Re: [TruthTalk] Trustworthy?
whatverse/s do/es this comment interpret? On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:34:23 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:In fact, Job himself shared [the belief that he had done something wrong]except for the knowledge that he had done nothing wrong.
Re: [TruthTalk] Trustworthy?
In a message dated 6/9/2004 10:58:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: what verse/s do/es this comment interpret? On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:34:23 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In fact, Job himself shared [the belief that he had done something wrong] except for the knowledge that he had done nothing wrong Job chapter 4, beginning with verse one, Eliphaz is reminding Job, his friend, of the shared (obviously) belief that the innocent are not punished (esp verse 7).
Re: [TruthTalk] (no subject)
Charles Perry Locke wrote: DaveH, do you think these two verses are referring to the same thing, or to different things? DAVEH: I don't know, Perry. I received it just before I had to go to work this morning. I got home (picked up nephew Jeff at the airport this evening) tonight at nearly 10 pm, and have 131 emails (mostly spam! and TT traffic) to deal with. I do intend to do some studying of the passage when I get time. I simply don't have the time to deal with it right now. How does this affect your understanding of 1 Peter 4:5,6? David, the reason I did not want to take the time to search out other references that support my understanding of the 1 Peter verses is that doing so always proves to be a waste of time with you. You never ever ever concede that the scriptures one presents demonstrate their interpretation to be accurate if it contradicts your admitted "LDS bias". DAVEH: What do you want, Perry?!?!?! Did I not say it was a point in your favor? I only had time to read the passage this morning before heading off to work. I don't recall saying you were wrong on your interpretation. I gave you a nod to the effect that you produced some viable evidence that I intend on examining closer when I get the chance. I now know not only what you think on this..but I have a bit better understanding of why you think that way. As to whether or not I agree with you on it, I can't say at this point. Dave, I still get a very strong feeling that you are on TT for a little more than just learning what Protestants believe. DAVEH: Duh!!! Don't you pay attention to my posts, Perry? I've repeatedly said I am here to learn what Protestants believe, and WHY they believe it. Your post this morning was the first one I can remember that offered a reason for why you believe 1Pet 4:6 is referring to spiritually dead instead of physically dead. If you had offered it much sooner, I wouldn't have had to drag it out of you (so to speak). Sorry. I just sense it very strongly. DAVEH: I'd say your senses are out of whack!!! :-) I am praying for you, Dave. DAVEH: Again..thank you for that. And, praying that I am responding to the real reason you are here, not your stated reason. DAVEH: ???...Huh? What's that all about! Perry, I think you are almost as hard headed as you think I am. If you try simply answering my questions sometime instead of trying to withhold the answers (for what reason I do not understand), I think you might have a bit more enjoyable discussion with me. I can tolerate your snide comments about my religion, and your distaste for my beliefs. But, when you try to avoid answering what I think are simple questions, it makes me suspicious of your beliefs. I don't know where this is going, but hopefully the Holy Spirit does. This situation brings to mind John 3, when Nicodemus cracks a little small talk with Jesus by saying that He must be from God because of His miracles. Jesus bypasses all of the smalltalk and goes directly to the point that Nicodemus needs to hear...to enter the kingdom of heaven one must be born again. DAVEH: LOL..do you really want to get me asking water baptism questions again..! :-\ Perry From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charles Perry Locke wrote: DavidH, read Ephesians 2:1. Reconcile it with 1 Peter 4:5. Are they referring to the same thing, or to different things? DAVEH: Very good, Perry. There is some evidence to support your beliefs..Thank you for sharing it! In Peter 4:6, I believe that the 'dead' are those who are physically alive, but spiritually dead, not those who are physically dead. DAVEH: What I have brought to this discussion is from the Bible. Though we read the same passages, we come to dramatically different conclusions. My curiosity is why you read some passages (like 4:6) so much differently than I do. Read vs 5... /Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead./ Do you think Peter is speaking about the /spiritually dead/, when he mentioned the /quick and the dead/? If Peter was referring the physically dead in vs 5, then does it not follow that the dead in vs 6 are also /physically dead/? To me, it seems that inserting /spiritually dead/ is adding to Scripture. I am not condemning you for that, Perry..but, I would be interested to know if other TTers agree with you on that understanding..? -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mediation of Christ -- the real vs false
DavidM:I don't hate him. I don't speak evil of him. My 'opinion' of his brightness or, lack of same, is simply based on many (many) hours of interviews talks which have been televised over the last several years.Though it's not a high compliment, I'd pick him over our last Prime Minister. From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: June 09, 2004 18:55 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Mediation of Christ -- the real vs false Lance gets political and says: From someone who is likely to re-elect a sincere but pretty stupid fundamentalist Christian to be the 'world leader' for four more years ... 1. Bush is not a fundamentalist. 2. Bush is not stupid. Please try to substantiate your characterizations or retract them. Also, why do you hate our President and speak evil of him? Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Bush blundered in his preemptive move
DavidM:I've read and, do read the book of Daniel. I do not see a connection between it's meaning and present day events. Yes, I am aware that many do and why. No, I wouldn't be more explicit. - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: June 09, 2004 18:58 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Bush blundered in his preemptive move Lance wrote: Your President made a decision on behalf of your nation to invade another country. I'd say that calls for commendation or blame. I choose the latter. I commend Bush for following God on this one. Lance wrote: His choice to enter, sort of by invitation, Afghanistan was an important and necessary one in my opinion. Terrorists are bad people. Squish 'em and put 'em through a blender. Saddam was more than a terrorist, so what is your problem with the time of his judgment being at hand? Don't you realize that God controls these political events through spiritual warfare and not men? Read the book of Daniel for details, especially chapter 10. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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.
