date:20060321




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?

ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 20, 2006 15:18
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  Unity in 
  Diversity.
  Fatness in 
  Skinniness.
  Ugliness in 
  Beauty.
  Dumbness in 
  Intelligence.
  Wisdom in 
  Nonsense.
  Jibberish in 
  Eloquence.

  iz

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:24 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

Did you mean to say the RNC?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 20, 2006 15:20
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  And this also is not 
  a shot. But how could you construe the end times harlot church as 
  anything other than the RCC? izzy

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  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.

- Original Message - 

From: Judy 
Taylor 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: March 
20, 2006 08:23

Subject: 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Who is Adam?

http://home.earthlink.net/~ldsendowment/lecture.html (Brigham Young - first official script of the endowment- BYU Special Collections,Provo, Utah) Adam was an immortal being when he came on this earth. He had lived on an earth similar to ours; he had received the priesthood and the keys thereof, and had been faithful in all things, and gained his resurrection and his exaltation, and was crowned with glory, immortality, and eternal lives, and was numbered with the Gods (for such he became through his faithfulness), and had begotten all the spirits that were to come to this earth. And Eve our common mother, who is the mother of all living, bore those spirits in the celestial world. And when this earth was organized by Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-ag-contv8p218.html Before Adam fell he was a resurrected man. "Biblical Cosmogony" article, Contributor, vol. 8, p. 218 (1886) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Brigham Young taught, "Elohim, Yahova Michael, were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth Michael became Adam" Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871
"The Father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with their Grandfather, and their children were more or less acquainted with their Great-Grandfather . . ." (Journal of Discourses 9:148, 12 Jan. 1862).If men areto become gods Men should Follow Adam women are to follow Eve BUT One must never believe that Adam ever actually accomplished his godhood? Even if he was partner with Elohim and Jehovah? Where was the Holy Ghost, what was he doing during this time? Why the substitution of Michael/Adam?Who is this Father - Son - GrandSON TRINITY?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I too should like to hear David's response to this.- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 19, 2006 20:15 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] torrance and logic
David , in other posts of the day, I find you saying that yoou and Torrance are in agreement concerninglogic. I may ahve misunderstood your wording, but that was what you said according to my perspective. Below you say this: If you define "rationalist" in the more esoteric sense of the idea that reason is the source of truth, then I do not believe the Holy Spirit is a rationalist. By this definition, I am not a rationalist either. However, I do believe that the Holy Spirit is rational. He also does not lie or employ deception to mislead others. The Holy Spirit uses rational thought to speak to us, and he expects us to include rationality as a basis of belief and action. -- DMTorrance might give caution with
these words: ".. we should seek to understand Christ, not by way of observational deductions from his appearances, but in the light of what he is in himself in his internal relations with God, that is, in terms of his intrinsic significance disclosed through his self-witness and self-communication to us in word and deed and reflected through the evangelical tradition of the Gospel in the medium which he created for this purpose in the apostolic foundation of the Church .. When we adopt this kind of approach, whether in natural science or in theology, we find that progress in understanding is necessarily circular. We develop a form of inquiry in which we allow some field of reality to disclose itself to us in the complex of its internal relations or its latent structure, and thus seek to understand it in the light of its own intrinsic intelligibility or logos ..Thus we seek to understand
something, not by schematising it to an external or alien framework of thought, but by operating wit h a framework of thought appropriate to it" ---The Mediation of Christ pp 4,5 Yahoo! MailBring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM

CONTENTION is of the Devil 3 Ne 11 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.29For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line too after all when the leaders speak the thinking
has been done.The Holy Bible on the other hand says: 1 Thessalonians 5:21 clearly commandsto "prove all things." The scriptures tell us to CONTEND for the faith ONCE delivered "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.Paulwas so despised bysome that he was lashed on5occasions,beaten w/ rods three times, and was nearly stoned to death The real question
is just who it is really getting angry. Galatians 4:16"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" After allANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight! http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htmDave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To avoid WHAT?DAVEH: Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?ShieldsFamily wrote: To avoid WHAT? That nice, positive place? izFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:30 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoMDAVEH: The Lord has provided a way for us to avoid it.ShieldsFamily wrote: What is the positive message about hell? izDo you ever warn people about the FIRE of hell? DAVEH: No, I don't do much preaching, and when I doI prefer to be more positive in my approach.-- ~~~ 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

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, 
either you   did not read my post or you have 
  decided to insult my presentation?

Re: [TruthTalk] Who is God?

I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.  You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.  Seems to me that OTOH there is NO ATTEMPT to explain LDS Trinities!Father Son and Michael  versus  Father Son and Holy GhostGreat Granpa, Granpa and Grandson  (Father Son and ADAM/Michael)Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?DAVEH: I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it using the Trinity?DAVEH: Ohhh.Kevin, I forgot to add.If you don't want to answer my question, I understand your reluctance
 todefend the mormon faith Trinity!Dave Hansen wrote:   How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?DAVEH: I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it using the Trinity?Kevin Deegan wrote: If you do not believe that God is expressesed as a Trinity  How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?--   ~~~  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! Mail 
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

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.

Re: [TruthTalk] Who is God?

Apparently it is no harder to EXPLAIN than the two different Trinities of LDS gods.Could you explain Father Son  MICHAEL to us?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?DAVEH: I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it using the Trinity?Kevin Deegan wrote: If you do not believe that God is expressesed as a Trinity  How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?--   ~~~  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! Mail 
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

Replacement Theology[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 doesnt that have any meaning for you? izzyFrom: [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! Mail
Bring 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.

--
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] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

What did YOU think of yesterday's QA with 
GWB?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 21, 2006 09:51
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  No. I meant DNC. 
  iz

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:28 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  Did you mean to say the 
  RNC?

- Original Message - 

From: ShieldsFamily 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: March 
20, 2006 15:20

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or 
figurative?

And this also is 
not a shot. But how could you construe the end times harlot church as 
anything other than the RCC? izzy

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
Genesis literal or figurative?

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.

  - Original Message - 

  From: Judy 
  Taylor 

  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 
  20, 2006 08:23

  Subject: 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]

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

1. "Faith" is used with two considerations in Romans 14 -- "the Faith" and "faith." The FOUR brethren disagreed on The Faith, Judy. Now if you do not think that "The Faith" includes doctrine, we must agree to disagree.

2. We have the eating of meats AND the observance of holy days presented in this passage.Each is a DOCTRINAL consideration with Paul telling them this: "let each be fully convinced in his own mind." DOCTRINE.

3. That you see no diversity here is simply unbelievable.

4. Romans 16:17 "Now I beseech you brethren, MARK THEM which cause divisions and offenses CONTRARY TO THE DOCTRINE which ye have learned and AVOID THEM" The "doctrine" referred to in this passage is the teaching concerning unity in diversity !!! They have received a teaching that prevents divisions and moves each away from offending the other. The non-forgiving legalist who insists that "it is my way or the highway" needs to bemarked and excluded, herself !! Within the boundaries of "Christian," our home church has only one rule of conduct - tolerance of another brother's views, knowing that he does not serve the church politic but Christ, Himself. People who violate that are asked to leave.

5. 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 Again, your own theology has blinded you to what is being said. Acts 15 is not about "what the Jews practiced .. following the resurrection." Rather, it is has to do with the "Jewish Church" faction and the "Gentile Church"faction. To prevent division within the church of Christ, the two groups were given a course of conduct and told [by implication] to stop judging each other. Unity was more important than the notion that they all "speak and believe the same things." If you cannot see this obvious truth -- well, I really so not know what to tell you.

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 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, 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 &
gt; 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 l
ong 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?




Why not just address Judy as a 'modalityite' as she 
hates 'isms'! She is also of the opinion that church history is of little 
value.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: March 21, 2006 08:56
  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 
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

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad









And look who sit squarely in the middle of
it all; how very convenient. iz











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:55
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special
Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad





Replacement Theology

[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 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
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?


LOL for Lance's comment. 

Also, Linda, when someone spoke of the "anti - Christ" in first century times, whommm do you think they would envision -- the RCC which wasn't in existence or some form of Judaism, which did exist and was very anti-Christ??? What would be the message in "anti-Christ" for those of the first century? 

-- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







Did you mean to say the RNC?

- Original Message - 
From: ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: March 20, 2006 15:20
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?


And this also is not a shot. But how could you construe the end times harlot church as anything other than the RCC? izzy





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?


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.


- Original Message - 

From: Judy Taylor 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: March 20, 2006 08:23

Subject: 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?


I stand corrected. 

Judy, modal--m was heresy thousands of years ago for the same reasons it is today - among other things, it denies the person of God the Father and the person of Christ, His eteranl son. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Why not just address Judy as a 'modalityite' as she hates 'isms'! She is also of the opinion that church history is of little value.

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: March 21, 2006 08:56
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 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, 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 &
amp; gt; 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

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad


Actually, Smithson Theologgy versus [apparently] Deegan Theology and/or differently stated than Muir Theology or Taylor Theology or Ottoson Theology.

Can't we all just get along -- seriously?

jd

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Replacement Theology[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 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.

RE: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11









Yours?











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006
12:00 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Physics,
Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11





DAVEH: Not at all, Izzy. It is simply an
observation of illogic.

ShieldsFamily wrote: 

Oh, I guess God forgot
how to do that particular trick, eh? iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:14
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Physics,
Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11







Doesn't that teach us something about God's abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?

DAVEH: Only if the bush is still burning.

