Re: [TruthTalk] TT w/o a moderator
I've been pondering on the same thing; how will we overcome to the point where we will "judge angels" if we can't control ourselves enough to be civil on an internet list? It's a good suggestion.Plus I still haven't seen Christine's picture - judyt On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:12:42 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Yikes.can I really be in agreement with Kevin??? If you decide to go that route for awhile, DavidMwhy not deep 6 the ad-hom rule. Who knowsmaybe TT can rise from the ashes like a phoenix!!!Kevin Deegan wrote: David, Since TT has been w/o a Moderator, it seems to have done just fine. Why not just keep the list up w/o one? Breaking up is just so hard to do. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
[TruthTalk] Goodbye
My it is awfully quiet this morning;I don't even see anything from Lance (the early bird) Have been busy over the weekend so have not had much time tothink about goodbyes. Our son and DIL are building a house at the back of us - also we are involved daily with our daughter in TX who is presently in the midst of an ongoingcrisis. I would like to thank all of you for sharing yourselves on the TT List. I think I have learned in some way from everyone, though possibly not in the ways you or I would have thought. For me, TT has been a learning experience and I am thankful that DavidM rescued me from the legalistic Homechurch List where we met. David you and your family have been a real encouragement in the Lord. I took me a while to get to know each Listmember. My ideas regarding Street Preaching have changed and I have enjoyed Kevin and Dean so much. I am glad to know they are out there along with DM and Christine Miller. Just this morning I read 1 Kings 14:24 regarding the mess Judah was in after Solomon "and there were also sodomites in the land and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord cast out before the children of Israel" so theirs istruly a labor of love. Thank you Iz for sharing yourself, your pilgrimage, and your family with us. I wanted to share some photos but haven't had time to look for one to compete with JD and Gary :) Lance, I have to say that I was often surprised that you hung in there - We never did agree but I do appreciate the kind words you spoke on occasion; they tell me that you did not take what I wrote personally which is good. I am not angry with any person per se and have found everything interesting, even Dave Hanson's contributions in the historical or cultural sense (see your inputLance :) but when I came to TT I was and am stillfrustrated by dead orthodoxy andtheologies or menbecause they are powerless and I so want to see Jesus on the scene. There are more than 500 families in the church we attend and so many hurting ppl that the new counseling pastor is swamped they are calling him all hours of the day and night and he doesn't have time for his family. The teaching pastor is just back from spending a week in London and yesterday he shared how on the flight over there was a rape on the TV's on either side of him and when his wife turned hers on there was an adulterous affair on it. He then told ushow overwhelmed he was by Westminster Abbey where the Westminster Confession was put together and All Souls Church where John Stott whose writings have affected him so much pastored.. that's all well and good and I'm glad for him but on the way homeI told my husband that the effecthis sermon had on me was to make me want to go to London - but not for the same reasons. It did not make me hunger for more of Jesus. I long for God's Word to be exalted with great plainness of speech so that we will see His results with lives changed and health and peace among the people. I pray you will all grow in grace and in the knowledge of Him and that we will have opportunity to meet again. God Bless You All judyt in Suffolk VA
[TruthTalk] Saying Goodbye
Thank you for these thoughts David; you seem to have apprehended everyone's specialness. I am, like Iz, already missing everyone even before the Lists final demise - after all I did spend many a day with all of you and you will be missed I'll need to get used to coffee without Lance now... Thanks Lance for the update re your Mom. judyt From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Continuing with my farewell impressions... Although John Smithson is a rather emotional person with whom I have butted heads concerning over-generalizations and stereotypic expressions, I have appreciated John's keen interest in theology and philosophy. He has ventured into areas which others on TruthTalk would not. By doing so, John has opened up avenues of thought and reflection which would otherwise have been stagnant. John was never afraid of a good brawl and often moved topics on TruthTalk into fisticuffs. I appreciated such opportunities as a way to dig deeper into issues, furthering a reductionistic method of breaking down subjects into smaller parts for analysis. I will always have fond thoughts about his passion for issues that were usually on the periphery of my thinking. Kevin Deegan has been a great contributor, always great with links and information about almost any issue. Kevin's breath of reading comes across loud and clear, but more than just being well read, he has expressed a passion for truth. He takes a hard line stance that is helpful to others willing to give a thorough study of a particular issue. While Kevin is quick to quip, he also exhibits a patience to keep ploughing along with difficult subjects. I think I will remember Kevin's patience more than the actual information he has posted. May God grant me the ability to stick with it like Kevin does, to present God's truth, despite what the detractors might offer. I also cannot sign off without mentioning my admiration for Kevin's sacrifice and diligence toward preaching the Word of God to those outside the churches of Jesus Christ. Such will always continue to inspire me. Carroll Dean Moore will be best remembered for his no-nonsense seriousness with which he approaches life and the Word of God. I will remember Dean's passion and loyalty toward what he perceives to be the right path. When I think of Dean, I tend to remember the passage from 1 Peter 5:8, "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour." Thank you Dean. Ruben Israel Chavez will be remembered for his always uplifting preaching reports. I stand in awe of the sacrifice he makes as he travels around the country and the world, preaching the Truth of Christ to those who are unchurched. Ruben also has taken time to joust with us from time to time, and to explain his thinking about issues of importance. Ruben is a constant model of being a preacher of the Word and not just a student. Such will always be in my mind. Charles Perry Locke has been a gentlemen among gentlemen. He is passionate about truth and at the same time well mannered and filled with common sense I appreciate Perry's sacrifice in helping moderate the list for a long time. In posts, he has perhaps been among the most patient. When I have been very dense in hearing him on a point, he would take the time to spell it out clearly until I got it. Many others would have simply made fun of me and gone on to other issues. Not Perry. I will always cherish his longsuffering and clear, logical mind. Gary Ottoson... I will always remember him as Mr. Abbreviation. Gary's presence has raised the intellectual level a notch or two on TruthTalk. While many of his posts were difficult to decipher for some, and nearly impossible for the uneducated, he did at times come up with gems that provoked further discussion. Gary was a constant reminder to TruthTalk that poets have something to say among those who wish to talk about truth. Gary also has a steadfastness to him that has been inspirational. Judy Taylor has been a rock for the unadulterated truth. Her adherence to Scripture without any contamination from the thoughts of men will always be in the back of my mind. In my tendency toward curiosity about many ideas and subjects, Judy has been that firm but gentle reminder of where my feet need to be firmly planted. Her strength of character and great love for God has been an inspiration for me, and will continue to be an inspiration to me for years to come. One cannot come into contact with such a person and not remember her when times of trials and persecution come because of the Word of God. Thank you Judy for being Judy. You are greatly loved. Linda Shields, well, Linda is Izzy... a fiesty cat. I have learned to appreciate her passion and independence of spirit. In a day when many Christians are generally somewhat reticent to declare political affiliations, Linda would boldly pro
Re: [TruthTalk] I Hope I'm Not too Late...
Christine, I can't see the picture - Must be my Norton spam blocker or something, is there another way you could send it? Have really enjoyed you. Thanks for beinga blessing to us on TT - judyt On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:45:37 -0800 (PST) Christine Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I just wanted to say one last time that it has been such a joy getting to know you all. I praise God for your wisdom and passion. Here's a picture of me grinning ear-to-ear with my mom on Broadway a couple of months ago. My father babysat all of my sisters back home while we two girls painted the town red! I love you all. -Christine Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
I think it's a "right back atcha" thing - for years I would go over there and hear much lamenting about what Americans had bought; do you know an American Company now owns the all Australian delicious spread called Vegemite? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:45:33 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate They just bought the New York Thruway. Does that mean I need a passport, now?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorThanks for this Kevin Proof of the pudding is always in the eating. I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate also So Lance and his prophet don't have a whole lot of support from "down under" either On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:20:31 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lance says Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Ah Ah AH CHOO! excuse me 348,000 New York jobs are supported by Canada-U.S. trade Total CanadaU.S. merchandise trade: $411 billion CanadaU.S. trade supported 5.2 million U.S. jobs More people traveled between Canada and NY in 2004 than any other U.S. state 14,500,000 vehicles crossed the Canada-U.S. border at the four Niagara crossings last year, accounting for 34% of all traffic that crossed into Ontario ROTFL With this many US Jobs gone, could CanaDUH rebound? http://www.2ontario.com/welcome/coca_401.asp Seeing that a FULL 84% of CanaDUHs exports are US Calculator please That leaves 16%, can CanaDUH's economy survive on 16% of its present exports? Remember that the Total export/imports of canada represents a FULL 2/3rds of their GDP! SIZE does matter! Thanks for the add'l example of mindless parroting. Don't you just HATE Ignorance? I guess it is better than letting it go to waste. Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The 'prophet' (take note, David) said otherwise in November. Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Size does matter but, it's not the only thing that matters. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 08:03 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster Don't worry Lance, if the USA implodes - Canada and Europe will go with it - at present when the US sneezes the rest of the world catch a cold. Such envy and jealousy from the North ... Goodness gracious! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirMost on TT will live to see the implosion of the USA. At what point will you declare bankruptcy. You don't have the option of moving out of your old house and into a new one. From: ShieldsFamily http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster As a teacher, he had come to dislike American elementary schools. They could be overcrowded, with up to seventy children of all ages crammed into one-room schoolhouses, poorly staffed with untrained teachers, and poorly equipped with no desks and unsatisfactory textbooks which came from England. Webster thought that Americans should learn from American books, so he began writing a three volume compendium, A Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The work consisted of a speller (published in 1783), a grammar (published in 1784), and a reader (publishe
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Thomas Merton and Joan Baez?? - O good gracious, you're sinking Gary, and fast. On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 01:33:29 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:46:50 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Really up on social justice huh..? whatever rings true "Sweet brother, if I do not sleep My eyes are flowers on your tomb And if I cannot eat my bread My fasts shall live like willows where you died If in the heat I find no water for my thirst My thirst shall turn to springs for you, poor traveler Come, in your labor find a resting place And in my sorrows lay your head Brother, take my life and bread And buy yourself a better bed Take my breath and take my death Buy yourself a better rest beneath the bells of Gethsemani When all the men of war are killed And flags have fallen into dust Your cross and mine will tell men still He died on each for both of us That we might become the brothers of God And learn to know the Christ of burnt men And the children are ringing the bells of Gethsemani For in the wreckage of your April Christ lies slain He weeps in the ruins of my spring The money of whose tears shall fall Into your weak and friendless hand And buy you back to your own land The silence of whose tears shall fall Like bells upon your alien tomb Hear them and come, they call you home And the children are ringing the bells of Gethsemani Yes, if they had been there They would have taken that crown of thorns from his hair And stayed for a while in that place of despair Ah, but what do I see, my brother is there And he's ringing the bells of Gethsemani" (Music by Joan Baez, Words by Thomas Merton) © 1981 Gabriel Earl Music (ASCAP)
[TruthTalk] Truth and Freedom (some food for thought)
Truth and freedom go hand in hand, but truth will produce freedom only as it is walked in. This ought to be self-evident. We can know something is true, but if we fail to walk in it, what good is it? Its value to us is worthless unless it is walked in. Freedom and truth come to those who press on. Freedom, the kind of freedom that God is involved in bringing us into, comes progressively, not all at once. These are lessons from the Days of Unleavened Bread. It took the Israelites seven days to get to and across the Red Sea. It took them another forty years to get into their own land, into their inheritance, the Promised Land. Their freedom was progressive. There was a time when it began, but if they had never continued on the way, they would never have had their own land, never have had their inheritance, never have been free. This is a large part of the object lesson: We have to continue. If we continue, then we will truly be a disciple. We will understand the truth, and the truth will make usfree. The truth of God shows us the real values of life because it shows us what we are to give our life to.
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
I didn't know about it - but it wouldn't bother Australians; they are not pleased with Paul Hogan ... mainly because he got carried away with celebrity and left his wife and mother of his five children Noela to marry the girl in his first movie. He lives in California most of the time now and is not the "unsophisticated" steel rigger he once was. On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 05:24:44 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it's a "right back atcha" thing Is that so? Well, how do you like the fact that some American Company bought the rights to all those Paul Hogan movies?Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's a "right back atcha" thing - for years I would go over there and hear much lamenting about what Americans had bought; do you know an American Company now owns the all Australian delicious spread called Vegemite? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:45:33 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate They just bought the New York Thruway. Does that mean I need a passport, now?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorThanks for this Kevin Proof of the pudding is always in the eating. I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate also So Lance and his prophet don't have a whole lot of support from "down under" either On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:20:31 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lance says Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Ah Ah AH CHOO! excuse me 348,000 New York jobs are supported by Canada-U.S. trade Total CanadaU.S. merchandise trade: $411 billion CanadaU.S. trade supported 5.2 million U.S. jobs More people traveled between Canada and NY in 2004 than any other U.S. state 14,500,000 vehicles crossed the Canada-U.S. border at the four Niagara crossings last year, accounting for 34% of all traffic that crossed into Ontario ROTFL With this many US Jobs gone, could CanaDUH rebound? http://www.2ontario.com/welcome/coca_401.asp Seeing that a FULL 84% of CanaDUHs exports are US Calculator please That leaves 16%, can CanaDUH's economy survive on 16% of its present exports? Remember that the Total export/imports of canada represents a FULL 2/3rds of their GDP! SIZE does matter! Thanks for the add'l example of mindless parroting. Don't you just HATE Ignorance? I guess it is better than letting it go to waste. Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The 'prophet' (take note, David) said otherwise in November. Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Size does matter but, it's not the only thing that matters. - Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 08:03 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster Don't worry Lance, if the USA implodes - Canada and Europe will go with it - at present when the US sneezes the rest of the world catch a cold. Such envy and jealousy from the North ... Goodness gracious! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirMost on TT will live
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Your buddy JD, the one who sent you the baseball bat; apparently he was lucid enough to accomplish that; the rest of the time he is obsessed by dualism. On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 13:28:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who is Gary Olson? From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] LOL! So true as to be hilarious. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor What was dualistic about that comment Gary Olson? It is world affairs that's all... You are truly weird, strange, weird ... Why do you truncate what ppl write and insert your own comments - ultimately making it appear the person said something they did not. Oh I understand - you do the same with God's Words. O' the shame of it. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:33:31 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: more evidenceof jt's implicit dualism On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:49:07 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [while eschatological] Proof of the pudding is always in the eating...[is'nt] Australia..investing workers retirement funds in[biblically questionable] Real Estate also[?]
Re: [TruthTalk] Truth and Freedom (some food for thought)
Of course they did - the two that made it that is (Joshua and Caleb) since they didn't return with an (evil) carnal report along withall of the following generation who beganwith a fresh copy book. On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 13:39:33 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Good post -- as far as it goes. What you leave out is this: they never fully arrived !!! God remained patient. Kinda like it is right now. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Truth and freedom go hand in hand, but truth will produce freedom only as it is walked in. This ought to be self-evident. We can know something is true, but if we fail to walk in it, what good is it? Its value to us is worthless unless it is walked in. Freedom and truth come to those who press on. Freedom, the kind of freedom that God is involved in bringing us into, comes progressively, not all at once. These are lessons from the Days of Unleavened Bread. It took the Israelites seven days to get to and across the Red Sea. It took them another forty years to get into their own land, into their inheritance, the Promised Land. Their freedom was progressive. There was a time when it began, but if they had never continued on the way, they would never have had their own land, never have had their inheritance, never have been free. This is a large part of the object lesson: We have to continue. If we continue, then we will truly be a disciple. We will understand the truth, and the truth will make usfree. The truth of God shows us the real values of life because it shows us what we are to give our life to.
Re: [TruthTalk] Izzy and Erin
Loved all of your photos Iz, Beautifulfamily, lovely pets, gracious home. How about all those garages; I know that comes in handy. From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 26, 2006 08:44 Subject: [TruthTalk] Izzy and Erin With my beautiful stepdaughter, Erin, this week. Izzy I sent these photos using Adobe(R) Photoshop(R) Elements 4.0. Find out more: http://www.adobe.com/photoshopelementswin
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
I can empathize with you Lance, it was not that long ago for me. I do hope and pray she will pull through so you can share some more days with her. Any official prognosis yet? jt On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 09:14:08 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I spent some time at my mother's bedside reading, praying and talking. She has not opened her eyes. thanks Iz, Lance From: ShieldsFamily Amen, Lance! Hoping all is well with you, izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:06 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster Or, take your Bible and point to Him while saying 'HE IS THE WORD'. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 26, 2006 08:33 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster I love Crocodile Dundee because he says, with a glint in his eye, Now THIS is a knife! Life up your Bible and say, Now THIS is the Word! It cuts to the quick and separates the men from the boys! J iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:25 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster I think it's a "right back atcha" thing Is that so? Well, how do you like the fact that some American Company bought the rights to all those Paul Hogan movies?Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's a "right back atcha" thing - for years I would go over there and hear much lamenting about what Americans had bought; do you know an American Company now owns the all Australian delicious spread called Vegemite? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:45:33 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate They just bought the New York Thruway. Does that mean I need a passport, now?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorThanks for this Kevin Proof of the pudding is always in the eating. I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate also So Lance and his prophet don't have a whole lot of support from "down under" either On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:20:31 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lance says Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Ah Ah AH CHOO! excuse me 348,000 New York jobs are supported by Canada-U.S. trade Total CanadaU.S. merchandise trade: $411 billion CanadaU.S. trade supported 5.2 million U.S. jobs More people traveled between Canada and NY in 2004 than any other U.S. state 14,500,000 vehicles crossed the Canada-U.S. border at the four Niagara crossings last year, accounting for 34% of all traffic that crossed into Ontario ROTFL With this many US Jobs gone, could CanaDUH rebound?
