I was just wondering if anyone has a schedule of the district conventions for this year? If you do could you possibly post it so that we can schedule some picketing?
Thanks,
Doug
dshields1
JoinedPosts by dshields1
-
1
District Convention Schedules
by dshields1 ini was just wondering if anyone has a schedule of the district conventions for this year?
if you do could you possibly post it so that we can schedule some picketing?.
doug
-
-
-
5
Apostate Update: "Prince"
by dshields1 innew license plate seen in brooklyn: apost8 .
prince in the watchtower kingdom.
the watchtower which is the mother organization of what are commonly referred to as jehovah's witnesses wants prince for his lyrical abilities says long time watchtower door knocker willie awake.
-
-
dshields1
*******APOSTATE UPDATE*******
New License Plate seen in Brooklyn: APOST8
PRINCE IN THE WATCHTOWER KINGDOM
The Watchtower which is the mother organization of what are commonly referred to as Jehovah's Witnesses wants Prince for his lyrical abilities says long time Watchtower door knocker Willie Awake.
"He's going to write a new Kingdom Melodies songbook that will just rock da house!"
He (Prince) reportedly will remaster and play such hits as:
"This year I'm going to pioneer like it's 1975!"
"All aboard the Watchtower!"
and the ever popular:
"When Dubs Cry"
When questioned about the dark sexual content of his previous lyrics Willie Awake replied,
"Hey man...you know Greenleese and Chitty spanked the *&^%$# why can't Prince?"
Speculation of Prince headlining at District Conventions has not been confirmed or denied.
***This Apostate Update has been brought to you by Friends Of The Governing Body. A Non-Prophet Organization.
-
Wacko cult leader resembles J.F. Rutherford!
by dshields1 inmistrial vindication for cult chief.
by luis cabrera, associated press writer .
everett, wash. (ap) - christopher turgeon has denounced his defense lawyer as ``an agent of satan,'' preached about the end of the world being just three years away and claimed he is the second coming of an old testament prophet.. the apocalyptic cult leader's lawyer says his client is ``nuts,'' but jurors deciding his first-degree murder trial weren't able to make such a determination - or decide on a verdict.. a judge declared a mistrial tuesday after jurors came back deadlocked, providing a vindication of sorts for the cult leader who was accused of orchestrating the killing of a follower.
-
dshields1
Mistrial Vindication for Cult Chief
By LUIS CABRERA, Associated Press WriterEVERETT, Wash. (AP) - Christopher Turgeon has denounced his defense lawyer as ``an agent of Satan,'' preached about the end of the world being just three years away and claimed he is the second coming of an Old Testament prophet.
The apocalyptic cult leader's lawyer says his client is ``nuts,'' but jurors deciding his first-degree murder trial weren't able to make such a determination - or decide on a verdict.
A judge declared a mistrial Tuesday after jurors came back deadlocked, providing a vindication of sorts for the cult leader who was accused of orchestrating the killing of a follower. Turgeon is already serving an 89-year sentence for his part in a July 1998 crime spree in San Diego that prosecutors said was meant to trigger the downfall of the United States.
``He's been going on and on about how he's not insane, and that really anybody who thinks he is is doing the devil's work,'' defense lawyer Royce Ferguson said.
``I think the guy really is nuts, though,'' he added. ``That's the way we presented it, even though he really didn't want us to.''
Jurors reported to Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Joseph Thibodeau that they were deadlocked 11-1 in favor of convicting Turgeon, 37, and fellow sect member Blaine Applin, 30. Jurors said they saw little hope of reaching a unanimous decision.
Prosecutors likely will move for a retrial at a hearing before Thibodeau on Thursday, county Deputy Prosecutor David Kurtz said.
``We're certainly not going to let this matter drop,'' he said.
Neither suspect denied taking part in the March 29, 1998, slaying of former cult member Dan Jess, 40. But their attorneys argued Turgeon and Applin were innocent by reason of insanity.
Turgeon told jurors that he is the second coming of the Old Testament prophet Elijah and has the same divine authority to punish sinners.