[TruthTalk] Re:Text Interpretation of the text
I am coming to use the word 'reading' when speaking to the meaning of the text (my reading of this..) I've employed an equation (believer+text+Spirit=??) to illustrate, at the least, the absence of unanimity following =. Some take exception to any hint of uncertainty as to meaning. Why??? Iknow someone who is currently meeting with two prophetesses. They pray and God answers. They write the answers down. Even they are unclear as to what some of the 'answers' mean. In my youth I was a friend to someone, though not a prophet, who regularly engaged God in real two-way conversation. He spoke and God answered. He also was, on occasion, confused as to what God meant. May we come to some sort of agreement that being tentative concerning Scripture's meaning is not the same thing as maligning Scripture? Lance
RE: [TruthTalk] Mediation of Christ -- the real vs false
From: Jonathan Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Judy, You seem to be having an identity crisis here. jt: I can't imagine why you would think such a thing. JH: Sure you can. You put your words into a one to one relationship between yourself and the Bible. When Judy speaks we should really say the Bible speaks. I myself have fallen for this temptation more than once (I remember distinctly doing it in a post to David Miller it was a display of the pride in my heart). Is the viewpoint below what the Bible says or what you perceive the Bible says? jt: You and Lance just love the word perceive, it's where we hang all our differences - right? JH: Absolutely. You think with a distinct modern mindset that comes straight out of the enlightenment. You are so steeped in it you are unable to climb the walls out. All you can claim is that it is your interpretation of what the Bible says. jt: That's all anyone who doesn't see it as you do is able to do so far as you are concenrned isn't it? JH: What one can claim is that they have a proper confidence in what they teach and think. This is not absolute certainty. It avoids such pride. It refuses to confuse Gods word with our word. What is hoped is that our words become a faithful interpretation of Gods words, that others may see through what we say to what God is saying to our hearts. You can go so far as saying that you believe the Holy Spirit revealed this interpretation to you through scripture. However, you can never divorce what is your interpretation from what may actually be being said. This notion seems to give you fits. It has been illustrated to you time and time again yet you cannot see it. jt: The same is true for you, Lance, TFT, Bill and whoever else is hanging onto your peculiar view of the incarnation. I have no problem with my vision and am not in the habit of taking fits. Wrong on both points. JH: You are correct here. Lance, TFT, Bill, and myself can never divorce what is their interpretation from what may actually be being said. There are no rules for you that are not rules for us as well. When I say that this notion seems to give you fits I am pointing out how incredibly hard it is for this truth to enter into your heart. Your modern mindset blocks every attempt to understanding on this important point. At some point in time you will have to learn how to read your Old Testament through the lens of Jesus Christ. jt: No problems with the OT Jonathan. God does not change. He says I am the Lord, I change not Neither does Jesus who is the same yesterday, today, and forever Looks to me as though the problem is yours rather than mine. JH: The above is my opinion of your reading of the OT. I believe you do not read it through the lens of Jesus Christ, nor even attempt to. It leads you to misrepresenting texts all over the place. Deuteronomy 28 and 29 must be understood in the light of who Jesus is and what He has done. If you read it with an Israeli mindset you will come out all wrong. If you choose a Christian mindset (and I pray that you do) you will finally come to understand the law and its place in our lives. jt: There is just one mindset with which to read God's Wordand this is the mind of the Spirit which is the same as the mind of ChristI don't placemyself or anyone else under the law. You really need to understand sin and it's ramifications in the lives of people Jonathan. Righteousness is something you do, it is not a concept of the incarnation. JH: Judy there are multiple mindsets with which to read Gods Word. Do not confuse your opinion with the mind of Christ. In the same way, I do not confuse my opinion with it. When you do that you will find yourself with a new Bible, one that still speaks today to our hearts, one that illuminates salvation, one that edifies instead of destroys. You will begin to worship the Word instead of the word. jt: I don't want or need a new Bible the ones I have speak to my heart all the time. I want to knowGod's ways and walk in them. What would make you imply thatthe Bible does not speak to my heart? This is really a presumptuous statement. JH: Gods grace is such that we may have our doctrine upside down and He still blesses and loves us. What I pray for is that your doctrines would come in line with who God is. I did not mean to imply that the Bible does not speak to your own heart, only that the speaking that it would do under a more faithful mindset would be incredible. Interestingly enough Izzy who is as mad as a hatter at me right now actually gave a compassionate reply to my statement below. Although she may agree with you doctrinally she is in a whole other class when it comes to compassion. I feel that you believe your doctrine below so much that it limits your ability to be loving; perhaps it is time for the truth.