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
Of course it is; JC is the Word of God isn't He? Everytime God speaks - He speaks Truth - and every time it is God the Word - JC Let God be true and every man a liar On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:10:15 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: then Truth ain't JC put yet another way, the notionmouthedisbeyond falseness, it is implicitly untrue as is a lie,M'am On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:05:59 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As..we turn Genesis into a statement... jt: ..it's 'a statement of TRUTH'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dominion
More accurately - the lack of understanding is just plain obdurance in those too full of themselves and their own opinions to yeild to the source of understanding all Truth. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:00:03 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..also,perceptively: "The Lack of understanding is just laziness of thought and lack of effort." On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:23:04 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: bullseye; v understandable, Bro! On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:30:28 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Fits the legal definition of LibelJudy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: || ..you are out there Lance, possiblyin the next orbit to Gary.
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on
Interpretation/interpolation/speculation re:Genesis leads one to that which one has just witnessed over the last week or so. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 17:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I don't know why you are getting so emotional over this. I think that when God spoke, in many situations, it took some time for what he said to take place. For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said.He also may have been involved in other ways that we don't understand right now. Do you see it differently? It does not have anything to do with resting for the next day. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:36 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist. Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical doesnot mean that God did not create the world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today. Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this is impossible. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into being? I don't understand your point. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 5:29 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So which fundamentalist version of creation do you support. That A E were spirit people. A 6000 year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that canbe spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water because my mouth was getting dry. Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into the school system ??? We are still waiting?? jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't you get it JT? TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS! The opinions of Men are the key.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
Big problem JD; the "biblical message" is something other than what you have been proffering on TT so far So why not just admit that you counsel using your own theology and that the results belong to you also?. jt: How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? JD: That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book. But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on. It does not appear that you do get what I have said. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:05:59 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What do I believe about Genesis? Did you read any of my posts? Sciencehas no answers to our confusion, our bondage, our need for community andan innate longing to live beyond what we see.As soon as we turn Genesis into a statement of science, we lessen its value to the human spirit. How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book. But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on. It does not appear that you do get what I have said. What do I get from reading those first three chapters? That God is in control -- not that He is SOMEHOW in control - but that He is IN FACT in control. He is my creator. I am in His image. He is your Creator but you are not in His image unless you have been totally conformed to the image of Christ already - in fact, not in theory only. Your attitude to His Law would belie that. Adam and Eve were not created with the nature of Christ as their mainstay !! Just JudySpeak and nothing more. And even when I fall, He continues to hover over and round me. It tells me that I was created for others -- my wife, my children and the world in which I live. The first three chapters of Genesis tells you all of the above? Where? Take your Bible, open it to the first pages of Genesis, lean over until your nose is nearly touching those pages and BAM !!!, YOU WILL SEE IT. It tells me I am responsible for much of my actions. Work is a curse because I must be responsible !! Newsflash!! You are responsible for ALL of your thoughts as well as your actions. No kidding. I and my wife are one becauseGodthought this to be the case from the beginning. and REST has as much a place in the coming and goings of man as work. That's what I get out of this Genesis account.Whilesome of you only see a debate You and your wife are one flesh; the Lord would like to be One spirit with you JD Done deal, Judge Judy . beginning many years ago. Do you know the best way of dealing with a child - in my case an older son -- who comes home announcing that he no longer believes in the bible??!! IGNORE that comment and continue to be a witness , using, at times, the very book that he rejects. DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT challenge him/her to a debate. You will not win, if your version of :winning" is to bring that child to say "Iwas wrong, Dad, and you were right again." He won't do it. But if you ignore the challenge, and give biblical presentations that make sense to the way he is living his life -- the objection vanishes into thin air. Theory? Nope. It worked on both of my older boys - the lawyer and the doctor. But I digress with some free advice. The long and short of the lesson is this -- make the Bible THE battle ground and you will lose the war !!! Present the Bible as something that offers life in the Spirit of God in the Christ of God and you have a winner. jd
Re: [TruthTalk] Divine Contingent Order
Why? What do they do for you? It's all about him, his thoughts, his opinions, the movies he sees, etc. etc. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:09:26 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :-) I shall miss these pithy responses. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] After reading you, I'm inclined toward a YES! From: Kevin Deegan Was it a BIG Bang?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When one seeks to apply the latter onto the former one is simply stymied. In failing to apprehend this one bangs one's head against the proverbial wall. Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on and on and on
Neither can you "debate" it, that is, if you deal with reality at all. You weren't there were you? All you have in your favor are flights of fancy that are no different than anyone else's flights of fancy. Jesus quoted from Genesis and He quoted as is - no explanation necessary. He was there!!! On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:30:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't it be the way it is written? Well - I wouldn't know the answer to that, Judy. I am talking about what is written. 26 seconds versus 144 hours is about what is written. Your little proof text has nothing to do with the topic of creation and this Genesis account. The reason why you chose not to debate the issue is because you cannot. And you certainly have not debated the issue. This is the third post from you I have opened this morning with absolutely nothing in any of them work responding too. Just negative chit-chat. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Says one from CA who has been permeated by the "fast food" fast everything generation Remember "He that believeth shall not make haste" So why does God have to be in a bighurry? And why can't it be the way it is written? Because JD says it does not make sense to him? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:33:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David, allow me this moment to reveal just a tad about the Smithmeister. Bulldogery is that which speaks of my passion. Indeed, I have gotten angry twice, here on TT, both times following one of your priceless comments . Twice in three years (going back a ways .)?!! Not bad, I think. I am certainly NOT emotional in my response(s)on this subject. There havebeen times, in past postings, that you have been even brilliant in your defense. This is not one of those times. Science and creation is not one of your strong points -- at least not this time around. I suspect that you are distracted with other things. To wit: God takes 26 seconds to speak all things into existence - I say. But you, wanting to present the act of creation as longer, say exactly 144 hours (6 days times 24 hours for those of you living near the Ozarks) retort with this -- For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. Maybe that doesn't sound funny to you, but honestly, it is a riot over here in my office. "Those dumb old land masses -- they couldn't just POP into place. N0sir-re. It took time for them to move into place -- upwards of several hours !! Com'on big D !! Just admit that the non-literal 24 hour crowd just might have a point !! Look -- if you give graduating high school studentsyour kind of information and send to them to Humbolt State - why, within minutes, the whole bunch of them would become atheists !! I have seen thishappen many times. Our young people have left their individual churches thinking there is nothing to evolution, or whatever, and when they sit in front of an antongist, they are left naked, poor and numb. You might not be impressed with my explanations offered to my boys at U of Cal at Davies -- but let me tell you this. I had been working on one line explanations for years before my boys got to school. All ofthose one-liners thoroughly defeated except for that one brief paragraph of thought I gave in another post (the eternity of matter and motion aand the philosophical advantage of going with the eternity of God - thingy). I have talked about "postulated" truth in the past -- that such is considered to be"truth" but without the possibility of PROOF. I have mentioned that science is as much addicted to "faith" as a Christian to his God . all things I could communicate in minutes over the phone. And guess what -- my boys called!!! These guys each won state wrestling championships and I coached them (AND YES I AM MOST DEFINITELY BRAGGING). In some venues , they completely trusted me and with reason. Probably the most important long distance phone call I will ever receive frommy boyswas THAT call -- "Dad, this prof is killing us !! What do we say?" There was no doubt in their minds that The Reply would work. I could have lost both boys the next day in class !! You should have heard that next phone call the next evening !! Awesome. How did I know it would work ? I went to several science
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
You JDhave rejectedsubstance unlessconformed to your liking and by then it is no longer substance but mixture. So what would be the point?? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:33:51 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I rest my case !! And a fourth post (of the morning) that is absolutely content free talk about "substance abuse !!" that is what goes on in your your posts. jd -- Original message ------ From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Big problem JD; the "biblical message" is something other than what you have been proffering on TT so far So why not just admit that you counsel using your own theology and that the results belong to you also?. jt: How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? JD: That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book. But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on. It does not appear that you do get what I have said. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:05:59 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What do I believe about Genesis? Did you read any of my posts? Sciencehas no answers to our confusion, our bondage, our need for community andan innate longing to live beyond what we see.As soon as we turn Genesis into a statement of science, we lessen its value to the human spirit. How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book. But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on. It does not appear that you do get what I have said. What do I get from reading those first three chapters? That God is in control -- not that He is SOMEHOW in control - but that He is IN FACT in control. He is my creator. I am in His image. He is your Creator but you are not in His image unless you have been totally conformed to the image of Christ already - in fact, not in theory only. Your attitude to His Law would belie that. Adam and Eve were not created with the nature of Christ as their mainstay !! Just JudySpeak and nothing more. And even when I fall, He continues to hover over and round me. It tells me that I was created for others -- my wife, my children and the world in which I live. The first three chapters of Genesis tells you all of the above? Where? Take your Bible, open it to the first pages of Genesis, lean over until your nose is nearly touching those pages and BAM !!!, YOU WILL SEE IT. It tells me I am responsible for much of my actions. Work is a curse because I must be responsible !! Newsflash!! You are responsible for ALL of your thoughts as well as your actions. No kidding. I and my wife are one becauseGodthought this to be the case from the beginning. and REST has as much a place in the coming and goings of man as work. That's what I get out of this Genesis account.Whilesome of you only see a debate You and your wife are one flesh; the Lord would like to be One spirit with you JD Done deal, Judge Judy . beginning many years ago. Do you know the best way of dealing with a child - in my case an older son -- who comes home announcing that he no longer believes in the bible??!! IGNORE that comment and continue to be a witness , using, at times, the very book that he rejects. DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT challenge him/her to a debate. You will not win, if your version of :winning" is to bring that child to say "Iwas wrong, Dad, and you were right again." He won't do it. But if you ignore the challenge, and give biblical presentations that make sense to the way he is living his life -- the objection vanishes into thin air. Theory? Nope. It worked on both of my older boys - the lawyer and the doctor. But I
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
Not so; the statement of a man of God inspired by the Spirit of God "For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged" On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:32:50 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: myth (feminists' rhetoric) || On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 ..Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Let God be true and every man a liar - ..Funny how some guys take a false assumption to the extreme, hey Judy? iz
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
The old house was judged at the cross; if you want to hang on to it JD that's your demise Probably why you defend carnality so adamantly also. Only the new men make it because only they are fit for the Kingdom. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:18:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Selling the old house and building the new house is precisely what does not happen in new birth. What you moved to avoid is the real analogy. I am surprised that you think differently. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 06:20 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of incarceration without charge Zündel was denied the right to cross-examine his accusers or to know all the evidence against him. Zündel stated that all his alleged crimes are Internet-related Canadian Human Rights Commission "The truth in some absolute sense really plays no role. Rather, it is the social context in which the message is delivered and heard which will determine the effect that the communication will have on the listener. It is not the truth or falsity per se that will evoke the emotion but rather how it is understood by the recipient.Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't look now but Canada is changing - Group Think Gary North would be proud of you folks. He tried to bring in New Geneva and by the looks of it you folks have actually
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
Then Willard will have to re evaluate - in this area anyway God is not in the business of renovation. He does not put new wine in old wineskins. It's a new covenant (Heb 8:8) for a new ppl in Christ (see 2 Cor 5:17; 2 Pet 1:4; Eph 4:24; Col 3:10; Gal 6:15). The heavens and earth will not be renovated either, they will also be made new (see (2 Pet 3:13, Rev 21:1). You believe Willard if you want to - I prefer the higher authority. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:08:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. From: ShieldsFamily Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of incarceration without charge Zündel was denied the right to cross-examine his accusers or to know all the evidence against him. Zündel stated that all his alleged crimes are Internet-related Canadian Human Rights Commission "The truth in some absolute sense really plays no role. Rather, it is the social context in which the message is delivered and heard which will determine the effect that the communication will have on the listener. It is not the truth or falsity per se that will evoke the emotion but rather how it is understood by the recipient.Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't look now but Canada is changing - Group Think Gary North would be proud of you folks. He tried to bring in New Geneva and by the looks of it you folks have actually suceeded! Robert Martin,professor of constitutional law at the University of Western Ontario "Canada now is a totalitarian theocracy. I see this as a country ruled today by what I would describe as a secular state religion [of political correctness]. Anything that is regarded as heresy or blasphemy is not tolerated." Be careful there have been Inquisitions against professors who attack American Foriegn policy. Hope you do not get turned in, for your thoughts!
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Which is just continuingon doing what they are already doing but all but the most gullible have enough sense to know there are no part monkey/part humans on this planet . On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 06:36:20 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not.- Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM> To:Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Mes sage - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
You don't know me JD, never have and never will ... not at this rate anyway As a man believeth in his heart, so is he On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:39:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, you are as carnal a spirited babe as I have ever known. So get off your high horse. There is a difference between defending sin and admitting to its presence. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] The old house was judged at the cross; if you want to hang on to it JD that's your demise Probably why you defend carnality so adamantly also. Only the new men make it because only they are fit for the Kingdom. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:18:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Selling the old house and building the new house is precisely what does not happen in new birth. What you moved to avoid is the real analogy. I am surprised that you think differently. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 06:20 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of incarceration without charge Zündel was denied the right to cross-examine his accusers or to know all the evidence against him.
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Hatred? To me it sounds like good sense My late father in law used to respond to the pundits who said the church was full of hypocrites the same way ie: "I'd rather go to church with them than go to hell with them.." On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:43:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you still harbor that much hatred? Sad! From: ShieldsFamily Funny, my ex-husband referred to Christianity as fantasyland. I told him Id rather live in fantasyland than in hell with him. Same to you and your belief system, I guess. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir No wonder you favour homeschooling! Hello fantasyland. Did you build a bunker and stock it with survivalist gear? Is it coffee that you wake up to smell or the odour of decaying infrastructure? From: ShieldsFamily More liberal negativism and fear mongering. Wishing evil upon ones neighbor. This is nasty fruit that turns the stomach and repels the Holy Spirit. Im not denying that such may happen, but only Screwtape and Wormwood should be cheering it on from the sidelines. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:24 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster Most on TT will live to see the implosion of the USA. At what point will you declare bankruptcy. You don't have the option of moving out of your old house and into a new one. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 07:13 Subject: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster As a teacher, he had come to dislike American elementary schools. They could be overcrowded, with up to seventy children of all ages crammed into one-room schoolhouses, poorly staffed with untrained teachers, and poorly equipped with no desks and unsatisfactory textbooks which came from England. Webster thought that Americans should learn from American books, so he began writing a three volume compendium, A Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The work consisted of a speller (published in 1783), a grammar (published in 1784), and a reader (published in 1785). His goal was to provide a uniquely American, Christ-centered approach to training children. The speller was originally entitled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The title was changed in 1786 to The American Spelling Book, and again in 1829 to The Elementary Spelling Book. Most people called it the "Blue-Backed Speller" because of its blue cover, and for the next one hundred years, Webster's book taught children how to read, spell, and pronounce words. It was the most popular American book of its time; by 1861, it was selling a million copies per year, and its royalty of less than one cent per copy was enough to sustain Webster in his other endeavors. Even Ben Franklin used Webster's book to teach his granddaughter how to read. Noah was generally known to be Christian. It is reported that Noah Websters 1828 American Dictionary contains the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. Webster considered "education useless without the Bible." "In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. (Preface to the 1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language ) Besides his dictionary, Webster also released his own translation of the Bible in 1833. In doing the translation, Webster used the King James Version as a base. He consulted the Hebrew and Greek along with various other versions and commentaries.
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
And why is it present? Not enough power emanating from the cross to get rid of it yet? The scripture Izzy posted this morning about the Kingdom suffering violence and the violent taking it by force is all about sin JD. If you don't hate it as much as God does in your life and the lives of others you will never press in; the word is #971 Blazo - means to overpower, compel, press in with energy. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:39:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a difference between defending sin and admitting to its presence. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] The old house was judged at the cross; if you want to hang on to it JD that's your demise Probably why you defend carnality so adamantly also. Only the new men make it because only they are fit for the Kingdom. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:18:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Selling the old house and building the new house is precisely what does not happen in new birth. What you moved to avoid is the real analogy. I am surprised that you think differently. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 06:20 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of inc
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not.- Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM> To:Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Mes sage - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24,
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Don't worry Lance, if the USA implodes - Canada and Europe will go with it - at present when the US sneezes the rest of the world catch a cold. Such envy and jealousy from the North ... Goodness gracious! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirMost on TT will live to see the implosion of the USA. At what point will you declare bankruptcy. You don't have the option of moving out of your old house and into a new one. From: ShieldsFamily http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster As a teacher, he had come to dislike American elementary schools. They could be overcrowded, with up to seventy children of all ages crammed into one-room schoolhouses, poorly staffed with untrained teachers, and poorly equipped with no desks and unsatisfactory textbooks which came from England. Webster thought that Americans should learn from American books, so he began writing a three volume compendium, A Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The work consisted of a speller (published in 1783), a grammar (published in 1784), and a reader (published in 1785). His goal was to provide a uniquely American, Christ-centered approach to training children. The speller was originally entitled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The title was changed in 1786 to The American Spelling Book, and again in 1829 to The Elementary Spelling Book. Most people called it the "Blue-Backed Speller" because of its blue cover, and for the next one hundred years, Webster's book taught children how to read, spell, and pronounce words. It was the most popular American book of its time; by 1861, it was selling a million copies per year, and its royalty of less than one cent per copy was enough to sustain Webster in his other endeavors. Even Ben Franklin used Webster's book to teach his granddaughter how to read. Noah was generally known to be Christian. It is reported that Noah Websters 1828 American Dictionary contains the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. Webster considered "education useless without the Bible." "In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. (Preface to the 1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language ) Besides his dictionary, Webster also released his own translation of the Bible in 1833. In doing the translation, Webster used the King James Version as a base. He consulted the Hebrew and Greek along with various other versions and commentaries.