David Miller
wrote: 

DaveH, I agree with Judy here. The argument of a literal impossibility is a little weak when we are talking about God. Moses did see a bush that was burning but not consumed. Doesn't that teach us something about God's abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?David Miller- Original Message - From: Judy TaylorTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:45 AMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance? Genesis is not a science book per se.Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that is called scienceAre you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy and Physics?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, whereasmental torment can go on forever.So tell me - What is a physical impossibility for God? The same God who delivered what he hadpromised to Abraham and Sarah when they were 90 and 100yrs old respectively. A God who wasable to roll back the Red Sea until his people crossed and afterward kept them in the desert for 40yrsfeeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from wearing out and their feet fromswelling. The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused an axe head to float on waterThe God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in front of Jezebels' chariot andhad the ravens feed 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 explainHim?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 receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

RE: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM









Amen, Brother Kevin! iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:45
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM







CONTENTION is of the Devil





3 Ne 11 And according as I have commanded you
thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as
there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you
concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.29For
verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of
contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one
with another.











Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line
too after all when the leaders speak the thinking has been done.











The Holy Bible on the other hand says:





1
Thessalonians 5:21 clearly commandsto prove
all things. 





The scriptures tell us to CONTEND for
the faith ONCE delivered





Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when
they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall
they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away
their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.











Paulwas so despised bysome that he was
lashed on5occasions,beaten w/ rods three times, and was
nearly stoned to death 











The real question is just who it is really getting
angry.





Galatians
4:16Am I therefore become your
enemy, because I tell you the truth?






After allANTI's are Stupid  Losers and do
not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!





http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm

Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:





To avoid
WHAT?

DAVEH: Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?


ShieldsFamily wrote: 



To
avoid WHAT? That nice, positive place? iz



















From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM















DAVEH: The Lord has provided a way for us to
avoid it.

ShieldsFamily wrote: 











What is the positive message about hell? iz













Do you ever warn people about the FIRE of hell?




DAVEH: No, I don't do much preaching, and when I doI prefer to
be more positive in my approach.









-- ~~~ 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad









Ive never known a Jew who hated
Palestinians. I do, sadly, know many Christians who hate Jews.
iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 6:28
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: 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
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









Those who claimed to be Christians, but
were not of the same Spirit. izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:53
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







LOL for Lance's comment. 











Also, Linda, when someone spoke of the anti -
Christ in first century times, whommm do you think they
would envision -- the RCC which wasn't in existence or some form of
Judaism, which did exist and was very anti-Christ??? What would be the
message in anti-Christ for those of the first century? 











-- Original message -- 
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



Did you mean to say the RNC?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
15:20





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









And this also is not a shot. But how
could you construe the end times harlot church as anything other than the RCC?
izzy











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







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.







- Original Message - 





From: Judy Taylor






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
08:23





Subject: 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.

[TruthTalk] Fw: Fw: understanding, believing, knowing, doing

- Original Message - 
From: David 
Peck 
To: 'Lance Muir' 
Sent: March 21, 2006 10:01
Subject: RE: Fw: understanding, believing, knowing, 
doing

This seems dangerously 
close to analytic philosophy and you know how I feel about thatI tried to call 
you yesterday, but you had already left. I will see if I can get a hold of you 
today.

-Original 
Message-From: Lance Muir 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 21, 2006 9:44 AMTo: David PeckSubject: Fw: Fw: understanding, believing, 
knowing, doing

- Original Message - 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Sent: March 21, 
2006 09:40

Subject: Re: Fw: 
understanding, believing, knowing, doing

*how/do 
someunderstand what not 
tobelieve*

(therefore, (e.g.~)"to understand : 
to [not] believe : : to know : to [not]do") 
?

On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 
07:05:32 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  - Original 
  Message - 

  From: 
  Debbie 
  Sawczak 

  To: 
  'Lance 
  Muir' 

  Sent: March 20, 2006 
  18:44

  Subject: 
  understanding, believing, knowing, 
  doing

  * 
  [one]can 
  understandsomething without believing it or assenting to 
  it. * 
  ||
  2. Then..the notion 
  thatonly those whodo something can be said to know it in any 
  meaningful sense.. seems to contradict what is said in (1) 
  above.

  That's true 
  ifwe can make the following analogy. 

  to understand : to 
  believe : : to know : to do

  I don't think I can. 
  Ihavelittle problem with making the terms 'believe' and 'do' 
  analogous.

Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM

After allANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not really
undestand, just can't get the facts straight!

DAVEH: Sigh Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue
with you, Kevin.

Kevin Deegan wrote:

Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line too after
all when the leaders speak the th inking has been done.

The Holy Bible on the other hand says:
1 Thessalonians 5:21 clearly
commandsto "prove all things."
The scriptures tell us to CONTEND
for the faith ONCE delivered
"Preach the word; be instant
in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all
longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will
not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to
themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away
their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Paulwas so despised bysome that he was lashed
on5occasions,beaten w/ rods three times, and was nearly stoned to
death

The real qu estion is just who it is really getting
angry.
Galatians 4:16"Am I therefore
become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
After allANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not
really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!
http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm

Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To avoid
WHAT?

DAVEH: Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?

ShieldsFamily wrote:

To avoid
WHAT? That nice, positive place? iz

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Dave
Hansen
Sent: Monday,
March 20, 2006 12:30 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM

DAVEH: The Lord has provided
a way for us to avoid it.

ShieldsFamily wrote:

What is the
positive message about hell? iz

Do you ever warn people about the FIRE of
hell?

DAVEH: No, I don't do much preaching, and when I doI prefer to be
more positive in my approach.

-- ~~~ 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

--
~~~
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] Who is God?





I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.

DAVEH: The keyword is attempts. And when you use the term numerous,
just how many times does mean numerous, Kevin?

You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.

DAVEH: When did I say that I do not get it? Care to quote me
on that Kevin, or are you just making stuff up? I bet you cannot even
recall when it was attempted and who attempted it.

Seems to me that OTOH there is NO ATTEMPT to explain LDS
Trinities!

DAVEH: Like I said Kevin..If you don't want to answer my
question, I understand your reluctance todefend the mormon
faith Trinity!.

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.
  You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.
  Seems to me that OTOH there is NO ATTEMPT to explain
LDS Trinities!
  
  Father Son and Michael
  versus
  Father Son and Holy Ghost
  
  Great Granpa, Granpa and Grandson
  (Father Son and ADAM/Michael)
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  How
do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?

DAVEH: I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it using
the Trinity?

DAVEH: Ohhh.Kevin, I forgot to add.If you don't want
to answer my question, I understand your reluctance todefend the mormon
faith Trinity!

Dave Hansen wrote:
How
do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?
  
  DAVEH: I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain
it using the Trinity?
  
Kevin Deegan wrote:
  
If you do not believe that God is expressesed as a Trinity
How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS
ONE?
  

  


-- 
~~~
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] Hell BoM









LOL!











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006
12:04 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM





To avoid
WHAT?

DAVEH: Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?


ShieldsFamily wrote: 

To avoid WHAT? That nice,
positive place? iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM







DAVEH: The Lord has provided a way for us to
avoid it.

ShieldsFamily wrote: 



What is the positive message about hell? iz











Do you ever warn people about the FIRE of hell?


DAVEH: No, I don't do much preaching, and when I doI prefer to
be more positive in my approach.







-- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









No. I meant DNC. iz











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:28
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







Did you mean to say the RNC?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
15:20





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









And this also is not a shot. But how
could you construe the end times harlot church as anything other than the RCC?
izzy











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







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.







- Original Message - 





From: Judy Taylor






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
08:23





Subject: 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,

RE: [TruthTalk] Interesting Topic - Should we send them North?









Thanks God they are Mexicans and not
Jews!!! (There would be an electric fence erected immediately!) izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:24
AM
To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [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

Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11





DAVEH: I would think anybody who understands that the argument of
using a burning bush as evidence to prove that God is capable of
creating an unquenchable fire
is a bit weak if that unquenchable
fire (burning bush) has been quenched.

ShieldsFamily wrote:

  
  

  
  
  
  
  Yours?
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  DAVEH: Not at all, Izzy. It
is simply an
observation of illogic.
  
ShieldsFamily wrote: 
  Oh,
I guess God forgot
how to do that particular trick, eh? iz
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Doesn't that teach us something about God's 
  abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?
  DAVEH: Only if the bush is
still burning.
  
  David Miller
wrote: 
  DaveH, I agree with Judy here. The argument of a "literal impossibility" is 
  a little weak when we are talking about God. Moses did see a bush that was 
  burning but not consumed. Doesn't that teach us something about God's 
  abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?
  
  David Miller
  
  

  
  Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance? Genesis is not a "science 
  book" per se.
  Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that is 
  called "science"
  Are you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy and 
  Physics?
  
  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 fire
  
  DAVEH: 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 same God 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 
  them in the desert for 40yrs
  feeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from wearing 
  out and their feet from
  swelling. The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused an axe 
  head to float on water
  The God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in front 
  of Jezebels' chariot and
  had the ravens feed 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.

[TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Hughes Jonathan 
To: Lance Muir 
Sent: March 21, 2006 10:45
Subject: Williams on Creationism

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/21/britain.williams.ap/index.html

Jonathan Hughes
Supervisor of Application 
Support
Kingsway Financial
905-629-7888 x. 
2471

This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged information. 
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by 
return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or 
use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is 
unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation in connection 
with the above.Ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents s’y rattachant 
contiennent de l’information confidentielle et privilégiée. Si vous n’êtes pas 
le destinataire visé, s.v.p. en informer immédiatement son expéditeur par retour 
de courriel, effacer le message et détruire toute copie (électronique ou autre). 
Toute diffusion ou utilisation de cette information par une personne autre que 
le destinataire visé est interdite et peut être illégale. Merci de votre 
coopération relativement au message susmentionné.