He also offered jurors an elaborate set of calculations, scriptural and symbolic evidence to support his claim that the world will end on March 22, 2004. He also pulled out a dollar bill and demonstrated for the jury that it contained codes that are part of a federal government conspiracy.
Turgeon, who mostly made his living as a resident apartment manager, started the Gatekeepers cult as a Bible study group in 1991. He persuaded members to progressively isolate themselves from what he termed the evil forces of pornography, homosexuality and witchcraft in the world.
The dozen or so sect members, including children, moved several times north of Seattle because of concerns that they would be investigated by Washington State Child Protective Services, court documents show. Finally, in 1997, they moved to a compound near Pala, Calif., a small town about 40 miles north of San Diego.
Jess declined to go. He was targeted after accusing Turgeon of writing a $2,000 bad check to an Everett transmission shop.
``God's calling us to a mission to destroy the enemy,'' Turgeon told a Gatekeepers member in California shortly before he and Applin drove north to target Jess.
Applin shot Jess seven times with a Glock 9mm after Jess opened his camper-trailer door, court documents said.
Applin and Turgeon were linked to the shooting after their capture in the string of San Diego-area robberies and other crimes about three months later. The gun was seized from Applin, who later was sentenced to 101 years in prison for his part in the spree, including a high-speed chase in which Turgeon drove and Applin fired a rifle into a police car.
Jurors in Everett began deliberations on Friday, after a three-week trial in which 11 psychiatrists and other experts offered conflicting testimony about Turgeon's and Applin's sanity.
Applin's lawyer, Pete Mazzone, argued his client was helplessly under Turgeon's charismatic sway.
Turgeon's lawyer acknowledged that his client's powers of persuasion are strong.
``Some of this stuff makes sense that he says. If you listen long enough, you can kind of come to understand,'' he said. ``In the back of my mind - way in the back - I'm thinking, what if he is Elijah?''
``This is a very unusual case,'' said Kurtz, the prosecutor.
<<What he needed to do was buy Beth Sarim and declare himself to be Elijah with an Attitude! Instead of calling out bears to kill little kids he's started writing bad checks and putting out contracts on people!>>
-
62
The Natural Law fallacy and Homosexuality
by JanH inthere is a fallacy of logic that is so common that few people realize that it is, indeed, a fallacy of logic: the fallacy by appeal to nature.. one argument against homosexuality goes something like this:.
the natural use of the reproductive organs is obviously to make children.
using these organs in a way that cannot produce children is unnatural and thus ethically wrong.. .
-
-
dshields1
Hi Waiting,
You wrote:
"We can assume what we want, but if a man was raped (and he didn't have to be hit on the head - men can be intimidated just like a woman, knife or no knife) under the law and did not scream, he would not be punished."
Actually that is incorrect. Again let me restate that in the Mosaic Law any two men found lying together as would a man and wife would be put to death. Both of them (or more in the case of a gang rape) would be put to death. Since there is NO provision for a man to scream and thereby escape the punishment then I maintain that some semblance of justice would have to take place at the hands of the older men i.e. "Your Honor the man screamed for a mile but nobody was around to help him. He was a victim and therefore should escape this judgement." I would imagine that at this point he would be set free. However there is NO PROVISION for this and so if we want to just read the "letter" of the law then we would have to contend that there was NO allowance for an unwilling victim of homosexual rape to escape the judgement spoken of in Leviticus 20:13.
In other words I could condemn God for the same mistreatment of men that you could for women if I went simply by the "letter" of the law. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that you are attempting to prove that God is sexist against women. I simply don't believe that and what we have discussed so far simply doesn't prove that.
Doug
-
62
The Natural Law fallacy and Homosexuality
by JanH inthere is a fallacy of logic that is so common that few people realize that it is, indeed, a fallacy of logic: the fallacy by appeal to nature.. one argument against homosexuality goes something like this:.
the natural use of the reproductive organs is obviously to make children.
using these organs in a way that cannot produce children is unnatural and thus ethically wrong.. .
-
-
dshields1
Hi Waiting,
Sorry it took so long to answer your post.