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on and on and on
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God Who spoke the worlds into existence? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:26:16 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well He (Jesus) was and He wasn't. From: Judy Taylor Neither can you "debate" it, that is, if you deal with reality at all. You weren't there were you? All you have in your favor are flights of fancy that are no different than anyone else's flights of fancy. Jesus quoted from Genesis and He quoted as is - no explanation necessary. He was there!!! On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:30:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't it be the way it is written? Well - I wouldn't know the answer to that, Judy. I am talking about what is written. 26 seconds versus 144 hours is about what is written. Your little proof text has nothing to do with the topic of creation and this Genesis account. The reason why you chose not to debate the issue is because you cannot. And you certainly have not debated the issue. This is the third post from you I have opened this morning with absolutely nothing in any of them work responding too. Just negative chit-chat. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Says one from CA who has been permeated by the "fast food" fast everything generation Remember "He that believeth shall not make haste" So why does God have to be in a bighurry? And why can't it be the way it is written? Because JD says it does not make sense to him? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:33:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David, allow me this moment to reveal just a tad about the Smithmeister. Bulldogery is that which speaks of my passion. Indeed, I have gotten angry twice, here on TT, both times following one of your priceless comments . Twice in three years (going back a ways .)?!! Not bad, I think. I am certainly NOT emotional in my response(s)on this subject. There havebeen times, in past postings, that you have been even brilliant in your defense. This is not one of those times. Science and creation is not one of your strong points -- at least not this time around. I suspect that you are distracted with other things. To wit: God takes 26 seconds to speak all things into existence - I say. But you, wanting to present the act of creation as longer, say exactly 144 hours (6 days times 24 hours for those of you living near the Ozarks) retort with this -- For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. Maybe that doesn't sound funny to you, but honestly, it is a riot over here in my office. "Those dumb old land masses -- they couldn't just POP into place. N0sir-re. It took time for them to move into place -- upwards of several hours !! Com'on big D !! Just admit that the non-literal 24 hour crowd just might have a point !! Look -- if you give graduating high school studentsyour kind of information and send to them to Humbolt State - why, within minutes, the whole bunch of them would become atheists !! I have seen thishappen many times. Our young people have left their individual churches thinking there is nothing to evolution, or whatever, and when they sit in front of an antongist, they are left naked, poor and numb. You might not be impressed with my explanations offered to my boys at U of Cal at Davies -- but let me tell you this. I had been working on one line explanations for years before my boys got to school. All ofthose one-liners thoroughly defeated except for that one brief paragraph of thought I gave in another post (the eternity of matter and motion aand the philosophical advantage of going with the eternity of God - thingy). I have talked about "postulated" truth in the past -- that such is considered to be"truth" but without the possibility of PROOF. I have mentioned that science is as much addicted to "faith" as a Christian to his God . all things I could communicate in minutes over the phone. And guess what -- my boys called!!! These guys each
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
You've got to be kidding; right now most of the church isn't doing it's job in the church let alone out there in the world. I suppose you have noted the preacher's wife shooting her husband in the back in TN and they are CofC. Wonder what underlies that tragedy. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:07:40 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not.- Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM> To:Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man!
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
I have a hard time taking these kinds of prophets seriously Lance. I remember when Pat Robertson was predicting the demise of our monetary system in the early 1980's I guess you could say your prophet is true and Pat is false. I'm not critical of PR however, he has missed it many times but he is one of the only two men in the US that I have heard calling Islam what it is. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:09:29 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The 'prophet' (take note, David) said otherwise in November. Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Size does matter but, it's not the only thing that matters. From: Judy Taylor Don't worry Lance, if the USA implodes - Canada and Europe will go with it - at present when the US sneezes the rest of the world catch a cold. Such envy and jealousy from the North ... Goodness gracious! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirMost on TT will live to see the implosion of the USA. At what point will you declare bankruptcy. You don't have the option of moving out of your old house and into a new one. From: ShieldsFamily http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster As a teacher, he had come to dislike American elementary schools. They could be overcrowded, with up to seventy children of all ages crammed into one-room schoolhouses, poorly staffed with untrained teachers, and poorly equipped with no desks and unsatisfactory textbooks which came from England. Webster thought that Americans should learn from American books, so he began writing a three volume compendium, A Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The work consisted of a speller (published in 1783), a grammar (published in 1784), and a reader (published in 1785). His goal was to provide a uniquely American, Christ-centered approach to training children. The speller was originally entitled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The title was changed in 1786 to The American Spelling Book, and again in 1829 to The Elementary Spelling Book. Most people called it the "Blue-Backed Speller" because of its blue cover, and for the next one hundred years, Webster's book taught children how to read, spell, and pronounce words. It was the most popular American book of its time; by 1861, it was selling a million copies per year, and its royalty of less than one cent per copy was enough to sustain Webster in his other endeavors. Even Ben Franklin used Webster's book to teach his granddaughter how to read. Noah was generally known to be Christian. It is reported that Noah Websters 1828 American Dictionary contains the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. Webster considered "education useless without the Bible." "In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. (Preface to the 1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language ) Besides his dictionary, Webster also released his own translation of the Bible in 1833. In doing the translation, Webster used the King James Version as a base. He consulted the Hebrew and Greek along with various other versions and commentaries.
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
Don't hold your breath waiting JD: You have never been open to anything I would have to say - when TT goes down I will know it is time tocall it a day. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:13:50 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Like I said, Judy, your spirit is as carnal as any. When you get that "fixed," talk to me. You''ll still have my e-mail. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] And why is it present? Not enough power emanating from the cross to get rid of it yet? The scripture Izzy posted this morning about the Kingdom suffering violence and the violent taking it by force is all about sin JD. If you don't hate it as much as God does in your life and the lives of others you will never press in; the word is #971 Blazo - means to overpower, compel, press in with energy. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:39:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a difference between defending sin and admitting to its presence. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] The old house was judged at the cross; if you want to hang on to it JD that's your demise Probably why you defend carnality so adamantly also. Only the new men make it because only they are fit for the Kingdom. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:18:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Selling the old house and building the new house is precisely what does not happen in new birth. What you moved to avoid is the real analogy. I am surprised that you think differently. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 06:20 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
All these so called paradigms need to be put to bed Without the Spirit of God there is nothing happening but dead religion and who needs that One of you is enough JD. God's Spirit anoints or empowers His Words only; your life may make one curious for any number of reasons - but without Him you can do nothing. Oh! you can influence your children but that is our responsibility asparents anyway On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:18:47 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM> To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
Why don't you go ahead and say it out loud JD Judy has a Jezebel spirit - I've been around that kind of thinking before and know from whence it comes. Also your particular area of expertise is not spiritual discernment JD. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:27:19 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Shucks !! And, did you note that us "liberals" do not agree on everything? One is not the puppet of the other. For my money, you are the poster girl for "carnal Christian" if same includes "rebellions" as an indicator. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't hold your breath waiting JD: You have never been open to anything I would have to say - when TT goes down I will know it is time tocall it a day. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:13:50 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Like I said, Judy, your spirit is as carnal as any. When you get that "fixed," talk to me. You''ll still have my e-mail. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] And why is it present? Not enough power emanating from the cross to get rid of it yet? The scripture Izzy posted this morning about the Kingdom suffering violence and the violent taking it by force is all about sin JD. If you don't hate it as much as God does in your life and the lives of others you will never press in; the word is #971 Blazo - means to overpower, compel, press in with energy. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:39:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a difference between defending sin and admitting to its presence. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] The old house was judged at the cross; if you want to hang on to it JD that's your demise Probably why you defend carnality so adamantly also. Only the new men make it because only they are fit for the Kingdom. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:18:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Selling the old house and building the new house is precisely what does not happen in new birth. What you moved to avoid is the real analogy. I am surprised that you think differently. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Renovation of the Heart' by Dallas Willard. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 06:20 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march Isnt that the truth? We sold our 100 year old house, for one thing, because we realized that the renovations would never be finished. As soon as you started to repair one thing it led to another and another. The whole house needed to be replaced one thing after another! So we built new. What an analogy of the difference between religion and being born again of the Holy Spirit. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvemen
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on and on and on
I follow Jesus' example - becauseHe was there. It was He who spoke the worlds into existence If he accepted Moses and the Prophets without explanation and taught them the same way Then this isgood enough for me. All it took for him to defeat the enemy was "It is written" On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:25:00 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I can have no opinion about the creation because I wasn't there, then you are excluded for the same reason. Certainly I wasn't there, but I know how to read AND comprehend at the same time. That ability came my way shortly after learning to walk upright. When will it happen to you? jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Neither can you "debate" it, that is, if you deal with reality at all. You weren't there were you? All you have in your favor are flights of fancy that are no different than anyone else's flights of fancy. Jesus quoted from Genesis and He quoted as is - no explanation necessary. He was there!!! On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:30:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't it be the way it is written? Well - I wouldn't know the answer to that, Judy. I am talking about what is written. 26 seconds versus 144 hours is about what is written. Your little proof text has nothing to do with the topic of creation and this Genesis account. The reason why you chose not to debate the issue is because you cannot. And you certainly have not debated the issue. This is the third post from you I have opened this morning with absolutely nothing in any of them work responding too. Just negative chit-chat. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Says one from CA who has been permeated by the "fast food" fast everything generation Remember "He that believeth shall not make haste" So why does God have to be in a bighurry? And why can't it be the way it is written? Because JD says it does not make sense to him? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:33:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David, allow me this moment to reveal just a tad about the Smithmeister. Bulldogery is that which speaks of my passion. Indeed, I have gotten angry twice, here on TT, both times following one of your priceless comments . Twice in three years (going back a ways .)?!! Not bad, I think. I am certainly NOT emotional in my response(s)on this subject. There havebeen times, in past postings, that you have been even brilliant in your defense. This is not one of those times. Science and creation is not one of your strong points -- at least not this time around. I suspect that you are distracted with other things. To wit: God takes 26 seconds to speak all things into existence - I say. But you, wanting to present the act of creation as longer, say exactly 144 hours (6 days times 24 hours for those of you living near the Ozarks) retort with this -- For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. Maybe that doesn't sound funny to you, but honestly, it is a riot over here in my office. "Those dumb old land masses -- they couldn't just POP into place. N0sir-re. It took time for them to move into place -- upwards of several hours !! Com'on big D !! Just admit that the non-literal 24 hour crowd just might have a point !! Look -- if you give graduating high school studentsyour kind of information and send to them to Humbolt State - why, within minutes, the whole bunch of them would become atheists !! I have seen thishappen many times. Our young people have left their individual churches thinking there is nothing to evolution, or whatever, and when they sit in front of an antongist, they are left naked, poor and numb. You might not be impressed with my explanations offered to my boys at U of Cal at Davies -- but let me tell you this. I had been working on one line explanations for years before my boys got to school. All ofthose one-liners thoroughly defeated except for that one brief paragraph of thought I gave in another post (the eternity of matter and motion aand the philosophical advantage of going with the eternity of
Re: [TruthTalk] Divine Contingent Order
ROFL :) On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 10:04:33 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's what it spells when one's nose hits the keyboard. :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 8:31 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine Contingent Order This is one of JD's best techniques he learned it when he was Pres of the D-bate Society. I am afraid he does not get it so let's just move on! Or maybe he fell asleep at the keyboard? Is there a doctor in the house to treat his narcolepsy? --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: z -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why? What do they do for you? It's all about him, his thoughts, his opinions, the movies he sees, etc. etc.On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:09:26 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :-) I shall miss these pithy responses. jd From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] After reading you, I'm inclined toward a YES! From: Kevin Deegan Was it a BIG Bang? Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When one seeks to apply the latter onto the former one is simply stymied. In failing to apprehend this one bangs one's head against the proverbial wall. Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.-- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dominion
akes seriously the law of God, and everyone else.- From: Kevin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 17:52 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Is KD a pseudonym for Gary North? Gary North king of y2k "if ever a continent of covenant-breakers deserved this attribution (extermination), the "native Americans" did." Pope Gary North (comments added) Pope Gary North "The long-term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit...must be denied citizenship". Reformed Baptist? LOL Baptist Reconstruction? LOLBaptist Kingdom builders? LOL Baptist DominionISM? LOLBaptist Pope ROTFLRC Pope CalvinReformed Presbyterian Bring in the kingdom Presbytery JD Replacement Theology "We are Jews" Presbytery, Romans, Reformed C's, Mormons, Reformed, JD Lance! Apparently you are TOTALLY IGNORANT of Baptistshttp://www.reformedreader.org/histb.htm see # 4 The priesthood of the believer #5 right of soul liberty or religious liberty# 7 The Separation of Church and State Try to get your baseless assertions straight: Gary North Reformed Catholic - Presbytery RJ Rushdoony Reformed Catholic - PresbyteryGary Demar -Reformed Catholic - presbytery Kindy garten 101 - Who is who? Baptist Roger Williams Holding a Bible http://www.zbt.org/traditions/Roger_Williams_photo.htm PROTESTant RC Zwingly - Holding Bible SWORDhttp://www.antipas.org/books/protesters/prot_images/zwingli.jpg For all you kiddies TEST QUESTION who has the sword? Even some Presbyterian RC's admit they are just RC http://reformedcatholicism.blogspot.com/ Dominion is the Sole Realm of Popes, Protestants Potentates!!! Again all the ammo you have is Psycho assertionISM!Name smearing and grossly misrepresenting peoples beliefs.These REFORMED Catholics are just like their PapaBaptists do not preach this baloney never have.Popes Protestants and Potentates have blood on their hands.Most times it was the blood of BaptistsYou defame their pure blood, shed by murderous RC'sAntipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you RJ Rushdooney http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/fundienazis/royal_race.htm The Royal Race of the Redeemed? Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is KD a pseudonym for Gary North? Have you finally come out of hiding after the Y2K fiasco? I do believe that were we to remove the hoods from some on TT we would see that which underlies the hatred that you spread throughout the mid-east and, elsewhere. - Original Message - From: Kevin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 07:50 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism AGAIN you show your Short ComprehensionI am NOT a REFORMED CATHOLIC. wrong slot Lance, better take it to your friends for a consensusWhat do you know of RJR?Not as much as you think, I suppose.He is NOT a Fundamentalist Like Papa like son, bring out the stake Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spoken like a true studen of RJR. - Original Message - From: Kevin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 22, 2006 21:05 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Let's have them Teach Dominion Theology in school ; )[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have manyand varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So?There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed uponby the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed,
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
The "mythmaker" has woken up again Iz Look at the "partial truth" lies coming from his keyboard On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:29:49 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:32:50 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] edits: myth (the statement of a man of God inspired by the Spirit of God employed asfeminists' rhetoric) || On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 ..Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Let God be true and every man a liar - ..Funny how some guys take a false assumption to the extreme, hey Judy? iz
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
ROFL :) On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:40:32 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: See the RED for real "substance" encoding --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Make that 5 posts. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] You JD have rejected substance unless conformed to your liking and by then it is no longer substance but mixture. So what would be the point??On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:33:51 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I rest my case !! And a fourth post (of the morning) that is absolutely content free talk about "substance abuse !!" that is what goes on in your your posts. jd -- Original message ------ From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Big problem JD; the "biblical message" is something other than what you have been proffering on TT so far So why not just admit that you counsel using your own theology and that the results belong to you also?. jt: How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? JD: That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book.But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on.It does not appear that you do get what I have said. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:05:59 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What do I believe about Genesis? Did you read any of my posts?Science has no answers to our confusion, our bondage, our need for community and an innate longing to live beyond what we see. As soon as we turn Genesis into a statement of science, we lessen its value to the human spirit. How about a statement of TRUTH communicated by the author of TRUTH then? That is exactly what I am saying. I counsel others as time permits. I use the biblical message in my work. That does not mean the Bible is a counseling manual !! Neither is it a science book. But if you don't get what I am saying in the above, just move on.It does not appear that you do get what I have said. What do I get from reading those first three chapters? That God is in control -- not that He is SOMEHOW in control - but that He is IN FACT in control. He is my creator. I am in His image. He is your Creator but you are not in His image unless you have been totally conformed to the image of Christ already - in fact, not in theory only. Your attitude to His Law would belie that. Adam and Eve were not created with the nature of Christ as their mainstay !! Just JudySpeak and nothing more. And even when I fall, He continues to hover over and round me. It tells me that I was created for others -- my wife, my children and the world in which I live. The first three chapters of Genesis tells you all of the above? Where? Take your Bible, open it to the first pages of Genesis, lean over until your nose is nearly touching those pages and BAM !!!, YOU WILL SEE IT. It tells me I am responsible for much of my actions. Work is a curse because I must be responsible !! Newsflash!! You are responsible for ALL of your thoughts as well as your actions. No kidding. I and my wife are one because God thought this to be the case from the beginning. and REST has as much a place in the coming and goings of man as work. That's what I get out of this Genesis account. While some of you only see a debate You and your wife are one flesh; the Lord would like to be One spirit with you JD Done deal, Judge Judy . beginning many years ago. Do you know the best way of dealing with a child - in my case an older son -- who comes home announcing that he no longer believes in the bible??!! IGNORE that comment and continue to be a witness , using, at times, the very book that he rejects. DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT challenge him/her to a debate. You will not win, if your version of :winning" is to bring that child to say "Iwas wrong, Dad, and you were right again." He won't do it. But if you ignore the challenge, and give biblical presentations that make sense to the way he is living his life -- the objection vanishes into thin air. Theory? Nope. It worked on both of my older boys - the lawyer and the doctor. But I digress with some free advice. The long and short of the lesson is this -- make the Bible THE battle ground and you will lose the war !!! Present the Bible as something that offers life in the Spirit of God in the Christ of God and you have a winner. jd __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- "Let your speech be always with grac
Re: [TruthTalk] Evangelism paradigms
What's that Kevin "delusory evangelism" or one of the three below?? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:25:50 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For enquiring minds: JD chose plan B ZER0 Evangelism --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have at leat three general patterns represented here on TT: 1. Drive-by or protest evangelism. 2. Ivory tower evangelism. 3. Mentor evangelism. I have made my choice. Enough said. jd __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on and on and on