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 dont 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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen and (X)save some of them. 
15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 
17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 
19(AE)You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you (AF)stand by your faith (AG)Do not be conceited, but fear; 
21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 
22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's (AH)kindness, (AI)if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also (AJ)will be cut
 off. 
23And they also, (AK)if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 
24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 
25For (AL)I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this (AM)mystery--so that you will not be (AN)wise in your own estimation--that a partial (AO)hardening has happened to Israel until the (AP)fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 
26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,"(AQ)THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27"(AR)THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,(AS)WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." 
28From the standpoint of the gospel they are (AT)enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for (AU)the sake of the fathers; 
29for the gifts and the (AV)calling of God (AW)are irrevocable. 
30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, 
31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy. 
32For (AX)God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all. 
33Oh, the depth of (AY)the riches both of the (AZ)wisdom and knowledge of God! (BA)How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! 
34For (BB)WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, OR WHO BECAME HIS COUNSELOR? 
35Or (BC)WHO HAS FIRST GIVEN TO HIM THAT IT MIGHT BE PAID BACK TO HIM AGAIN?

RE: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11









It has not been quenched. It is alive
today in my heart. izzy











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:03
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Physics,
Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11





DAVEH: I would think anybody who understands
that the argument of using a burning bush as evidence to prove that God is
capable of creating an unquenchable
fire is a bit weak if that unquenchable
fire (burning bush) has been quenched.

ShieldsFamily wrote: 

Yours?





















DAVEH: Not at all, Izzy. It is simply an
observation of illogic.

ShieldsFamily wrote: 

Oh, I guess God forgot
how to do that particular trick, eh? iz















Doesn't that teach us something about God's abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?

DAVEH: Only if the bush is still burning.

David
 Miller wrote: 

DaveH, I agree with Judy here. The argument of a literal impossibility is a little weak when we are talking about God. Moses did see a bush that was burning but not consumed. Doesn't that teach us something about God's abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?David MillerWhy try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance? Genesis is not a science book per se.Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that is called scienceAre you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy and Physics?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, whereasmental torment can go on forever.So tell me - What is a physical impossibility for God? The same God who delivered what he hadpromised to Abraham and Sarah when they were 90 and 100yrs old respectively. A God who wasable to roll back the Red Sea until his people crossed and afterward kept them in the desert for 40yrsfeeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from wearing out and their feet fromswelling. The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused an axe head to float on waterThe God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in front of Jezebels' chariot andhad the ravens feed 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 explainHim?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 receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

RE: [TruthTalk] It ain't gospel if it ain't this





What good is theology if it doesn't hit the ground running in the midst of our city, our culture?
(a question asked by another)

jd

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









Missed it. Who did he QA with? 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:39
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







What did YOU think of yesterday's QA with GWB?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 21, 2006
09:51





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









No. I meant DNC. iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:28
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







Did you mean to say the RNC?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
15:20





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









And this also is not a shot. But how
could you construe the end times harlot church as anything other than the RCC?
izzy











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







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.







- Original Message - 





From: Judy Taylor






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
08:23





Subject: 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

Fw: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Debbie Sawczak 
To: 'Lance Muir' 
Sent: March 21, 2006 12:15
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

"And for most of the history of Christianity ... there's 
been an awareness that a belief that everything depends on the creative act of 
God is quite compatible with a degree of uncertainty or latitude about how 
precisely that unfolds in creative time."

Yup.

D

From: Lance Muir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:09 PMTo: Debbie 
SawczakSubject: Fw: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on 
Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Lance Muir 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: March 21, 2006 12:06
Subject: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Hughes Jonathan 
To: Lance Muir 
Sent: March 21, 2006 10:45
Subject: Williams on Creationism

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/21/britain.williams.ap/index.html

Jonathan Hughes
Supervisor of Application 
Support
Kingsway Financial
905-629-7888 x. 
2471

This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged information. 
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by 
return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or 
use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is 
unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation in connection 
with the above.Ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents sy rattachant 
contiennent de linformation confidentielle et privilégiée. Si vous nêtes pas 
le destinataire visé, s.v.p. en informer immédiatement son expéditeur par retour 
de courriel, effacer le message et détruire toute copie (électronique ou autre). 
Toute diffusion ou utilisation de cette information par une personne autre que 
le destinataire visé est interdite et peut être illégale. Merci de votre 
coopération relativement au message susmentionné. 

--No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG 
Free Edition.Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.6/287 - Release Date: 
3/21/2006
--No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG 
Free Edition.Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.6/287 - Release Date: 
3/21/2006

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad


You are not required to make up lies about a person -- the judgment you offer is the judgment you will receive. Have a nice day.

jd

-- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 








Fine with me; Im only required to warn you. iz





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 11:11 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: 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 dont 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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen and (X)save some of them. 
15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 
17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 
19(AE)You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you (AF)stand by your faith (AG)Do not be conceited, but fear; 
21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 
22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's (AH)kindness, (AI)if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also (AJ)will be cut
 off. 
23And they also, (AK)if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 
24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 
25For (AL)I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this (AM)mystery--so that you will not be (AN)wise in your own estimation--that a partial (AO)hardening has happened to Israel until the (AP)fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 
26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,"(AQ)THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 
27"(AR)THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,(AS)WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." 
28From the standpoint of the gospel they are (AT)enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for (AU)the sake of the fathers; 
29for the gifts and the (AV)calling of God (AW)are irrevocable. 
30For just as you once were disobedient to

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

A group of businessmen in Cleveland. I thought he 
handled himself rather well.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 21, 2006 12:16
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  Missed it. Who did he 
  QA with? 

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:39 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
  Genesis literal or figurative?

  What did YOU think of yesterday's 
  QA with GWB?

- Original Message - 

From: ShieldsFamily 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: March 
21, 2006 09:51

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or 
figurative?

No. I meant DNC. 
iz

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:28 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in 
Genesis literal or figurative?

Did you mean to say the 
RNC?

  - Original Message - 

  From: ShieldsFamily 

  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: March 
  20, 2006 15:20

  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or 
  figurative?

  And this also is 
  not a shot. But how could you construe the end times harlot church 
  as anything other than the RCC? izzy

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day 
  in Genesis literal or figurative?

  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.

- Original Message - 

From: Judy 
Taylor 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: 
March 20, 2006 08:23

Subject: 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.

Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism



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?

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. 

jd 



-- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] ï»¿ 




- Original Message - 
From: Hughes Jonathan 
To: Lance Muir 
Sent: March 21, 2006 10:45
Subject: Williams on Creationism

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/21/britain.williams.ap/index.html


Jonathan Hughes
Supervisor of Application Support
Kingsway Financial
905-629-7888 x. 2471




This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation in connection with the above.Ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents sây rattachant contiennent de lâinformation confidentielle et privilÃ©giÃ©e. Si vous nâÃªtes pas le destinataire visÃ©, s.v.p. en informer immÃ©diatement son expÃ©diteur par retour de courriel, effacer le message et dÃ©truire toute copie (Ã©lectronique ou autre). Toute diffusion ou utilisation de cette information par une personne autre que le destinataire visÃ© est interdite et peut Ãªtre illÃ©gale. Merci de votre coopÃ©ration relativement au message susmentionnÃ©.

Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11

The burning bush is not a weak observation concerning the question of 
whether or not God is capable of creating an unquenchable fire.  It would 
not be proof that he has done it, but it does logically support the idea 
that he is capable, even though the bush is not burning right now.

By the way, when I climbed Mount Sinai, they have a rock there with black 
magnesium deposits that make it look like a bush was burned into the rocks. 
The guide there tells everyone that it is the burning bush of Moses.  :-)

David Miller


- Original Message - 
From: Dave Hansen
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11

DAVEH:  I would think anybody who understands that the argument of using a 
burning bush as evidence to prove that God is capable of creating an 
unquenchable fire is a bit weak if that unquenchable fire (burning bush) has 
been quenched.

ShieldsFamily wrote:
Yours?


DAVEH:  Not at all, Izzy.  It is simply an observation of illogic.

ShieldsFamily wrote:
Oh, I guess God forgot how to do that particular trick, eh? iz

Doesn't that teach us something about God's
abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?
DAVEH:   Only if the bush is still burning.

David Miller wrote:
DaveH, I agree with Judy here.  The argument of a literal impossibility is
a little weak when we are talking about God.  Moses did see a bush that was
burning but not consumed.  Doesn't that teach us something about God's
abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?

David Miller




Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance?  Genesis is not a science
book per se.
Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that is
called science
Are you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy and
Physics?

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 fire

DAVEH:   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 same God 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
them in the desert for 40yrs
feeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from wearing
out and their feet from
swelling.  The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused an axe
head to float on water
The God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in front
of Jezebels' chariot and
had the ravens feed 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. 

--
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] Fw: Williams on Creationism

Yup is right, but how does he get from this thought to the idea that 
creationism should not be considered in schools?  I hate it when theologians 
are embarassed of giving glory to the Creator in school.

David Miller

- Original Message - 
From: Debbie Sawczak
To: 'Lance Muir'
Sent: March 21, 2006 12:15
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

And for most of the history of Christianity ... there's been an awareness 
that a belief that everything depends on the creative act of God is quite 
compatible with a degree of uncertainty or latitude about how precisely that 
unfolds in creative time.

Yup.

D

From: Lance Muir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:09 PM
To: Debbie Sawczak
Subject: Fw: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 21, 2006 12:06
Subject: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

- Original Message - 
From: Hughes Jonathan
To: Lance Muir
Sent: March 21, 2006 10:45
Subject: Williams on Creationism

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/21/britain.williams.ap/index.html

Jonathan Hughes
Supervisor of Application Support
Kingsway Financial
905-629-7888 x. 2471

This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any 
dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended 
recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation 
in connection with the above.

Ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents s'y rattachant contiennent de 
l'information 
confidentielle et privilégiée. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, 
s.v.p. en informer immédiatement son expéditeur par retour de courriel, 
effacer le message et détruire toute copie (électronique ou autre). Toute 
diffusion ou utilisation de cette information par une personne autre que le 
destinataire visé est interdite et peut être illégale. Merci de votre 
coopération relativement au message susmentionné.

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.6/287 - Release Date: 3/21/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.6/287 - Release Date: 3/21/2006 

--
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] 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 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 
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
 gt; 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

The four disagreed on The Faith?  How so?

David Miller

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

1.  Faith is used with two considerations in Romans 14  --  the Faith 
and faith.The FOUR brethren disagreed on The Faith, Judy.   Now if you 
do not think that The Faith  includes doctrine,  we must agree to 
disagree.

2.  We have the eating of meats AND the observance of holy days presented in 
this passage.   Each is a DOCTRINAL consideration with Paul telling them 
this:  let each be fully convinced in his own mind.   DOCTRINE.

3.  That you see no diversity here is simply unbelievable.

4.  Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you brethren, MARK THEM which cause 
divisions and offenses CONTRARY TO THE DOCTRINE which ye have learned and 
AVOID THEM The doctrine referred to in this passage  is the teaching 
concerning unity in diversity  !!!   They have received a teaching that 
prevents divisions and moves each away from offending the other.   The 
non-forgiving legalist who insists that it is my way or the highway needs 
to be marked and excluded, herself !!  Within the boundaries of Christian, 
our home church has only one rule of conduct  -   tolerance of another 
brother's views, knowing that he does not serve the church politic but 
Christ, Himself.   People who violate that are asked to leave.

5.  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 
Again, your own theology has blinded you to what is being said.   Acts 15 is 
not about what the Jews practiced  ..  following the resurrection. 
Rather, it is has to do with the Jewish Church faction and the Gentile 
Churchfaction.   To prevent division within the church of Christ,  the two 
groups were given a course of conduct and told [by implication] to stop 
judging each other.   Unity was more important than the notion that they all 
speak and believe the same things.If you cannot see this obvious 
ruth  --  well,  I really so not know what to tell you.

jd 

--
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] Fw: Williams on Creationism




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] Modalism the RESTORATION

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In short, Modalism  !!   

Sort of Like the RESTORATIONISTS of the pre Church of Christ -
CHRIST-ian church?
Sounds more like your HERITAGE!
The guys who thaought, the only name for the TRUE church is to have the
name of CHRIST thus the Christian Church!
 
http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jburnett/eshm/ESHM.HTM
http://www.restorationquarterly.org/Volume_009/rq00903olbricht.htm
http://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/1960s/vol_9_no_3_contents/olbricht.html

Some of these fellas Like David Millard, lived a scant 13 miles from
Joe Smith and thus the MODALISM in the BoM!
Book of Mormon theology is generally modalistic. In the Book of
Mormon, God and Jesus Christ are not distinct beings. (New Approaches
to the Book of Mormon, 1993, pages 82, 96-99, 103-104, 110)
Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to
redeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the
Son.  In me shall all mankind have light... they shall become my sons
and my daughters. (Ether 3:14)
http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/gods_1.htm

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 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

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

BTW of What TRIBE are you?

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Actually, Smithson Theologgy versus [apparently] Deegan Theology
 and/or differently stated than Muir Theology or Taylor Theology or
 Ottoson Theology.
 
 Can't we all just get along  --  seriously?
 
 jd
 
 -- Original message -- 
 From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Replacement Theology
 
 [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
 of faith and practice. Biblically speaking,  Judaism reached full
 term in Jesus Christ.   It is not a sister 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 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 PM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: 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! Mail
 Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. 


__
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] God's Covenant with Abram for the Promised Land

A long period of time has a end point Forever does not!

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Judy,  I have no idea as to the connection between your comments and
 my mine, below?  
 
 Also, do you not believe that forever can also mean a long period
 of time?
 
 One more thing, quickly.   I am not saying that covenant Israel is
 unimportant to the biblical text or to our circumstance, today.  But
 I do not believe that Israel is set apart outside the body of Christ.
   The mystery of the gospel is the revelation that renders such
 thinking as myth.  He who is a real Jew is one who is circumcised
 in the heart.  
 
 Dispensationalism is an American theological invention.  
 
 jd
 
 jd
 
 -- Original message -- 
 From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
 
 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
 of faith and practice. Biblically speaking,  Judaism reached full
 term in Jesus Christ.   It is not a sister 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

Re: [TruthTalk] God's Covenant with Abram for the Promised Land

A long period of time has a end point Forever does not!
Change a few more words it will fit your Replacement Theology better.
Jew does not really mean Jew it means church!

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Judy,  I have no idea as to the connection between your comments and
 my mine, below?  
 
 Also, do you not believe that forever can also mean a long period
 of time?
 
 One more thing, quickly.   I am not saying that covenant Israel is
 unimportant to the biblical text or to our circumstance, today.  But
 I do not believe that Israel is set apart outside the body of Christ.
   The mystery of the gospel is the revelation that renders such
 thinking as myth.  He who is a real Jew is one who is circumcised
 in the heart.  
 
 Dispensationalism is an American theological invention.  
 
 jd
 
 jd
 
 -- Original message -- 
 From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
 
 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
 of faith and practice. Biblically speaking,  Judaism reached full
 term in Jesus Christ.   It is not a sister 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,

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

The Bible tells us that a insignificant piece of dirt inhabited by Jews
come from all over the world would be a problem to the whole world in
the last days.

It does not tell us of a land filled with Christians would be the
problem

--- ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never known a Jew who hated Palestinians.  I do, sadly, know
 many
 Christians who hate Jews. iz
 
  
 
   _  
 
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
 Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 6:28 AM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: 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
 of
 faith and practice.  
 
  
 
 I wouldn't be so quick to judge them JD; if we had the same kind of
 history
 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; I found it quite apalling.   
 
  
 
 Biblically speaking,  Judaism reached full term in Jesus Christ.   It
 is not
 a sister 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 doesn't 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 PM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: 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! Mail
 Bring photos to life! New

http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39174/*http:/photomail.mail.
 yahoo.com  PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. 
 
  
 
 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

So too those that claim to be Jews and are not; Revelation says they
are in REALITY of the Synagogue of Satan!

--- ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Those who claimed to be Christians, but were not of the same Spirit.
 izzy
 
  
 
   _  
 
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:53 AM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
 
  
 
 LOL for Lance's comment. 
 
  
 
 Also,   Linda,  when someone spoke of the anti - Christ in first
 century
 times,  whommm  do you think they would envision  -- the RCC
 which
 wasn't in existence or some form of Judaism, which did exist and was
 very
 anti-Christ???  What would be the message in anti-Christ for those
 of the
 first century?  
 
  
 
 -- Original message -- 
 From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
 Did you mean to say the RNC?
 
 - Original Message - 
 
 From: ShieldsFamily mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
 
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
 
 Sent: March 20, 2006 15:20
 
 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
 
  
 
 And this also is not a shot.  But how could you construe the end
 times
 harlot church as anything other than the RCC? izzy
 
  
 
 
   _  
 
 
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
 Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 AM
 To:  mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
 
  
 
 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.
 
 - Original Message - 
 
 From: Judy Taylor mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
 
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
 
 Sent: March 20, 2006 08:23
 
 Subject: 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 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
 biblical sense , of course.  
 
  
 
 jd

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

Somebody has missed the History of the world for the last almost 60
years. It has been one big problem after another all revolving around
just what should the UN (or world) do with those Jews anyhow. 

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 dont 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? 
  3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
  14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen and
 (X)save some of them. 
  15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world, what
 will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
  16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if
 the root is holy, the branches are too. 
  17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you,
 being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
 with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
  18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant,
 remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but the root
 supports you. 
  19(AE)You will say then, Branches were broken off so that I might
 be grafted in. 
  20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you
 (AF)stand by your faith (AG)Do not be conceited, but fear; 
  21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare
 you, either. 
  22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell,
 severity, but to you, God's (AH)kindness, (AI)if you continue in His
 kindness; otherwise you also (AJ)will be cut off. 
  23And they also, (AK)if they do not continue in their unbelief, will
 be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 
  24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree,
 and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how
 much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into
 their own olive tree? 
  25For (AL)I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this
 (AM)mystery--so that you will not be (AN)wise in your own
 estimation--that a partial (AO)hardening has happened to Israel until
 the (AP)fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 
  26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
  (AQ)THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
  HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB. 
 27(AR)THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
  (AS)WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS. 
  28From the standpoint of the gospel they are (AT)enemies for your
 sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for
 (AU)the sake of the fathers; 
  29for the gifts and the (AV)calling of God (AW)are irrevocable. 
  30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been
 shown mercy because of their disobedience, 
  31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the

Re: [TruthTalk] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11

And I would think that it would be easy for you to answer why you take
part of the same sentence/verse figurative and another literal.
I asked; you avoided, because there is no logical reason to do so, just
an Emotive one!

--- Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 DAVEH:  I would think anybody who understands that the argument of
 using 
 a burning bush as evidence to prove that God is capable of creating
 an 
 *unquenchable fire* is a bit weak if that *unquenchable fire*
 (burning 
 bush) has been quenched.
 
 ShieldsFamily wrote:
 
  Yours?
 
   
 
 


 
  **
 
   
 
  DAVEH:  Not at all, Izzy.  It is simply an observation of illogic.
 
  ShieldsFamily wrote:
 
  Oh, I guess God forgot how to do that particular trick, eh? iz
 
   
 
 


 
   
 
 *Doesn't that teach us something about God's *
 
 *abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?*
 
  DAVEH:   Only if the bush is still burning.
 