RE: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
Jonathan, I think there is little point in belaboring this discussion any further. I am extreme about everything I believe in, and see that as a result of my extreme commitment to God. I am not lukewarm about anything. Lets just agree to disagree. Youll have to malign America and President Bush to someone else who will agree with you, like G. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hughes I feel that your extreme pro-American stance (with takes the religiosity of Christianity and mixes it with patriotism) is an unchristian stance, one that works against your faith. Jonathan
Re: [TruthTalk] (no subject)
DavidH wrote: I do intend to do some studying of the passage when I get time. I simply don't have the time to deal with it right now. Excellent. I look forward to hearing from you on this when you get the time. I gave you a nod to the effect that you produced some viable evidence that I intend on examining closer when I get the chance. Actually, you did not say in your post that you intended on examining it closer. Your terse Thanks for sharing seemed like the end of it. I don't know unless you tell me. As far as the strong feeling I have had for over a year now that there is more to your being on TT than you openly state, I do not pass these things off lightly. I would not discount that the HS has a Mormon boy hanging out with a bunch of, according to the LDS, believers of creeds of abomination, for a more solid reason than his own curiosity. And, if the HS is involved, YOU might not even understand why He has you here! Perry -- 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] (no subject)
Charles Perry Locke wrote: DavidH wrote: I do intend to do some studying of the passage when I get time. I simply don't have the time to deal with it right now. Excellent. I look forward to hearing from you on this when you get the time. I gave you a nod to the effect that you produced some viable evidence that I intend on examining closer when I get the chance. Actually, you did not say in your post that you intended on examining it closer. DAVEH: I was 20 minutes late getting to work yesterday (the traffic was bad and I got a late start.) I should not have made any reply to your post, but felt you might be interested to know that I thought the passage you quoted was a good one in your favor. Last night, I was about 45 minutes late getting to bed (due to meeting Jeff at the airport), but again felt compelled to respond to your post. Let me offer you some advice, Perry.relax. If I fail to answer a question you have, repeat it a week or two later and I will try to answer it then. (Sometimes I just forget or have too many questions to deal with.) Your terse "Thanks for sharing" seemed like the end of it. I don't know unless you tell me. DAVEH: Once I know the reason why you believe as you do, I may stop responding. Contrary to your thinking about my reasons for being here, I won't continue badgering you once I understand what you believe and why you believe it, even if it is opposite of what I believe. I'm usually quite content to know what you believe and why and don't feel compelled to convince you to believe as I do. You apparently feel the need to change my thinking though.. As far as the strong feeling I have had for over a year now that there is more to your being on TT than you openly state, I do not pass these things off lightly. I would not discount that the HS has a Mormon boy hanging out with a bunch of, according to the LDS, believers of creeds of abomination, for a more solid reason than his own curiosity. And, if the HS is involved, YOU might not even understand why He has you here! DAVEH: Then your beef is with the HS, and not me. I had not considered your theory about the HS compelling me to be in TT for the reason of converting you lost souls from your creeds of abomination to Mormonism.Hmm.perhaps the HS is trying to send you a message, Perry!!! ;-) Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
[TruthTalk] Polygamy in Utah
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38877 Polygamy in Utah.
[TruthTalk] free speech lawsuit
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38869 College GOP sues over speech code Message 'End Liberal Indoctrination on Campus' deemed harrassment
[TruthTalk] revisionist history
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38878 Ronald Reagan: So now they think he was charming.
[TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
This is just a reminder that TT is a discussion group. It's purpose is to facillitate the discussion of truth (whatever that is). With this in mind, please limit yourself to posts that discuss the topics presented by members. Yesterday one poster had 24 posts, another just under 20, most of which were one liners with little or no discussion content. Here are some types of posts that come across the TT forum that do not pertain to discussions, and that needlessly increase the traffic that one must wade through to find the discussion material: 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting. 2. A one-liner that does not further a discussion, or multiple one-liners that each address only one point of a larger discussion. Try to respond to an entire post with a single response of your own. Occasionally, if you leave out an important point you intended to make, or want to change or correct a previous post, then a second post is warranted. 3. One-line responses back and forth between two posters for an extended period. This is a discussion group, not an immediate message board. If you go one to two quick one-liner posts with another member, why not take it to an IM board, chat room, or to private email. 4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough FW: email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT. 5. ANYTHING that ends with Send this to xxx friends, or If you love Jesus you will forward this to I would guess that Jesus could care less about your email, and doubt that not forwarding such will affect your state of redemption. 6. Personal discussions between two members. Most probably don't care that Bobby is in graduate school at the same place the other member's brother's son went. If it becomes personal please use private email. Thanks, Perry the Moderator -- 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] Conspiracy Buffs (I mean you John)
"Interview With The Assassin" (Dallas 1963 The Second Shooter). The DVD has bonus extras.2003 Spirit Award Winner. The manager of the video store turns out to be a mega conspiracy guy. He's going to supply me with more video info which I'll pass along Let me know if you find watch it. Lance
Re: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
In a message dated 6/10/2004 11:13:22 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with most of what you said but I do think we should include prayer requests. I am sometimes overwhelmed with the number of posts but if someone thinks it is urgent or something that might get a thread going then I think you should allow it. Maybe we should send these things to you and you can decide if it benefits the whole group. Just my opinion. Laura 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting.2. A one-liner that does not further a discussion, or multiple one-liners that each address only one point of a larger discussion. Try to respond to an entire post with a single response of your own. Occasionally, if you leave out an important point you intended to make, or want to change or correct a previous post, then a second post is warranted.3. One-line responses back and forth between two posters for an extended period. This is a discussion group, not an immediate message board. If you go one to two quick one-liner posts with another member, why not take it to an IM board, chat room, or to private email.4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough "FW:" email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT.5. ANYTHING that ends with "Send this to xxx friends", or "If you love Jesus you will forward this to...". I would guess that Jesus could care less about your email, and doubt that not forwarding such will affect your state of redemption.6. Personal discussions between two members. Most probably don't care that Bobby is in graduate school at the same place the other member's brother's son went. If it becomes personal please use private email.Thanks,Perry the Moderator
Re: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
Laura, I am glad you brought that up. In the post I was listing specific things that should be excluded from posts, sort of a 'negative' list. I added prayer requests as item 7 as something that are okay to post because, after all, we are Christians (for the most part) and that is something we do. But, I removed it when I realized that the entire list was negatives, and felt that by NOT mentioning, it would imply that it was not excluded. Personally, I do not want to have to approve anything to be posted and hope that by reminding members of the purpose of TT it will help it to be self-monitoring. Thanks Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:26:37 EDT In a message dated 6/10/2004 11:13:22 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with most of what you said but I do think we should include prayer requests. I am sometimes overwhelmed with the number of posts but if someone thinks it is urgent or something that might get a thread going then I think you should allow it. Maybe we should send these things to you and you can decide if it benefits the whole group. Just my opinion. Laura 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting. 2. A one-liner that does not further a discussion, or multiple one-liners that each address only one point of a larger discussion. Try to respond to an entire post with a single response of your own. Occasionally, if you leave out an important point you intended to make, or want to change or correct a previous post, then a second post is warranted. 3. One-line responses back and forth between two posters for an extended period. This is a discussion group, not an immediate message board. If you go one to two quick one-liner posts with another member, why not take it to an IM board, chat room, or to private email. 4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough FW: email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT. 5. ANYTHING that ends with Send this to xxx friends, or If you love Jesus you will forward this to I would guess that Jesus could care less about your email, and doubt that not forwarding such will affect your state of redemption. 6. Personal discussions between two members. Most probably don't care that Bobby is in graduate school at the same place the other member's brother's son went. If it becomes personal please use private email. Thanks, Perry the Moderator -- 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.
[TruthTalk] Been very busy ...
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua !! Haven't been able to keep up with TT ... All that glitters is not gold Chromium glitters, too. If it is true that good health is worth more than great wealth then chromium is more valuable Within the dark recesses of the womb, egg and sperm unite, and the conception of new life occurs. The subsequent process of mitosis accelerates, and this cell division progresses to a differentiation of cells which results in a fetus and culminates at the entrance into the world of a healthy, beautiful, human infant. At birth, this infant has a brain that is still in a state of rapid development. The brain will reach most of its adult size in only a few years. The child grows, full of energy and life, and journeys through adolescence to adulthood. Energies may decrease throughout the twenties and thirties as one settles into a sedentary or comfortable lifestyle around the age of forty. Weight gain may creep up on or even overwhelm one through this period of time. One may now find that eyesight is not what it once was, and eyeglasses become necessary. One slowly comes to the realization of going over the proverbial hill. As one proceeds down the hill it becomes apparent that various body mechanisms are becoming inefficient. Diabetes, and/or heart disease sneak up on you. One hopes to avoid the scourge of the Big C - cancer. One finds it necessary to slow down the pace of living even further. All of the above are considered normal parts of growing up and subsequent ravages of the process of aging. Is this accurate? One element is a key to this voyage, from the initiation of life in the womb, until the conclusion of life at death. This most valuable element is the mineral chromium that is the subject of this writing. The pages that follow will take you through a journey from genesis through revelation. You may just discover that chromium is the most important nutrient discovered to date. Copyright 2004 from the introduction of my new book, 'CHROMIUM: Sparkling health for your life and living! ' Stores in both Arkansas and Missouri have ordered it by the dozen.
