to see you magnify God through His Word rather than attempt to ridicule Godly men like Driscoll, Chan, and other important figures in this generation of Christianity.
I did however, find this post challenging and it gave me something to think about.
Thank you
You have 3000 characters
remaining for your comment. Note: All comments must be approved before being posted.
Email me when someone posts a comment.
Thanks for stopping by to comment, Tom. You'll have to forgive the tongue-in-cheek 50s references...I don't know what got into me.
Yes, I'll be the first to admit these guys know a lot about reaching this generation. They are new media savvy, and I appreciate how adept they've been at getting their message out.
But that's right at the heart of our concern. What is this generation learning from these men? What they do, not merely what they say, is a better barometer for what they truly believe. And that's true for all of us, isn't it? The methodology we practice says more about our belief system and worldview than the theology we profess.
"A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher" (Luke 6:40). Students often learn more from the way their teachers live than what they teach—they mimic their habits, follow their methods, and learn how they make decisions. So, that's what we think is at stake.
As for using God's Word to instruct, correct, and support our points, you're absolutely right. We'll get to that in upcoming posts; this post was meant merely to introduce the series.
Finally, if you're taking away any insult from this post, keep in mind that I've merely challenged what these men have said. If challenging someone's words is insulting, you'd better put a helmet on.
Again, thanks for your comments. You made some good points and I look forward to hearing more from you.
You have 3000 characters
remaining for your comment. Note: All comments must be approved before being posted
What do you mean by "free agents" in the following sentence?
The choices we make as free agents demonstrate a major outworking of the imago dei; it's one of the main ways we bear God's image.
Tom #1,
I think it is bit of an over reaction to say Travis was "ridiculing" these men. Since when does critiquing and questioning one's theological practice equate to ridicule?
These men invoke serious authority when they claim "God is telling me" thus and such. You had better be sure God is telling you such and such to make such dogmatic claims. Yet, what I see from them is a vague uncertainty. Chan, for example, says he has to go on some sort of walk about to determine where God wants him to minister next. Is God unclear? Why didn't God tell him in the first place? Why an entire year or more to discover God's will in matters of ministry especially when he already had a thriving ministry? This type of decision making process is alarming and it is troubling to see it being modeled for younger, less mature Christians as a means to true spirituality.
By "free agents" I simply mean that when we make choices, we are choosing what we want and acting in accordance with what we want. No one is holding a gun to our head to make a decision or act against what we want.
I fully accept the notion that human freedom is limited to a certain set of boundaries (e.g., of sin, of creatureliness, of finitude).
Thanks for the clarifying question.
I am just trying to understand your post. So you are saying the way, for example, that Francis articulates his move, that God is leading him, or that he feels this where God wants him, is not the way that he should say it? So instead, he should just say that He wants to move, or that the desire of his heart is to move and being Spirit-filled, walking with the Lord, that He is free to do that in God's will. Is that correct?
I remember Pastor Macarthur talking about fasting for his son for nine days and at the end of the nine days a lady brought him a sandwich who had never done so before, and that because of his prayers and relationship with the Lord, that he knew God was communicating to him that he could stop fasting. I think that these men, like Francis, are doing the same, in that, they believe that God's will is objective truth found in scripture and that it is not hard to find, and in prayer over their lives and the desires of their heart, they move toward those desires. Maybe they need to articulate that better though to avoid confusion of discovering God's will.
My guess is if Francis said, "I'm leaving because I'm uncomfortable here and I'd rather do something else," there would certainly be a lot of discussion, but it would be different, and he wouldn't be included in this post. Instead, he has invoked divine authority for his decision which is unverifiable.
For Pastor MacArthur decided to stop fasting, we have to remember at least three things: 1) it was a unique situation that didn't involve decisions that affected anyone else, 2) he wasn't invoking divine authority for his decision, and 3) he referred to feeling peace about it, not hearing from God.
Just to be clear, all I intended to accomplish in the post was to introduce a series. But good questions nonetheless, and here you go...
When someone uses the phrase, "God told me to do thus and such," he is going beyond what he can legitimately claim. He might as well say, "Thus saith the Lord (to me)," and if he's prepared to be that bold, then he bears a huge burden of proof. No one should believe him or follow him until he proves it.
If he's not prepared to be that bold, then he should stick with, "This is what the Word of God teaches, and this is what I think I should do, or this is what I want to do, based on that teaching." That's a humble way of admitting our own fallibility and limitations, and putting the onus of responsibility on ourselves for our endeavors.
My concern with saying, "God told me to" is that it puts a divine imprimatur on our desires, methodologies, plans, and strategies. Some who may question that approach but are too nervous, timid, or polite to press the point, they simply go along with it. Others begin to adopt the same kind of language for their endeavors, and speaking that way becomes contagious. It's not helpful, and it often causes great distress and confusion in the spiritual lives of regular folks.
Thanks for your helpful question.
As a 25-year listener to Dr. MacArthur and GTY, I must confess how disappointed I was in this article. Having listened to Francis Chan on scores of occasions, I am saddened to see him lumped in and discounted as a mystic. His whole aim in life is to simply be consumed with Christ. He has said over and over that what is happening with him fits in to the overarching narrative of what happened in Acts. See this video (http://timmybrister.com/2010/10/25/the-weirdness-of-our-generation/). Brister also notes:
"Francis Chan talks about the weirdness of our generation and the areas incongruent with biblical Christianity. I hope we have enough humility and self-examination that we don't have to wait until our generation passes to discover the things we have uncritically adopted which have little or nothing to do with the kind of Christian faith we see demonstrated in Scripture."
Chan has searched and discerned for a considerable amount of time how all this jibes with Holy Scripture and has never shied away from this. He has looked and examined and prayed to see if what is happening with him squares with what happened to men in Scripture.
And to follow up, after watching the video regarding the "gay bar," he seemed to say that the owner of the gay bar came to Christ, and that owner gave the guy that place to use for a new work! Should that be something one celebrates, rather than not tell it fully in order to make a point about something?
Again, long-time listener and prayerful supporter, but this and other items being sent out against others trying to make an impact for Christ, even if it may be off the conventional path is very concerning.
Matthew Perry writes under #9,
Chan has searched and discerned for a considerable amount of time how all this jibes with Holy Scripture and has never shied away from this. He has looked and examined and prayed to see if what is happening with him squares with what happened to men in Scripture.
I'll zero in on your last sentence. The difference with men in Scripture is that they knew with absolutely certainty what God was saying. God's Will was not revealed to them like a video game where a person has to unlock a series of clues in order to determine what God wants so as to move on to the next level. Chan's justification for his decision to throw this in the lap of God leading him sets a dangerous precedent for the immature believer.
I find the local Acts 29 churches remind me of the movie Wild In The Streets from 1968. That of course shows my age but it really is appropriate as the movie was based upon the younger generation telling the older generation you don't get it so get out of the way. "Fourteen or Fight" was changed to "Fifteen and Ready". Here's the end of the story; maybe not just the movie. Everyone either grows older or they die younger! In the movie it started with mandatory retirement centers (camps) for anyone over 35 and eventually the age was dropped to anyone over 30. The leaders were always guys in there 30's leading teens but one day the leader reached 35 and was too old and now considered washed up. Nothing new here. Every generation thinks it's wiser and better than their parents generation is or was. Acts 29 is so driven to not be legalistic (as their parents were) to such an extreme that they are incorporating their own brand
of legalism. They've also gone from business casual to slobs. There God is the God of holes (in their blue jeans) and that's not holy! History repeats itself generation to generation. Just finished 2 Kings this morning. Thank God for a few of the kings but most walk in the way of their fathers and did evil in the sight of the Lord.
