|
Dean, I did not call you a liar.
Judy is the one who said that if you were misrepresenting me, you
were either lying or deceived. I gave her a third option:
that you misunderstood.
You had written:
> David Miller was actually having Blaine
> do readings for Him-gave him his birth
> dated and even comment on how actuate
> the reading were-have you ever heard
> of the likes from a man of
God?
I believe this grossly misrepresents
me, and the post you provide below proves this. Nothing in this post indicates that I was
inquiring of Blaine to give me an astrological reading, and my comments dealt
with how inaccurate his astrological perceptions were, not with how accurate
they were.
Blaine wrote:
> Yes, David is pretty fixed--he was probably born
> under one of the four fixed signs--Leo, Taurus,
> Scorpio, or Aquarius. Or, he's one of those highly
> independent Aries characters, who never admit
> to being wrong!! If I knew for sure, I could read
> him better.
Well, Blaine guessed wrong, and so I
told him so. Not only that, but he mentions nearly half the signs of the
zodiac and still misses me! There is absolutely nothing accurate about
this.
I wrote:
> Blaine... my astrological sign is pices. I guess that
> astrology isn't helping you be too predictive after all.
:-)
Then Blaine admitted to the problem
that identical twins pose to astrology. Apparently Dean has some other
interpretation of what "reality check" means. Maybe I'm the one
misunderstanding, but I took it that Blaine was admitting to problems in
astrology. Identical twins have different personalities, yet are born very
close to the same time. Giving him my personal
information was for his benefit, not mine. I don't care about
any "reading" and anybody who knows me knows this to be true. On the
other hand, I'm not afraid to talk with someone about their astrological
beliefs, nor even to divulge information about me that might be
used to refute the validity of astrology. He claimed he
missed it because of a lack of information. Did he? An easy way
to test this is to provide him the information he says he requires.
As for the Biblical prohibitions
against astrology, we have already been over this. I uphold the Bible's
prohibition against it, and the last time this came up, I asked other
Mormons to comment on this as well. Not all the Mormons agree with Blaine
about astrology.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:26
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Astrology-Miller
cd:Judy I am not lying.- See below in blue and
red.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 3/13/2006 12:00:46 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Astrology-Miller
Judy, I never inquired Blaine's expertise in astrology regarding my
birth sign, and it would be better to say that my comment to him was about
his INACCURACY in astrology. So take it to the bank that I have been
misrepresented by Dean because of his misreading of my post. Lance is
entirely right when he speaks of a faulty reading. So do you now
conclude that Dean is lying or is genuinely deceived? I prefer to
think of it as a misunderstanding, not understanding what he is
reading.
David Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cd: I don't appreciate being called a Liar
David- Here are the post to support my statements. You gave Blaine
you birth date (Highlighted in Red)for a reading
and you remarked you were an identical twin and understood about
Astrology being a reality check-after Blain mentioned Identical twins were
different-Ask for forgiveness or be held accountable for partaking of
pagan practices and for falsely accusing your brother in Christ.Start
at the bottom and work up the page.
cd: I am surprised and disappointed that you would be any part of this
sin David.
> [Original Message]
> Date: 2/15/2006 6:45:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David
Miller
>
> Blaine, considering that I am an
identical twin myself, I do understand how
> what you just said would be a reality
check for astrology. :-)
>
> David Miller
> Born March 3,
1960
> 4:50 am
> Cleveland, Ohio.
> In a snow blizzard that dumped 24 inches of snow.
>
>
> > David Miller
> >
> > p.s. Blaine... my astrological sign is pices. I guess that
astrology isn't
> > helping you be too predictive after all. :-)
>
> Thank you David, I have wondered about that. Pisces is my opposite
sign,
> and, being the sign of transition from Winter to Spring, is next
to Aries,
> the sign that ushers in Springtime (1st degree Aries is also the
first day
> of Spring). I believe all things are written in the stars--the
trick is
> in reading them accurately. :>) I try, and sometimes get pretty
close to
> people by doing so. But humans are so complex!! Astrology helps,
but is
> not, of course, infallible. But thanks for being open--lots of
people will
> not divulge their birth info to me, probably think by doing so I
might form
> unjustified opinions of them. :>)
>
> One thing, though, without precise birth info--date, time of day,
and place
> of birth--you can't tell too much beyond generalities. The beauty
of precise
> astrological analysis is that no two personalities can ever be the
same--not
> even identical
twins--which is a reality check for astrology few people
> understand.
> Blainer
>
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] il.innglory.org
> > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 2:07 PM
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations
re:David Miller
> >
> > In a message dated 2/13/2006 12:02:28 P.M. Mountain Standard
Time,
> >
> > I've not forgotten you, David. IMO, you are both incorrect
and immoveable
> > on
> > at least a portion of that which is under discussion. What
I've got to
> > determine is whether or not it is worth the 'ink' to engage
further with
> > you
> > given what I've just said. I'm checking around with some
who've read you
> > over time.
> >
> > Lance.
> >
> > Yes, David is pretty fixed--he was probably born under one of
the four
> > fixed
> > signs--Leo, Taurus, Scorpio, or Aquarius. Or, he's one of
those highly
> > independent Aries characters, who never admit to being
wrong!! If I knew
> > for sure, I could read him better.
> > Blainerb
> >
> ----------
> "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.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 9:37
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Astrology-Miller
Understanding is not the issue here Lance
...
Did David Miller inquire of Blaine's
expertise in astrology regarding his birth sign?
He either did or he did not regardless of
personal views
If he did then he IS NOT being misrepresented
here.