[TruthTalk] CORRECTED Been very busy ...
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua !! Haven't been able to keep up with TT ... All that glitters is not gold Chromium glitters, too. If it is true that good health is worth more than great wealth then chromium is more valuable than gold. Within the dark recesses of the womb, egg and sperm unite, and the conception of new life occurs. The subsequent process of mitosis accelerates, and this cell division progresses to a differentiation of cells which results in a fetus and culminates at the entrance into the world of a healthy, beautiful, human infant. At birth, this infant has a brain that is still in a state of rapid development. The brain will reach most of its adult size in only a few years. The child grows, full of energy and life, and journeys through adolescence to adulthood. Energies may decrease throughout the twenties and thirties as one settles into a sedentary or comfortable lifestyle around the age of forty. Weight gain may creep up on or even overwhelm one through this period of time. One may now find that eyesight is not what it once was, and eyeglasses become necessary. One slowly comes to the realization of going over the proverbial hill. As one proceeds down the hill it becomes apparent that various body mechanisms are becoming inefficient. Diabetes, and/or heart disease sneak up on you. One hopes to avoid the scourge of the Big C - cancer. One finds it necessary to slow down the pace of living even further. All of the above are considered normal parts of growing up and subsequent ravages of the process of aging. Is this accurate? One element is a key to this voyage, from the initiation of life in the womb, until the conclusion of life at death. This most valuable element is the mineral chromium that is the subject of this writing. The pages that follow will take you through a journey from genesis through revelation. You may just discover that chromium is the most important nutrient discovered to date. Copyright 2004 from the introduction of my new book, 'CHROMIUM: Sparkling health for your life and living! ' Stores in both Arkansas and Missouri have ordered it by the dozen. YHVH is so good!
RE: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
Perry, I realize I sent 3 website articles, but I think each one is very pertinent to our discussions of the past couple of days. Thanks. Izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator This is just a reminder that TT is a discussion group. It's purpose is to facillitate the discussion of truth (whatever that is). With this in mind, please limit yourself to posts that discuss the topics presented by members. Yesterday one poster had 24 posts, another just under 20, most of which were one liners with little or no discussion content. Here are some types of posts that come across the TT forum that do not pertain to discussions, and that needlessly increase the traffic that one must wade through to find the discussion material: 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting. 2. A one-liner that does not further a discussion, or multiple one-liners that each address only one point of a larger discussion. Try to respond to an entire post with a single response of your own. Occasionally, if you leave out an important point you intended to make, or want to change or correct a previous post, then a second post is warranted. 3. One-line responses back and forth between two posters for an extended period. This is a discussion group, not an immediate message board. If you go one to two quick one-liner posts with another member, why not take it to an IM board, chat room, or to private email. 4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough FW: email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT. 5. ANYTHING that ends with Send this to xxx friends, or If you love Jesus you will forward this to I would guess that Jesus could care less about your email, and doubt that not forwarding such will affect your state of redemption. 6. Personal discussions between two members. Most probably don't care that Bobby is in graduate school at the same place the other member's brother's son went. If it becomes personal please use private email. Thanks, Perry the Moderator -- 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] the real vs false
Good day Izzy, I shall call off the dogs. I may even climb down from my high horse demanding apologies from anyone that moves. My attempts at convicting others of sin have always been failures; perhaps the Holy Spirit really is better at it. Sigh, unemployed again! After saying lets agree to disagree you make one final poke; enjoy it. If I was a big man I would not poke back. Must.. Stop.. Typing.. To reconciliation from our Lord Jesus Christ, Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] the real vs false Jonathan, I think there is little point in belaboring this discussion any further. I am extreme about everything I believe in, and see that as a result of my extreme commitment to God. I am not lukewarm about anything. Lets just agree to disagree. Youll have to malign America and President Bush to someone else who will agree with you, like G. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hughes I feel that your extreme pro-American stance (with takes the religiosity of Christianity and mixes it with patriotism) is an unchristian stance, one that works against your faith. Jonathan
RE: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
The dogs were never a match for the Cat. J From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hughes Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 3:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] the real vs false Good day Izzy, I shall call off the dogs. I may even climb down from my high horse demanding apologies from anyone that moves. My attempts at convicting others of sin have always been failures; perhaps the Holy Spirit really is better at it. Sigh, unemployed again! After saying lets agree to disagree you make one final poke; enjoy it. If I was a big man I would not poke back. Must.. Stop.. Typing.. To reconciliation from our Lord Jesus Christ, Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] the real vs false Jonathan, I think there is little point in belaboring this discussion any further. I am extreme about everything I believe in, and see that as a result of my extreme commitment to God. I am not lukewarm about anything. Lets just agree to disagree. Youll have to malign America and President Bush to someone else who will agree with you, like G. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hughes I feel that your extreme pro-American stance (with takes the religiosity of Christianity and mixes it with patriotism) is an unchristian stance, one that works against your faith. Jonathan