The title of the video you mentioned is "Planting a Church in a Gay Bar in the Bible Belt," so, I think I have represented him fairly. And yes, I'd say that's just a bit off the "conventional path." That should concern you too.
But even more to the point of this post is that he's claiming God told him to do it. Doesn't that cause you to raise an eyebrow? Aren't you the least bit concerned about this "God told me to" language?
The video clearly shows that this man felt that God was leading him to plant a church in that area and without provocation this owner who had come to know the Lord crossed his path and wanted to know if this man wanted to use this building which happened to be a former gay bar. Did you not watch the content of the video, or did you just see the provocative title and go from there? If not, that concerns me even more.
It's as if we are supposed to hold to the Scriptures, but if something happens to someone that squares with an experience of a Christ follower in the Scriptures, we dismiss it. You said, "The difference with men in Scripture is that they knew with absolutely certainty what God was saying. God's Will was not revealed to them like a video game where a person has to unlock a series of clues in order to determine what God wants so as to move on to the next level." Are you certain that this is what is happening? Are you certain that God did not open this path, and they are giving credit where credit is due? It seems that we are getting on them about being undiscerning about God's call, when we are doing the same thing toward them.
Which video are you talking about? Please be clear, because your accusations against me aren't making any sense.
For the record, I've watched everything I linked to, several times. So, please, no more insinuations about my lack of integrity.
Also, your second paragraph is in response to Fred Butler's comment, not mine.
Thanks Travis!
Just to be clear--my comments were never intended to go after your lack of integrity. It was an inquiry. I was familiar with the background of the man's story which I've indicated above. I'm sorry if this disagreement in perspective like this seemed to infer you had a lack of integrity.
My apologies--I did intend that for Fred.
I have long been grateful to the ministry at GTY. Thanks to Dr. MacArthur's tapes which I first listened to in 1985 were used by God to help me cast my lot as an expositor. I pray he keeps on preaching another 40+ years, if God wills.
I would like to correct something that is amiss in opening post; "The sad thing is, those men are all shepherds"
(1) They are not shepherds.
(2) As Acts 29 church models have Sunday worship or Saturday evening worship and then small group meetings through the week. Prayer is only on the calendar maybe once a quarter or twice a year. In business the axiom is "you can't execute on a plain higher than you plan" and in the bible it teaches "you can't pray on a plain higher than your scripture reading, study, and meditation." If prayer is an after thought for a church what's that say? Ditto small groups when they leave the last 5 minutes for prayer. I asked another pastor of another church plant where that church has prayer as 1 of it's 4 pillars; "when's prayer?" since they too did the Sunday worship and then only small groups. He at least got the point and started scheduling prayer each Sunday before worship.
(3) Benny Hinn and other charismatics always say they have a direct word or revelation from God; does the company you keep matter?
(4) Larry the Cable guys says, "Walmart shoppers dress better!"
Hi, may the Lord continue his blessings towards this ministry of GTY. Some months ago I decided to cancel my membership at a local church all my family and I attended. We were very involved in the ministry; the pastoral family was great to us. When I started assisting this church, I had recently, in my house, asked the Lord for His forgiveness and for Him to accept me into his Glory. I became like a sponge absorbing everything 'Christianity' (TBN) had to offer. The services at this church were like an extension of TBN, meaning that certain people were speaking in the name of God (more like for God), others telling one another "the Holy Spirit told me to tell you."
Something happened from the moment of my conviction that a hunger for the written Word of God awakened in me. The church leadership kept on bringing 'prophets' to fortune tell people 'God's Plan' with them. Not to mention what God told the leadership they were to do. The situation became so scary to me when a person shouted from one corner of the worship room to the other telling the pastor that the Spirit had just told him that He was going to "fill-up all the chairs in the church with new members." Later I learned that the pastor had recently resigned from his job to become a full-time-salaried pastor. All the messages were topical in nature with little to none bible exposition, but extra heavy in the music and repeating the same thing over and over, at same time the Spirit 'speaking' to them at their will.
Thanks to the solid teaching of Dr. MacArthur, Alistair Beg, RC Sproul, James McDonald, and J Vernon McGee, and more importantly the hunger for the written Word of God implanted in me by Sovereign Grace, I am no longer a member of that church and because of that solid teaching and reading I found a church that is strong in the teaching where my children are learning the Word of God in a biblical way.
All this is to say to be careful with those that speak for God, or God told them to tell you, or God told me I need to do this. Mathew records the words of Jesus in chapter 24:21-25, that speaks about this issue. When individuals 'speak for God' in the basis of "God told me to", the parishioners tend to follow them because it is some sort of telling people there is Jesus in what He just told me.
God spoke to the prophets, and they wrote it down. Then God became flesh and spoke, and his life and words were written down by His followers. There is nothing really that needs adding; the book tells you how everything started, and how everything is going to end, and in the middle it tells you what must be done for salvation. What else do you need from God? I guess the point is, trust God by his spoken recorded Word, and believe in your very core that Jesus is Lord of your entire being, salvation will knock on your spiritual door. Be careful with these subjective, unverifiable revelations some are claiming.
While I agree with that you are saying theologically, is the purpose of this blog post to help people understand God's will or to warn them of pastors you think they need to be warned of? After reading this post it seemed to me that your purpose in this blog was to call out Chan, Driscoll, and company. I think that it is fine to do call people out, though I am just not sure that the Grace to You blog is an appropriate vehicle by which to do that. I think that if you were truly trying to help people understand God's will you would attack faulty ideas (such as subjectivism) and not call out Pastors by name.
I also wonder what is the benefit of calling these Christian pastors out by name. These people are proclaiming the gospel and making disciples. They are calling for young men to be leaders in their families, and they champion expository preaching. Though you may disagree with them, is saying they are leading people into darkness really accurate? Surely we must protect the gospel and call out so called Christian teachers when their life and practice are against the gospel. If you are really trying to teach people to be discerning don't you think it is a much better approach to teach against ideas. This blog advertised how to know God's will, but I feel that the only thing people are going to be talking about is GTY's "beef" with Acts 29.
I watched the Francis Chan interview with Harris and Driscoll. While I, like you disagree with Chan's approach to making this decision, I think he really is trying to know God's Will and is trying to honor Him with his decision. Don't you think that someone like that should receive different treatment than what you have given him? He is not a false teacher. Francis Chan is one of you guys. He graduated from TMC and TMS. I believe the college still has a relationship with him. I know he spoke there 2 years ago.
I think that there is a clear lack of bold people in the church today and I am thankful for Macarthur and Johnson's boldness to proclaim the truth. However, when we are dealing with obviously born-again pastors we need to be firm but extend grace. If found out a ministry closely affiliated with my alma mater was calling me out as someone who is leading people to darkness, I would be hurt.
(for those who haven't seen the videos)
Mr. Early (the first one) said he thought God told him to get a job at a "gay rock and roll bar", then told him he was to plant a church there, and then came through with the plan, almost miraculously.
The second one (Pastor Tim), got "dreams and visions", went and got his Master's of Divinity, and opened a church in a most questionable part of town (though rather well placed strategically), and is now (or was then) becoming prosperous.
The third one (Mr. Chan), just says God's calling him to better things (hopefully), not knowing what's going on, or what's going to happen. All this AFTER starting and keeping a prospering church.
I find it interesting that the people interviewing these guests saw no need to ask for specific examples of "the calling" from them. This speaks more to a "If God told you, or showed you something, it must be right" mentality, which makes any doubting, or need for further explanation, necessary.
Re "The sad thing is, those men are all shepherds, influential pastors who are leading entire congregations into the darkness of their own subjectivism."