  David Miller wrote:
 
 DaveH, I agree with Judy here.  The argument of a literal
 impossibility is 
 
 a little weak when we are talking about God.  Moses did see a bush
 that was 
 
 burning but not consumed.  *Doesn't that teach us something about
 God's *
 
 *abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?*
 
  
 
 David Miller
 
  
 
 
  
 
 Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance?  Genesis is not a
 science 
 
 book per se.
 
 Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that
 is 
 
 called science
 
 Are you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy
 and 
 
 Physics?
 
  
 
 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 fire
 
  
 
 DAVEH:   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 same God
 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 
 
 them in the desert for 40yrs
 
 feeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from
 wearing 
 
 out and their feet from
 
 swelling.  The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused
 an axe 
 
 head to float on water
 
 The God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in
 front 
 
 of Jezebels' chariot and
 
 had the ravens feed 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] mailto:[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.
 
 


__
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] Who is God?

I have numerous times would you like the posts reposted to refresh your
memory?

What is up with all the various LDS TRINITIES?
I am real interested in the CREATORS of this planet
Why is Adam a creator of Earth?
Why are you to follow adam to become a God?
ELohim 
Jehovah
Michael/Adam 

Why is Adam a Grandson?
Great Granpa, Granpa and Grandson*
  (Father Son and ADAM/Michael)

--- Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 *I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.*
 
 DAVEH:   The keyword is *attempts*.  And when you use the term 
 *numerous*, just how many times does mean* numerous*, Kevin?
 
 *You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.*
 
 DAVEH:   When did I say that I *do not get it*?  Care to quote me on 
 that Kevin, or are you just making stuff up?  I bet you cannot even 
 recall when it was *attempted* and who *attempted *it.
 
 *Seems to me that OTOH there is _NO ATTEMPT_ to explain LDS
 Trinities!*
 
 DAVEH:  Like I said Kevin..*If you don't want to answer my
 question, 
 /I understand your reluctance to defend the mormon faith /Trinity!*.
 
 Kevin Deegan wrote:
 
  *I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.*
  *You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.*
  *Seems to me that OTOH there is _NO ATTEMPT_ to explain LDS
 Trinities!*
   
  *Father Son and Michael*
  versus
  *Father Son and Holy Ghost*
  ** 
  *Great Granpa, Granpa and Grandson*
  (Father Son and ADAM/Michael)
 
  */Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote:
 
  *How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*
  _
  DAVEH:   I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it
  using the Trinity?_
 
  DAVEH:   Ohhh.Kevin, I forgot to add.*If you don't
  want to answer my question, /I understand your reluctance
  to defend the mormon faith /Trinity!*
 
  Dave Hansen wrote:
 
  *How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*
 
  _DAVEH:   I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain
 it
  using the Trinity?_
 
  Kevin Deegan wrote:
 
  If you do not believe that God is expressesed as a Trinity
  *How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*
 
 
 -- 
 ~~~
 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.
 
 


__
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] Hell BoM

Why all the name calling from LDS is this CONTENTION?
http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm

--- Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 _*After all ANTI's are Stupid  Losers and do not really undestand,
 just 
 can't get the facts straight!*_
 
 DAVEH:  Sigh  Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue with
 you, 
 Kevin.
 
 Kevin Deegan wrote:
 
  *CONTENTION is of the Devil*
  3 Ne 11  And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye
 baptize. 
  And there shall be no disputations 
  http://scriptures.lds.org/3_ne/11/28a#28a among you, as there
 have 
  hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you 
  concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. 
   For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the *spirit of 
  **contention* http://scriptures.lds.org/3_ne/11/29a#29a* is not
 of 
  me, but is of the **devil* 
  http://scriptures.lds.org/3_ne/11/29b#29b, who is the father of 
  contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with 
  anger, one with another.
   
  Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line too after all
 when 
  the leaders speak the th inking has been done.
   
  The Holy Bible on the other hand says:
  *1 Thessalonians 5:21 clearly commands to /prove all things./*
  The scriptures tell us to *CONTEND for the faith ONCE delivered*
  /*Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, 
  rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time
 will 
  come when they _will_ not endure sound doctrine; but after their
 own 
  lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
 And 
  they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned
 
  unto fables.*/
   
  Paul was so despised by some that he was lashed on 5 occasions,
 beaten 
  w/ rods three times, and was nearly stoned to death
   
  *The real qu estion is just who it is really getting angry.*
  *Galatians 4:16 /Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell
 you 
  the truth?/*
  _*After all ANTI's are Stupid  Losers and do not really undestand,
 
  just can't get the facts straight!*_
  http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm
 
  */Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote:
 
  *To avoid WHAT?*
 
  DAVEH:   Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?
 
 
  ShieldsFamily wrote:
 
  *To avoid WHAT?* That nice, positive place? iz
   
 


  *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Dave
 Hansen
  *Sent:* Monday, March 20, 2006 12:30 AM
  *To:* TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
  *Subject:* Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM
   
  DAVEH:  The Lord has provided a way for us to avoid it.
 
  ShieldsFamily wrote:
   
  What is the positive message about hell? iz
 


 
 *Do you ever warn people about the FIRE of *
 
 *hell?*
 
 
  DAVEH:   No, I don't do much preaching, and when I doI
 prefer
  to be more positive in my approach.
 
  
 
 
 --   ~~~  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! Mail
  Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail 
 

http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39174/*http://photomail.mail.yahoo.com
 
  makes sharing a breeze. 
 
 
 -- 
 ~~~
 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.
 
 


__
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] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

Thats funny coming from you.
Do you want to quote some more of my thoughts/beliefs again?
You had a running debate with yourself posting my thoughts on the
subject of carnal babes.
LOL
It is only arrogant/narrow when others do it to you?
LOL

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 dont 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? 
  3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
  14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen and
 (X)save some of them. 
  15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world, what
 will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
  16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if
 the root is holy, the branches are too. 
  17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you,
 being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
 with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
  18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant,
 remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but the root
 supports you. 
  19(AE)You will say then, Branches were broken off so that I might
 be grafted in. 
  20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you
 (AF)stand by your faith (AG)Do not be conceited, but fear; 
  21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare
 you, either. 
  22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell,
 severity, but to you, God's (AH)kindness, (AI)if you continue in His
 kindness; otherwise you also (AJ)will be cut off. 
  23And they also, (AK)if they do not continue in their unbelief, will
 be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 
  24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree,
 and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how
 much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into
 their own olive tree? 
  25For (AL)I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this
 (AM)mystery--so that you will not be (AN)wise in your own
 estimation--that a partial (AO)hardening has happened to Israel until
 the (AP)fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 
  26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
  (AQ)THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
  HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB. 
 27(AR)THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
  (AS)WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS. 
  28From the standpoint of the gospel they are (AT)enemies for your
 sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for
 (AU)the sake of the fathers; 
  29for the gifts and the (AV)calling of God (AW)are irrevocable. 
  30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been
 shown mercy because of their disobedience, 
  31so these also now

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? 
 
  3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
 
  14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen
 and (X)save some of them. 
 
  15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world,
 what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
 
  16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and
 if the root is holy, the branches are too. 
 
  17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you,
 being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
 with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
 
  18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are
 arrogant, remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but
 the root supports you. 
 
  19(AE)You will say then, Branches were broken off so that I
 might be grafted in. 
 
  20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you
 (AF)stand by your faith (AG)Do not be conceited, but fear; 
 
  21for if

Re: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

A classic the likes of which have not been seen around TT since the old
CPP funding of WMD!

--- Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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? 
  
   3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 
  
   14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow
 countrymen
  and (X)save some of them. 
  
   15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the
 world,
  what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 
  
   16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also;
 and
  if the root is holy, the branches are too. 
  
   17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and
 (AC)you,
  being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
  with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 
  
   18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are
  arrogant, remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the

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 
 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
  gt; 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

Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

DM says In case you did not notice, the fundamentalists are not causing
the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools.  It is
the liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doing
this.

Some around here are concerned that there are FUNDIES lurking around
every keyboard on TT.
Perhaps these previous comments are a incantation meant to flush them
out into the open.
One can never be to prepared to protect oneself from fundaMENTALism!

--- David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 you were 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 not causing the
 acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools.  It is the
 liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doing
 this.
 
 David Miller
 


__
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] Modalism the RESTORATION

This is interesting, Kevin.  The LDS believes in henotheism (a type of 
polytheism) and modalism at the same time?  How can this be?  DaveH, please 
let us know your thoughts about this.

David Miller

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Modalism  the RESTORATION

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In short, Modalism  !!

Sort of Like the RESTORATIONISTS of the pre Church of Christ -
CHRIST-ian church?
Sounds more like your HERITAGE!
The guys who thaought, the only name for the TRUE church is to have the
name of CHRIST thus the Christian Church!

http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jburnett/eshm/ESHM.HTM
http://www.restorationquarterly.org/Volume_009/rq00903olbricht.htm
http://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/1960s/vol_9_no_3_contents/olbricht.html

Some of these fellas Like David Millard, lived a scant 13 miles from
Joe Smith and thus the MODALISM in the BoM!
Book of Mormon theology is generally modalistic. In the Book of
Mormon, God and Jesus Christ are not distinct beings. (New Approaches
to the Book of Mormon, 1993, pages 82, 96-99, 103-104, 110)
Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to
redeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the
Son.  In me shall all mankind have light... they shall become my sons
and my daughters. (Ether 3:14)
http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/gods_1.htm

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 biblical sense , of course.

 jd

 From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  John wrote:
   To your first question , no.

  If I

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: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
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 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?

  3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,

  14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen
 and (X)save some of them.

  15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world,
 what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead?

  16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and
 if the root is holy, the branches are too.

  17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you,
 being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
 with them of the rich root of the olive tree,

  18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are
 arrogant, remember that (AD)it is not you who supports the root, but
 the root supports you.