I can certainly appreciate your viewpoint and I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I don't believe, at least for the nation of Israel, that a homosexual gang rape was very likely. However in Leviticus 18:22 the law is handed down with regard to homosexual relations:
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
Later in that same context the punishment for both offenders i.e. the "pusher" and the "pushee" was to be death. (Lev 20:13) Of course one could make the case:
"Hey, why didn't God allow for a MAN to scream and thus to escape the punishment of death since he was FORCED into bending over. I think God treats women better than He does MEN!"
Do you see now how that works both ways? I could get really insulted over that and rationalize hating God for not allowing some poor straight guy who while minding his own business got hit over the head and then was forcibly raped by a bunch of flaming Israeli homos to have an "escape" clause. Again, I don't believe that there was much likelihood for that to have happened ergo no law being in place. If it had I believe that the actual case would have been heard and then true justice would have been carried out (i.e. the pack of flaming Israeli homos would have been put to death by being roasted slowly on a spit and the poor straight guy would have been given a tube of Preparation-H and excused from his next day's work.[8>])
<<Sorry guys. I just couldn't resist that stab at Mosaic humor! >>
Okay now to take it into our time. We are NOT under the mosaic law any longer. We don't keep the festivals we don't keep the holy days and we don't sacrifice goats and bulls. All of this has been handled by Jesus Christ as He has fulfilled the law. Therefore, as I stated before, any attempt by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society to use the mosaic law to bolster their Victorian viewpoints with regard to sex or rape is totally wrong just as it was for the Judaizers of Paul's day to say that circumcision was required for Christians. It simply isn't true.
I understand now where you are coming from. You are ticked at the WT for their not enforcing the same treatment for a man in a similar situation. I agree with you wholeheartedly. If a woman has to scream then by all means a man should do no less. However, I don't believe that God would have deliberately given a woman any less justice than a man in that He didn't enforce the same law. I believe it was just something that was highly unlikely to happen in the nation of Israel.
I hope that answers your question.
Doug
-
62
The Natural Law fallacy and Homosexuality
by JanH inthere is a fallacy of logic that is so common that few people realize that it is, indeed, a fallacy of logic: the fallacy by appeal to nature.. one argument against homosexuality goes something like this:.
the natural use of the reproductive organs is obviously to make children.
using these organs in a way that cannot produce children is unnatural and thus ethically wrong.. .
-
-
dshields1
Hi Waiting,
Touche' on the "surrounding cities". That certainly adds credence to your "pecking order" theory. Do you know of any documentation of that? I'm not being smart, actually I'm quite curious if there is any record of such a practice among ancient cities.
QUOTE:
Genesis, "the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, from boy to old man, all the people in one mob."
Notice that the scripture says "the men" of the city. If men were all that inhabited the city (highly unlikely) then the differentiation would not have been needed. When it says "all the people" it is in the context of the men of the city i.e. all the people who had already gathered rather than all the people of the city.
As for the discrepancy between women and men, could you give me the scripture references for the law stating that they had to scream? I'd like to read those in context before I respond to your question.
Thanks,
Doug AKA Junior
-
62
The Natural Law fallacy and Homosexuality
by JanH inthere is a fallacy of logic that is so common that few people realize that it is, indeed, a fallacy of logic: the fallacy by appeal to nature.. one argument against homosexuality goes something like this:.
the natural use of the reproductive organs is obviously to make children.
using these organs in a way that cannot produce children is unnatural and thus ethically wrong.. .
-
-
dshields1
Hi Waiting!
I'm honored that you have chosen to respond to my post with my being a JUNIOR member and all.
Your theory about a "pecking order" if you will excuse my horrid pun, is quite interesting. However, the scriptures seem to single out only Sodom and Gomorrah. I agree with you that there had to be some heterosexuals in the city but apparently not enough to hold back the wrath of God. Another thought which just came to me is that quite possibly they were on the whole bisexuals. This seemed to be the case with the Greek and Roman empires as well. This would explain the fact that there were boys as well as men in the city.
I have always personally had a problem with Lot's act of offering his daughter's to the men in place of the angels. (He may have known that they were bisexual and this was his way of appeasing them.) Of course this disrespect for women is seen throughout the old testament i.e. Abraham and Haggar etc. The fact that Christ mentioned what Moses did in granting divorce certificates and spoke of it as being because of the "hardness of your hearts" gives us some idea of the way God feels about women.