There IS a danger there, but, just as history has taught us, "You can't argue with success", right??
I fully understand the compexity of claiming to have had some divine encounter with God and how others may wonder why God is'nt speaking to them. I would definetly put anything I may think I have heard from God to the test of what is written in his word. If it doesnt match up then there is a problem. As for opening a church at a former gay bar, I see that as a victory. I say we we start a church in every former adult bookstore, gay bar, house of prostitution or any other ground that was given up to the devil. Lets take it all back and claim it for jesus. But thats just me talking, I didnt hear this from God, or at least I don't think so... :)
Craig writes,
Francis Chan is one of you guys. He graduated from TMC and TMS. I believe the college still has a relationship with him. I know he spoke there 2 years ago.
I'm a graduate from TMS. I can testify that there are many individuals who are graduates who no longer "sync" with our point of view. Some have gone really off the beaten path while others not so much. That of course is fine if not full blown apostasy, and as you note, we extend to many of them grace. But the extension of grace does not mean we are prevented from naming them by name, particularly if they have a public ministry; nor does it mean we are prevented from saying their ideas are unbiblical or problematic if such are. We are under obligation to say so, especially if the person was once affiliated with us and now has a far reaching ministry.
Thanks Travis, for defining and supporting your original good point. It is such a relief to me. I think, and I am no scholar or anything, but if you do yourself what God tells you to do, you don't need to tell anyone. If you feel you need to tell someone, maybe you are upsetting others and want that as a defense. It is like a person who sins and when confronted says, "Oh it is not that bad you know I am a good Christian." It is using God's name to get out of fair confrontation. I believe you should never say, "God told me you should do so and so..." because I only think He tells me what I need to do to follow Him, I don't think God tells me what someone else should do, right? Well anyway I think this sounds interesting. Thanks for bringing it up.
Thank you for your questions, comments, and overall concern for the good reputation of GTY and this blog.
You believe "when we are dealing with obviously born-again pastors we need to be firm but extend grace." We agree. In fact, when the grace of God appeared, bringing salvation to us, it "instruct[ed] us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age."
In other words, grace is firm, and it sometimes hurts in order to heal. We care enough about the truth and the spiritual benefit of believers to say uncomfortable things, to confront and point out serious error. And the men cited in this post are in error on this issue, and they are leading many into the darkness of their own subjectivism.
Names, personalities, affiliations, associations, or whatever supposed merit exists in a particular ministry--none of that should put someone off limits. If there's a pattern of serious error, it's loving to confront it for the good of those under the influence of those men and their ministries.
Craig, if we shielded those affliated with TMC, TMS, GCC, and GTY from criticism and challenge--whenever they practice serious error--you'd be the first to cry "foul," wouldn't you? You should be.
Lastly, lest this get sidetracked to a discussion about one man, the point in "calling these Christian pastors out by name" is to inform, teach, instruct, and disciple other Christians. The men we used as counter-examples (how not to follow God's will) are by no means unexceptional in terms of their reach and influence. Many follow their manner of living, their ministry methodologies. These men don't have to be wolves to become the subjects of our warnings.
Again, thanks for raising your concerns. I hope that bit of explanation helps you see why we feel compelled to do what we do.
I watched the interview with Francis Chan conducted by Mark Driscoll and Joshua Harris. Here are a few quotes from Francis Chan that should give clarity as to why there are concerns with his approach to decision making while holding the office of Pastor:
"I've read the Book. I got this theology in my head. I have all these thoughts and convictions. Let me just start something fresh with all of those convictions rather than constantly tweaking something that I may have possibly taken in the wrong direction for a little while."
"I don't even know where I'm going to end up...let me just erase some of this. Maybe there's more of a fog that I'm in than I realize."
"I just don't want to be deceived."
"Maybe some of it is that pursuit of poverty thing...I don't think so. Right now I believe it is motivated by love."
Whatever he, Chan, may be one thing is for sure...he certainly is confused...and God is not the author of confusion 1 Corinthians 14:33
Returning to the parenting posts, I would love to see one that helps us in the area of Christians dating unbelievers (especially youth). Don't know if we can make it happen, since GTY is "moving on" to the will of God. Maybe, "What is God's will for dating?" :)
Thanks for all the investment into Christian ministries, GTY. I appreciate it all!
I think it is a little far fetched to call Driscoll and Chan mystics. I have listened to Chan speak multiple times about his decision to leave Cornerstone and he more or less says the same thing. (i believe he even says it it in the video link) He feels like the spirit led him to do this by what he has read in the scriptures. In fact I just recently heard him state in sermon I tracked down that he didn't here gods voice literally say to him to leave his church or anything like that. But to go to where people need to be ministered to. I think both Driscoll and Chan are great bible teachers who's main concern is teaching people what it means to be true disciples, not just counterfeit Christians who think they are saved. They are both expository teachers and I know Driscoll is a Calvinist. His theology is not much different then what GTY teaches. I listen Driscoll almost as much as GTY and there are some minor differences but he is definately not a mystic or in the same league as Benny Hinn any any of these TV prosperity gospel preachers.
@ post #31
I understand what Keith said of Francis Chan. I was in a group to watch him on video. When he was telling about the book of Jeremiah when God said before you were born, I knew you in the womb. He made
a expression like being shocked and really confuse about it and did'nt know what the verse meant. Yes, God is not the Author of confusion.
I saw that same video, He was not confused.. that was intense emotion as he went on to say that his mother died while giving birth to him and that god had determined that etc etc. Did you not watch the rest of the sermon? He goes onto say that he made his decsion not because he heard a voice telling him to but that because the bible is telling him to. All he is doing is a missionary trip in our country.
It looks as if this new blog series will generate more interest than the series on families and parenting. I am a little disappointed that the articles on parenting didn't receive more interest.
Anyway, the truth matters! And it matters more than people's feelings. If someone is in error, the most loving thing to do is to point out error, even though people might not like it. Even Paul called out people by name: Alexander the coppersmith, Philetus, and Hymenaeus.
The unloving thing would be to say nothing, to allow people to be deceived by wayward teachers or attacked by wolves in sheep's clothing. I am not yet saying that the three men mentioned are wolves in sheeps clothing; I don't have enough information about them to make that kind of judgment. BUT, it definitely concerns me when people do something, and then throw out the statement, "God told me to!" as a justification, and then expect that nobody should question their actions, even if what they are doing goes directly against what God has revealed in the Bible. Talk is cheap. Anyone can say "God told me to". I want to see people back up their actions with God's Word.
It does seem like the subject of God's Will brings out the comments, doesn't it? As I think about your reference to our last series on parenting, I see a connection between the two. Our parents (if believers) are really the first people we see flesh out this doctrine—and teach us by example how to find and follow God's will. Not a small lesson. It makes me thankful I didn't have "radical" parents...
Maybe I missed something, I only watched two of the videos and only one of them in its entirety but which one of these guys said that God told them to do something and it went against God's word? What I know of both Chan and Driscoll is if they say something like that it IS becuase it is stated in the bible. I have literally heard Chan say in a sermon he DIDNT here a voice or anything radical like that, but it is what was revealed to him in scripture. God tells me things all the time, every single time I open my bible God is literally talking to me. I don't think that makes me a mystic or wierd or anything like that if that is what I believe. If this blog is going to be a bash session on two well known Christian leaders I will probably not participate. It seems like the GTY leaders don't like how these other guys do ministry. Are we going to bring up guys that are affiliated with GTY but believe in infant baptism. Is RC Sproul a wolf in sheeps clothing or a wayward teacher? Or on his way to being one? Obviously he believes it is at least implied in the bible, which means he believes God said it because that is what he teaches. But it does not say it ANYWHERE in scripture. I dont think that makes him any less of a man of God or a great teacher.