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
 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
  gt; 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

[TruthTalk] The week winds down...




As the week winds down, I will not be enforcing any rules on 
TruthTalk. If any of you have felt muzzled by the no ad hominem rule, now 
is your time to vent. However, I would ask that you consider that you will 
be leaving your last impression upon us, so it might be prudent for you to be 
nice.

The reason I am doing this is that some might feel like saying something 
but are concerned about being reprimanded. Won't happen after this 
post. I planto take the list down after this week. So take the 
next few days to wrap up your discussions on subjects. I will give you one 
more notice about two days before I take down the list (probably around Thursday 
or Friday)so that you can say your final good byes. 

David Miller

Re: [TruthTalk] Modalism the RESTORATION

What is also interesting is they have roots in the Restoration movement. via David Millard (contemporary of Joe who lived Published 13 miles away.) Elias Smith see links below.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is interesting, Kevin. The LDS believes in henotheism (a type of polytheism) and modalism at the same time? How can this be? DaveH, please let us know your thoughts about this.David Miller- Original Message - From: "Kevin Deegan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:18 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Modalism the RESTORATION[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In short, Modalism !!Sort of Like the RESTORATIONISTS of the pre "Church of Christ"
-"CHRIST-ian church"?Sounds more like your HERITAGE!The guys who thaought, the only name for the TRUE church is to have thename of CHRIST thus the Christian Church!http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jburnett/eshm/ESHM.HTMhttp://www.restorationquarterly.org/Volume_009/rq00903olbricht.htmhttp://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/1960s/vol_9_no_3_contents/olbricht.htmlSome of these fellas Like David Millard, lived a scant 13 miles fromJoe Smith and thus the MODALISM in the BoM!"Book of Mormon theology is generally modalistic. In the Book ofMormon, God and Jesus Christ are not distinct beings." (New Approachesto the Book of Mormon, 1993, pages 82, 96-99, 103-104, 110)"Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world toredeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and theSon. In me shall all mankind have light... they shall become my sonsand my daughters." (Ether
3:14)http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/gods_1.htm--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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 biblical sense , of course. jd From: "David Miller"

Re: [TruthTalk] Who is Adam?

Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.LDS Scriptures teach that Adam is the one on the Throne of Revelation Dan 7 as "ancient of days" http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/27DC 27:11 And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of dayshttp://scriptures.lds.org/dc/116DC 118:1 SPRING Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to
visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/138DC 138:38 Among the great and mighty ones who were assembled in this vast congregation of the righteous were Father Adam, the Ancient of Days and father of all,http://scriptures.lds.org/bdr/rsrrctnBible Dictionary ( p 761 BD)Heading Ressurection: "Jesus Christ was the first to be resurrected on this earth ,... whereas a resurrection means to become immortal, without blood, yet with a body of flesh and bone."http://scriptures.lds.org/bdf/fllfdmBD p 570 Heading Fal: "Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies but no blood." Since ressurected Bodies have no blood could you tell me what planet
Adam was ressurected on? Was he a god, yet? Was he resurrected before jesus?TPJS p 157 Adam is said to "preside over the spirits of all men" And is the Oldest man therefore ancient of days At the bottom of the page the references given for the Ancient of days includes Rv 5:11 11:19 20:12 In Revelation it is "our God which sitteth upon the throne" Rv 1:4 3:21 7:10,15 14:5 22:1 Again we find the evidence for the Fruit of mormonism in the Standard works which have already been verified by membership vote. This led Brigham and a few others to preach the Doctrine (not theory) of Adam as god. "When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and
spoken--HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do" Young JoD 1:46Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:http://home.earthlink.net/~ldsendowment/lecture.html (Brigham Young - first official script of the endowment- BYU Special Collections,Provo, Utah) Adam was an immortal being when he came on this earth. He had lived on an earth similar to ours; he had received the priesthood and the keys thereof, and had been faithful in all things, and gained his resurrection and his exaltation, and was crowned with glory, immortality, and eternal lives, and was
numbered with the Gods (for such he became through his faithfulness), and had begotten all the spirits that were to come to this earth. And Eve our common mother, who is the mother of all living, bore those spirits in the celestial world. And when this earth was organized by Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-ag-contv8p218.html Before Adam fell he was a resurrected man. "Biblical Cosmogony" article, Contributor, vol. 8, p. 218 (1886) Kevin Deegan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Brigham Young taught, "Elohim, Yahova Michael, were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth Michael became Adam" Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871"The Father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with their Grandfather, and their children were more or less acquainted with their Great-Grandfather . . ." (Journal of Discourses 9:148, 12 Jan. 1862).If men areto become gods Men should Follow Adam women are to follow Eve BUT One must never believe that Adam ever actually accomplished his godhood? Even if he was partner with Elohim and Jehovah? Where was the Holy Ghost, what
was he doing during this time? Why the substitution of Michael/Adam?Who is this Father - Son - GrandSON TRINITY?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I too should like to hear David's response to this.- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 19, 2006 20:15 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] torrance and logic David , in other posts of the day, I find you saying that yoou and Torrance are in agreement concerninglogic. I may ahve misunderstood your wording, but that was what you said according to my perspective. Below you say this: If you define "rationalist" in the more esoteric sense of the idea that reason is the source of truth, then I do not believe the Holy Spirit is a

Re: [TruthTalk] Another Strong Christian Babe

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/21/charges.dropped/  Prosecutors drop sex case against teacher  She offers 'deepest apologies' to boy, 14, and his family"I am a strong Christian woman," she said. "I believe that God has a path for me, and this was just a bump in the road."
		Brings words and photos together (easily) with 
PhotoMail  - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism


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] Modalism the RESTORATION

The LDS believes in henotheism modalism?Not at the same time. FIRST This is an IMPORTANT thing to rightly understand even Joe said so Let us here observe, that three things are necessary, in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation...Secondly, a correct idea of his character, perfections and attributes. (1835 DC, "Lecture Third of Faith")It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another... (April 1844, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, by Joseph Fielding Smith, p. 345)
The LDS godEVOLVED over time. This is easly to show from the extant manuscripts.The Evolution of the LDS GodTIMELINE: 1830 ONE GOD - Modalism "Book of Mormon theology is generally modalistic. In the Book of Mormon, God and Jesus Christ are not distinct beings." (New Approaches to the Book of Mormon, 1993, pages 82, 96-99, 103-104, 110) The Book of Mormon tells of a visitation of the Father and the Son to the "brother of Jared," but the account is not speaking of two separate personages. Only one personage appears, and this personage says: "Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the
world to redeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have light... they shall become my sons and my daughters." (Ether 3:14) "And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son... And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation (Book of Mormon, Mosiah 15:1, 2, 5) honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen. ("The Testimony of Three Witnesses," the last line) ...Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God... (Alma 11:44) 3 Nephi 11:27, 36; Alma 11:28-29 and Mormon 7:7The Book of Mormon (1830) declared that Mary 'is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh,' which was changed in 1837 to 'mother of the Son of God.'
1835 TWO GODS binitarianism - Gradual separation into TWO personages one a personage of SPIRIT one of taberancle (body)http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-gd-dc-lfp55.html p 55 1835 Lectures on Faith ONLY TWO personages in the godhead http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-gd-dc-lfp56.html 1835 Lectures on Faith p 56 Son is a personage of tabernacle (BODY) http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-gd-dc-lfp53.html 1835 LonF p 53 Father a personage of SPIRIT Son tabernacle (Body) http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-gd-dc-lfp57.html p 57 Holy Spirit is the SHARED MIND of Father/Son, NOT a Personage!1839 A time to come in the which nothing shall be withheld, whether there be one God or
many gods, they shall be manifest. (March 20, 1839, DC 121:28) 1844 MANY GODS - Plurality of Gods "I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods. It has been preached by the Elders for fifteen years. I have always declared God to be a distinct personage--Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and or Spirit, and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods'. Teachings prophet J Smith 1844"First, God himself, who sits enthroned in yonder heavens, is a man like unto one of yourselves, that is the great secret I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined that God was God from all eternity God himself; the Father of us all dwelt on an earth
the same as Jesus Christ himself did... You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves... No man can learn you more than what I have told you." (1844 Times and Seasons, vol. 5, pp. 613-14) Also see: Joseph Smith's 1832 account of his first vision spoke only of one personage and did not make the explicit separation of God and Christ found in the 1838 version.The lack of LDS scriptures teaching any other view especially the current LDS view of the Godhead, during the time period 1830 - 1835 also testifies to the above.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is interesting, Kevin. The LDS believes in henotheism (a type of polytheism) and modalism at the same time? How can this be?
DaveH, please let us know your thoughts about this.David Miller- Original Message - From: "Kevin Deegan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:18 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Modalism the RESTORATION[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In short, Modalism !!Sort of Like the

Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

JD says Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do.  He too is afraid of fundamentalists?  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: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 rejectany mention of
 God in the evolutionary process,IMO. But creationism in the schools? Couldthat not be considered the beginnings of a fanaticalfundamentalist take-over of the culture?   ROTFLOL. I sure hope youwere being facetious on purpose.John wrote:   But to allow a mere statement that suggests Godis somehow in control as the Creator(?) If thiscould be presented into the secular system ofeducation without it being coopted by the fundies-- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shamethat radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forcesthe Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunityto 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! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.

Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

Well --- I really do not know his reasoning.. hence the wording "perhaps " I have a friend, a math teacher in high school. He had to teach biology for a semester. He decided he was put his career on the line and make a statement ,in class, that was pro-creation. Before he made his presentation, he happened to ask the class of over 40 how many believed in evolution? No one raised their hands !! He didn't make his presentation.