[TruthTalk] the real vs false
From: "Jonathan Hughes" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Good evening Judy,Do not be too dismayed by being judgmental. You are in good company; I myself am quite critical. J jt: Your criticisms areon a personal/national level. I don't practice that and this is why I would like a list of what I have said that you consider to be judgmental. I am being very honest when I say that I could easily whip up a post containing many references to you being judgmental, towards myself and others. You may think I am being double minded or hypocritical when I now state that I will not do this. jt: Why not? If you are going to continueto accuse you should be able to producethe grounds for your accusation. If you go back a few months you will see where I have tried this with you before (not just me but others tried as well [there is that ambiguous others againI have no desire to out what others have communicated to me in private. jt: Others like Ellsman, Chris Barr, Lance? I'm not surprised to learn thatwe have some private gossiping going on as well; so much for the divine dance and all inclusive incarnation.Bad fruit. A quick look back through your emails in the last 4 months will make it very clear that the tone and judgmental attitudeexpressed in your posts have been called into question a number of times.]). It was unsuccessful. Note that to your credit this time you have actually invited critique. jt: The reason I am asking you for evidence this time Jonathan is because I am weary of your constantly alluding to these things. You neverdialogue in an up front way and neither does Lance. Both of you use obscuretheological wordsand lots of one liners.You appear to have some favorite authors and theologians in commonbut there is no fellowship around God's Word. At this point I don't believe you know the Word of God or the God of the Word. Now I am not being mean or judgmental - as you have repeatedly claimed "I am just stating how I see it" The comment below was a contrast between Izzys graceful response to my illness and yours. You may think it double minded of me to praise Izzy in one post and in another give a rather severe critique. Never confuse a critique on something specific (such as a behaviour, action, or words) with a critique on who the person is as a whole. jt: What??? You don't know either of us as a whole Jonathan. Izzy is a nurse by profession so you apparently relate to her professional approach which is fine but all you have is an opinion based on an internet persona with little or no actual knowledge. Anyways, conscious of the fact that I have a chronic illness and struggle mightily with your viewpoint on a connection between sin and illness you made a few responses that I felt contained little if any compassion. I thought that you should have been softer. I feel that you should be much softer in almost all of your posts. I would love to see a spirit of gentleness and caring from you. jt: Jonathan if you've been struggling with CFS for 16yrs I would think you would want to be free of it. I know it feels good to be stroked butuntil you deal with the underlying spiritual issues you will die with CFS so I try to encourage in a different way. During his earthly ministry Jesus told people he healedto "go and sin no more lest a worse thing come on you" Do you think he was being judgmental and hard on them? What I usually see is a number of biblical passages thrown together to make a hard edged argument. What I find disconcerting about your theology is that it does not seem to be good news at all. jt: They are not just "thrown together" - Have you bothered to go to the Lord about these things? To me the Good News is the proof of the pudding - which is actual freedom rather than all this high sounding doctrinal talk. It doesnt lead me to Gods feet in worship. You may be surprised to learn that I used to think much like you do (actually I was probably even more conservative). I used to argue with passages in the same way, driving my point home as if I could speak for God. jt: God has already spoken, and I accept it. I'm not driving anything home. It's your choice where you want to walk. God had to wear me down quite a bit to allow the grace of Jesus Christ to seep into my heart (and He continues to do so). I am sure you think that I have fallen into deception. I think I have never been more in love with Him, nor had theability to love others like I do now. jt: Apparently these others don't include the leadership of the USA. I hope you don't mind if I am brutally honest (rather than judgmental) but it has been my observation that those of you who hold to this incarnational perichoresis are very easily offended and seem to consider that you live on a higher plane. Judyt From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 2:50 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [TruthTalk] the real vs
Re: [TruthTalk] revisionist history
In a message dated 6/10/2004 8:07:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ronald Reagan: So now they think he was charming. Exactly. They spent years saying exactly the same things about Reagan as they are now doing with Bush. What is so very good is the building confidence some of us have in the conservative revolution. It has changed over the years. The radical right has not the same influence (soem of that is good, some not). When Americans are asked how they identify there political tendency, 17 % say liberal and 37% say conservative. That numbers are up for conservatives and down for liberals. Recently, C BS took a poll and found that 12% of probable voting Democrates will not vote for Kerry in this election. We shall see. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Conspiracy Buffs (I mean you John)