Anyway, I know, at least two of the three men mentioned are doing great things for the kingdon and great bible teachers. Just like Macarthur is.
The reason I didnt participate in the last series was because it didn't pertain ot me. The last series I participated in was the creation series and that was short lived for me becuase someone implied that I was an "unregenerate messenger of satan" because of a couple of questions I asked. I didn't even get into any theological veiws on the series. Just asked some questions. Anyway, I'll probably continue to follow the blogs but if it turns into a bash fest then I will probably not particpate in this one either. I do love Macarthurs teachings and I am curious about the infant baptism question now that I have posted it. It seems people teaching that would be a wayward teacher just as much as some of these other guys who really believe they are doing what the bible tells them to do.
This series is not intended to be a bashing session, but to examine how to make decisions biblically. I don't think Francis can legitimately say that his decision to leave his ministry came from Scripture. He may have seen some principles in Scripture and applied them to his situation, but his decision was not an act of obedience to Scripture.
In the same way when I decided to attend seminary on the basis of my subjective call to ministry it was not out of obedience to a passage in Scripture. God did not tell me to go to seminary in any sense of the term. But I used discernment, wisdom, and counsel to make the decision which I truly believe was God's will.
I'm not sure what future posts will deal with, but I can assure you that GTY is not interested in bashing people just because there is disagreement. Unfortunately, it is seen as acceptable to attack an idea, but once you attach a name to the idea it's called bashing.
Thus far this blog has attempted to touch "hot topics" for the sake of clarity and discernment. We probably won't see a paedo-baptism series on here any time soon, but there are several resources on this website if you want to study it.
Did you watch the first two videos I linked to? Nothing about Chan, nothing about Driscoll. Can you stick to the challenge I posed--the problem of saying, "God told me to"--rather than talking about "bash sessions," defending these guys, and bringing up infant baptism? We're asking a specific, and legitimate question. As pastors, these men are accountable for their influence on less mature Christians.
So, what of it? Do you think it's okay to make major decision in your life by responding to what God is telling you? If you'll watch the videos, you'll see that these men are not hearing from God by reading their Bibles. What chapter and verse pointed the one man to plant a church in a gay bar? What about God leading the other through dreams and visions?
And if you won't acknowledge the difference between what these men are saying and doing, and the whole tenor of R.C. Sproul's ministry...well, it's sidetracking this conversation--not helpful. This is no bash session; it's a legitimate question. So if you want to contribute and defend the men I've linked to, fine. Just make a defense about the issue we've raised.
I know GTY's motives are not to bash, but I also know that the majority of the people who post on this site are not in ministry at GTY. I am curious to see how the next several posts go and if there is anything else posted specifically about Chan and his decision to leave cornerstone and pursue ministry in the inner cities. He does claim he is being obedient to scrpture and for all we know he used the same process that you did when you decided to enter seminary. From what I have heard him state his motive is to fullfill the great commission and he does believe his decsion was biblical. Is it a legitimate claim? I geuss time will tell on that. I have heard his sermons and read one of his books and unless I missed something he doesn't say or teach anything that was unbiblical. In fact the book I read was more or less based on lordship salvation theology, frankly I was surprised by it. I was expecting some free grace easy believism teachings but was pleasantly surprised.
I have checked the resources on the infant baptism and I know where Macarthur stands on it, I can assume that is also GTY's stand. My question was about people who teach that it is biblical, are they also considered wayward teachers?
Just for the sake of clarity, your comment about being called an "unregenerate messenger of Satan" during the GTY Creation series doesn't make sense. That comment was made before you ever posted on our blog. Plus, it was clearly a reference to the men we featured in the video links (such as N.T. Wright and others) who were calling into question the plain teaching of Genesis—not you.
If you check out that particular comment thread, you'll note we reprimanded that specific commenter, and addressed his ungracious tone for the sake of others like you who did not share our convictions on Genesis. Beyond that, we provided clear answers to all the questions you raised in your comment.
Just setting the record straight …
I cannot wait for this series! As someone who was "rescued" out of the charismatic church I know how things work. The PRESSURE to "get a word from God" and report in next week....I saw many a person completely fall out of church for this alone and many more take a mere fleshly feeling [albeit good things]and confuse them with a word from God. This emotion driven Christianity is rampant and along with it, instead of reading the bible they read a plethora of books by "christian" writers like they were the bible. This is my BIGGEST heartache--to see good people completely deceived due to ignorance and lack of personal bible study [you are shunned if you question things]. These same people tell me constantly they they could never leave this church for one that is bogged down in the minutia of scripture and in the same breath bemoan the fact that the bible is so confusing. Their main criteria for a church is the praise and worship style and how they "feel" but honestly I see nothing they do that glorifies God!!! It took God a while to straighten me out and restore the joy of my salvation. Now I have learned to just be observant to things and people around me and make the most of God opportunities when they present themselves. I guess I have just come to a place where I realize that the more I learn and study the more God puts in my path and opens doors for me to witness. I just get on with may life and try to be a light and be ready in season and out. Boy has it been light and easy, the burden to be a "super saint" was killing me. I have no idea who most of these people you are talking about are but I do know who Rick Warren is and I agree with John MacArthur on this 100%. The buzz word used to be "don't put God in a box" but isn't that exactly what they do with all these programs. God just wants a personal relationship with each of His children and He will use our unique personalities, skills, etc for His glory. What I see in the Word is God isn't looking for super stars, He is looking for humble servants--doesn't is say to do things quietly and our reward will be in heaven? As for calling these "teachers" out-please continue because I have used the material from this website on MANY occasion to try and help lead people out of emotionville. Thank you.
there is nothing new under the sun. My experience was the same as you describe. We serve a big God! Amen!
I never said I was called anything on that particular thread. I said it was implied. I didn't think it would be necessary to explain fully as it was almost a year ago give or take. The person you are referring to (I don't remember his name cause it's been so long) If I remember correctly he was implying that anyone who held any other belief besides the literal 6 day creation was an unregenerate messenger of satan. That was not the only time during the creation series that things were stated in a negative manor. Go back and re-read some of them. I didn't say I was called anything. My whole point in even bringing it up was to state the reason I didn't participate in the last two series was all.
In terms of mystical practices with some of the "New Calvinists" I have discovered a trend that is startling. These guys are into Eastern mystical prayer patterned after Roman Catholic monks...such as Brother Lawrence. Here is one such teaching from a popular "pastor":
Steps for Meditative Prayer
1. Designate a quiet place. In a world full of distractions, we need a quiet place where we can allow God to speak to us. The most effective place to pray is where you are least likely to be disturbed.
2. Give yourself 20-30 minutes. Many people only spend a few minutes each day in prayer. Very few people actually spend time in meditative prayer. It takes time to drown out the cares of the world, sit, prayerfully meditate on God's word, and then allow him to speak to us.
3. Choose Scripture to prayerfully meditate on. Prayerfully select a passage of Scripture that means something to you. Let it either focus on the goodness of God, the promises of God, or the worship of God.
4. Allow God to speak to you. This is the hardest part. Many people never hear the Lord speak to them simply because they don't allow him to. We need to sit and listen for the voice of the Lord. Samuel was open to hearing from the Lord (1 Samuel 3). He said, "Speak, for your servant hears."
On this site there are books promoted which are written by Eastern Mystical proponents. One of the men promoted has a very interesting (read weird) web site: http://www.renovare.us/
We should always ponder whether we are following God's or our very own decisions.