IF he DID NOT then someone is lying about it
or genuinely deceived (with same outcome)
Your criticism of DM on astrology is based
upon a faulty 'reading'. This faulty reading was exhibited by Kevin
re:David's nuanced take on pagan, cult/sect & Mormonism.Genuine
conversations take place when the view of the other person is equitably
represented. Now, if ppl can't read TT with understanding then what are
we to make of their reading of the Scriptures?
Blaine has posted a
number of times refering to Astrology.
What do you think of such?
cd: It goes much deeper than that
Bro. Kevin- David Miller was actually having Blaine do readings for
Him-gave him his birth dated and even comment on how actuate the
reading were-have you ever heard of the likes from a man of God? No
different then what we saw in front of the Catholic off Bourbon
street remember? Seems that some believers won't request
God's prediction on the future or even ask Him they have to
inquire of spirits.Here is God's take on the
matter.
Isa
47:13 Thou art wearied
in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the
stargazers, the monthly
prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that
shall come upon thee.
Isa 47:14 Behold,
they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not
deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there
shall not be a coal to warm
at, nor fire to sit before it.
Isa 47:15 Thus shall
they be unto thee with whom thou hast labored, even thy merchants,
from thy youth: they shall wander every one to his quarter; none
shall save thee.
Lev 19:31 Regard not them that have familiar
spirits, neither
seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I
am the LORD your God.
cd: Has David defiled himself ? My suggestion is for
repentence to be given-in sackcloth and ashes if need be-Serous
matter.
PA'GAN, n. [L. paganus, a peasant or countryman, from
pagus, a village.] A heathen; a Gentile; an
idolater; one who worships false gods. This word was
originally applied to the inhabitants of the country, who on the
first propagation of the christian religion adhered to the worship
of false gods, or refused to receive christianity, after it had been
received by the inhabitants of the cities. In like manner, heathen
signifies an inhabitant of the heath or woods, and caffer, in
Arabic, signifies the inhabitant of a hut or cottage, and one that
does not receive the religion of Mohammed. Pagan is used to
distinguish one from a Christian and a Mohammedan.
PA'GAN, a. Heathen; heathenish; Gentile; noting a person
who worships false gods.
1. Pertaining to the worship of false
gods.
Dave Hansen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK let me chime in I will restate it for Dean
DH's BELIEFS are Pagan!
DAVEH: OK
Kevin....specifically in what way do draw that conclusion?
What is it that you think I believe that qualifies as a pagan
belief? First, you may want to define what you think pagan
means so we will have a common starting point.
Kevin Deegan
wrote:
"You .. are a
pagan" is not the same as "Your beliefs are
pagan"
For the sake of Lance (IYO)
OK let me chime in I will restate it for Dean
DH's BELIEFS are Pagan!
So does the BIBLE practice ADHOMS?
AND name names!
Sop let me get this straight Paul should NOT have
said:
Acts 13 Elymas the sorcerer
...
PAUL SAYS:
And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou
child of the devil, thou enemy of all
righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of
the Lord?
SHOULD BE
And said, O full of all subtilty
beliefs and all beliefs of mischief, thou child with
beliefs of the devil, thou believing
against all righteousness, wilt thou not cease believing
to pervert the right
ways of the Lord? (what VERSION
would this be? )
Since Paul was FULL of the Holy Ghost (IMO VS 9) when
he said this does that mean God called Elymas A DEVIL? Is God
ADHOM? Did God call him a PERVERT?
You DaveH are a
Pagan.
DAVEH: I
respectfully disagree, Judge Dean. To me, your above
comment is a blatant ad-hom
Why is attacking your genuinely held
beliefs an attack on your person?
Seriously; can you
expound?
KD
DH can make the point
but let me chime in here, as well. "You ..
are a pagan" is not the same as "Your beliefs are
pagan>"
Those who have eyes, let
them see, Lord.
jd
--------------
Original message --------------
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You DaveH are a
Pagan.
DAVEH: ; I
respectfully disagree, Judge Dean. To me, your above
comment is a blatant ad-hom
Why is attacking your genuinely held
beliefs an attack on your person?
Seriously; can you expound?
I called you a Mormon-to which you do not
deny-You called me a Christian to wit I did not deny. By
doing so you separated the two-and as receiving the first
(Mormon) and tagging me with the second(Christian) you
have clearly showed yourself to be non
Christian
DAVEH:
What kind of convoluted logic is that, Judge Dean???
Does any other TTer who understands what Dean said above,
agree with his explanation?
You DaveH are a
Pagan.
DAVEH:
I respectfully disagree, Judge Dean. To me, your
above comment is a blatant ad-hom, and I will request
Judge Moore take the appropriate action if you do not wish
to apologize.
he fact that you do not
follow the teaching of Jesus
Christ
DAVEH:
Is that coming from Judge Dean, or Judge
Moore?
Get over it the truth is not an Ad. Homein
attack
DAVEH:
Really?!?!?!?! Did you just make a new TT
rule, Judge Moore? Or was that Judge Dean expressing
his unfounded wishes?
state a petition to impeach
me
DAVEH:
Seems to me that you are doing a good job of it on your
own.
I am not Judge
Dean
DAVEH:
Then am I to assume that every t ime you pass judgment,
you are speaking as Judge Moore?
by your
standards
isn't that Ad. Homein
attacking
DAVEH:
??? I thought we were playing the game by your
standards, Judge Dean! Hence.....Get over it the truth is not an Ad. Homein
attack
according
to you.
I will have to g o to the
Moderator
DAVEH:
I've not had much luck with him, but I suspect he will
listen to you.
Are you implyin g Dean called you
such NAMES?
DAVEH: I'll
let Judge Dean answer that, Kevin..........I say/demand again " Get the
"Church of Jesus Christ" name off your temple
Pagan!!!
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
|