The crap that the Watchtower blows out it's theocratic hole is nothing more than a combination of mosaic law and man made drivel. They don't realize that we are under the law of grace and are no longer under the mosaic law covenant. Out of one side of their mouth's they shout that they are saved by grace and then like the Judaizer's of Paul's day they go right back to the law to seek justification by works. This has resulted in a GRACE + WORKS = SALVATION mentality. However, rather than adopt the whole mosaic law covenant they pick and choose specific enforceable laws such as abstaining from blood, bloodguilt, screaming when raped, etc. Supposedly by living by these laws the "great crowd" are going to gain their salvation. Of course the male slant is and always will be present because of the structure of the Watchtower itself. Remember the sex laws of the 80's? This was clearly another attempt by the Watchtower to control their flock and keep them on the defensive. By imposing their own antiquated views on sex the Governing Body created it's own little mini law.
Song sung to a JW trying to get into heaven/paradise via going door-to-door instead of faith in Jesus Christ.
"KEEP ON KNOCKING BUT YOU CAN'T COME IN!"
Warm regards,
Doug Shields
-
62
The Natural Law fallacy and Homosexuality
by JanH inthere is a fallacy of logic that is so common that few people realize that it is, indeed, a fallacy of logic: the fallacy by appeal to nature.. one argument against homosexuality goes something like this:.
the natural use of the reproductive organs is obviously to make children.
using these organs in a way that cannot produce children is unnatural and thus ethically wrong.. .
-
-
dshields1
Hey SJ-Jim,
I'm sorry that what I wrote got you angry. After reading your post regarding mine I decided to research what Paul actually said. What I found interested me and might just interest you.
Thayer's Greek Lexicon gives the word translated "homosexuals" in 1 Tim 1:10 and 1 Cor 6:9 as "arsenokoites". This word is taken from two words the first being "arsen" meaning "man" or "male" and the second word "koites" meaning "lie down" or "marriage bed". The meaning of the words when put together is quite obvious. The Greek, "Koites" and English, "Coitus" are related.
At 1 Timothy 1:9-10 we see how Paul lumps different sins together:
"in the knowledge of this fact, that law is promulgated, not for a righteous man, but for persons lawless and unruly, ungodly and sinners, lacking loving kindness, and profane, murderers of mothers, manslayers, fornicators, men who lie with males (arsenokoites), kidnapers, liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching..." (NWT)
At 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 we see this shown again:
"What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, or men who lie with men(arsenokoites), nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God's kingdom." (NWT)
I think it is safe to say that these ones practicing "arsenokoites" are in pretty bad company at least in the eyes of the apostle Paul.
When you lump these two with Old Testament scriptures such as Genesis 13:13, 19:5 you begin to see a pattern.
According to the outcome of Sodom and Gomorrah, God doesn't seem to be particularly fond of homosexuals. Check out Jude 1:7 where it says:
"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh (Greek "opiso sarkos" meaning literally "behind flesh or flesh behind") are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." (NWT)
I know that my opinion isn't politically correct. I'm okay with that. Jesus wasn't politically correct. In fact He was probably the least politically correct of His whole generation. One of the most impressive things that Jesus Christ did was when the prostitute was brought before him by the Pharisees. He didn't condemn her. Yet He did say "sin no more."
I have had some really good friends who I know are homosexual. I accept their choice as just that. My choice is to be a Christian and to follow the guidelines of the scriptures. I don't judge anyone as being deserving of life or death. I'm very happy that that job is in Jesus Christ's hands. Sin is sin. Nothing more and nothing less. Those who PRACTICE sin will not inherit the kingdom of God. We all have our own problems and our own sinful nature to contend with.
As for those who would classify homosexuality as something far worse than adultery for example, I just have this to say: We all have our way of justifying our own sinfulness by attempting to magnify the sins of others. I agree with your assertion that certain "heteros" are on a gay bashing spree. It's an easy sin to bash. However, greediness is also a sin as well as lying, cheating, stealing etc.