When God speaks usually uses more than one person like in Acts 10 with Peter and Cornelius (Deu 19:15 , Mat 18:16)
I am not sure what I said that was hurtful, but If I inadvertantly hurt your feelings I apologize. I'll do my best to make sure it does not happen again. My motive was not to hurt anyones feelings. I am not sure what sermon you are refering to, is it one in Macarthur's archives? I have not had time to listen to them yet. I am still listening to his sermon on 1 John. And you are right, God is not the author of confusion. I was not disputing that with you
Travis, I was not referring to any video but responding to what others have posted specifically about Driscoll and Chan. I have not had the chance to watch all the videos in there entirety. I don't have sound at my home computer and what I did watch was at work and didn't have time to watch all three. You ask if I think it's ok for me to make a decision on what God is telling me? My Answer, I don't know becuase I have never heard a literal "word from god" like some of the hardcore Charismatics you see on T.V. I can tell you I am extremely leary of anyone claiming "God told me this and God told me that" I have had intense conversations with people about specific biblical teachings and doctrines because "God told them different so it cant be true" and then watch them twist up scripture to prove a point. My motive was not to say its ok to do that, what I was saying about Chan and Driscoll specifically is that I don't believe there mystics or wayward teachers. I have heard them both teach more then once and in fact listen to Driscoll almost as much as Macarthur. He is a solid teacher. I also was not trying to say that GTY bashes people or that GTY's motive in starting this thread was to bash people, but I have read threads on here where people seem to get bashed by bloggers who are most likely not a part of GTY ministry or leadership. I get the sense from your response that you were/are frustrated with my posts. I was not intending to do that or trying to upset anyone. As far as the infant baptism thing goes I will rephrase the question in a more general way because I dont want anyone to think I am not acknowledging what Ligonier does or think I am implying Sproul is a false teacher because I don't think that at all. He is one of my favorites also. My question then is What makes a wayward teacher a wayward teacher? I suppose it does not matter as it IS off topic. The whole reason I brought it up was beacause someone else posted something implying that these men COULD be wayward teachers or at least on their way. Some men believe and teach infant baptism and that does not automatically mean there wayward teachers of God's word. Probably not the best example to use. I personally don't beleive if someone is a charismatic leader they are automatically a false teacher or wolf in sheeps clothing. That was why I brought up the baptism thing. I think I will hang back and just see where this series go's before throwing any more of my two cents in.
Thank you for responding to me. I definitely see where you are coming from, and to be honest after reading your post I am laughing at myself a little. I am glad that you do not shield people who graduated from Master's and who go to GCC from criticism. You are correct that subjectivism is dangerous and that people do follow the life and practice of these preachers. I was just concerned that you were throwing these guys into a category of false teachers. I now see where you are coming from. Thanks a lot, brother.
Hi Travis,
I watched the first video. I've read all of the posts here and confess I seem to be a bit confused. I read arguments for, and arguments against.
I know the voice of God is in His word. When we pray, that is our voice to God. When we open His book, that is God's voice to us. Alex Early explains, "I felt like God was telling me to go there" (in reference to working at this gay bar). Wouldn't this be going against the scripture of 1 Cor. 15:33, "Bad company corrupts good morals."?
(But then, couldn't one argue about how Jesus met with tax gatherers and prostitutes?)
Though we think our hearts are right with God, we are still humans, susceptible to fleshly "feelings" and "emotions". We can however shield ourselves from falling if we are constantly, daily reading, studying and meditating on God's word. (Jeremiah 1: 8 - "Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth, meditate on it day and night, so that you may careful to do everything that is written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.")
From the 1 Cor.'s verse, could it be said that Alex Early did not start out biblically? And, if this is a correct assessment, does that nullify what he has done further down the line? (i.e. winning the lost to Christ, planting God in a place where Satan once dominated? etc.)
Well, that's my "two cents" of thoughts. I highly value the teachings of gty.org. I grew up in John MacArthurs church many years ago. About two years ago I learned of this web site and it has changed my life to a deeper relationship with God as it encouraged me to go deeper in God's word.
Thanks for listening.
P.S. Someone made a comment about the two guys wearing jeans with holes in them on video #1. Does God grade us on what we wear? Does John MacArthur have to wear a suit to preach and be heard? Are there bible verses on our attire?
Thank you for following up with that bit of explanation. I think I understand where you're coming from now, but it did seem like you came out swinging at first.
Just one thing I wanted to mention in your most recent post. You said these men are solid teachers and you like to listen to them. I understand that. I also find them to be very gifted communicators, passionate, etc. There's no virtue in boring teaching.
My concern is how Bible teachers conduct their lives and ministries, and the effect of that on others. It's important that the methodology we practice is consistent with the theology we profess. What we do is just as influential as what we teach.
Our hope for this series is to show a biblical, principled, sensible approach to decision making. So, I'm glad to see you're willing to stick it out. I think you'll find very little to disagree with (e.g., John presenting biblical decision making). The rub will probably come as we apply those truths more broadly to popular or influential teachers.
Thanks again,
You got it, Craig. Thanks for the follow-up.
FYI: This web site happens to have a written account of what Alex Early said on video #1. Sometimes reading the type is better to comment on listening to the video because sometimes we forget what we hear or misquote. So if this can be helpful, it's just an "fyi", nothing more:)
FYI: This is another video of Alex Early and the story of the Alamo. It shows Alex inside the bar itself.
Question: Is the Alamo still a gay bar, or have they actually turned it into a church?
Points to ponder on this discussion.
Satan's first attack on mankind was deception, which was followed by man's hiding, denial and blame shifting.
-Satan's #1 tactic is deception
-Satan first will always question God's goodness
-Then he will twist the truth
-Then he will make it look appealing
"Deceived people always think they are doing the right thing, for the right reason, with the right motive, and are pleasing to God."
The only real protection is "truth", the truth about God, the truth of God's Word, the truth about yourself, the truth about Satan, demons and spiritual warfare!
Is this spiritual warfare or not?
Dear Travis:
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I live in Mars Hill country and am appalled by the growth of this so-called church (or campus). I confronted them about their promotion of drinking and was never given an answer. I guess that the scripture that talks of not living only to ourselves but for others and not giving provision for the flesh doesn't apply to the Driscies. The beer bottles in the video were blatantly Driscoll as he wants to do anything to be unnerving. I am sure all of the Gospel Missions in downtown Seattle really appreciate his appetite control, while they serve those and their families that have been destroyed by alcohol.
Your comment about people's actions being much more convincing than words hit the nail on the head. The sad thing is that he is a leader but he is confused as to what camp he is in.
Most Sincerely,
#52 Posted by Nancy "P.S. Someone made a comment about the two guys wearing jeans with holes in them on video #1. Does God grade us on what we wear? Does John MacArthur have to wear a suit to preach and be heard? Are there bible verses on our attire?"
Since I posted the comment you mention I'll answer your inquiries.