Yeah right Lance; your world will cease to exist for you There is however, such an animal as objective Truth which will endure forever ie: "All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field; The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; because the spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it; surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; BUT THE WORD OF OUR GOD SHALL STAND FOREVER." On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:12:50 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sometimes I think that I did but, those are not my good days, Judy.I do know that the world will cease to exist when I cease to exist. From: Judy Taylor In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God Who spoke the worlds into existence? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:26:16 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well He (Jesus) was and He wasn't. From: Judy Taylor Neither can you "debate" it, that is, if you deal with reality at all. You weren't there were you? All you have in your favor are flights of fancy that are no different than anyone else's flights of fancy. Jesus quoted from Genesis and He quoted as is - no explanation necessary. He was there!!! On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:30:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't it be the way it is written? Well - I wouldn't know the answer to that, Judy. I am talking about what is written. 26 seconds versus 144 hours is about what is written. Your little proof text has nothing to do with the topic of creation and this Genesis account. The reason why you chose not to debate the issue is because you cannot. And you certainly have not debated the issue. This is the third post from you I have opened this morning with absolutely nothing in any of them work responding too. Just negative chit-chat. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Says one from CA who has been permeated by the "fast food" fast everything generation Remember "He that believeth shall not make haste" So why does God have to be in a bighurry? And why can't it be the way it is written? Because JD says it does not make sense to him? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:33:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David, allow me this moment to reveal just a tad about the Smithmeister. Bulldogery is that which speaks of my passion. Indeed, I have gotten angry twice, here on TT, both times following one of your priceless comments . Twice in three years (going back a ways .)?!! Not bad, I think. I am certainly NOT emotional in my response(s)on this subject. There havebeen times, in past postings, that you have been even brilliant in your defense. This is not one of those times. Science and creation is not one of your strong points -- at least not this time around. I suspect that you are distracted with other things. To wit: God takes 26 seconds to speak all things into existence - I say. But you, wanting to present the act of creation as longer, say exactly 144 hours (6 days times 24 hours for those of you living near the Ozarks) retort with this -- For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. Maybe that doesn't sound funny to you, but honestly, it is a riot over here in my office. "Those dumb old land masses -- they couldn't just POP into place. N0sir-re. It took time for them to move into place -- upwards of several hours !! Com'on big D !! Just admit that the non-literal 24 hour crowd just might have a point !! Look -- if you give graduating high school studentsyour kind of information and send to them to Humbolt State - why, within minutes, the whole bunch of them would become atheists !! I have seen thishappen many times. Our young people have left their individual churches thinking there is
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Shouldn't have to teach 'conclusions' 1 Cor 3:6 tells us that one scatters and another waters but only God can give the increase ... so what's wrong with scattering a few seeds out there in the Public School System. by giving Truth equal time with all the theories and watch them fall just like Dagon. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:10:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You, Judy, could teach researching. However, you could not teach 'conclusions'! From: Judy Taylor If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM> To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Path
Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson goes on and on and on and on and on
Doubleminded ... A doubleminded man is unstable in all his ways (James 1:8) On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:22:03 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: God did !! In 26 seconds OR LESS... or maybe 13.5 million. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God Who spoke the worlds into existence? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:26:16 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well He (Jesus) was and He wasn't. From: Judy Taylor Neither can you "debate" it, that is, if you deal with reality at all. You weren't there were you? All you have in your favor are flights of fancy that are no different than anyone else's flights of fancy. Jesus quoted from Genesis and He quoted as is - no explanation necessary. He was there!!! On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:30:28 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't it be the way it is written? Well - I wouldn't know the answer to that, Judy. I am talking about what is written. 26 seconds versus 144 hours is about what is written. Your little proof text has nothing to do with the topic of creation and this Genesis account. The reason why you chose not to debate the issue is because you cannot. And you certainly have not debated the issue. This is the third post from you I have opened this morning with absolutely nothing in any of them work responding too. Just negative chit-chat. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Says one from CA who has been permeated by the "fast food" fast everything generation Remember "He that believeth shall not make haste" So why does God have to be in a bighurry? And why can't it be the way it is written? Because JD says it does not make sense to him? On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:33:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David, allow me this moment to reveal just a tad about the Smithmeister. Bulldogery is that which speaks of my passion. Indeed, I have gotten angry twice, here on TT, both times following one of your priceless comments . Twice in three years (going back a ways .)?!! Not bad, I think. I am certainly NOT emotional in my response(s)on this subject. There havebeen times, in past postings, that you have been even brilliant in your defense. This is not one of those times. Science and creation is not one of your strong points -- at least not this time around. I suspect that you are distracted with other things. To wit: God takes 26 seconds to speak all things into existence - I say. But you, wanting to present the act of creation as longer, say exactly 144 hours (6 days times 24 hours for those of you living near the Ozarks) retort with this -- For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. Maybe that doesn't sound funny to you, but honestly, it is a riot over here in my office. "Those dumb old land masses -- they couldn't just POP into place. N0sir-re. It took time for them to move into place -- upwards of several hours !! Com'on big D !! Just admit that the non-literal 24 hour crowd just might have a point !! Look -- if you give graduating high school studentsyour kind of information and send to them to Humbolt State - why, within minutes, the whole bunch of them would become atheists !! I have seen thishappen many times. Our young people have left their individual churches thinking there is nothing to evolution, or whatever, and when they sit in front of an antongist, they are left naked, poor and numb. You might not be impressed with my explanations offered to my boys at U of Cal at Davies -- but let me tell you this. I had been working on one line explanations for years before my boys got to
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Thanks for this Kevin Proof of the pudding is always in the eating. I've just learned that Australia is investing workers retirement funds in US Real Estate also So Lance and his prophet don't have a whole lot of support from "down under" either On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:20:31 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lance says Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Ah Ah AH CHOO! excuse me 348,000 New York jobs are supported by Canada-U.S. trade Total CanadaU.S. merchandise trade: $411 billion CanadaU.S. trade supported 5.2 million U.S. jobs More people traveled between Canada and NY in 2004 than any other U.S. state 14,500,000 vehicles crossed the Canada-U.S. border at the four Niagara crossings last year, accounting for 34% of all traffic that crossed into Ontario ROTFL With this many US Jobs gone, could CanaDUH rebound? http://www.2ontario.com/welcome/coca_401.asp Seeing that a FULL 84% of CanaDUHs exports are US Calculator please That leaves 16%, can CanaDUH's economy survive on 16% of its present exports? Remember that the Total export/imports of canada represents a FULL 2/3rds of their GDP! SIZE does matter! Thanks for the add'l example of mindless parroting. Don't you just HATE Ignorance? I guess it is better than letting it go to waste. Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The 'prophet' (take note, David) said otherwise in November. Canada will not suffer the same fate at the USA. Size does matter but, it's not the only thing that matters. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 08:03 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster Don't worry Lance, if the USA implodes - Canada and Europe will go with it - at present when the US sneezes the rest of the world catch a cold. Such envy and jealousy from the North ... Goodness gracious! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirMost on TT will live to see the implosion of the USA. At what point will you declare bankruptcy. You don't have the option of moving out of your old house and into a new one. From: ShieldsFamily http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster As a teacher, he had come to dislike American elementary schools. They could be overcrowded, with up to seventy children of all ages crammed into one-room schoolhouses, poorly staffed with untrained teachers, and poorly equipped with no desks and unsatisfactory textbooks which came from England. Webster thought that Americans should learn from American books, so he began writing a three volume compendium, A Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The work consisted of a speller (published in 1783), a grammar (published in 1784), and a reader (published in 1785). His goal was to provide a uniquely American, Christ-centered approach to training children. The speller was originally entitled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. The title was changed in 1786 to The American Spelling Book, and again in 1829 to The Elementary Spelling Book. Most people called it the "Blue-Backed Speller" because of its blue cover, and for the next one hundred years, Webster's book taught children how to read, spell, and pronounce words. It was the most popular American book of its time; by 1861, it was selling a million copies per year, and its royalty of less than one cent per copy was enough to sustain Webster in his other endeavors. Even Ben Franklin used Webster's book to teach his granddaughter how to read. Noah was generally known to be Christian. It is reported that Noah Websters 1828 American Dictionary contains the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. Webster considered "education useless without the Bible." "In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind th
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
What was dualistic about that comment Gary Olson? It is world affairs that's all... You are truly weird, strange, weird ... Why do you truncate what ppl write and insert your own comments - ultimately making it appear the person said something they did not. Oh I understand - you do the same with God's Words. O' the shame of it. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:33:31 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: more evidenceof jt's implicit dualism On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:49:07 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [while eschatological] Proof of the pudding is always in the eating...[is'nt] Australia..investing workers retirement funds in[biblically questionable] Real Estate also[?]
Re: [TruthTalk] Noah Webster
Really up on social justice huh Gary Olson; and allowing Dylan to do a lot of thinking for you??. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:04:35 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:04:08 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What was..that..Gary Olson? || "Oh my name it is nothin'My age it means lessThe country I come fromIs called the MidwestI's taught and brought up thereThe laws to abideAnd that land that I live inHas God on its side. Oh the history books tell itThey tell it so wellThe cavalries chargedThe Indians fellThe cavalries chargedThe Indians diedOh the country was youngWith God on its side.. But now we got weaponsOf the chemical dust If fire them we're forced toThen fire them we mustOne push of the buttonAnd a shot the world wideAnd you never ask questionsWhen God's on your side. In a many dark hourI've been thinkin' about thisThat Jesus ChristWas betrayed by a kissBut I can't think for youYou'll have to decideWhether Judas IscariotHad God on his side.." B Dytlan :: Copyright © 1963; renewed 1991 Special Rider Music
Re: [TruthTalk] four of the five smithsons
Nice looking kids, they must take after their Mom :) Where are you JD? On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:03:13 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Re: [TruthTalk] correction - wife Kathy and grandbaby delaney
Definitely cute JD But where are you in all this and which girl in the group is Julie? On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:05:06 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [TruthTalk] Creationism
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 5:29 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So which fundamentalist version of creation do you support. That A E were spirit people. A 6000 year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that canbe spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water because my mouth was getting dry. Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into the school system ??? We are still waiting?? jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't you get it JT? TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS! The opinions of Men are the key.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
But then you don't really know that upon which we focus do you Lance? I for one do not take on responsibility for every decision made by the US Gov't, Congress, Senate, and GWB and I have released ourchildren to run their own lives.I've discovered a funny thing Lance; you know the only one I can influence in a way that changes things is "me" How about that now ... Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). From: Kevin Deegan The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of incarceration without charge Zündel was denied the right to cross-examine his accusers or to know all the evidence against him. Zündel stated that all his alleged crimes are Internet-related Canadian Human Rights Commission "The truth in some absolute sense really plays no role. Rather, it is the social context in which the message is delivered and heard which will determine the effect that the communication will have on the listener. It is not the truth or falsity per se that will evoke the emotion but rather how it is understood by the recipient.Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't look now but Canada is changing - Group Think Gary North would be proud of you folks. He tried to bring in New Geneva and by the looks of it you folks have actually suceeded! Robert Martin,professor of constitutional law at the University of Western Ontario "Canada now is a totalitarian theocracy. I see this as a country ruled today by what I would describe as a secular state religion [of political correctness]. Anything that is regarded as heresy or blasphemy is not tolerated." Be careful there have been Inquisitions against professors who attack American Foriegn policy. Hope you do not get turned in, for your thoughts! You Cant Say ThatCanadian thought police on the march. By David E. Bernstein I've had the good fortune of spending this past month on the road promoting my new book about how anti-discrimination laws are eroding civil liberties. At the end of a recent talk about the book, an audience member asked whether I believe that freedom of _expression_ is really at risk in the United States from laws meant to aid women and minorities. The heart of my response is, "Look at what's happening in Canada. If we don't watch out, we're next." The decline of freedom of _expression_ in Canada began with seemingly minor and understandable speech restrictions. In 1990, the Canadian supreme court upheld the conviction of James Keegstra, a public-high-school teacher, for propagating Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic views to his public high-school students, despite repeated warnings from his superiors to stop. Keegstra was convicted of the crime of "willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group," which carries a penalty of up to two years in jail. Criminalizing hate speech, the court stated, was a "reasonable" restriction on _expression_, and it therefore passed constitutional muster. Two years later, the same court held that obscenity laws are unconstitutional to the extent they criminalize material based on sexual content alone. However, any "degrading or dehumanizing" depiction of sexual activity including material that the First Amendment would protect in the United States was deprived of constitutional protection to protect women from discrimination. Even the most zealous advocates of freedom of _expression_ often feel
Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march
There is no such thing as a "renovated" heart Lance; more misunderstanding which makes me wonder about you and your SS conversion. It is a new heart; the old has passed away - all things become new. On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:06:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My critique of this would be similar to your own. Granted that a civil society is an improvement on an uncivil one. Granted that a moral society is an improvement on an immoral one. Granted that some attempt to govern their lives by the so-called 'golden rule' or, by the ten commandments. These also offer up a social improvement on that which opposes the foregoing. Please, please tell me Kevin, Judy, David and Iz that the genuine 'renovation of the heart' would/should include all of the above? I do believe that some of y'all have things ass backwards with that upon which you focus (signage wise and all). - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:54 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Canadian Thought Police on the march The Canadian Guanatamo Better be careful with your social context on the INET Lance! Are you hating an identifiable group? And your comments on "FUNDIES" have hurt me, I understand it as an attack on me multiple groups of my friends. ; ) Do you have the telE for the Tribunal? Justice in Canaduh http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/petersen02272005/ passed his second year of incarceration without charge Zündel was denied the right to cross-examine his accusers or to know all the evidence against him. Zündel stated that all his alleged crimes are Internet-related Canadian Human Rights Commission "The truth in some absolute sense really plays no role. Rather, it is the social context in which the message is delivered and heard which will determine the effect that the communication will have on the listener. It is not the truth or falsity per se that will evoke the emotion but rather how it is understood by the recipient.Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't look now but Canada is changing - Group Think Gary North would be proud of you folks. He tried to bring in New Geneva and by the looks of it you folks have actually suceeded! Robert Martin,professor of constitutional law at the University of Western Ontario "Canada now is a totalitarian theocracy. I see this as a country ruled today by what I would describe as a secular state religion [of political correctness]. Anything that is regarded as heresy or blasphemy is not tolerated." Be careful there have been Inquisitions against professors who attack American Foriegn policy. Hope you do not get turned in, for your thoughts! You Cant Say ThatCanadian thought police on the march. By David E. Bernstein I've had the good fortune of spending this past month on the road promoting my new book about how anti-discrimination laws are eroding civil liberties. At the end of a recent talk about the book, an audience member asked whether I believe that freedom of _expression_ is really at risk in the United States from laws meant to aid women and minorities. The heart of my response is, "Look at what's happening in Canada. If we don't watch out, we're next." The decline of freedom of _expression_ in Canada began with seemingly minor and understandable speech restrictions. In 1990, the Canadian supreme court upheld the conviction of James Keegstra, a public-high-school teacher, for propagating Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic views to his public high-school students, despite repeated warnings from his superiors to stop. Keegstra was convicted of the crime of "willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group," which carries a penalty of up to two years in jail. Criminalizing hate speech, the court stated, was a "reasonable" restriction on _expression_, and it therefore passed constitutional muster. Two years later, the same court held that obscenity laws are unconstitutional to the extent they criminalize material based on sexual content alone. However, any "degrading or dehumanizing" depiction of sexual activity including material that the First Amendment would protect in the United States was deprived of constitutional protection to protect women from discrimination. Even the most zealous advocates of freedom of _expression_ often feel uncomfortable defending the right to engage in Holocaust denial or to propagate degrading pornography. But, not surprisingly,
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
I don't believe so Lance. I do believe she has her own ideas - that she is faithful where God has her and that she is weary of the constant carping and criticism that one must endure on this list. When I came it wasn't like this but this is what it has become. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:00:50 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or, she swims in a shallow pond, Judy. From: Judy Taylor I think she adjusts and adapts to theperceived depth of those she is addressing Lance On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:12:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're soo deep, Iz.\ From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baloney. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lance Even at this late date such a response is unworthy of you. Israel, on some occasions (see it's Lebanese incursion), OPPRESSES! - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 21:49 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is BadBut Israel oppresses its enemies by EXISTING!!! (Poor sissies!) iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:06 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Lance says Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor. ROTFL That is Ludicrous on the face of it. Where did you pick this whopper up? Perhaps you need a Geography lesson! http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html Israel in RED , is a democratic nation 1/19th the size of California, SURROUNDED by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 TIMES her size, 60 TIMES her population and ALL the oil. How dare Arab propagandists call Israel "expansionist!" And how dare anyone believe them! How can Israel, which occupies one-sixth of one percent of the lands called Arab, be responsible for the political dissatisfaction of 22 Arab countries? How can the 13 million Jews in the world (almost 5 million fewer than they were in 1939!) be blamed for the problems of the 300 million Arabs, who have brotherly ties to 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide? I guess DAVID OPPRESSED GOLIATH too Israel Oppressing the Arabs is like the UN call for disarmament of David before he meets Goliath! LOL --- Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance chimes in: Just like you and I, Linda, John has gone on the odd 'rant'. but, my goodness, JOHN IS IN NO WAY ANTI-SEMITIC! Sadly, Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor.This is WHO WE ARE WHEN IN POWER. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 12:11 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad There is little point in talking with someone who knows me better than I know me. Such arrogant surmising is the product of the kind of narrowness that I disregard. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, I never said the Jews will be restored Outside of the church; they will be become believers. You say you don't dislike Jews more than any other unbelievers. It is obvious to me that you do. Your stereotypes and slurs are very revealing. Izzy Romans 11 Israel Is Not Cast Away 1I say then, God has not (A)rejected His people, has He? (B)May it never be! For (C)I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God (D)has not rejected His people whom He (E)foreknew (F)Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3"Lord, (G)THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE." 4But what is the divine response to him? "(H)I HAVE KEPT for Myself SEVEN THOUSAND MEN WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL." 5In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time (I)a remnant according to God's gracious choice. 6But (J)if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