That is just my take on the whole matter. This is MY research and no one else's. Unlike certain people (NOT YOU) on this discussion board who merely parrot other's arguments I choose to use the conclusions that I have come to in my own research.
SJ, I have a tremendous amount of respect for anyone who can leave the JW's with their sanity intact. I may not agree with your sexual pursuasion but I do respect you alot. I have read several of your posts and they are filled with warmth and intelligence.
Sincerely,
Doug
-
20
Which is the best translation of the bible...
by TheApostleAK in50 years ago respected textual critic ernest cadman colwell created an apparatus of 64 scriptures to determine which is the best new testament.
i created a chart using the same criteria...and the results will surprise you!!.
http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/colwell.htm .
-
-
dshields1
You wrote:
"And finally, why does “calling God his own Father” make Jesus equal to God. Are you equal to your father? Or are you two different beings? I never understood how that verse (John 5:18) was a proof text for Jesus = God. Especially when Jesus corrects them in
verse 19 by saying that “the Son can do nothing by himself, he can do only what he sees the Father doing” and in verse 23 explains that he is the representative of “the Father who sent him.”"Okay now we are getting somewhere. If you have a son and he grows up what does he become? A man just as YOU are. If God has a son then by all means the Son will have the same characteristics and abilities as the Father does. The very fact that Jesus is called mighty God and Eternal Father might indicate to most people that He shares the stature that God the Father has. Also, if there were no such thing as a trinity then why in God's name would we have to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit is an active force as the WT likes to say then why would He even be mentioned? That's kind of like saying eat this cake in the name of the cook, the server, oh yes and electricity. Many people confuse the fact that here Jesus is living in human form. He left his glory in heaven. He therefore was no longer all knowing (No man knows the day nor the hour not even the son but the Father)nor all powerful. Many of the WT arguments are based in this mistake. Jesus Christ resumed His power upon His ascension.
If that isn't enough how do you explain John 20:28 where Thomas stated to Jesus "My Lord and my God." (literally ho kurios and ho theos or "the lord of me and the God of me." And don't try to squeak by it with the old WT sidestep "Oh that was an exclamation." Jesus Christ would have scolded him for taking the Lord's name in vain. Jesus asked him "having seen have you believed?"
How do you explain the margin in the Kingdom Interlinear which translates John 8:58 CORRECTLY? This is the true literal interpretation of the Greek here.
You wrote:
(Out of curiosity, Doug -- How do you explain the difference in the Greek Septuagint ho ohn’ translated ‘The I Am’ at Exodus 3:24 and the Greek ego eimi at John 8:58? I am not being a smart aleck. I would really like to know.)
Firstly and I'm not being a smart alec either...its Exodus 3:14 not 3:24.
Secondly the reading at least from what I can see from the RSV for example is this:
"God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" (RSV)
I don't see a "the" in front of this from where I'm sitting. Furthermore, your assertion that it is dishonest to translate this in all caps also misses the point. If you as a translator find that a particular verse is even a partial quote of a previous old testament scripture then the long held practice of capitalization is honored.
As for Hebrews 1:6 even the WT admits that Paul was quoting Psalms when he applied this to Christ. See the following quote from the January 15, 1992 Watchtower:
CERTAIN translations of Hebrews 1:6 say: "Let all the angels of God worship him [Jesus]." (King James Version; The Jerusalem Bible) The apostle Paul evidently quoted the Septuagint, which says at Psalm 97:7: "Worship Him [God] all ye His angels."-C. Thomson.
If one prefers the rendering "worship," such worship is relative, for Jesus told Satan: "It is Jehovah your God you must worship [form of pro·sky·ne'o], and it is to him alone you must render sacred service."-Matthew 4:8-10.
So the Watchtower admits openly that Hebrews 1:6 is a quote from Psalms and in so doing admits that it has mistranslated the Septuagint by changing the word "worship" to "obeisance". Actually in its first version the NWT was translated as worship here at Hebrews 1:6. Of course it was changed later because it disagreed with their theology.