Are there bible verses on our attire? Yes. The majority deal with women needing to dress modestly (but are men to dress modestly too or only women?) 1 Tim 2:8-9 and 1 Pet 3:3-4. But here's the point it's about putting others first, being humble and not offending a brother or sister in Christ. Phil 2:4, Rom 15:2. And yes, dress can and does offend other believers in Christ. The question now becomes where do you draw the line? Does or should a line have to be drawn? I'm sure you'd agree women can dress seductively and men unfortunately are sight driven by lust... Is that appropriate church attire? Would that be appropriate even at work? Now you say I'm going to an extreme. License is always about going to the extreme and that's the issue here too. Sloppy is just an extreme; taking license with business casual which is the norm today? I asked a guy in a small group (he was 50) setting one time about this subject and he immediately said I was being legalistic and he went ballistic. After he calmed down I then asked if he dresses that way at work? And he said, "No." I asked "why can't you dress that way at work?" His reply was, "the company has a dress code and this doesn't meet it." I asked, "why?" He replied, "it wouldn't represent the company very well in front the customer." (He was a software engineer). I then asked the oldest group member if he thought it could offend others dressing so sloppily? He said, "it pretty much offends everyone in my generation (he was 65). Who are you representing? Yourself or someone else? Who is a preacher representing? Himself or someone else? Is that important? Should you offend a whole generation? There is Christian (spiritual) maturity and also just maturity. Since I'm on my soapbox I'll go for it. Deep down inside it's about attitude and it's a heart issue. Deep down is where rebellion and disrespect reside. Isn't this all about rebellion and disrespect deep down anyway?
John MacArthur doesn't always wear a suit when working. For preachers is it a work attire question then?
Does God grade us on what we wear? What if the answer is "yes"!
The mouth is the heart's witness of it's true attitude; how you dress says volumes and your lips aren't moving.
I'm now stepping down off the soapbox...
I understand and appreciate your questions. You've asked about the validity of the arguments in favor of Alex Early's endeavor, and I'll try to address them for you. But what we're trying to accomplish here is to warn against a very popular way of speaking about decision making, namely, "God told me to" (see comment #8).
Back to your concerns...There's a sense in which all of us don't start out biblically. And yet, God blesses us and our ministries--He's the one who chose to put the glorious treasure of His gospel in jars of clay, precisely to bring glory to Him, not us (2 Cor. 4:7).
However, we ought always to strive to conform our lives and doctrine to the Word of God. We ought to be self-critical about ourselves and our ministries, ruthlessly judging them by the standard of Holy Scripture. And we ought to admit and forsake our errors, mistakes, and sins.
What I've just described is not the pattern I'm seeing practiced in some of these new, wildly popular approaches to church planting. And it's even worse when every endeavor is baptized with, "God lead me to ______." As I commented above, people who say such things bear a tremendous burden of proof.
Gotta run for now. I'll try to address your P.S. in a follow-up.
Thanks for your comments and questions.
Dan #61,
GCC = Grace Community Church
TMC = The Master's College
TMS = The Master's Seminary
or browse by Topic or


text:
Diageo Uses Digital, Social, and Physical to Own Nightlife Globally
July 17, 2012
Michelle Klein, vice president, content, digital and communications, Smirnoff, Diageo North America, Inc., and Wayne Arnold, co-founder and global chief executive officer, Profero LLC, discussed Diageo's Nightlife Exchange Project, which is rooted in social media.
Members Only Content
This content is available to ANA Members only. Please login below or create an account.
You may already be a member. Find out if your company is already an ANA member.


text:
View full-size image
This image is unpublished.
Some rights reserved
© Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University
View source
Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard
Location Created: Sierra Maestra, East Cuba, Cuba, Granma
Become part of the EOL community—sign up for the EOL Newsletter today
Become part of the EOL community!
Join EOL now
Already a member?
Sign in
Visit the Biodiversity Heritage Library


text:
Steve Jobs: A Bad Role Model
Steve Jobs, former Apple & Pixard CEO, died on October 5th, 2011, at the age of 56 after a fight with cancer. His life and career was inspiring enough to Apple for them to put up a permanent online memorial of wishes shared by millions around the globe.
Among them:
- "One of my heros died today. Thank you Steve for changing my world in so many unbelievable and wonderful ways! The world lost so much today."
- "Thank you for your life well lived. You was able to transform materials into masterpieces of design that help people to be more human."
- "Dear Mr. Steve: You are the greatest man I never knew…"
- etc…
I want to challenge this post-mortal view of Steve Jobs as a saint. Jobs' entire life is a relentess story of episode after episode where his immorality, crass capitalism, and greed shine through every moment. I debated writing a post titled "Steve Jobs: The Embodiment of the 7 Deadly Sins," but felt that it would be better to simplify Jobs' personal flaws into more simple categories. You all know what he did well, the companies that prospered under his unforgiving hand; now, perhaps after reading this article you can bring some balance to the other side of the scale of Steve Jobs' life.
Selfish & Above the Law
Credit to Flickr user Acaben for the photo
Liver Transplant
Do you remember the liver transplant Steve Jobs received in April 2009? He flew 2,000 miles from Northern California to the Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute in Memphis, Tennessee, where the waitlist of organs is about 80% shorter. How did he get in line for a transplant organ in another state? He multiple-listed by buying homes to meet the residents requirements of the foreign states. The shady process has since been stopped, but was, at the time, legal:
Transplant centers cannot stop anyone from registering as a potential recipient at multiple locations, said UNOS' Dr. Higgins. So long as patients meet the clinical evaluation criteria, can afford to pay and have access to follow-up care there is nothing in theory to stop the rich from listing themselves at many different centers.
Someomewhere in Tennessee, there's was a sick/dying patient who had to wait longer for his new liver, because Steve Jobs bought his way to the top of the list. Topping it off, as he had terminal cancer, he should have been consider ineligible. However, due to different admission criteria in different states, Jobs could throw out money to find the state with lax enough criteria to put him on the list. And because he was terminally ill, of course, he found himself at the top of the list:
Transplant chief, Dr. James Eason said "He received a liver transplant because he was … the sickest patient on the waiting list at the time a donor organ became available."
Car Plates
Another great example of Steve Jobs' willful contravention of the spirit of the law is with his "no-plates" Mercedes car, which he drove without license plates, legally under the rule of law which required plates to be affixed after the car was 6 months old. Jobs, of course, "made an arrangement with his Mercedes leasing company in which he would exchange cars every six months; trading for an identical Mercedes each time. As iTWire puts it: "At no time would he ever be in a car as old as six months; and thus there was no legal requirement to have the number plates fitted."
Such an arrangement would be unlikely to be offered or accepted from mere mortals like you or me, but Jobs could flaunt his wealth and status to secure the means to pursue an arbitrary loophole in the law to stroke his massive ego.
Poor Personal Judgement
When Apple came out with the LISA computer system in 1976, Steve Jobs claimed it was named after the acronym "Local Integrated Software Architecture." Years later, he recanted, saying "Obviously, it was named for my daughter." But in her childhood years, fighting in courts to avoid paternity, Jobs claimed he was "sterile and infertile, and as a result thereof, did not have the physical capacity to procreate a child." Does this make Jobs a psycopathic liar? Or does their subsequent reconciliation show his human side?
Alternative treatments
If you had treatable cancer, would you go to a doctor and have it cut out? Or would you complain, as Jobs did, "'I really didn't want them to open up my body" and wait 9 months. Steve Job's insane decision to resort to alternative medicine to treat his pancreatic tumor because he "believed in alternative herbal treatments" shows absurd personal judgement. Among the "alternative treatments" he tried were "a vegan diet, acupuncture, herbal remedies and other treatments he found online, and even a psychic."
SJ is god, right?
Apple's censorship
I've written before about Apple's arbitrary app censorship and once sent Steve Jobs the following email:
Reading your interchange with Gawker writer Ryan Tate, I have to comment on the closed-off app store approach, and the idea that some content/applications are inappropriate for public consumption. I appreciate fully the technical beauty of the iPhone/iPad approval process, vetting apps to make sure of their quality and trustworthiness. Better battery life, no malware, and an overall positive experience have made the iPhone/iPad platform what it is.
But, banning applications that challenge your particular sense of morality is wrong. Whether it's political satire, crude tasteless humour, or porn, consumer and individuals deserve an open platform and the freedom of choice to determine what to watch, read, and play. Mark these apps as objectionable (like you mark "explicit" music in iTunes) and force users to prove they're adults if you must.