I don't use "electronic concordances" Lance, sorry to disappoint you. Would it be a big surprised to you to know that some have God's Word deep within - I mean in the heart? You know His Words are life to those who find them and health to all their flesh. IMO it is folly to waste much time on the various winds and fads that pass through along with your "best layer-outers" On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:03:19 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Somone would post a perceptive email then, Iz would say 'Bob's your uncle' while you would pull out your electronic concordance so as to cite every contra verse you could locate. From: Judy Taylor There you go again - as is your custom. You make these great outlandish accusations and then when asked for evidence you shrink back and put it all off on someone else. There has got to be a psychological term for ppl like you, I know what my husband would say - something about bull dog mouth and humming bird tail On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:03:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I watched whilst the two of you shot down the best of the 'layer-outers'. Close mindedness is the operative _expression_. Sad, sad, sad! From: Judy Taylor Your observations are delusions Lance; I have learned much during my time on TT Just because you have no insight does not negate the reality. Nor does it let you off the hook. If you have all of this insight that DavidM and myself lack then it is your responsibility to lay it out. judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:39:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy:Short of intervention by the Spirit of God, I deem it IMPOSSIBLE for you to be shown anything on TT by anyone. I've observed this over my entire stint on TT. Of course you'll disagree with this. From: Judy Taylor If this were so Lance it would behoove you who are in the "know" to lay it out clearly and succinctly so that we might be corrected. So far I have not seen anything but tongue in cheek comments that are often snide along with Personal shots and put downs. So what is your problem?? From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 AMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:My interpretation of what you just said: 'Lance:Judy and I see this matter as it should be seen. We've tried so hardto get you to come around to see things our (God's) way. You do not see themour (God's) way so, you do not see at all! Of course, David, I'm aware of the distinction you two make! I'm 'thick'but, not that 'thick".SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES the two of you apprehendTHE TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE. SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES that which is spokenof as being 'orthodox' and the teaching of Scripture overlap. The two of you, David. often MISAPPREHEND the actual teaching of Scripture!!This is sometimes why the two of you are wrong vis a vis both Scripture'steaching and orthodoxy. The two of you, on some occasions, are presumptuousto the nth degree!! - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: March 22, 2006 08:43Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Lance, you have never been able to distinguish between Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture. Judy has been trying so hard to get you to see it. Martin Luther, if he was here, would be trying so hard to get you to see it. You just don't get it. Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture is not the same thing. We repent if we walk contrary to Scripture. We do not necessarily repent if we depart from Orthodoxy, nor do we call upon others to repent if they depart from Orthodoxy. The standard of Orthodoxy and the standard of the Bible are two different things. Why can't you see that? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
What is the point in pursuing dead letters when one can feast on a "living Word" On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:04:45 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or, as on TT, theologically unknowing while spiritually alive. This is much more the case. From: Judy Taylor So true, so true KD On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 13:54:02 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A man may be Theologically knowing while spiritually DEAD.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me get this straight JD. By Rad Fundies you are talking about people who believe Genesis as it is written - Right?? PS What is wrong with the Carroll Dean's and the Pat Robertsons of this world? You may have to eat those words one day because both are busy about what they believe God has called them to do and who are you to denigrate another man's servant. O thou Romans 14 theological expert... On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:18:00 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is a shame we will not be able to finish this thread, I suppose, but I must say something here -- the conflict (speaking for myself) is not between science and religion. It is between religion and fundamentalism (radical fundamentalism, if you will.) Knowing that the first step will not be last step for Rad Fundies, I prefer to deal with the situation outside the school setting. The church has done an excellent job in this regard with the High School population -- but it has forsaken the University campus' without a fight. Truth will win out if compared to that which has no bearings. The failure, here, is with the church and its seeming inability to continue with the college age population. It -- religion - simply does not need to be in collegiate curriculum to win the fight for the hearts and minds of the college age student. The church has done a shameful job with the older student, just as it does with the unwanted-infant population. If the church could place 1.4 million newborns each year -- abortion would be EASILY defeated. But , as long as we think that after birth,it is all up to the infant, well, the battle will rage. In short -- the fundies (and not they alone) do not want the kind of involvement that would make victory in either venue almost undeniable. I do not want the Carroll Dean's and Pat Robertsons of this world running anything of an evangelistic nature. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming tha t CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
Exactly, you have set yourself up as a judge of ppl who knows nothing about what is important and exhibitsinordinate affection for worldly foolishness and the wisdom of Hollywood. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:12:02 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I offer up as evidence Kevin, Judy, David, Dean and Iz.Say n'more, say n'more, a nod's as good as a wink. From: Kevin Deegan And we have been been here so long and you have offered WHAT EVIDENCE? O I forgot Lances BASELESS ASSERTIONS qualify as Evidence.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David:It's because this is that which passes for evidence with such as yourself. I've seen that for a long time.- Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To:Sent: March 22, 2006 10:26Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Sadly, Lance, you do not see that you are the one who offers only a "harumph." Kevin presented actual evidence for consideration. David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:42 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad David/Kevin: 'Good point'? As I said recently to David concerning theology/science/logic; should you respond only with 'harumph' in the face of mounting evidence then, you ought to be speaking only with those who hold your views on things. This is a 'cultish' approach and, is inherently dangerous. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 21, 2006 17:56 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad ROTFLOL. Good point, Kevin. David Miller - Original Message - From: "Kevin Deegan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:05 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Lance says Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor. ROTFL That is Ludicrous on the face of it. Where did you pick this whopper up? Perhaps you need a Geography lesson! http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html Israel in RED , is a democratic nation 1/19th the size of California, SURROUNDED by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 TIMES her size, 60 TIMES her population and ALL the oil. How dare Arab propagandists call Israel "expansionist!" And how dare anyone believe them! How can Israel, which occupies one-sixth of one percent of the lands called Arab, be responsible for the political dissatisfaction of 22 Arab countries? How can the 13 million Jews in the world (almost 5 million fewer than they were in 1939!) be blamed for the problems of the 300 million Arabs, who have brotherly ties to 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide? I guess DAVID OPPRESSED GOLIATH too Israel Oppressing the Arabs is like the UN call for disarmament of David before he meets Goliath! LOL --- Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Lance chimes in: Just like you and I, Linda, John has gone on the odd 'rant'. but, my goodness, JOHN IS IN NO WAY ANTI-SEMITIC! Sadly, Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor.This is WHO WE ARE WHEN IN POWER. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 12:11 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad There is little point in talking with someone who knows me better than I know me. Such arrogant surmising is the product of the kind of narrowness that I disregard. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jd, I never said the Jews will be restored Outside of the church; they will be become believers. You say you don't dislike Jews more than any other unbelievers. It is obvious to me that you do. Your stereotypes and slurs are very revealing. Izzy Romans 11 Israel Is Not Cast Away 1I say then, God has not (A)rejected His people, has He? (B)May it never be! For (C)I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God (D)has not rejected His
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
What is that supposed to mean? It's no trouble to maketime for BSF or others who edify .. glorifying God with the fruit of their lips. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:22:45 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: More time for BSF, Judy. From: Judy Taylor I don't believe so Lance. I do believe she has her own ideas - that she is faithful where God has her and that she is weary of the constant carping and criticism that one must endure on this list. When I came it wasn't like this but this is what it has become. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:00:50 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or, she swims in a shallow pond, Judy. From: Judy Taylor I think she adjusts and adapts to theperceived depth of those she is addressing Lance On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:12:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're soo deep, Iz.\ From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baloney. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lance Even at this late date such a response is unworthy of you. Israel, on some occasions (see it's Lebanese incursion), OPPRESSES! - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 21:49 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad But Israel oppresses its enemies by EXISTING!!! (Poor sissies!) iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:06 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Lance says Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor. ROTFL That is Ludicrous on the face of it. Where did you pick this whopper up? Perhaps you need a Geography lesson! http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html Israel in RED , is a democratic nation 1/19th the size of California, SURROUNDED by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 TIMES her size, 60 TIMES her population and ALL the oil. How dare Arab propagandists call Israel "expansionist!" And how dare anyone believe them! How can Israel, which occupies one-sixth of one percent of the lands called Arab, be responsible for the political dissatisfaction of 22 Arab countries? How can the 13 million Jews in the world (almost 5 million fewer than they were in 1939!) be blamed for the problems of the 300 million Arabs, who have brotherly ties to 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide? I guess DAVID OPPRESSED GOLIATH too Israel Oppressing the Arabs is like the UN call for disarmament of David before he meets Goliath! LOL --- Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance chimes in: Just like you and I, Linda, John has gone on the odd 'rant'. but, my goodness, JOHN IS IN NO WAY ANTI-SEMITIC! Sadly, Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor.This is WHO WE ARE WHEN IN POWER. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 12:11 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad There is little point in talking with someone who knows me better than I know me. Such arrogant surmising is the product of the kind of narrowness that I disregard. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, I never said the Jews will be restored Outside of the church; they will be become believers. You say you don't dislike Jews more than any other unbelievers. It is obvious to me that you do. Your stereotypes and slurs are very revealing. Izzy Romans 11 Israel Is Not Cast Away 1I say then, God has not (A)rejected His people, has He? (B)May it never be! For (C)I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God (D)has not rejecte
[TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
Re: [TruthTalk] on Creationism
But only One Creator and only one kind who believe what is written as is. Take your pick. I see no point in running after more darkness and/or presumption. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 07:02:56 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There are as many 'species' of creationists as fish. Put a million of 'em at the keyboards of computers and they'd come up with.well...what they've already come up with. I rest my case your honor. From: Judy Taylor Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
It didn't Lance, you are lacking eyes thatsee On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 04:16:19 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did it change Judy?Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't believe so Lance. I do believe she has her own ideas - that she is faithful where God has her and that she is weary of the constant carping and criticism that one must endure on this list. When I came it wasn't like this but this is what it has become. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:00:50 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or, she swims in a shallow pond, Judy. From: Judy Taylor I think she adjusts and adapts to theperceived depth of those she is addressing Lance On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:12:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're soo deep, Iz.\ From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baloney. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lance Even at this late date such a response is unworthy of you. Israel, on some occasions (see it's Lebanese incursion), OPPRESSES! - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 21:49 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad But Israel oppresses its enemies by EXISTING!!! (Poor sissies!) iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:06 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Lance says Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor. ROTFL That is Ludicrous on the face of it. Where did you pick this whopper up? Perhaps you need a Geography lesson! http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html Israel in RED , is a democratic nation 1/19th the size of California, SURROUNDED by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 TIMES her size, 60 TIMES her population and ALL the oil. How dare Arab propagandists call Israel "expansionist!" And how dare anyone believe them! How can Israel, which occupies one-sixth of one percent of the lands called Arab, be responsible for the political dissatisfaction of 22 Arab countries? How can the 13 million Jews in the world (almost 5 million fewer than they were in 1939!) be blamed for the problems of the 300 million Arabs, who have brotherly ties to 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide? I guess DAVID OPPRESSED GOLIATH too Israel Oppressing the Arabs is like the UN call for disarmament of David before he meets Goliath! LOL --- Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance chimes in: Just like you and I, Linda, John has gone on the odd 'rant'. but, my goodness, JOHN IS IN NO WAY ANTI-SEMITIC! Sadly, Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor.This is WHO WE ARE WHEN IN POWER. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 12:11 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad There is little point in talking with someone who knows me better than I know me. Such arrogant surmising is the product of the kind of narrowness that I disregard. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, I never said the Jews will be restored Outside of the church; they will be become believers. You say you don't dislike Jews more than any other unbelievers. It is obvious to me that you do. Your stereotypes and slurs are very revealing. Izzy Romans 11 Israel Is Not Cast Away 1I say then, God has not (A)rejected His people, has He? (B)May it never be! For (C)I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God (D)has not rejected His people whom He (E)foreknew (F)Or do you not know what the S
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:29:33 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders.That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. "Let there be" is hardly an evolvement. Who is it who was laughing at me for believing it even took one whole day Wasn't that you JD? My point? If the church had not surrendered its college ageyoung people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most ofHis day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd Check the gospels again JD. Jesus always taught before he ministered and this is the example left to us. If you are ministering as the oracles of God, rather than your own opinion and he is blessing your words, then you should also have signs following just as He did. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Know what Lance? Nothing earthshaking coming from that direction. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:33:56 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, I guess he does KNOW, Judy. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 08:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders.That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college ageyoung people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most ofHis day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope
Re: [TruthTalk] In sum
Oophs! The mockers have been emboldened ... Anarchy is at the door On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:47:26 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:52:32 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:.. [so so has no]method whatsoever to discern the truth of Scripture : On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 20:27:27 -0800 (PST) Christine Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the Bible has offered a *[partial but truthful] revelation concering Himself and His son [*g] --- On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 23:12:34 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: TRUTH IS Jesus Christ g: then, implicitly,you area liar
[TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
If this were so Lance it would behoove you who are in the "know" to lay it out clearly and succinctly so that we might be corrected. So far I have not seen anything but tongue in cheek comments that are often snide along with Personal shots and put downs. So what is your problem?? From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would say what Martin Luther would say... show it to me by Scripture, not by quoting a church father or some dignified scholar in the church. You seem to have no firm standard to judge what is of God and what is not, nor do you seem to have any method whatsoever to discern the truth of Scripture. Your biggest mantra is, nobody knows the truth! From your perspective, we all speculate and sometimes we accidentally overlap with truth and sometimes we don't. David Miller From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 AMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:My interpretation of what you just said: 'Lance:Judy and I see this matter as it should be seen. We've tried so hardto get you to come around to see things our (God's) way. You do not see themour (God's) way so, you do not see at all! Of course, David, I'm aware of the distinction you two make! I'm 'thick'but, not that 'thick".SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES the two of you apprehendTHE TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE. SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES that which is spokenof as being 'orthodox' and the teaching of Scripture overlap. The two of you, David. often MISAPPREHEND the actual teaching of Scripture!!This is sometimes why the two of you are wrong vis a vis both Scripture'steaching and orthodoxy. The two of you, on some occasions, are presumptuousto the nth degree!! - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: March 22, 2006 08:43Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Lance, you have never been able to distinguish between Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture. Judy has been trying so hard to get you to see it. Martin Luther, if he was here, would be trying so hard to get you to see it. You just don't get it. Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture is not the same thing. We repent if we walk contrary to Scripture. We do not necessarily repent if we depart from Orthodoxy, nor do we call upon others to repent if they depart from Orthodoxy. The standard of Orthodoxy and the standard of the Bible are two different things. Why can't you see that? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:34 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:'PROVEN'? 'ERROR' In the light of 'orthodox' thought concerning the Triune nature of God David, it is an heresy. It'd appear to be an heresy that is a part of YOUR BELIEVE CONCERNING THE TRIUNE NATURE OF GOD but, that does not change what it is in this context. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 13:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Excuse me, John, but nobody has proven that modalism is an error, so how can you use the word repent in regards to this? Do you really think it is a sin for someone to think modalism is useful in understanding the Godhead? David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? In short, Modalism !! Modalism The error that there is only one person in the Godhead who manifests himself in three forms or manners: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. REPENT -- HURRY !! jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] GOD IS ONE; JESUS SAID "I AND THE FATHER ARE ONE" More accurately, one person in three manifestations On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:27:25 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS From: ShieldsFamily Unity in Diversity. Fatness in Skinniness. Ugliness in Beauty. Dumbness in Intelligence. Wisdom in Nonsense. Jibberish in Eloquence. iz If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We
[TruthTalk] Scripture
That's real good Lance, So insightful from someone who has no understanding at all. I have never ever seen you present scripture as grounds for anything you believe. It is always some theologian or other or else it is rcc orthodoxy... and yet you are more opininionated than anyone I know who is a sincereand steady student of the Bible. From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] David:No wonder you come both readily and frequently to Judy's defence. Now, if only we could clarify, prior to TT's demise, that you both hold to an heretical position concerning illumination/interpretation of Scripture. From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: March 21, 2006 17:56Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Yes. - Original Message - From: "Kevin Deegan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Do you still consider yourself a Trinitarian leaning towards Modalism? --- David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excuse me, John, but nobody has proven that modalism is an error, so how can you use the word repent in regards to this? Do you really think it is a sin for someone to think modalism is useful in understanding the Godhead? David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? In short, Modalism !! Modalism The error that there is only one person in the Godhead who manifests himself in three forms or manners: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. REPENT -- HURRY !! jd -- Original message ------ From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] GOD IS ONE; JESUS SAID "I AND THE FATHER ARE ONE" More accurately, one person in three manifestations On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:27:25 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS From: ShieldsFamily Unity in Diversity. Fatness in Skinniness. Ugliness in Beauty. Dumbness in Intelligence. Wisdom in Nonsense. Jibberish in Eloquence. iz If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17. He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you see the Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of the fear of reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the opportunity to delve into the character of the opponent is side tracked. Motivation be damned -- in a bibli
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
Your observations are delusions Lance; I have learned much during my time on TT Just because you have no insight does not negate the reality. Nor does it let you off the hook. If you have all of this insight that DavidM and myself lack then it is your responsibility to lay it out. judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:39:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy:Short of intervention by the Spirit of God, I deem it IMPOSSIBLE for you to be shown anything on TT by anyone. I've observed this over my entire stint on TT. Of course you'll disagree with this. From: Judy Taylor If this were so Lance it would behoove you who are in the "know" to lay it out clearly and succinctly so that we might be corrected. So far I have not seen anything but tongue in cheek comments that are often snide along with Personal shots and put downs. So what is your problem?? From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 AMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:My interpretation of what you just said: 'Lance:Judy and I see this matter as it should be seen. We've tried so hardto get you to come around to see things our (God's) way. You do not see themour (God's) way so, you do not see at all! Of course, David, I'm aware of the distinction you two make! I'm 'thick'but, not that 'thick".SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES the two of you apprehendTHE TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE. SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES that which is spokenof as being 'orthodox' and the teaching of Scripture overlap. The two of you, David. often MISAPPREHEND the actual teaching of Scripture!!This is sometimes why the two of you are wrong vis a vis both Scripture'steaching and orthodoxy. The two of you, on some occasions, are presumptuousto the nth degree!! - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: March 22, 2006 08:43Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Lance, you have never been able to distinguish between Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture. Judy has been trying so hard to get you to see it. Martin Luther, if he was here, would be trying so hard to get you to see it. You just don't get it. Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture is not the same thing. We repent if we walk contrary to Scripture. We do not necessarily repent if we depart from Orthodoxy, nor do we call upon others to repent if they depart from Orthodoxy. The standard of Orthodoxy and the standard of the Bible are two different things. Why can't you see that? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:34 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:'PROVEN'? 'ERROR' In the light of 'orthodox' thought concerning the Triune nature of God David, it is an heresy. It'd appear to be an heresy that is a part of YOUR BELIEVE CONCERNING THE TRIUNE NATURE OF GOD but, that does not change what it is in this context. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 13:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Excuse me, John, but nobody has proven that modalism is an error, so how can you use the word repent in regards to this? Do you really think it is a sin for someone to think modalism is useful in understanding the Godhead? David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? In short, Modalism !! Modalism The error that there is only one person in the Godhead who manifests himself in three forms or manners: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. REPENT -- HURRY !! jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] GOD IS ONE; JESUS SAID "I AND THE FATHER ARE ONE" More accurately, one person in three manifestations On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:27:25 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS From: ShieldsFamily Unity in Diversity. Fatness in Skinniness. Ugliness in Beauty. Dumbness in Intelligence. Wisdom in Nonsense. Jibberish in Eloquence. iz If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "mak