The godless evolutionists -- and there are many who are not godless, of course -- really do not have success in teaching people away from their faith until they get to college. If a battle needs to be waged, it is in the university system.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JD says Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do.
He too is afraid of fundamentalists?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

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.

-- 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! MailBring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM

DAVEH: Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue with you, Kevin.Don't want to "argue"? TRUTH is always able to withstand Public scrutiny! Maybe, you can call me names (like the other LDS quoted below much more available on request)orget a LDS BISHOP High Priest to find a very small SP to attack from the back. Because LDS "truth" is not able to withstand public scrutiny! "anti-Mormon" is a "thought-terminating cliché," in other words, Orwellian "NEWSPEAK". The purpose of which is to CUE LDS to get their minds off track to reduce any possibility that they may come into contact with NON faith promoting FACTS. The LABELING of so-called "opponents" with a word, whose only
purpose is to create a mental aversion, is the deliberate mechanism of the leadership to cue the membership to subconsciously censor their own thoughts! This tactic is employed by Authoritarian organizations which seek to CONTROL reduce the flow of information to their followers. The TRUTH is always ABLE to WITHSTAND public scutiny!Contention is of the Devil? Innoculates the LDS to censor discussion. Who ios getting ANGRY here? Look at the following Mormon APOLOGETIC: And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm RE: You Loser What
exactly is your problem against the mormon church? You take the information you have in the wrong context. Get a life. RE: your stupid I have been investigating the mormon church for some time now. I know that all the false doctren is a lie. I have felt the spirit,I have a sure faith in the prophet Joseph Smith. Contention is of the devil. Therefore we cannot teach Christ's doctrine by contending one with another, nor can we be called by the name of Christ if we act as such. Christ himself taught that if a man smite thee on one cheek turn to him the other also. It saddens my heart to think of all time and effort spent trying to tear each others beliefs apart. If I think I know something to be true I will speak of my knowledge of the truth. I would not try to convert anyone to my beliefs by trying to destroy their beliefs. You do not punch someone in the eye out of love. MAY GOD BLESS THE
PEACEABLE FOLLOWERS OF CHRIST. But "James," the only things I want to eliminate are you from the newsgroup and the test tube you came in on. Get a life and leave the Church of Jesus Christ alone. It makes me sad to think of all the people you may have led away from the truth of the Gospel. P.S. Next time you talk to Satan tell him to go to .. and stay there. you need to get your facts straight. but it's a nice try!! who ya working for ? mankind? ya right! Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why all the name calling from LDS is this CONTENTION?http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm--- Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: _*After all ANTI's are Stupid
Losers and do not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!*_ DAVEH: Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue with you, Kevin. Kevin Deegan wrote: *CONTENTION is of the Devil* 3 Ne 11 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the *spirit of **contention* * is not of me, but is of the **devil* , who is the father of contention, and
he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line too after all when the leaders speak the th inking has been done.The Holy Bible on the other hand says: *1 Thessalonians 5:21 clearly commands to /"prove all things."/* The scriptures tell us to *CONTEND for the faith ONCE delivered* /*"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they _will_ not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.*/Paul was so
despised by some that he was lashed on 5 occasions, beaten w/ rods three times, and was nearly stoned to death*The real qu estion is just who it is really getting angry.* *Galatians 4:16 /"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"/* _*After all ANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!*_ http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm */Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote: *To avoid WHAT?* DAVEH: Contention perhaps, such as is commonly found here?ShieldsFamily wrote: *To avoid WHAT?* That nice, positive place? iz

Re: [TruthTalk] Hell BoM

"If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if its preachers and professors are AFRAID to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak." Apostle George A. Smith, Journal of Discourses, Volume 14, Page 216Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:DAVEH: Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue with you, Kevin.Don't want to "argue"? TRUTH is always able to withstand Public scrutiny! Maybe, you can call me names (like the other LDS quoted below much more available on request)orget a LDS BISHOP High Priest to find a very small SP to attack from the back. Because LDS "truth" is not
able to withstand public scrutiny! "anti-Mormon" is a "thought-terminating cliché," in other words, Orwellian "NEWSPEAK". The purpose of which is to CUE LDS to get their minds off track to reduce any possibility that they may come into contact with NON faith promoting FACTS. The LABELING of so-called "opponents" with a word, whose only purpose is to create a mental aversion, is the deliberate mechanism of the leadership to cue the membership to subconsciously censor their own thoughts! This tactic is employed by Authoritarian organizations which seek to CONTROL reduce the flow of information to their followers. The TRUTH is always ABLE to WITHSTAND public scutiny!Contention is of the Devil? Innoculates the LDS to censor
discussion. Who ios getting ANGRY here? Look at the following Mormon APOLOGETIC: And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm RE: You Loser What exactly is your problem against the mormon church? You take the information you have in the wrong context. Get a life. RE: your stupid I have been investigating the mormon church for some time now. I know that all the false doctren is a lie. I have felt the spirit,I have a sure faith in the prophet Joseph Smith. Contention is of the devil. Therefore we cannot teach Christ's doctrine by contending one with another, nor can we be called by the name of Christ if we
act as such. Christ himself taught that if a man smite thee on one cheek turn to him the other also. It saddens my heart to think of all time and effort spent trying to tear each others beliefs apart. If I think I know something to be true I will speak of my knowledge of the truth. I would not try to convert anyone to my beliefs by trying to destroy their beliefs. You do not punch someone in the eye out of love. MAY GOD BLESS THE PEACEABLE FOLLOWERS OF CHRIST. But "James," the only things I want to eliminate are you from the newsgroup and the test tube you came in on. Get a life and leave the Church of Jesus Christ alone. It makes me sad to think of all the people you may have led away from the truth of the Gospel. P.S. Next time you talk to Satan tell him to go to .. and stay there. you need to get your facts straight. but it's a nice
try!! who ya working for ? mankind? ya right! Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why all the name calling from LDS is this CONTENTION?http://www.mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/negative.htm--- Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: _*After all ANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!*_ DAVEH: Sometimes I just don't feel compelled to argue with you, Kevin. Kevin Deegan wrote: *CONTENTION is of the Devil* 3 Ne 11 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither
shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the *spirit of **contention* * is not of me, but is of the **devil* , who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.Perhaps this helps with keeping the members in line too after all when the leaders speak the th inking has been done.The Holy Bible on the other hand says: *1 Thessalonians 5:21 clearly commands to /"prove all things."/* The scriptures tell us to *CONTEND for the faith ONCE delivered* /*"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they _will_ not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.*/Paul was so despised by some that he was lashed on 5 occasions, beaten w/ rods three times, and was nearly stoned to death*The real qu estion is just who it is really getting angry.* *Galatians 4:16 /"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"/* _*After all ANTI's are Stupid Losers and do not really undestand, just can't get the facts straight!*_

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









Thats to be expected IMO. iz











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006
11:37 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







A group of businessmen in Cleveland. I thought he handled himself
rather well.







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 21, 2006
12:16





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









Missed it. Who did he QA with? 











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:39
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







What did YOU think of yesterday's QA with GWB?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 21, 2006
09:51





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









No. I meant DNC. iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:28
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







Did you mean to say the RNC?







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
15:20





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is
the day in Genesis literal or figurative?









And this also is not a shot. But how
could you construe the end times harlot church as anything other than the RCC?
izzy











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the
day in Genesis literal or figurative?







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.







- Original Message - 





From: Judy Taylor






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: March 20, 2006
08:23





Subject: 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

RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim 2006-Not All Authority is Bad

True Christians are a the problem.  Faux Christians are. And Jews are
always a problem for them. iz

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 3:31 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] A Special Message from Rabbi Daniel Lapin: Purim
2006-Not All Authority is Bad

The Bible tells us that a insignificant piece of dirt inhabited by Jews
come from all over the world would be a problem to the whole world in
the last days.

It does not tell us of a land filled with Christians would be the
problem

--- ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never known a Jew who hated Palestinians.  I do, sadly, know
 many
 Christians who hate Jews. iz

   _  

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
 Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 6:28 AM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: 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
 of
 faith and practice.  

 I wouldn't be so quick to judge them JD; if we had the same kind of
 history
 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; I found it quite apalling.   

 Biblically speaking,  Judaism reached full term in Jesus Christ.   It
 is not
 a sister 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 doesn't 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 PM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: 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

RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

Amen.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 3:32 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

So too those that claim to be Jews and are not; Revelation says they
are in REALITY of the Synagogue of Satan!

--- ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Those who claimed to be Christians, but were not of the same Spirit.
 izzy

   _  

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:53 AM
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

 LOL for Lance's comment. 

 Also,   Linda,  when someone spoke of the anti - Christ in first
 century
 times,  whommm  do you think they would envision  -- the RCC
 which
 wasn't in existence or some form of Judaism, which did exist and was
 very
 anti-Christ???  What would be the message in anti-Christ for those
 of the
 first century?  

 -- Original message -- 
 From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 Did you mean to say the RNC?

 - Original Message - 

 From: ShieldsFamily mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

 Sent: March 20, 2006 15:20

 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

 And this also is not a shot.  But how could you construe the end
 times
 harlot church as anything other than the RCC? izzy

   _  

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
 Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:30 AM
 To:  mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?

 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.

 - Original Message - 

 From: Judy Taylor mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

 Sent: March 20, 2006 08:23

 Subject: 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 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

RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

If fundamental Christianity is a problem for you, of what spirit are you? iz

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:15 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

DM says In case you did not notice, the fundamentalists are not causing
the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools.  It is
the liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doing
this.

Some around here are concerned that there are FUNDIES lurking around
every keyboard on TT.
Perhaps these previous comments are a incantation meant to flush them
out into the open.
One can never be to prepared to protect oneself from fundaMENTALism!

--- David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 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 you were 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 not causing the
 acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools.  It is the
 liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doing
 this.