Steve Jobs wanted to control the entire Apple user experience, so he mandated that the iPhone platform would be a walled garden–only his preferred applications would be allowed. In the classic greek definition of hubris, Jobs decided to play god of the playground, a petty move that artificially restricts the richness of the iOS platform.
Apple's stolen apps
It's well known that Jobs' hubris extends to the level where he believes that no original idea can be conceived outside of the Apple ecosystem. As evidence, take a look at the long list of iPhone applications that Apple has ripped-off wholesale:
- WiFi syncing – Functionality and Icon stolen
- MobileNotifier – Ripped off into iOS5
- SnapTap's volume-button-to-shoot feature
- Where Too's interface was subsequently "patented" by Apple
I'm sure there's a clause in the Apple/iPhone development agreement that says "If you develop for the iPhone platform and have a great idea that we like, Apple reserves exclusive rights to the intellectual property and to develop it in the future. In Steve Jobs' mind, no true iOS/iPhone innovation can come from outside Apple–therefore, any applications developed in the iOS ecosystem whose features are subsequently ripped off and made iPhone/iOS features are merely the cobblestones paving the road to greatness.
Environmental waste
Apple came in nearly last place in the inaugural edition of Greenpeace's Guide to Greener Electronics in 2006, scoring just 2.7/10:
For a company that claims to lead on product design, Apple scores badly on almost all criteria. The company fails to embrace the precautionary principle, withholds its full list of regulated substances and provides no timelines for eliminating toxic polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and no commitment to phasing out all uses of brominated flame retardants (BFRs). Apple performs poorly on product take back and recycling, with the exception of reporting on the amounts of its electronic waste recycled.
Apple's products, manufactured in China, have been criticized for using polluting supplies and plants. Some years later, Apple has improved their processes and now ranks 4.6/10 on the scale. Apple, prodded into compliance by public scrutiny and Greenpeace, has reduced the toxic chemicals used in their products, such as lead, cadmium, arsenic, and other heavy metals. Despite this, note that under Jobs, Apple got their start peddling products contaminated with toxic chemicals, doing an intense amount of damage to the environment.
Foxconn suicides
Apple's assembler Foxconn is one of the world's leading exploiters of human capital. Based in China, they work their employees so hard that one of them, Chen Long, died at the ripe old age of 23, having worked continuously for weeks under long hours and harsh conditions. Workers earn a few hundred dollars a month assembling iPhones and other Apple devices, but the conditions are so bleak that between January and November 2010, eighteen Foxconn employees committed suicide.
After getting poor press, Foxconn has improved their wages, invested in robotics, installed netting to prevent jumpers, and asked employees to sign "no suicide" pledges. Now they're a right jolly place of employment!
Woz Programming
From the earliest, pre-Apple days, Steve Jobs was looking for an edge over his partners and associates. This story, courtesy of Wikipedia, sets the stage perfectly. Jobs was hired by Atari to produce a circuit-board layout for their arcade game Breakout:
Jobs noticed his friend Steve Wozniak was capable of producing designs with a small number of chips, and invited him to work on the hardware design with the prospect of splitting the $750 wage. Wozniak had no sketches and instead interpreted the game from its description. To save parts, he had "tricky little designs" difficult to understand for most engineers. In the end 50 chips were removed from Jobs' original design. This equated to a US$5,000 bonus, which Jobs kept secret from Wozniak, instead only paying him $375.
"Backdated" stock Options
Have you heard of options backdating? Basically, bigwigs wanted to grant their employees lucrative compensation while avoiding complicated tax issues–ie paying more corporate tax for the "in the money" options classification. So they backdated them to cherry-picked dates, taking advantage of vague wording in the compensation clauses to "spring load" their option grants. Under the newer SarbOX rules, companies have to declare such options grants within two days, vastly narrowing the window. According to the New York Times, "Apple has acknowledged that Mr. Jobs was aware of backdating but said he did not benefit financially from it and did not understand the accounting implications."
Apple's Charitable Giving
Steve Jobs' attitude towards charity is unbelievable in an age where America's leading CEOs and technologists like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have pledged to give their fortunes to improving the world. Walter Isaacson, Steve's official biographer, refused to speak about his attitude to philanthropy, except to deflect that it was "unspeakable." When he took over the helm of Apple as CEO, all charitable giving by the company ceased. Apple did not have a corporate donation-matching program until September, 2011. For an interesting look into the world's most famous misanthrope, give Andrew Ross Sorkin's The Mystery of Steve Jobs's Public Giving a read.
As Richard Stallman said about Steve Jobs, "I'm glad he's gone. [W]e all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing." On the other hand, Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs just came out; you can read the other side of the story for yourself. Malcolm Gladwell has also written a hilarious troll THE TWEAKER: The real genius of Steve Jobs for the New Yorker.


text:
- yankees
- nets
- nycfc
- nfl
- video
- more
- personalities
- my yes
The Michael Kay Show: David Cone
Analyzing the Yankees' much improved up farm system
Yankees Hot Stove answers audience questions
Are Posada or Mussina worthy of Hall of Fame?
Yankees Hot Stove on the 2017 Hall of Fame ballot
Tim Raines inducted into the Hall of Fame
Ivan Rodriguez inducted into the Hall of Fame
The Michael Kay Show: Starlin Castro on 2017 Yankees
Gary Sanchez talks about his offseason
Jack Curry on avoiding arbitration with Betances
Michael Kay debates a variety of topics on Hot Stove
It's a great time to be a Yankees fan
How will Yankees handle their depth at shortstop?
Yankees Hot Stove guesses where free agents may land
What will Yankees' final bench, bullpen look like?
A look into Jacoby Ellsbury's spring preparation
Ellsbury talks about growing up in the Navajo Tribe
Ellsbury hosts baseball clinic for Navajo tribe youth
Yankees Hot Stove: Top prospects
Yankees Hot Stove: Projected Opening Day lineup
Yankees Hot Stove: Brian Cashman on season outlook
Top 5 New York Yankees nicknames
Similarities between Trout, Mantle
Austin Romine on his first full year in the Majors
Greg Bird and Tyler Austin competing for first base?
Can Aaron Judge improve at the Major league level?
Yankees Magazine: Northwestern wins Pinstripe Bowl
Yankees Magazine: Hard Rock Cafe at Yankee Stadium
Yankees Magazine: Matt Holliday talks joining Yanks
Retired Numbers: Billy Martin
Many questions surround Yankees' starting rotation


text:
The late Marvin Oliver opened The Browse Shop in 1968 in the old Dixon Boot Co. building, where it has been from day one. Marlene Ermis first went to work at the Western-wear store in 1974; and in 2005, she purchased the shop from Mr. Oliver. Marvin Oliver died on October 2, 2006 at the ripe age of 102 and 6 months.
Marlene learned the business inside and out from Oliver, including custom steam-shaping cowboy hats.
The Browse Shop has Western attire for the entire family, from babies on up. The large building is filled to the brim with boots, jeans, belts, hats, buckles, jewelry, purses, jackets, coats, blouses and more, including a large selection of gift items. We have tall sizes, hard to find items and as always, the guaranteed lowest prices on town! It is one-stop shopping for the whole family.
