Re: [TruthTalk] Person
Hey you guys, all you do is argue and do put-downs, or so it seems at least. I am giving up TT for a while, since all I have been doing lately is delete, delete, delete! Also, I am changing my web server, so I may be back, but I seriously have to ask myself, "For What?" Been nice arguing with you guys, especially Kevin, and I see he's back, so maybe I will make it back too. Take Care, Blainerb In a message dated 3/9/2006 9:23:47 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Coming from a Master Cryptologist I thought you really enjoyed the cryptic messages passed from within the deep dark caverns of the "community of real crypto believers" Incidently, is Gary the high priest and pinnacle of community communication?Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MayI quote? "This seems to be a real problem for you. All kidding aside would you attempt to help me understand you better on this? Do you believe that one cannot be a believer yet convinced that the right is wrong?" Part 2 Please fill us in on your enjoyment of GT Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I should have know better than to suggest thinking. Shame on me! Do you enjoy saying nothing about something? - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 09, 2006 08:42 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Person There you go refering us to your "bibLe" again Why would I not find such import displayed in the HOLY BIBLE? Why do I need to go to those that ( IYO ) may or may not have REAL TRUTH Your philosophy is SELF-REFUTINGLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is apparent to all that I'm no match for such as Dean, Kevin and, Judy. I'm just not in their league. Therefore.NO, I'm not leaving! I'd only suggest that you look up the discussion on the above as it took place in the history of the 'believing community'. You needn't and, probably won't, agree. It might however, give you some sense of the import attached to it vis a vis Jesus.
Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David Miller
cd wrote:2. The power which celestial bodies are supposed to exert on terrestrial; as the influence of the planets on the birth and fortunes of men; an exploded doctrine of astrology. Blainerb: The heavens do not compel or even influence, they symbolize--they are the handwriting of God, showing us his glory and his wisdom. Some ancient people actually worshipped planets, stars, constellations, as if they were gods--but the truly wise, such as the wise men who followed the star to find the Messiah and worship him, will find the heavens all testify of the truths of Christ--as do all things. Your wisdom, cd, is from what you perceive as being popular and widely accepted. The truth is seldom that. Blainerb In a message dated 2/15/2006 4:37:11 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: David my advice- for what its worth- is to leave this astrology garbage alone -as God said to do. 2. The power which celestial bodies are supposed to exert on terrestrial; as the influence of the planets on the birth and fortunes of men; an exploded doctrine of astrology. a 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Deu 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.
Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David Miller
In a message dated 2/15/2006 6:23:13 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: I am surprised and disappointed that you would be any part of this sinDavid. cd, If what you say is correct, the wise men of the east who used astrological symbolism to locate the birth place of Christ were sinners. Maybe you need to review what the Bible really says--between the lines, at least. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David Miller
In a message dated 2/13/2006 3:55:37 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Funny. I just don't see David as ever having been young. :-) jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] You guys are just upset you didn't get ahold of me when I was young and ignorant. Maybe if you had encountered me when I was 8, you could have played me like playdough. Surely you both understand that if I appear incorrect and immoveable to you, then you likely appear incorrect and immoveable to me. It works both ways. It is the nature of one who studies and forms opinions. The godly will consider such comments as a compliment concerning integrity, so thank you for the compliment. :-) David Miller p.s. Blaine... my astrological sign is pices. I guess that astrology isn't helping you be too predictive after all. :-) Thank you David, I have wondered about that. Pisces is my opposite sign, and, being the sign of transition from Winter to Spring, is next to Aries,the sign that ushers in Springtime (1st degree Aries is also the first day of Spring). I believe all things are written in the stars--the trick is in reading them accurately.:) I try, and sometimes get pretty close to people by doing so. But humans are so complex!! Astrology helps, but is not, of course, infallible. But thanks for being open--lots of people will not divulge their birth info to me, probably think by doing so I might form unjustified opinions of them. :) One thing, though, without precise birth info--date, time of day, and place of birth--you can't tell too much beyond generalities. The beauty of precise astrological analysis is that no two personalities can ever be the same--not even identical twins--which is a reality check for astrology few people understand. Blainer - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] il.innglory.org Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David Miller In a message dated 2/13/2006 12:02:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've not forgotten you, David. IMO, you are both incorrect and immoveable on at least a portion of that which is under discussion. What I've got to determine is whether or not it is worth the 'ink' to engage further with you given what I've just said. I'm checking around with some who've read you over time. Lance. Yes, David is pretty fixed--he was probably born under one of the four fixed signs--Leo, Taurus, Scorpio, or Aquarius. Or, he's one of those highly independent Aries characters, who never admit to being wrong!! If I knew for sure, I could read him better. Blainerb -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Behind the scenes conversations re:David Miller