 David Miller

__
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] 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 Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how
 he pleads with God against Israel? 

  3Lord, (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 apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 

  14if somehow I might (V)move to jealousy (W)my fellow countrymen
 and (X)save some of them. 

  15For if their rejection is the (Y)reconciliation of the world,
 what will their acceptance be but (Z)life from the dead? 

  16If the (AA)first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and
 if the root is holy, the branches are too. 

  17But if some of the (AB)branches were broken off, and (AC)you,
 being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker
 with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 

  18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but

Re: [TruthTalk] Modalism the RESTORATION

http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jburnett/eshm/ESHM.HTM Elder Smith had, previous to this time, deliberately concluded to disown all names but the name Christian, and had taught that the name Christian was the only one for Christ's followers to wear. In the year 1802 he began his work in Portsmouth, N. H., where in 1803 he organized a "Church of Christ," owning Him as their only Master, Lord and Lawgiver, and agreeing to consider themselves Christian without the addition of any unscriptural name. Wonder where the LDS belief came from? THE SEVENTEEN POINTS OF THE TRUE CHURCH The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23) http://www.restorationquarterly.org/Volume_009/rq00903olbricht.htm Millard lived most of his adult life in the area south of Rochester, New York, but he traveled extensively. He secured a place for himself in the Trinitarian controversy while he was yet young by publishing a short; work on the subject in 1818Before they were Campbellites they were Christ-ians By 1840, however, the rift between Campbell and the New England Christians was certain. By that time they accused Stone of having gone over to the Campbellites(Joe would have been about 16, as LDS say "how could such a young boy make up the BoM?) http://olivercowdery.com/texts/1851Trn1.htm#turn1850 The elder Smith had
been a Universalist, and subsequently a MethodistBut Joseph had a little ambition, and some very laudable aspirations; the mother's intellect occasionally shone out in him feebly, especially when he used to help us to solve some portentous questions of moral or political ethics, in our juvenile debating club, which we moved down to the old red school-house on Durfee street, to get rid of the annoyance of critics that used to drop in upon us in the village; amid, subsequently, after catching a spark of Methodism in the camp-meeting, away down in the woods, on the Vienna road, he was a very passable exhorter in evening meetings. Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In short,
Modalism !! Sort of Like the RESTORATIONISTS of the pre "Church of Christ" -"CHRIST-ian church"?Sounds more like your HERITAGE!The guys who thaought, the only name for the TRUE church is to have thename of CHRIST thus the Christian Church!http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jburnett/eshm/ESHM.HTMhttp://www.restorationquarterly.org/Volume_009/rq00903olbricht.htmhttp://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/1960s/vol_9_no_3_contents/olbricht.htmlSome of these fellas Like David Millard, lived a scant 13 miles fromJoe Smith and thus the MODALISM in the BoM!"Book of Mormon theology is generally modalistic. In the Book ofMormon, God and Jesus Christ are not distinct beings." (New Approachesto the Book of Mormon, 1993, pages 82, 96-99, 103-104, 110)"Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world toredeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and theSon. In me shall
all mankind have light... they shall become my sonsand my daughters." (Ether 3:14)http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/gods_1.htm--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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. izIf 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

RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism

Whom do you ask the guys who think DM Judy are Fundies?ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If fundamental Christianity is a problem for you, of what spirit are you? iz-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 4:15 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on CreationismDM says In case you did not notice, the fundamentalists are not causingthe acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools. It isthe liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doingthis.Some around here are concerned that there are "FUNDIES" lurking aroundevery keyboard on TT.Perhaps these previous comments are a incantation meant to flush
themout into the open.One can never be to prepared to protect oneself from fundaMENTALism!--- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: 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 you were 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 not causing the acknowledgement of our Creator to be forbidden in schools. It is the liberal loonies like this Archbishop of Canterbury who are doing this. David Miller __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 knowhow you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have afriend 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.orgIf 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.
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

Re: [TruthTalk] Who is God?





I have numerous times would you like the posts reposted to refresh your
memory?


DAVEH: Yes Kevin, please do.

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  I have numerous times would you like the posts reposted to refresh your
memory?

What is up with all the various LDS TRINITIES?
I am real interested in the CREATORS of this planet
Why is Adam a creator of Earth?
Why are you to follow adam to become a God?
ELohim 
Jehovah
Michael/Adam 

Why is Adam a Grandson?
Great Granpa, Granpa and Grandson*
  
  

  (Father Son and ADAM/Michael)
  

  
  
--- Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
  
*I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.*

DAVEH:   The keyword is *attempts*.  And when you use the term 
*numerous*, just how many times does mean* numerous*, Kevin?

*You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.*

DAVEH:   When did I say that I *do not get it*?  Care to quote me on 
that Kevin, or are you just making stuff up?  I bet you cannot even 
recall when it was *attempted* and who *attempted *it.

*Seems to me that OTOH there is _NO ATTEMPT_ to explain LDS
Trinities!*

DAVEH:  Like I said Kevin..*If you don't want to answer my
question, 
/I understand your reluctance to defend the mormon faith /Trinity!*.

Kevin Deegan wrote:



  *I believe there has been numerous attempts on TT.*
*You say you do not get it but at least it has been attempted.*
*Seems to me that OTOH there is _NO ATTEMPT_ to explain LDS
  

Trinities!*


   
*Father Son and Michael*
versus
*Father Son and Holy Ghost*
** 
*Great Granpa, Granpa and Grandson*
(Father Son and ADAM/Michael)

*/Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote:

*How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*
_
DAVEH:   I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain it
using the Trinity?_

DAVEH:   Ohhh.Kevin, I forgot to add.*If you don't
want to answer my question, /I understand your reluctance
to defend the mormon faith /Trinity!*

Dave Hansen wrote:

  
  
*How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*

_DAVEH:   I forgot to ask, Kevin.Would you please explain

  

it


  
using the Trinity?_

Kevin Deegan wrote:



  If you do not believe that God is expressesed as a Trinity
*How do you get Father PLUS Son PLUS Holy Ghost EQUALS ONE?*
  

  

-- 
~~~
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.



  
  

__
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.



  


-- 
~~~
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] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11





DAVEH: Was there a question somewhere in there, Kevin?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  And I would think that it would be easy for you to answer why you take
part of the same sentence/verse figurative and another literal.
I asked; you avoided, because there is no logical reason to do so, just
an Emotive one!

--- Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
  
DAVEH:  I would think anybody who understands that the argument of
using 
a burning bush as evidence to prove that God is capable of creating
an 
*unquenchable fire* is a bit weak if that *unquenchable fire*
(burning 
bush) has been quenched.

ShieldsFamily wrote:



  Yours?

 


  

  
  
  
  

  **

 

DAVEH:  Not at all, Izzy.  It is simply an observation of illogic.

ShieldsFamily wrote:

Oh, I guess God forgot how to do that particular trick, eh? iz

 


  

  
  
  
  

   

*Doesn't that teach us something about God's *

*abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?*

DAVEH:   Only if the bush is still burning.

David Miller wrote:

DaveH, I agree with Judy here.  The argument of a "literal
  

impossibility" is 


  a little weak when we are talking about God.  Moses did see a bush
  

that was 


  burning but not consumed.  *Doesn't that teach us something about
  

God's *


  *abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?*



David Miller






Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance?  Genesis is not a
  

"science 


  book" per se.

Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that
  

is 


  called "science"

Are you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy
  

and 


  Physics?



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 fire



DAVEH:   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 same God
  

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 


  them in the desert for 40yrs

feeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from
  

wearing 


  out and their feet from

swelling.  The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused
  

an axe 


  head to float on water

The God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in
  

front 


  of Jezebels' chariot and

had the ravens feed 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] mailto:[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] Physics, Astronomy and Genesis chapters 1-11

but it does logically support the idea
that he is capable (of creating an unquenchable fire), even though the bush is not burning right now.

DAVEH: I'd (respectfully) say your logic is flawed on this one,
DavidM.

David Miller wrote:

The burning bush is not a weak observation concerning the question of
whether or not God is capable of creating an unquenchable fire. It would
not be proof that he has done it, but it does logically support the idea
that he is capable, even though the bush is not burning right now.

By the way, when I climbed Mount Sinai, they have a rock there with black
magnesium deposits that make it look like a bush was burned into the rocks.
The guide there tells everyone that it is the burning bush of Moses. :-)

David Miller

DAVEH: I would think anybody who understands that the argument of using a
burning bush as evidence to prove that God is capable of creating an
unquenchable fire is a bit weak if that unquenchable fire (burning bush) has
been quenched.

ShieldsFamily wrote:
Yours?

DAVEH: Not at all, Izzy. It is simply an observation of illogic.

ShieldsFamily wrote:
Oh, I guess God forgot how to do that particular trick, eh? iz

Doesn't that teach us something about God's
abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?
DAVEH: Only if the bush is still burning.

David Miller wrote:
DaveH, I agree with Judy here. The argument of a "literal impossibility" is
a little weak when we are talking about God. Moses did see a bush that was
burning but not consumed. Doesn't that teach us something about God's
abilities of creating an unquenchable fire?

David Miller

Why try to confuse Conor right off the bat Lance? Genesis is not a "science
book" per se.
Although the writer of Genesis is also the God who created all that is
called "science"
Are you asking Conor to interpret Genesis in the light of Astronomy and
Physics?

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 fire

DAVEH: 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 same God 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
them in the desert for 40yrs
feeding them with manna from heaven and keeping their clothes from wearing
out and their feet from
swelling. The same God who stopped the sun for 24 hours and caused an axe
head to float on water
The God who energized His prophet causing him to run for 25 miles in front
of Jezebels' chariot and
had the ravens feed 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] The week winds down...