The Browse Shop
1111 E. Scott Ave
Wichita Falls, TX 76301
Copyright 2017 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


text:
John Powers Severin was born in Jersey City, New Jersey, and attended the High School of Music and Art in New York City, together with Harvey Kurtzman, Will Elder, Al Jaffee and Al Feldstein. He had published his first cartoons at the age of 10 in the the Hobo News in 1932. After serving in the Army, he entered the comic book field in 1947. He did his first work through Simon and Kirby's Crestwood studio. In cooperation with Bill Elder, who did the inking, he produced covers and stories for Prize Comics, including features called 'American Eagle', 'Lazo Kid' and 'Black Bull'. The pair also did many fillers and contributions to romance and crime titles by Better Publications, National Periodicals, and Timely.
In 1953, John Severin began working for EC Group, concentrating mainly on western and war comics, which were published in the titles Two-Fisted Tales and Frontline Combat. Later on he also was a regular on Harvey Kurtzman's early issues of the MAD comic book, and served as an editor of the final issues of Frontline Combat. Severin also worked on EC's New Direction title Extra!, for which he drew the 'Steve Rampart' feature.
After EC folded in 1955, Severin started drawing for Stan Lee's Atlas group, initially on westerns like 'Kid Colt', 'Rawhide Kid' and 'The Ringo Kid'. When Atlas became the Marvel group, Severin worked for the whole new range of comics, including 'The Hulk' and inking Dick Ayers's pencils on 'Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos'. He was the main artist for the MAD competitor Cracked, and freelanced for other companies in the 1960s. He drew 'Sgt. Rock' for DC, and contributed to James Warren's magazines Eerie, Creepy and Blazing Combat, and to titles published by Dell, Harvey and Charlton, often with a focus on western. He worked with his sister Marie Severin on the 'King Kull' title for Marvel in 1973. Still active until the 2000s, he has worked on titles like 'Desperadoes', 'Suicide Squad', 'American Century', 'Caper', 'The Punisher', 'Conan' and 'Bat Lash'. In 2003 he illustrated the controversial version of 'Rawhide Kid' mini-series, in which the classic western hero was a gay gunslinger.


text:
iHerb Customer Reviews
Savings of: $1.80 (34% off)
stomach irritant
Posted by 4890553540544221628 on Oct 03, 2016
It makes dough well but as its made up of chickpeas it irritates and bloats the stomach. I've tried it many times on different people and they all said the same thing
not as good as King Arthur's mixed gluten free flour
Posted by 5337652482377838413 on Mar 11, 2014
Used this for batter for fish (British style fried fish & chips); did not like the consistency or taste. Much "stronger" flavour (more distinctive) than other flours. Will not be using the rest of the flour. I would recommend King Arthur multi purpose gluten free flour instead (for batter / dusting meats / cakes / muffins).
Posted by 5113914411521338635 on Jul 03, 2014
The texture of the flour is all right, but the taste is very overpowering. It tastes bitter and awful. Nothing will taste good if you put this flour in the mixture. Will not buy again.
Didn't like it
Posted by misspineapple on Oct 31, 2014
I think the garbanzo or fava bean flour really overpowers the flavor. Didn't matter if I used only a small amount mixed with other gluten free flours - it still made things taste odd.
tastes Gluten Free
Posted by amyjeans on Jan 21, 2009
We would pass on this mix again. It has a "chalky" texture.
Bob's Red Mill All Purpose GF Baking Flour
Posted by Reviewer2480452 on Apr 13, 2009
too gritty for some types of baking
Items 1-6 of 6 total


text:
UFC 99 Predictions
View Single Post
Posts: n/a
UFC 99 Predictions
Here we go! I'm going to put my thoughts out there. Lets see what everyone thinks. I think this is a great card and am looking very forward to it.
UFC 99 Predictions
Mirko Cro Cop vs. Mostapha Al Turk
I see this as being a one sided fight in favor of Cro Cop. After losing his past two fights in the UFC, I think Cro Cop wants to prove to everyone that he belongs and can hang with the heavyweights in the UFC. Not sure if he will have ring rust since he hasnt fought in a couple of years.
Winner : Cro Cop (TKO) Round 1
Spencer Fisher vs. Caol Uno
Caol Uno is making his return to the UFC with a very tough opponent in Fisher. Fisher has won his last two fights and if he could beat Uno this would probably put him at the number one contender spot. Fisher has great stand up skills, but Im sure Uno and his camp knows that. This can be a very interesting if Uno can take Fisher to the ground where Uno is exceptional. Uno has fought some of the best in the world and has a ton of experience.
Winner : Caol Uno (Submission) Round 2
Marcus Davis vs. Dan Hardy
Not much to say here except, I cannot wait for this fight. Two guys who want to go out there and kill each other. Davis has a boxing background and KO power, but so does Hardy. Hardy also has a slight reach advantage and the advantage on the ground. (I dont see it going to the ground though.) There is bad blood and someone is getting KOd.
Winner : Hardy (KO) Round 1
Mike Swick vs Ben Saunders
This is the most interesting fight on the card in my opinion. Both are aggressive and very good strikers. Saunders has the reach and height advantage. Swick has more experience in the octagon and against more experienced fighters. I like Saunders Thai clinch and aggression. He has excellent knees and is versed in Jiu-Jitsu. Whoever wins this fight gets catapulted in the rankings.
Winner : Saunders (Decision)
Cheick Kongo vs Cain Velasquez
This could be fight of the night. You have the up and comer Velasquez taking on the very experienced Kongo. While Velasquez has been very impressive in his three UFC fights, he has a very tough opponent in Kongo. Kongo has won his last three fights by TKO. If Velasquez could pull of the win it would really put his name up in the division.
Winner : Kongo (Decision)
Rich Franklin vs. Wanderlei Silva
Silva has stated Either Im knocking him out or his knocking me out. I agree with his statement. Some people have been questioning the chin of Silva, but I have not doubt its still strong. Franklin is an excellent striker and if he uses his reach and keeps distance on Silva, he could be in for a long night. If Silva can work the clinch and take the fight to the ground, things could get interesting. Both of these fighters are in excellent shape and are great competitors. This is the fight that changes someones life, as they make a comeback.
Winner : Silva (TKO) Round 2


text:
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Transcom Selects Vertical de Aviacion for Afghan Support
The U.S. Transportation Command has issued a $214.2-million contract to Bogota, Colombia-based Vertical de Aviacion related to helicopter support services in Afghanistan. The agreement, which runs until Oct. 31, 2013, includes aircraft, pilots, mechanics and support personnel, tools, maintenance and management for passenger and cargo transportation in Afghanistan. Vertical de Aviacion is among six companies to receive extensions, with AAR, Canadian Helicopters, Columbia Helicopters, Construction Helicopters, Evergreen Helicopters also winning bids on the multiple-award contract.
Related: Procurement News


text:
Beef Roast with Tomato Madeira Sauce
- 2 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
- 3 pounds beef rump roast, rinsed and patted dry
- Salt and pepper
- 1 1/2 cups roasted garlic and herb tomato sauce
- 3/4 cup Madeira wine
- 1 teaspoon minced garlic
- 1 1/2 cups frozen pearl onions
- 1 cup frozen carrot slices
Heat the olive oil in a large frying pan on medium-high heat. Season the roast with salt and pepper. Brown the roast on all sides, remove to a plate, and set aside.
In a medium bowl, combine the tomato sauce, Madeira, and garlic. Set aside.
To a slow cooker add the onions and carrots. Add the browned roast and any accumulated juices. Pour the sauce mixture over the top of roast.
Cover and cook on low setting for 8 hours.
Recipe courtesy of Sandra Lee
Cooking Tips
More Recipes and Ideas
Turkey with Glazed Chestnuts, Parsnips and Mushrooms
Recipe courtesy of Food Network Kitchen
Roasted Dates with Pancetta, Almonds and Chile
Recipe courtesy of Michael Symon