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Let me get this straight JD. By Rad Fundies you are talking about people who believe Genesis as it is written - Right?? PS What is wrong with the Carroll Dean's and the Pat Robertsons of this world? You may have to eat those words one day because both are busy about what they believe God has called them to do and who are you to denigrate another man's servant. O thou Romans 14 theological expert... On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:18:00 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is a shame we will not be able to finish this thread, I suppose, but I must say something here -- the conflict (speaking for myself) is not between science and religion. It is between religion and fundamentalism (radical fundamentalism, if you will.) Knowing that the first step will not be last step for Rad Fundies, I prefer to deal with the situation outside the school setting. The church has done an excellent job in this regard with the High School population -- but it has forsaken the University campus' without a fight. Truth will win out if compared to that which has no bearings. The failure, here, is with the church and its seeming inability to continue with the college age population. It -- religion - simply does not need to be in collegiate curriculum to win the fight for the hearts and minds of the college age student. The church has done a shameful job with the older student, just as it does with the unwanted-infant population. If the church could place 1.4 million newborns each year -- abortion would be EASILY defeated. But , as long as we think that after birth,it is all up to the infant, well, the battle will rage. In short -- the fundies (and not they alone) do not want the kind of involvement that would make victory in either venue almost undeniable. I do not want the Carroll Dean's and Pat Robertsons of this world running anything of an evangelistic nature. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming tha t CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this lis t, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Well what are you about Lance Muir Are you doing what God has called someone else to do? Are you criticizing what you think someone else is doing that God didn't tell them to do? Are you hearing God as to what he wants you to do? How do you know you are hearing God since noone can know truth according to you? On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:06:05 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Operative _expression_ 'what they believe God has called them to do'? From: Judy Taylor Let me get this straight JD. By Rad Fundies you are talking about people who believe Genesis as it is written - Right?? PS What is wrong with the Carroll Dean's and the Pat Robertsons of this world? You may have to eat those words one day because both are busy about what they believe God has called them to do and who are you to denigrate another man's servant. O thou Romans 14 theological expert... On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:18:00 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is a shame we will not be able to finish this thread, I suppose, but I must say something here -- the conflict (speaking for myself) is not between science and religion. It is between religion and fundamentalism (radical fundamentalism, if you will.) Knowing that the first step will not be last step for Rad Fundies, I prefer to deal with the situation outside the school setting. The church has done an excellent job in this regard with the High School population -- but it has forsaken the University campus' without a fight. Truth will win out if compared to that which has no bearings. The failure, here, is with the church and its seeming inability to continue with the college age population. It -- religion - simply does not need to be in collegiate curriculum to win the fight for the hearts and minds of the college age student. The church has done a shameful job with the older student, just as it does with the unwanted-infant population. If the church could place 1.4 million newborns each year -- abortion would be EASILY defeated. But , as long as we think that after birth,it is all up to the infant, well, the battle will rage. In short -- the fundies (and not they alone) do not want the kind of involvement that would make victory in either venue almost undeniable. I do not want the Carroll Dean's and Pat Robertsons of this world running anything of an evangelistic nature. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming tha t CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this lis t, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
I think she adjusts and adapts to theperceived depth of those she is addressing Lance On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:12:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're soo deep, Iz.\ From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baloney. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lance Even at this late date such a response is unworthy of you. Israel, on some occasions (see it's Lebanese incursion), OPPRESSES!- Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 21:49 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is BadBut Israel oppresses its enemies by EXISTING!!! (Poor sissies!) iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:06 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Lance says Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor. ROTFL That is Ludicrous on the face of it. Where did you pick this whopper up? Perhaps you need a Geography lesson! http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html Israel in RED , is a democratic nation 1/19th the size of California, SURROUNDED by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 TIMES her size, 60 TIMES her population and ALL the oil. How dare Arab propagandists call Israel "expansionist!" And how dare anyone believe them! How can Israel, which occupies one-sixth of one percent of the lands called Arab, be responsible for the political dissatisfaction of 22 Arab countries? How can the 13 million Jews in the world (almost 5 million fewer than they were in 1939!) be blamed for the problems of the 300 million Arabs, who have brotherly ties to 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide? I guess DAVID OPPRESSED GOLIATH too Israel Oppressing the Arabs is like the UN call for disarmament of David before he meets Goliath! LOL --- Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance chimes in: Just like you and I, Linda, John has gone on the odd 'rant'. but, my goodness, JOHN IS IN NO WAY ANTI-SEMITIC! Sadly, Israel, many times oppressed and, often by believers, has adopted the role of oppressor.This is WHO WE ARE WHEN IN POWER. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 12:11 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad There is little point in talking with someone who knows me better than I know me. Such arrogant surmising is the product of the kind of narrowness that I disregard. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, I never said the Jews will be restored Outside of the church; they will be become believers. You say you don't dislike Jews more than any other unbelievers. It is obvious to me that you do. Your stereotypes and slurs are very revealing. Izzy Romans 11 Israel Is Not Cast Away 1I say then, God has not (A)rejected His people, has He? (B)May it never be! For (C)I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God (D)has not rejected His people whom He (E)foreknew (F)Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3"Lord, (G)THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE." 4But what is the divine response to him? "(H)I HAVE KEPT for Myself SEVEN THOUSAND MEN WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL." 5In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time (I)a remnant according to God's gracious choice. 6But (J)if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. 7What then? What (K)Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were (L)hardened; 8just as it is written, "(M)GOD GAVE THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR, EYES TO SEE NOT AND EARS TO HEAR NOT, DOWN TO THIS VERY DAY." 9And David says, "(N)LET THEIR TABLE BECOME A SNARE AND A TRAP, AND A STUMBLING BLOCK AND A RETRIBUTION TO THEM. 10"(O)LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED TO SEE NOT, AND BEND THEIR BACKS FOREVER." 11(P)I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? (Q)May it never be! But by their transgression (R)salvation has come to the Gentiles, to (S)make them jealous. 12Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their (T)fulfillment be! 13But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as (U)I am an
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
There you go again - as is your custom. You make these great outlandish accusations and then when asked for evidence you shrink back and put it all off on someone else. There has got to be a psychological term for ppl like you, I know what my husband would say - something about bull dog mouth and humming bird tail On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:03:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I watched whilst the two of you shot down the best of the 'layer-outers'. Close mindedness is the operative _expression_. Sad, sad, sad! From: Judy Taylor Your observations are delusions Lance; I have learned much during my time on TT Just because you have no insight does not negate the reality. Nor does it let you off the hook. If you have all of this insight that DavidM and myself lack then it is your responsibility to lay it out. judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:39:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy:Short of intervention by the Spirit of God, I deem it IMPOSSIBLE for you to be shown anything on TT by anyone. I've observed this over my entire stint on TT. Of course you'll disagree with this. From: Judy Taylor If this were so Lance it would behoove you who are in the "know" to lay it out clearly and succinctly so that we might be corrected. So far I have not seen anything but tongue in cheek comments that are often snide along with Personal shots and put downs. So what is your problem?? From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 AMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:My interpretation of what you just said: 'Lance:Judy and I see this matter as it should be seen. We've tried so hardto get you to come around to see things our (God's) way. You do not see themour (God's) way so, you do not see at all! Of course, David, I'm aware of the distinction you two make! I'm 'thick'but, not that 'thick".SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES the two of you apprehendTHE TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE. SOMETIMES and only SOMETIMES that which is spokenof as being 'orthodox' and the teaching of Scripture overlap. The two of you, David. often MISAPPREHEND the actual teaching of Scripture!!This is sometimes why the two of you are wrong vis a vis both Scripture'steaching and orthodoxy. The two of you, on some occasions, are presumptuousto the nth degree!! - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: March 22, 2006 08:43Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Lance, you have never been able to distinguish between Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture. Judy has been trying so hard to get you to see it. Martin Luther, if he was here, would be trying so hard to get you to see it. You just don't get it. Orthodoxy and the teaching of Scripture is not the same thing. We repent if we walk contrary to Scripture. We do not necessarily repent if we depart from Orthodoxy, nor do we call upon others to repent if they depart from Orthodoxy. The standard of Orthodoxy and the standard of the Bible are two different things. Why can't you see that? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:34 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? David:'PROVEN'? 'ERROR' In the light of 'orthodox' thought concerning the Triune nature of God David, it is an heresy. It'd appear to be an heresy that is a part of YOUR BELIEVE CONCERNING THE TRIUNE NATURE OF GOD but, that does not change what it is in this context. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 21, 2006 13:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative? Excuse me, John, but nobody has proven that modalism is an error, so how can you use the word repent in regards to this? Do you really think it is a sin for someone to think modalism is useful in understanding the Godhead? David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So true, so true KD On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 13:54:02 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A man may be Theologically knowing while spiritually DEAD.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me get this straight JD. By Rad Fundies you are talking about people who believe Genesis as it is written - Right?? PS What is wrong with the Carroll Dean's and the Pat Robertsons of this world? You may have to eat those words one day because both are busy about what they believe God has called them to do and who are you to denigrate another man's servant. O thou Romans 14 theological expert... On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:18:00 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is a shame we will not be able to finish this thread, I suppose, but I must say something here -- the conflict (speaking for myself) is not between science and religion. It is between religion and fundamentalism (radical fundamentalism, if you will.) Knowing that the first step will not be last step for Rad Fundies, I prefer to deal with the situation outside the school setting. The church has done an excellent job in this regard with the High School population -- but it has forsaken the University campus' without a fight. Truth will win out if compared to that which has no bearings. The failure, here, is with the church and its seeming inability to continue with the college age population. It -- religion - simply does not need to be in collegiate curriculum to win the fight for the hearts and minds of the college age student. The church has done a shameful job with the older student, just as it does with the unwanted-infant population. If the church could place 1.4 million newborns each year -- abortion would be EASILY defeated. But , as long as we think that after birth,it is all up to the infant, well, the battle will rage. In short -- the fundies (and not they alone) do not want the kind of involvement that would make victory in either venue almost undeniable. I do not want the Carroll Dean's and Pat Robertsons of this world running anything of an evangelistic nature. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming tha t CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this lis t, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Some ppl are willing to let God be God JD The secret things belong to the Lord and as Kevin says; let the ppl serving Caesar fumble around and follow whatever way the wind is blowing. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:34:20 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Someone said render to Cesear what is Cesear's [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So which fundamentalist version of creation do you support. That A E were spirit people. A 6000 year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that canbe spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water because my mouth was getting dry. Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into the school system ??? We are still waiting?? jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't you get it JT? TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS! The opinions of Men are the key.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Well of course you couldn't tell them the Truth JD could you? I mean after all He is a Rock of offense and it might offend the Muslims We are responsible to instruct our own children - The public schools don't care what view anyone on TT holds do they? On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:22:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GOES INTO THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM -- HUH ??!! Be sure to answer with "the right one, John -- duh !!" or will that be Linda's piece of intellectual contribuation for the day? jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Sure because this is what you are talking about JD; ppl of faith believe God's Word and wait for Him to give them understanding. Religious ppl have all kinds of theories, big bang, black holes, and on and on. You don't need to worry about fundies or school systems JD because you don't have influence over either Say, does your mother wear combat boots - JD? On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:57:07 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system ... I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller
[TruthTalk] Know the Truth
What do you know about "being free" JD? Ppl who just talk and encourage carnality in others don't know anything about freedom or entering His Rest. In fact this mindset replicates that of Israel who thought God cared so much for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that he would overlook some things they were getting up to. jt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systemsand you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worryabout consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isurmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Well Mr. Teacher - what is the "right answer?" An opinion that is the same as yours? Why can't we deal with a little reality here at the last. On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 02:26:31 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And sure enough, you did this very thing -- Be sure to answer with "the right one, John -- duh !! Your wording a little different, but it is the same ridiculous non-answer. From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well of course you couldn't tell them the Truth JD could you? I mean after all He is a Rock of offense and it might offend the Muslims We are responsible to instruct our own children - The public schools don't care what view anyone on TT holds do they? On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:22:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GOES INTO THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM -- HUH ??!! Be sure to answer with "the right one, John -- duh !!" or will that be Linda's piece of intellectual contribuation for the day? jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: The world in which we live would reject any mention of God in the evolutionary process, IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose. John wrote: But to allow a mere statement that suggests God is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this could be presented into the secular system of education without it being coopted by the fundies -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notice,the fundamentalists are notcausing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden inschools. It is the liberal loonies like thisArchbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
JD you are not keeping good company here - but then as the old adage goes"birds of a feather" You really should discuss what you know about and it is obvious that you know nothing about Rad Fundy's "Walking after the Spirit" or being a "doer of God's Word" rather than a deceived hearer only. And no that's not it JD ... On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 05:16:13 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Believe in God's word" is fundy code for "believe as I do." When we have been dispersed, take with you the knowledge that not one single Rad Fundy has given any of us a clue as to what "doctrine" they are talking about. You must obey the commandments !!! they yell to the others. What commandments --- love one another, treat others as you would be treated, do not judge with finality, strive to be as mature as God is? Do not lust. Be angry and sin not? Is that it? They make it sound as if they have commandments no else has -- and it turns out , they do not. Just a big deal over the very same things all of uspractice. Sigh jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] myth (this writersubjugates us to her narrow notions, permits usnofaith in God per se) On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:08:08 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: .. jt: ppl of faith believe God's Word
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:33:23 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Romans 14 is not a discussion of how to treat the weak brother TO THE EXCLUSION OF DIVERSITY.The problem in Romans 14 is clearly that of diversity. The principle used to deal with doctrinal diversity is stated in 14:4 and is the only way unity within the fellowship can exist. Answer this question, Judy. At the end of the day, do the four brothers in Romans 14 speak and and say the same thing? If not, why is that picture not oneof manifest diversity? There is no principle or a picture of "manifest diversity" there JD; being either "weak or strong"IN THE SAME FAITH once delivered to the saintshardlyconstitutes"diversity". Also the doubtful disputations in Romans 14:1 do not apply to doctrine but to what one feels free to eat or not to eat. See Romans 14:15 "If your brother be grieved at your meat, how are you walking in love?" So far as doctrine is concerned Paul goes on to write in Romans 16:17 "Now I beseech you brethren, MARK THEM which cause divisions and offences CONTRARY TO THE DOCTRINE which ye have learned and AVOID THEM" Secondly, with regard to Acts 15, at the end of the day, are the Jewish Christian practicing the very same things as is required of the Gentile Church in the letter from the Council? If not, why is that not a picture of manifest diversity? What the Jews practiced or did not practice following the resurrection is no standard for doctrine, nor is it a picture of manifest diversity JD. This was the rationale of the rcc priest who once told me the reason for rosary beads is because the ppl liked them and they comforted the ppl sothe church adopted them. This is how we get off into heresy and gross error. Paul was far from "unity in diversity"at the end of his day when he writes"Therefore watch, and remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears" (Acts 20:31) jd On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:30:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You don't see it ianywhere in scripture??? Try reading Romans 14. Or look to the solutions offered in Acts 15. Unity in diversity is the very theme of those passages. jd Only if you are intent on reading it into these passages JD Romans 14 speaks of how to treat those weak in the faith; I don't see any "diversity" there; unity is something they will grow into as they grow in faith, it is still the faith once delivered to the saints. Acts 15 does not address "diversity" either, in fact the instruction is only about sin that would cause them to stumble as they grown. Interesting that they didn't send them a book of rules. However, this is not so they could "do their own thing" - Note: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us" so they are to be under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. The goal is for all "to come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph 4:13)
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
GOD IS ONE; JESUS SAID "I AND THE FATHER ARE ONE" More accurately, one person in threemanifestations On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:27:25 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS From: ShieldsFamily Unity in Diversity. Fatness in Skinniness. Ugliness in Beauty. Dumbness in Intelligence. Wisdom in Nonsense. Jibberish in Eloquence. iz If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist.jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the opportunity to delve into the character of the opponent is side tracked. Motivation be damned -- in a biblical sense , of course. jd From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: To your first question , "no." If I get time, I will try and present some of it for you. John wrote: To your second question,
Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad
Israel was created by agreements of the young United Nations. Their new land was nothing like what it is today. The land was covenanted by God to Abraham and his seed in an "everlasting" covenant; I'd say that lasts a long time - wouldn't you JD? And the hatred of Palestinians goes beyond that which is reasonable or even human, at times. One has to wonder why even the other Arab nations don't want anything to do with the Palestinians; possibly because there is no such thing as a Palestinian; they are descendents of the Philistines who sailed over from Greece ... The surrounding Muslim/Arab world's determination to destroy Isreal without the possibility of compromise is disgustingly stupid to me Where, at one time, I had some regard for the Muslim religion , today, I have none. I think it is violent at its core, a faith built upon a hatred for all who are not Muslim. Yes, Golda Meir used to say that they would have peace in the middle east when the Muslims begin to love their children more than they hate the Jews. But I have little regard for Judaism, as well. A very materialistic people, fully antagonistic to the Living Christ in terms of matters offaith and practice. I wouldn't be so quick to judge them JD; if we had the same kind ofhistory as a nation we would probably (without supernatural help) be the same. They have been run out of just about every country on the globe, with pogroms in Europe, Isabella shipped them out of Spain. I did a paper on it once and was amazed; Ifound it quite apalling. Biblically speaking, Judaism reached full term in Jesus Christ. It is not asister religion. Where some consider the Old Testament as the history of the Jewish people, I really view it as the history of the Church. God's chosen are to be found within the body of Christ. You are ungrateful JD - go back and read Romans again. We received the oracles of God through the Jews and God has not forsaken them. Not yet. I personally believe their ability to prosper is crumbs of the blessings they once walked under. jd From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, there are not yet many Jews who know their Messiah, as you know. Soon there will be. What bewilders me is why you rarely miss a chance to take a shot at Jews, yet not the mormons or the RCC who are true apostates. They claim to serve Jesus and yet are anti-Christs preaching a different Jesus and a different gospel. The Jews at least are honest about their stance on Jesus. I have a special place in my heart for Jews because my Savior is a Jew, because the Father says they are His chosen people, and because one day Jesus will again restore Israel into His kingdom. Why doesnt that have any meaning for you? izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:23 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad Here is what I said, Linda.: "Do you know of any orthodox Jews who do not deny the Christ? And why does that not have any meaning to you? I will give my money to the needy, thank you very much. " There in not one hateful word in that comment -- not one. You can choose to continue to run your mouth or maybe, just maybe, you can stop with your dedicated effort to make me look as bad as possible and actually answer the above question. I am for US aid to Israel. I am not for spending one penny from church coffers. but go ahead and blast the RCC or those on this forum who are dedicated followers of Christ and kiss up to those who deny the Lord you claim to serve. I expect such conduct from you. jd Yahoo! MailBring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
[TruthTalk] God's Covenant with Abram for the Promised Land
Genesis 13:14-15 (14) And the LORD said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: (15) For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. The lands where Abram lived is the land of Canaan, called Israel today. That, then, is the Promised Land?that is why it is called the Promised Land! But for how long? Forever! The inheritance is to be an eternal inheritance, which of necessity involves and includes everlasting life! If one inherits a piece of land, the deed must describe the exact boundaries of the property. Is such a description given in this deed of the land we may hope to inherit? The answer is found in Genesis 15:18, "In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates." From the Nile River in Egypt, to the Euphrates in the Near East! We have all seen enough maps to know where that is, and I am sure we all know it is not up in heaven somewhere, but right here on this earth. "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Galatians 3:29); and the promise?the promise of eternal inheritance?is the land of Israel, from the Nile clear to the Euphrates, here on this earth! God help us to put our trust in the sure Word of God, not in the fables of men! Other scriptures show that the territory of Christ's Kingdom is to expand and spread until ultimately it shall include the whole earth. See Romans 4:13.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First , I am not a dispensationalist -- never have been and very likely never will be. It is an American theological invention. a man named Darby being its first major proponent, and Scolfield along with Dallas Theological Seminary being the back bone of its critical acclaim. Secondly, an unregenerated Jew is no different than an unregenerated Floridian. I give no honor to any race of people for the simple reason that such was never the intention of God -- never. Jews get no credit from me for the Messiah -- they rejected Him then, killed him, came into the church thinking that the Church was to play a role in establishing them as the Kingdom of God upon this earth -and left the church almost to the man in the years following the fall of their holy city. There is more blasphemy on Jewish sites than perhaps the sites of any other world religion. That God is going to reestablish the Jewish people outside the blessings of the Church of Jesus Christ is simply not a biblical conclusion. And the main point , for me, that you skim over, is the fact that I do not hate the Jew. Israel was created by agreements of the young United Nations. Their new land was nothing like what it is today. And the hatred of Palestinians goes beyond that which is reasonable or even human, at times. The surrounding Muslim/Arab world's determination to destroy Isreal without the possibility of compromise is disgustingly stupid to me Where, at one time, I had some regard for the Muslim religion , today, I have none. I think it is violent at its core, a faith built upon a hatred for all who are not Muslim. But I have little regard for Judaism, as well. A very materialistic people, fully antagonistic to the Living Christ in terms of matters offaith and practice. Biblically speaking, Judaism reached full term in Jesus Christ. It is not asister religion. Where some consider the Old Testament as the history of the Jewish people, I really view it as the history of the Church. God's chosen are to be found within the body of Christ. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jd, there are not yet many Jews who know their Messiah, as you know. Soon there will be. What bewilders me is why you rarely miss a chance to take a shot at Jews, yet not the mormons or the RCC who are true apostates. They claim to serve Jesus and yet are anti-Christs preaching a different Jesus and a different gospel. The Jews at least are honest about their stance on Jesus. I have a special place in my heart for Jews because my Savior is a Jew, because the Father says they are His chosen people, and because one day Jesus will again restore Israel into His kingdom. Why
[TruthTalk] Interesting Topic - Should we send them North?
Illegal Alien Invasion By Judge Roy Moore The Covenant News ~ March 21, 2006 America is a land of immigrants. From the beginning of our Nation, people have come to America "the land of opportunity" where they found freedom and prosperity. However, over the last few years the immigration story has changed from a tale of working hard, playing by the rules and achieving success to a nightmare of poorly secured borders, irresponsible employers, overwhelmed social services, and increased crime.Immigration is the legal means by which one becomes a citizen of this Country. It has historically involved an application for citizenship, a test, an investigation and an oath. When people enter our Country who make no application to become a citizen, do not wish to learn our language or our customs, and only intend to reap the rewards of our economy while paying no taxes required of a citizen, they are illegal aliens and not immigrants.It is estimated that nearly 20 million illegal aliens now reside in the United States, with thousands more crossing the border every day. Statistics on how many illegal aliens reside in Alabama are sketchy, but it is known that Alabama has seen an explosion in those numbers over the last ten years. In 2000, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimated that 24,000 illegal aliens resided in Alabama. That represented a 500 percent increase from INS estimates in 1996. Today, experts place the number of illegal aliens at 75,000 to 100,000 and rising rapidly.Such vast numbers of people are not harmlessly absorbed into the overall population. Last year, police in Birmingham and Decatur working with the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs to locate criminals among the illegal alien population, arrested over 30 who were suspected of being involved in brutal gang activities. One of those individuals arrested had a prior felony charge and is suspected of kidnapping, extortion, and trafficking of other illegal aliens into the country.The law requires hospitals to provide free emergency medical services to illegal aliens, which costs well over $250 million per year. Alabama received $572,326 from Congress in fiscal year 2004 to offset the cost of medical services for illegal aliens, but that amount represents only a fraction of what the state actually spends in this area. Along with this illegal alien invasion come dangerous diseases and other medical conditions which are cause for heightened concern.Illegal aliens are generally not proficient in English and this lack of proficiency leads to the additional costs of providing translation expenses, and government services such as driver's license testing, education, and law enforcement. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that the children of illegal aliens, regardless of their place of birth, have a constitutional right to be educated in public schools.This judicially mandated entitlement currently costs the state over $7,000 per child per year. Given such alarming numbers as well as the renewed emphasis on security in the Country, one would think that our state and national government would focus more attention on the illegal alien problem.In fact, governments are doing less than they were even ten years ago. Since 1993, the federal spending on border enforcement has grown from more than $740 million to $3.8 billion. Despite the increase, the number of undocumented aliens flooding into our Nation has continued at a rate of about 500,000 per year. Clearly, current efforts to curtail these problems are not working.Alabama is restricted by federal law with regard to interdiction and deportation of illegal aliens. Nevertheless, our law enforcement officers can never be prohibited from arrest and detention of illegal aliens for criminal activity or violation of our laws. Some officers have been led to believe otherwise. A simple training program could correct this deficiency.Another course of action is to put more pressure on employers who hire those illegally present in this state. The federal government has left a gaping hole in this area of enforcement that the state can fill. In 1992, INS issued 1,063 orders nationwide levying fines against employers for hiring illegal aliens; in 2002, INS issued just 13 such orders. Only 3 notices of intent to seek fines against employers for knowingly hiring illegal aliens were issued in 2004 by the Immigration Customs Enforcement agency (ICE - the successor to INS). We can do better than that!Alabama needs to fill the void left by the federal government by enacting tougher laws that punish employers who hire illegal aliens for their own profit. When it becomes clear that jobs will only be available to those who become citizens by following the rules, illegal aliens will leave Alabama. Fewer
Re: [TruthTalk] Lance, TFT, Promises etc
Hey Iz; you and your husband are in the medical field. What do they say about ppl who like to dialogue with themselves all the time like this? I note none of these are questions they are all answers. What was the question? On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:21:08 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..e.g., "Take a guard..Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how" means thatPilate knew, implictly,that he never could 'wash his hands' ofJC (who was, quiteinterestingly, apprehending him) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:11:47 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..the difference betw her Pilate is that his language, implicitly, his notion of having 'apprehended'JC, is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:41:10 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..in her psyche, the writer already knows the notion is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:28:55 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: myth (note the quotes) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:51:52 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: .. apprehend Christ.. ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist.jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the opportunity to delve into the character of the opponent is side tracked. Motivation be damned -- in a biblical sense , of course. jd From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: To your first question , "no." If I get time, I will try and present some of it for you. John wrote: To your second question, either you did not read my post or you have decided to insult my presentation? I read your post very carefully. I am not trying to insult you at all. Most of your argument revolves around why we should consider using a figurative meaning. This is the approach I hear from most Bible scholars, but the pressure for doing this seems to come from science not good theology, in my opinion. The strongest statement you make is where you point out that Gen. 2:4 uses the word day figuratively. This is easily understood to be figurative, but ; the uses of the word day prior to this are numbered. The text says, First Day, Second Day, Third Day, etc. It is hard to insist that numbered days are figurative. It is the numbering of the day as well as its coupling with the evening and morning statements that makes it difficult to perceive it as being anything other tha
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: and now
Strange friend you have Lance; she has her own definitions for everything. If something false that sounds logical is the criteria then we should begin to censure everyone who speaks the truth, it sure would be a lot less work for the moderator. 1984 has arrived. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:43:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Debbie Sawczak sectarianism. Is nobody safe from your ignorance andbigotry? DM has never really understood what an ad hominem is. It has nothing to do with rudeness. All ad homs, as a form of logical fallacy,are a variant of "Your disagreeing with me is just an intellectual failure on your part. Hence I am right." The rude parts are just incidental extensions of the first sentence, of the form "... resulting from your being Catholic, Calvinist, prejudiced, poorly-read, Canadian, Communist, stupid, deceived by the devil, blind, itchy-eared, liberal, [fill in the blank]." D
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
Lance you are truly an obdurant person. DM has said over and over ad nauseum that he is not leading and does not belong to a sect. Why do you insist on using this type terminology. Do you really want to communicate with him or just totweak him a little? Because you are by your actions calling him a liar. Your belief about DM has nothing at all to do with reality along with your belief in some other areas. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 08:30:00 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What follows is not a 'shot'...I repeat, THIS IS NOT A SHOT! Re: 'end times 'harlot church' is that which I'd see as the mantra of David Miller's sect. I believe he's part of a sect which, as they used to say, has hived off from the 'end times harlot church' so as to recover the true (his) gospel. From: Judy Taylor If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist.jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the opportunity to delve into the character of the opponent is side tracked. Motivation be damned -- in a biblical sense , of course. jd From: "David Miller&
Re: [TruthTalk] Who is God?
Why would he call himself a Mormon or for that matter identify with any 'ism in which he did not believe Lance? I go to a Reformed Church but I will not join and I do not identify myself with or tell others that I am Presbyterian. It is possible not to be affiliated with a sect Lance. Just as it is possible to understand and walk in Truth. HELLO? On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:12:37 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. You, Kevin, could tell him what his sect teaches. 2. It is just possible that that which he believes differs from that which his sect teaches. 3. It is also possible, as it is with anyone, that he might believe truly for the wrong reasons. 4. It is further possible that he, as it is with anyone, that he might believe wrongly for the right reasons. L From: Kevin Deegan Because you took opportunity again to avoid the question, AGAIN One God or Three which is it? Why is that so hard???Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DAVEH: ??? Why do you say that, Kevin? Just because I don't always respond quickly or as often as you do hardly means that I am not willing to defend that which I believe to be true. Nor am I compelled to respond to every post aimed at deriding that which I believe.sometimes I'm quite content letting the poster muddle in his own puddle.Kevin Deegan wrote: I understand your reluctance todefend the mormon faith!Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are right about that! I do have a hard time understanding how you have THREE gods but you tell me you really have one. Take that back you have an INFINITE nuber of gods but you say you have one.That is hard to understand and hard to comprehend too. Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do I know LDS theology as well as you do?DAVEH: You certainly seem to know a lot about it, Kevin. However, it is obvious that you don't understand it.Kevin Deegan wrote: Do you agree with Lance DH? Do I know LDS theology as well as you do? Or is Lance putting words in your mouth? I seem to remember you saying quite the opposite!Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As DH has acknowledged and, 'everyone here already knows', you know the teachings of his sect as well or better than he does. Are you attempting to teach or embarrass him? ONCE AGAIN, I'd recommend the book 'Joseph Smith - Rough Stone Rolling' Richard Lyman Bushman - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 19, 2006 07:00 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Who is God? As everyone here alread y knows, I believe God is a Trinity that is exactly why I was wondering how you would answer. Is this that difficult to answer? Who do you, believe to be God? Father Son Holy Ghost Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DAVEH: For a guy who knows so much about LDS theology, Kevinrather than me answering this, why don't you tell me how you believe about the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?Kevin Deegan wrote: Maybe you can help me out here Dave H? Who do you, believe to be God? Father Son Holy Ghost -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Yahoo! TravelFind great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM
I don't know if closing down TT is Lance's ultimate agenda but he does appear to like the idea. Reminds me of Tobias who kept nipping at the heels of those engaged in rebuilding the temple. Nehemiah said he didn't have time to engage him because he was a diversion and seemingly on a mission. . Lance and cohorts, please stop referring to David Miller's "sect". Canyou identify or name any such sect? Why do you insist on such arrogant insults? David please close this snakepit. izzy Lance writes: David:On warning (wo)men re:'transgressing the commandments of God'. Everyone (including you along with all of those within your sect, David) 'transgresses the commandments of God', David. You then, David, ought to be and, likely are, warning those non-protestants within your sect concerning this. Amen, I guess, for consistency if nothing else. From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 18, 2006 16:11 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoMDave, for what it is worth, your view of hell is also shared by many Protestants. In fact, a very well known hell fire and brimestone preacher by the name of Jed Smock (www.brojed.org) believes about hell pretty much just like you do. Still, Jed will stand on campus and warn students loudly about "bur-r-r-n-n-ning in the la-a-a-ke of FI-I-I-R-R-E!" I was surprised the first time I learned that Jed believed the fire he preached was figurative. I'm curious about you. Do you ever warn people about the FIRE of hell? In other words, do you use this metaphor yourself to convey to people the danger of transgressing the commandments of God? David Miller - Original Message - From: Dave To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 2:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM I did think from previous encounters that you believed there was no "literal" Hell. DAVEH: Quite the contrary. As I view it, hell is the physical separation from God and his love. The effect of such separation is similar to how it would feel if you were cast into the burning garbage dump of Jerusalem, except its effect would last forever. Are you saying then that it is not a place? DAVEH: No, I did not say that. If heaven is located in a place, then heaven is located in a place other than where heaven is located. So yes, hell is a place.a place where God does not reside, nor does his love emanate. It is not physical? DAVEH: Yes, it is a physical place, but the description of the lake of fire and brimstone is symbolic representation of how folks will feel who end up there. I do not believe people will literally be cast into a burning lake of fire and brimstone. That is imagery, IMHO. If this "literal" Hell you speak of is not a place, DAVEH: Since I do believe it is a place, the remaining questions seem irrelevant. Now that I've satisfied your curiosity Kevin, let me now ask where you think the literal burning pit (hell) will be located? Kevin Deegan wrote: I am sorry I did think from previous encounters that you believed there was no "literal" Hell. Are you saying then that it is not a place? It is not physical? When someone uses the term Literal that is synonomous with physical, perhaps, therein lies the confusion. If this "literal" Hell you speak of is not a place, where will those that suffer this mental anguish be? Will they be neighbors of those that do not suffer? Can there be both joy sorrow in the same place? Will they be in a physical place? Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you have been decieved by the Devil DAVEH: I respectfully disagree with you on that, Kevin. Quite the contraryIn reality, I've been enlightened by a fellow TTer! I don't know why it is so difficult for you to understand my position on this, Kevin. I do believe in a literal hell.literally beingseparated from God. I just don't believe that those who reject Jesus will literally be cast into a lake of fire and brimstone, as many believe. Lacking the eternal love of the Lord, those who suffer such separation will eternally and forever suffer mental anguish at their shortsighted selfish decision to choose evil over good. Before you had brought these BoM and DC passages to my attention, I had never considered how latter-day scriptures handled this topic. The only time I had looked into it was several years ago in response to TTers questioning me about it, and at that time I only looked at Bible passages that were posted. Perhaps it was you Kevin, I don't recall. Back then, I had only examined a number of Biblical passages to come to deter mine that those who mentioned hell in the Bible were doing so symbolically when they used the imagery of the burning trash pit of Jerusalem to reflect how one who does not
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
I know what he has shared publicly which is that he has a house Church and meets with believers inhomes. He also ministers publicly on college campuses and in the streets. Kind of like Paul in the book of Acts who taught in his home for 3 1/2yrs as well as on the streets. What is your problem Lance? You are all over DM like a rash. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 08:46:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tell me then Judy, what you actually know about the group with whom he worships. You appear confident that his 'group' is not a 'sect' so, let's hear what you actually KNOW. From: Judy Taylor Lance you are truly an obdurant person. DM has said over and over ad nauseum that he is not leading and does not belong to a sect. Why do you insist on using this type terminology. Do you really want to communicate with him or just totweak him a little? Because you are by your actions calling him a liar. Your belief about DM has nothing at all to do with reality along with your belief in some other areas. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 08:30:00 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What follows is not a 'shot'...I repeat, THIS IS NOT A SHOT! Re: 'end times 'harlot church' is that which I'd see as the mantra of David Miller's sect. I believe he's part of a sect which, as they used to say, has hived off from the 'end times harlot church' so as to recover the true (his) gospel. From: Judy Taylor If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist.jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One othe
Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM
What is the "Word of Faith" approach Lance? Just because there are a few nuts and flakes out there will you throw all healing down the drain with them? This is why the church in general has so many sick ppl. Sin is not understood or dealt with most of the time because we don't want to offend anyone. If someone would just get up there and boldly teach truth things might begin to change. If people could just begin to recognize what it is and were willing to take responsibility, repenting and renouncing it then we could get rid of it once and for all and they would know enough to resist when it tries to come back. But Oh well! We can't offend anyone, they might leave and take their offering with them. Got to have those big tithers to pay for the building fund while the ppl perish. Peter rightly said "If the righteous scarcely be saved" On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 06:20:24 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh but I do rejoice with you, David. God does heal and, this may be one of those healings. It was the 'word faith approach' that concerned us. From: David Miller What this reminds me of is when the Pharisees complained about Jesus healing on the Sabbath. My daughter is healed now, and she is happy, I'm happy, my wife is happy, everybody is happy except for these 3 people who came together and talked about how disturbing my post to TT was about it. At this same time, Dean sent me a post complaining about my testimony concerning childbearing, not using doctors and believing God for painless childbirth. I don't know if I will ever understand how others cannot simply rejoice with me when God is so good. David Miller From: Judy Taylor What truth do you refer toLance? Are you calling him co-leader of a sectarian group because he encourages his daughter to believe God to speed healing of herwrist and relieve the pain? or Because there are many religious sects on this TT list? On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 08:13:20 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David could 'justify' this truth better than I, Judy. From: Judy Taylor On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 08:00:09 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Like it or not David, you are co-leader of a sectarian group. Can you justify this announcement Lance by giving us a list of the various sects that comprise this group? Mormon is obvious, what are the others.