In a message dated 6/10/2004 9:16:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Interview With The Assassin" (Dallas 1963 The Second Shooter). The DVD has bonus extras.2003 Spirit Award Winner. The manager of the video store turns out to be a mega conspiracy guy. He's going to supply me with more video info which I'll pass along Let me know if you find watch it. Lance Perry has admonished against one word posts, among other things. So allow me the digression of making it abundantly clear as to the prognosis of my waning regret regarding the disposition of something we longingly might call gratitude. That it exists on my part for all the help that you and countless others have offered over the months and especially over the past several days, you may be certain. In short, Thanks JDSmithson
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
In a message dated 6/10/2004 2:52:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Good day Izzy, I shall call off the dogs. I may even climb down from my high horse demanding apologies from anyone that moves. My attempts at convicting others of sin have always been failures; perhaps the Holy Spirit really is better at it. Sigh, unemployed again! After saying lets agree to disagree you make one final poke; enjoy it. If I was a big man I would not poke back. Must.. Stop.. Typing.. To reconciliation from our Lord Jesus Christ, Jonathan OK I had to laugh at this -- John
[TruthTalk] the real vs false
From: "Jonathan Hughes" [EMAIL PROTECTED]From the sound of things you may not care much for what I have to say inresponse. You have not offended me, but you have deeply hurt me. jt: Then your answer is No! You probably don't want to take the time which tells me you are insincere and not interested in genuine dialogue. I don't want to see any more accusations from you. BTW I understand what you are saying - and choose not to take it to heart because I believe you are in error. Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism. Judyt From: "Jonathan Hughes" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Good evening Judy,Do not be too dismayed by being judgmental. You are in good company; Imyself am quite critical. J jt: Your criticisms are on a personal/national level. I don't practicethat and this is why I would like a list of what I have said that youconsider to be judgmental. I am being very honest when I say that I could easily whip up a postcontaining many references to you being judgmental, towards myself andothers. You may think I am being double minded or hypocritical when Inow state that I will not do this. jt: Why not? If you are going to continue to accuse you should be ableto produce the grounds for your accusation. If you go back a few months you will see where I have tried this with youbefore (not just me but others tried as well [there is that ambiguousothers again I have no desire to out what others have communicated to mein private. jt: Others like Ellsman, Chris Barr, Lance? I'm not surprised to learnthat we have some private gossiping going on as well; so much for thedivine dance and all inclusive incarnation. Bad fruit. A quick look back through your emails in the last 4 months will make itvery clear that the tone and judgmental attitudeexpressed in your posts have been called into question a number oftimes.]). It was unsuccessful. Note that to your credit this time youhave actually invited critique. jt: The reason I am asking you for evidence this time Jonathan is becauseI am weary of your constantly alluding to these things. You neverdialogue in an up front way and neither does Lance. Both of you useobscure theological words and lots of one liners. You appear to have somefavorite authors and theologians in common but there is no fellowshiparound God's Word. At this point I don't believe you know the Word of Godor the God of the Word. Now I am not being mean or judgmental - as youhave repeatedly claimed "I am just stating how I see it" The comment below was a contrast between Izzys graceful response to myillness and yours. You may think it double minded of me to praise Izzyin one post and in another give a rather severe critique. Never confusea critique on something specific (such as a behaviour, action, or words)with a critique on who the person is as a whole. jt: What??? You don't know either of us as a whole Jonathan. Izzy is anurse by profession so you apparently relate to her professional approachwhich is fine but all you have is an opinion based on an internet personawith little or no actual knowledge. Anyways, conscious of the fact that I have a chronic illness and strugglemightily with your viewpoint on a connection between sin and illness youmade a few responses that I felt contained little if any compassion. Ithought that you should have been softer. I feel that you should be muchsofter in almost all of your posts. I would love to see a spirit ofgentleness and caring from you. jt: Jonathan if you've been struggling with CFS for 16yrs I would thinkyou would want to be free of it. I know it feels good to be stroked butuntil you deal with the underlying spiritual issues you will die with CFSso I try to encourage in a different way. During his earthly ministryJesus told people he healed to "go and sin no more lest a worse thingcome on you" Do you think he was being judgmental and hard on them? What I usually see is a number of biblical passages thrown together tomake a hard edged argument. What I find disconcerting about yourtheology is that it does not seem to be good news at all. jt: They are not just "thrown together" - Have you bothered to go to theLord about these things? To me the Good News is the proof of the pudding- which is actual freedom rather than all this high sounding doctrinaltalk. It doesnt lead me to Gods feet in worship. You may be surprised to learnthat I used to think much like you do (actually I was probably even moreconservative). I used to argue with passages in the same way, driving mypoint home as if I could speak for God. jt: God has already spoken, and I accept it. I'm not driving anythinghome. It's your choice where you want to walk. God had to wear me down quite a bit to allow the grace of Jesus Christ toseep into my heart (and He continues to do so). I am sure you think thatI have fallen into deception. I think I have never been more in lovewith Him, nor had theability to love others like I do now.