This is the crux of the whole issue. Jesus accepted worship (proskuneo) in many ways via bowing down by his disciples. They even at one point grabbed his feet and bowed down to him. (Matthew 28:9, Matthew 2:11, Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:17, John 9:38, Acts 10:25 IN ALL INSTANCES THE WORD FOR WORSHIP OR "OBEISANCE" IS PROSKUNEO) Notice that Colossians 2:18 condemns worship of angels. (Proskuneo) Yet when Shadrack Meshak and Abednego were asked to worship the idol they refused. When Cornelius tried to do the same to Peter he refused and reproved Cornelius. When John tried to do the same to the angel in Revelation he refused TWICE and was reproved by the angel. (Rev 19:10 and 22:8 SAME WORD PROSKUNEO) Yet Jesus Christ never once refused or reproved his disciples in any way for their worship of him.
The fact is that Jesus was worshiped while on earth by His disciples. (Proskuneo) All other servants of God in the New Testament refused worship (Proskuneo) except for Jesus Christ. This makes for a tough case if Jesus Christ was created. OR WAS HE?
"He is without father or mother or geneology, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever." (Hebrews 7:3 RSV)
The WT takes the Greek word "proskuneo" and translates it "worship" when it applies to the Father. When it applies to the son they conveniently translate it as "obeisance". It is the same word with the same meaning as has already been proven above.
All of God's angels worship Him as well. Stephen even prayed to Him in Acts 7:59.
My point is that Jesus Christ holds a much higher office than the Watchtower gives Him. He is (I believe) equal to God the Father in importance as He (The Father) has given Him a name above every name. There is also no other name by which we must be saved. We must honor the Son just as we honor the Father. (Acts 4:12, Phillipians 2:9, John 5:23)
Regards,
Doug
-
20
Which is the best translation of the bible...
by TheApostleAK in50 years ago respected textual critic ernest cadman colwell created an apparatus of 64 scriptures to determine which is the best new testament.
i created a chart using the same criteria...and the results will surprise you!!.
http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/colwell.htm .
-
-
dshields1
You wrote:
"I really have to laugh at you, dshields. All you've done is to copy stuff from one or more stock-standard Fundy-Trinitarian anti-JW pages. Big Deal. Thousands of your ilk do it.
While the JWs are royally mucked up in many ways, their NWT agrees with quite a few other Bible translations on John 8:58. The fact that you present only the stock-standard Fundy-Trinitarian anti-JW arguments shows that you have no idea what you're talking about, but are merely parroting what certain Fundy leaders have told you. And they've royally misinformed you, just as JW leaders have misinformed JWs in so many other areas."
--------------------------------
Well there are a few things that I will say to you that should help others who read your posts. The standard Watchtower/Cult response to a doctrinal challenge is exactly what you just posted. First they laugh at the person and then they attempt to "box" them into a stereotype such as a "apostate", "evil slave", "fundy", etc. All cults do this but the Jehovah's Witnesses are especially fond of character assassination. It is quite interesting that while they engage in this kind of response in order to discredit their opponents they (and you) never seem to get around to addressing the real issues at hand. The fact is that there is no instance in the history of the New Testament where ego eimi is translated as "have been". Oh the NWT tries to as well as Greber's Demonic New Testament that the Watchtower is so fond of quoting but that is about as far as it goes. Of course, if I was a non-trinitarian and wanted to write a version that supported my beliefs then of course I could certainly do that.
The other issue is that the Pharisees immediately sought to stone Christ right after this statement by Him.
John 5:18 really sheds a lot of light on the context of this whole situation where it says (NWT):
"On this account, indeed, the Jews began seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath but he was also calling God his own Father, making himself equal to God."
The Pharisees KNEW what Jesus was claiming in John 8:58 and this is why they sought to kill him.
In closing I will say this:
I have spent the last several years studying Greek. I felt the need to find the truth for myself without having to listen to others and follow their own interpretations. Instead I have been able to come to my own conclusions based on a thorough examination of the bible and the language that it was written in. The fact that Christ is God is very plain and easily found in many different areas of both the old and new testament. Rather than reply to your verbal assaults in kind I will merely close with a wish:
I wish you peace.
Doug Shields