Re: [TruthTalk] RSR
For those who are not all that interested and those who do not have the $35 to spend on this book; here is an online Review from another cult the Christian Science Monitor This is what Lance has been talking about. judyt Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling by Richard L Bushman Founder of a church, he stirred up the United States A Review by Jane Lampman How did a young man from a poor farm family -- who as a boy received minimal education and had little religious background -- come to found a church that today boasts millions of members worldwide? A religious leader for only 14 years until his assassination in 1844, Joseph Smith drew thousands during his lifetime to his vision of a theocratic New Jerusalem in the American heartland. Possessing what one critic called a genius for "religion making," Smith wrote new scriptures and created a complex institution that has long survived his death. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints celebrated its 175th anniversary last year, and on December 23, the 200th anniversary of Smith's birth. In Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, historian Richard Bushman, professor emeritus at Columbia University and a practicing Mormon, fashions a fascinating, definitive biography of the rough-hewn Yankee who stirred controversy from the start. Bushman's intimate, 740-page portrait explores all the corners of controversy but does not resolve them, suggesting that -- given the nature of the man and his story -- such resolution is never likely to occur. An honest yet sympathetic portrayal, the book is rich in its depiction of developing Mormonism. During an era of revivals and religious ferment, Smith saw himself as a major prophet and revelator -- a restorer of the one true church. Despite a story that appeared fantastical to many, Smith's teaching caught the interest of others in search of a faith different from that offered by the churches of the time. As a youth, Smith engaged with family and friends in magic and treasure-digging. He also prayed to know which church to attend. He said later that he was then told by God and Jesus that the existing churches were in apostasy. In a second vision, Smith said, an angel named Moroni directed him to buried golden plates that were to become the source for his Book of Mormon, which he translated from hieroglyphs through the use of a seer stone and spectacles that he called the Urim and Thummim. (The angel later retrieved the plates.) The Book of Mormon is understood by Latter-day Saints to be the history of Jews who traveled to the Western hemisphere around 600 BCE, and of Jesus' visit to them after his resurrection. (The assumption that the Indians of the Americas are the descendants of the people in the book has been upset recently by DNA studies -- done by Mormons -- which show no connection to the ancient Hebrews.) Smith -- called simply "Joseph" by Mormons -- published the book in 1830, and later published others (The Book of Abraham and The Book of Moses) purporting to provide true histories that go far beyond the Bible. It was not preaching, but his ongoing "revelations" that shaped the developing religion and its practices. They were full of biblical phrasings, and many practices derived from Old Testament teachings (such as restoration of Aaron's priesthood). The revelations included establishment of a hierarchical priesthood in which all males participate; secret temple rites; the deeding of property to church bishops, to be distributed as appropriate to the needy and toward purchase of land; and the nature of the afterlife, which includes "plural marriage." Some may feel the author sanitizes Smith's motives for establishing polygamy and marrying dozens of wives. Bushman tells an engrossing tale of a charismatic leader who was egalitarian and loved working with others, yet who was sensitive to criticism or dissent. Mormons believed the Second Coming to be imminent, and converts followed their leader from New York to Ohio to Missouri, where Joseph said New Jerusalem was to be situated. But in purchasing large amounts of land for their City of Zion, the Mormons clashed -- and even went to war -- with other residents. Smith lived in a biblical world where God's laws alone were of concern; He did not acknowledge governments, the nation, or the Constitution, Bushman says, until his flock ran into trouble and needed government protection. He then turned to state governors, and later to the US Congress for aid. The Mormons' story and self-image shifted from one of revelation to persecution. Driven out of Missouri, the Saints regrouped in Nauvoo, Ill., where they built a temple and city, drawing church members from as far away as England. Yet Joseph's polygamous practice stirred controversy even among the faithful (including his first wife, Emma), and a few dissidents were excommunicated. After he destroyed a dissenting Nauvoo newspaper, Smith was jailed in a
Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:20:45 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What is a physical impossibility for God? DAVEH: Did you ever read the SCREWTAPE LETTERS, Judy? jt: I started to but lost interest. I prefer to spend time on studying the real thing rather than someone else's opinion about the subject. At one point, Screwtape (the devil) tells Wormwood that humans are too quick to attribute their all their ills to him, effectively suggesting that sometime humans give credit to where credit isn't due. jt: Well the devil isn't known for telling the truth DH;Jesus called him the father of lies. He is the one who comes to steal, to kill, and to destroy. Jesus was sent to heal all who are oppressed of the devil. I don't believe Lewis understood the realm of darkness all that well, and in fact he played with it in hiswritings. I think the same can be said of God. Sometimes we assume he does things he really doesn't. In this case, by suggesting God can do the impossible might just be painting God into a corner from which he would prefer not to be. jt: What is too difficult for the Creator of everything that is DH? You asked the question.What is a physical impossibility for God?... .and the obvious answer is that which you have undoubtedly heard before.Can God create a rock to heavy for him to lift? Would you agree that doing so is a physical impossibility for God, Judy? No, I would say nothing but nothing is impossible with God other than evil which is an affront to His Holy nature. I prefer to believe God operates within the laws of his creation. Those laws define him and all his creation, and I do not think God could/would break those laws, but is capable of using them in ways of which we are unaware in order to perform miracles that confound his Adversary. You would be wrong then DH because Jesus as God's Son walking about in a flesh body defied the laws of creation many times. The creation as it stands presently is under the curse of death. Jesus is the Lord of Life The resurrection itself defied the laws of nature. So if you believe what is written you will have to change your mind DH.Judy Taylor wrote: Just this morning I read this interaction between DaveH and KevinD (I think) ... KD:That is explained by the fire and brimstone imagery that is in reality endless torment. a fire which cannot be consumed, even an unquenchable fireDAVEH: More imagery that is physically an impossibility. Fire can be extinguished, whereas mental torment can go on forever. So tell me - What is a physical impossibility for God? The sameGod who delivered what he had promised to Abraham and Sarah when they were 90 and 100yrs old respectively. A God who was able to roll back the Red Sea until his people crossed and afterward kept themin the desert for 40yrs feeding them with manna from heavenand keepingtheir clothes from wearing out and their feet from swelling. The sameGod whostopped the sun for 24 hours andcaused an axe head to float on water The God who energized His prophet causing him torun for 25 miles in front of Jezebels' chariot and had the ravensfeed him while he rested and regrouped in a cave. Tell me - what would be too difficult for a God like this and how can the feeble efforts of man explain Him? On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:57:56 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Conor: Might we hear from you on this? Frame this in whatever fashion suits you. Lance -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Lance, TFT, Promises etc
Then I suggest that those of you who are titillated by this kind of thing take G with you and form your own List because this is not only rude it is divisive and sectarian - Oh thou discerner of sects DM does not do this. He works hard to try and communicate with others wherever they are at -This is preferring one's brother/sister - in LOVE. An alien concept to some. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:26:30 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It should be obvious why G does this. It is to some of us. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey Iz; you and your husband are in the medical field. What do they say about ppl who like to dialogue with themselves all the time like this? I note none of these are questions they are all answers. What was the question? On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:21:08 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..e.g., "Take a guard..Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how" means thatPilate knew, implictly,that he never could 'wash his hands' ofJC (who was, quiteinterestingly, apprehending him) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:11:47 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..the difference betw her Pilate is that his language, implicitly, his notion of having 'apprehended'JC, is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:41:10 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..in her psyche, the writer already knows the notion is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:28:55 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: myth (note the quotes) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:51:52 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: .. apprehend Christ.. ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:30:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You don't see it ianywhere in scripture??? Try reading Romans 14. Or look to the solutions offered in Acts 15. Unity in diversity is the very theme of those passages. jd Only if you are intent on reading it into these passages JD Romans 14 speaks of how to treat those weak in the faith; I don't see any "diversity" there; unity is something they will grow into as they grow in faith, it is still the faith once delivered to the saints. Acts 15 does not address "diversity" either, in fact the instruction is only about sin that would cause them to stumble as they grown. Interesting that they didn't send them a book of rules. However, this is not so they could "do their own thing" - Note: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us" so they are to be under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. The goal is for all "to come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph 4:13) From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] If your idea were so JD then Jesus would have prayed "make them "unity in diversity" just as we are ... I see that nowhere in scripture. Jesus said if someone had seen him they had seen the Father because he did only what he first saw the Father do and he said only what he first heard from the Father. This is the kind of unity he was praying about JD. Unifying around rebellion is what the end times "harlot church" is all about. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We shall be one as He and the Father are one, someday, Judy. Right now, unity inspite of diversity is all we've got. Because you and I are not of the same Christ does not mean that unity in diversity does not exist.jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the op
Re: [TruthTalk] Can 'an heretick' have her name written in the Lamb's Book of Life?
Only in your "book" Lance; the Lamb's Book contains those who are His disciples and hereticks do not qualify. They have a different root along with different fruit in their lives. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:26:40 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course! Lance
Re: [TruthTalk] Can 'an heretick' have her name written in the Lamb's Book of Life?
My belief is that everyone's name was written in there before the foundation of the world but that some have their names blotted out as time goes by; for reasons that are plainly evident in the Word of God; the "elect" being the remnant that when all has been said and done comprise the Church of the Living God. This is why "overcoming" is important. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:44:32 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So then Judy, were the impossible possible, (demonstrating that YOU ARE AN HERETICK) would that mean that your name is not included in that book? From: Judy Taylor Only in your "book" Lance; the Lamb's Book contains those who are His disciples and hereticks do not qualify. They have a different root along with different fruit in their lives. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:26:40 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course! Lance
Re: [TruthTalk] Lance, TFT, Promises etc
Why? I am OK with this one As for G's monologue, most of the time I bypass it, I don't make any effort to try and apprehend a meaning; I figure if someone really wants to communicate they will use plainness of speech; Gary is just doing his own thing, which is fine, especially since he has a cheering gallery, but he certainly is not exalting Christ in it. If I wanted an English lesson I would go back to Paul D. Camp. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:02:44 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why not form your own list, Judy. I would be interested in seeing just how that would work. And you miss the point of G's monologue, altogether -- IMO. Hint: it has to do with thepossibility for a reply that leaves open the notion of true exchange -- from G's perspective, maybe there is a message to be gleaned from the very presence of syntax in this regard. jd . From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then I suggest that those of you who are titillated by this kind of thing take G with you and form your own List because this is not only rude it is divisive and sectarian - Oh thou discerner of sects DM does not do this. He works hard to try and communicate with others wherever they are at -This is preferring one's brother/sister - in LOVE. An alien concept to some. On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:26:30 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It should be obvious why G does this. It is to some of us. jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey Iz; you and your husband are in the medical field. What do they say about ppl who like to dialogue with themselves all the time like this? I note none of these are questions they are all answers. What was the question? On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:21:08 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..e.g., "Take a guard..Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how" means thatPilate knew, implictly,that he never could 'wash his hands' ofJC (who was, quiteinterestingly, apprehending him) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:11:47 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..the difference betw her Pilate is that his language, implicitly, his notion of having 'apprehended'JC, is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:41:10 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..in her psyche, the writer already knows the notion is suspect On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:28:55 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: myth (note the quotes) On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:51:52 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: .. apprehend Christ.. ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11
I'm wondering what would motivate someone to send a msg like this to a public list Can you help me with it DavidM? It is not conversation that's for sure It is not communication either Is this written to helpencourage or instruct? What is the point in taking one line out of it's setting to make it imply something the author may never have intended? On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 02:31:21 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: interesting eh, DavidM? On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 23:38:31 -0800 Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ||Judy Taylor wrote: On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:20:45 -0800.. I don't make up things that paint God into any corner..I go to a higher authority
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
Agreed! I to hate all the isms and all the ologies. In fact I don't see why we can not lay them aside so that we may recognize the faith once delivered to the saints and "walk in Truth" or reality. Jesus was not referring to any "Unity in diversity" in John 17.He prayed they would be One as He and the Father are One Is "Unity in diversity" how you seethe Godhead or "Trinity?" JD On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 05:33:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sectarianism! Amen! Have you (of course you have) taken note of those who so identify others as sectarians while their group (sect) is thus reflective of a repristinated gospel. They seem themselves as 'recovering' the truth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It has occurred to me that legalism, although unattractive as it is, is not my real complaint. Henceforth and forever more, I will be opposed to sectarianism. The legal content of the sectarian is often different -- but the sectarian is the same kind of cat, regardless of his/her stripes. They are the ones who oppose the unity concerns expressed by Christ in John 17. There can be unity in diversity. In sectarian circles, the only unity that exists is one borne of thefearof reprisal. jd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One other thought on the creation thread. I wrote my remarks more because of Conor than for any other reason. My comments can stand on their own, I believe. I do not believe in a 6000 year old earth nor do I beleive the bible teaches such - for the reasons stated. Could the earth be only 6000 years old. I suppose so, but only the sectarians beleive such, IMHO. Is God the creator? Now that is the real question. I would think we all agree on the answer to that question. End of the matter for me. And, so, the opportunity to delve into the character of the opponent is side tracked. Motivation be damned -- in a biblical sense , of course. jd From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: To your first question , "no." If I get time, I will try and present some of it for you. John wrote: To your second question, either you did not read my post or you have decided to insult my presentation? I read your post very carefully. I am not trying to insult you at all. Most of your argument revolves around why we should consider using a figurative meaning. This is the approach I hear from most Bible scholars, but the pressure for doing this seems to come from science not good theology, in my opinion. The strongest statement you make is where you point out that Gen. 2:4 uses the word day figuratively. This is easily understood to be figurative, but the uses of the word day prior to this are numbered. The text says, First Day, Second Day, Third Day, etc. It is hard to insist that numbered days are figurative. It is the numbering of the day as well as its coupling with the evening and morning statements that makes it difficult to perceive it as being anything other than a specific time period measured by evening and morning. You would have to argue that evening and morning were greatly extended, or that they too are figurative, to maintain the figurative chronology that you hold onto. There is the added problem of having plants created long before the sun, moon, and stars? Not likely from a biologist's perspective. So, in all, your perspective is not the most parsimonious explanation. I remain skeptical of the figurative interpretation. What bothers me about the approach many theologians take to Genesis 1 is that rather than trying to show from the text itself why the meaning must be figurative, they just find ways to try and show why it could be read this way. I have no trouble understanding that it might be read this way. I have trouble with the idea that it should be read this way. What is the motivation for making it figurative? I believe the motivation is cultural. It seems to me that if it were not for science and the claims of science, theologians would not be taking a figurative approach to Genesis 1. Do you see it different? Is there any way to argue directly from the text (any thing in the Bible anywhere) for a very long process of creation? David Miller John, I have a couple questions for you. 1. Have you ever read John Whitcomb's theological treatment concerning the length of the day in Genesis 1? I have read his perspective and even discussed this personally with him before, but he comes from a theology background and I come from