Re: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
Charles Perry Locke wrote: Yesterday one poster had 24 posts, another just under 20, most of which were one liners with little or no discussion content. Here are some types of posts that come across the TT forum that do not pertain to discussions, and that needlessly increase the traffic that one must wade through to find the discussion material: 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting. DAVEH: FWIW..The advantage of posting a link it that it does not conflict with copyrights, which is a common trespass of many folks who mistakenly believe it is OK to copy and post material wherever/whenever it is found on the net or is emailed to them by others. 4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough "FW:" email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT. DAVEH: I assume that means you prefer I do not further post things like this... The secret of a good sermon is to have a good beginning and a good ending; and have the two as close together as possible. ~George Burns I have been the chief offender, and will refrain from doing so in the future. Thanks, Perry the Moderator -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
Re: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
lol! On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:27:52 -0700 Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The secret of a good sermon is to have a good beginning and a good ending; and have the two as close together as possible. ~George Burns
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
how do you think he and Luther and Billy Graham'llget along with JS, Hitler, the Pope, and Bill Clinton? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:38:14 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
better whileCorrie Ten Boom'shelpin' Mother Teresa serve breath mints to the crowd--eh? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:16:39 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: how do you think he and Luther and Billy Graham'llget along with JS, Hitler, the Pope, and Bill Clinton? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:38:14 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
[TruthTalk] the real vs false
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? jt: Thankfully I'm not the one who makes that determination Gary; but I would hope that he repented for his responsibility not only for the death of Servetus but also for hisdoctrinal error and for the original Calvinistic merging of Church and State. Would you also happen to be a Calvinist? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
hey DaveH--ever heard a Mormon sermon like this one(?:) On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:47:49 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: better whileCorrie Ten Boom'shelpin' Mother Teresa serve breath mints to the crowd--eh? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:16:39 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: how do you think he and Luther and Billy Graham'llget along with JS, Hitler, the Pope, and Bill Clinton? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:38:14 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
Re: [TruthTalk] the real vs false
when did you hope this? On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:50:09 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] so Calvin is goin' to hell, too? jt: ..I would hope that he repented.. On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:00:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Your beliefs arerooted in Calvinism...I don't believe you know the Word of God
RE: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator
No problem, Izzy, but at least a little introducory note and perhaps your comments on the article, or your impression of why the article applies to the topic would be helpful rather than just a raw link by itself. Perry the Moderator From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:03:38 -0500 Perry, I realize I sent 3 website articles, but I think each one is very pertinent to our discussions of the past couple of days. Thanks. Izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [TruthTalk] Reminder from the Moderator This is just a reminder that TT is a discussion group. It's purpose is to facillitate the discussion of truth (whatever that is). With this in mind, please limit yourself to posts that discuss the topics presented by members. Yesterday one poster had 24 posts, another just under 20, most of which were one liners with little or no discussion content. Here are some types of posts that come across the TT forum that do not pertain to discussions, and that needlessly increase the traffic that one must wade through to find the discussion material: 1. Posts containing a link to an interesting web page you found. If a link helps to progress an argument, make a point, or directly relates to a topic of discussion, then use it. But, please avoid just sending a link that pertains to something you think is interesting. 2. A one-liner that does not further a discussion, or multiple one-liners that each address only one point of a larger discussion. Try to respond to an entire post with a single response of your own. Occasionally, if you leave out an important point you intended to make, or want to change or correct a previous post, then a second post is warranted. 3. One-line responses back and forth between two posters for an extended period. This is a discussion group, not an immediate message board. If you go one to two quick one-liner posts with another member, why not take it to an IM board, chat room, or to private email. 4. A cute joke or anecdote that you found on the internet, or that a friend or relative sent you. I am sure we each get enough FW: email every day that we do not need to wade through it on TT. 5. ANYTHING that ends with Send this to xxx friends, or If you love Jesus you will forward this to I would guess that Jesus could care less about your email, and doubt that not forwarding such will affect your state of redemption. 6. Personal discussions between two members. Most probably don't care that Bobby is in graduate school at the same place the other member's brother's son went. If it becomes personal please use private email. Thanks, Perry the Moderator -- 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. -- 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.
[TruthTalk] Got a quarter?
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua !! Got a quarter? How 'bout two? One that is old One that is new The left behind craze has overwhelmed America. Now look what America has left behind. The old American quarters have a profile of George Washington facing the words, "IN GOD WE TRUST". The new American quarters placed those words behind George Washington. Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Bro. Chris Barr -- BORN IN THE USA a servant of YHVH