In a message dated 2/13/2006 12:02:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've not forgotten you, David. IMO, you are both incorrect and immoveable on at least a portion of that which is under discussion. What I've got to determine is whether or not it is worth the 'ink' to engage further with you given what I've just said. I'm checking around with some who've read you over time. Lance. Yes, David is pretty fixed--he was probably born underone of the four fixed signs--Leo, Taurus, Scorpio, or Aquarius.Or, he's one of those highly independent Aries characters, who never admit to being wrong!! If I knew for sure, I could read him better. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Something to think about
In a message dated 1/19/2006 8:13:01 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Isn't this a form of what the Mormon Church teaches Lance? Theirs is a flesh religion and theyhave noproblems with purity and holiness Same with the so called "Church fathers" or patriarchs who came up with the pronouncements this generation mindlessly parrots. Judy, what are you trying to say, here, as you carelessly toss your half-formed ideas around? Flesh religion? What does that mean? And what does it mean we have "no problems with purity and holiness?" If you are speaking as an authority on Mormon religious thought,aren't you just a little out of your field? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Something to think about
In a message dated 1/19/2006 8:34:35 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They do, their stance is that man is progressing toward godhood as they do what the church says and that basically God is a man from the planet Kolob. Where in the Bible are we told that Nowhere in the Bible, norare we toldthat in any Mormon scripture. Judy, you're totally out of it! Your ignorance is bliss, maybe, huh? No Mormon believes God is a man from Kolob.No one lives on Kolob, as far as anyone knows, since it revolves on its axis only once per 1000 years.It is NEAR where God resides, not WHERE he resides. Its function as a huge, controlling planet was revealed to Abraham, as he sought to understand the workings of the universe. You do not give us much credit for smarts, is all I can say:( By the way, were you aware the Milky Way Galaxyrevolves, spins, like a giant, 4th of Julypin wheel? Around what, can you tell us?What causes it to spin? Maybe your Bible can tell us--or maybe you can do that . . . Obviously, the Bible does not have the answer to everything, and I doubt you do either. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] TT's ??
In a message dated 1/18/2006 4:24:50 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/17/2006 8:05:17 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] TT's ?? Soo, Dean, you believe in a pre-existence after all, at least for Jesus Christ. What about the rest of us, do you think we were there too, looking on , wide-eyed and open mouthed at what was taking place? What about this part of your quote?: :Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. Blainerb cd: Yes Christ pre-existed but man was created after the earth. Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men Dean, the gist of your entire set of quotes is talking about the pre-existence--why would just that one depart from the rest of them in meaning? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] TT's ??
In a message dated 1/18/2006 3:29:27 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for your input Dean; I have no problem with Jesus having a human flesh body... but I havea "huge" insurmountable problem with the idea that Mary's child, the one called by the angel "the holy pure sinless offspring" born of her and called the Son of God" (Luke 1:36 Amp) ATSThad a "fallen" Adamic nature. Make no mistake this is nothing more than speculation by religious men who have no understanding about spiritual realities. Don't mean to butt in, but what about the passage that describes Christ as being "tempted in all things, yet sinless?" How can a man be tempted, if he has none of the fallen nature within himself to be tempted? Also, before he began his ministry, Jesus was commanded to go into the wilderness to fast for forty days and nights (the same as with Moses on the mountain of revelation). Why the need to purify himself, if there was not a fallen nature to purify?
Re: [TruthTalk] I've sent an email to 'Wonder Woman'. I await her replay.
In a message dated 1/17/2006 8:23:02 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Don't hold your breath. I'm also checking for the Bat signal should WW be unavailable. Ha! Good oner, Lancer. Blainer
Re: [TruthTalk] TT's ??
Soo, Dean, you believe in a pre-existence after all, at least for Jesus Christ. What about the rest of us, do you think we were there too, looking on , wide-eyed and open mouthed at what was taking place? What about this part of your quote?: :Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. Blainerb In a message dated 1/17/2006 6:00:29 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Maybe to better understand Christ in the flesh-Maybe we should focus on whatHe was before the Flesh?For that I offer Proverbs 8:22-36 Pro 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. Pro 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. Pro 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: Pro 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. Pro 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: Pro 8:28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. Pro 8:32 Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways. Pro 8:33 Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not. Pro 8:34 Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors. Pro 8:35 For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favor of the LORD. Pro 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.
Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine (of atonement)
Generally, your message is not too far off, I think, but a little over-simplified. :) Blainerb In a message dated 1/12/2006 5:45:55 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Blaine-in my opinion-AE were failures who allowed a Horrible monster loose on this world and uncountable billions are suffering in torment-even the verycreatures on the earthitself are suffering also. Jesus Christ came and bound the horrible Monster by allowing the sin to come upon him and then paid the price the Father demanded for that sin. Note a bad thing got loose-Jesus caught the bad thing and now we have a chance to fellowship with God. The sin or bad thing is not or every will be good and no good will ever come from this bad thing(sin)-to think so is to think foolishly as all have done soat one time, but now this foolishness can be laid aside for righteousness (ie. right by God's law or the Law Christ brought if you prefer.). - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/11/2006 11:21:06 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine (of atonement) Blainerb:Below are all more or less Mormon doctrines relating to the Atonement--but you will have to think/contemplate on these things to understand them: Here's the deal as I understand it: Although Adam and Eve were real people, Adamwas a type or similitudeof Christ--the Bridegroom, and Evewas a type or similitudeof the Church--the Bride.Adam and Evehad together entered into a covenant relationship of marriage, and just as Adam took upon himself sin in order thathe might not be separated from Eve, so Christ took upon himself the sins of the Church, in order that the Church (the Bride) might not become separated from Him. This symbolism/reasoning tells us that the atonement was primarily to bring abouta reconciliation between Christ, the Bridegroom,and the Bride, or members of the Church, who are in a covenant relationship with Christ, similar to marriage.(See the parable of the ten virgins also.) Others outside the covenant relationship will benefit from the grace or, in other words, good will of Christ, but may not reap full benefits from the atonement, simply because they are not in a covenant relationship with him. Christ may well give them side-benefits, one of which is immortality, but since they have no promise, only his good will operates in their behalf. There is no, "If you will keep my commandments, then I will give you glory, immortality, and eternal lives." There is only his good will, and his love, and his desire to see all justly and mercifully dealt with. Simply put, in the very words of Christ, "Greater love hath no man than this--that he give his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if you keep my commandments." Only those who have kept his commandments, and fulfilled the terms of the covenant/contract (have kept their lamps trimmed and filled with the oil of obedience), will reap full benefits. Baptism by one having authority, by the way, is believed by Mormons to be one of these terms. :) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: January 10, 2006 08:04 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine Yes I have. And, over the years, your contribution has not help . For example -- what is the official Mormon teaching on the atonement of Christ? I have asked that question before, here on TT. The answer? Must be under the pickle!! I am beginning to believe that there is no Mormon teaching on the atonement of Christ save for the claim that the price was paid in the Garden !! Help. jd - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/10/2006 8:30:56 AM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine If the 'Mormon Jesus' is comparable to Rudolph the red nosed reindeer who 'saved' the day for Santa one dark night then belief in such an one is pointless. DM appears to perceive little difference between his Jesus and DH's Jesus? CD: They are as both are Idols. - Original Message -
Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine (of atonement)
Blainerb:Below are all more or less Mormon doctrines relating to the Atonement--but you will have to think/contemplate on these things to understand them: Here's the deal as I understand it: Although Adam and Eve were real people, Adamwas a type or similitudeof Christ--the Bridegroom, and Evewas a type or similitudeof the Church--the Bride.Adam and Evehad together entered into a covenant relationship of marriage, and just as Adam took upon himself sin in order thathe might not be separated from Eve, so Christ took upon himself the sins of the Church, in order that the Church (the Bride) might not become separated from Him. This symbolism/reasoning tells us that the atonement was primarily to bring abouta reconciliation between Christ, the Bridegroom,and the Bride, or members of the Church, who are in a covenant relationship with Christ, similar to marriage.(See the parable of the ten virgins also.) Others outside the covenant relationship will benefit from the grace or, in other words, good will of Christ, but may not reap full benefits from the atonement, simply because they are not in a covenant relationship with him. Christ may well give them side-benefits, one of which is immortality, but since they have no promise, only his good will operates in their behalf. There is no, "If you will keep my commandments, then I will give you glory, immortality, and eternal lives." There is only his good will, and his love, and his desire to see all justly and mercifully dealt with. Simply put, in the very words of Christ, "Greater love hath no man than this--that he give his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if you keep my commandments." Only those who have kept his commandments, and fulfilled the terms of the covenant/contract (have kept their lamps trimmed and filled with the oil of obedience), will reap full benefits. Baptism by one having authority, by the way, is believed by Mormons to be one of these terms. :) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: January 10, 2006 08:04 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine Yes I have. And, over the years, your contribution has not help . For example -- what is the official Mormon teaching on the atonement of Christ? I have asked that question before, here on TT. The answer? Must be under the pickle!! I am beginning to believe that there is no Mormon teaching on the atonement of Christ save for the claim that the price was paid in the Garden !! Help. jd - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/10/2006 8:30:56 AM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine If the 'Mormon Jesus' is comparable to Rudolph the red nosed reindeer who 'saved' the day for Santa one dark night then belief in such an one is pointless. DM appears to perceive little difference between his Jesus and DH's Jesus? CD: They are as both are Idols. - Original Message -
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine
In a message dated 1/11/2006 6:48:15 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: OK Go to the corner for some down time, David. Ha Ha! I love it!! Blainerb - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: January 11, 2006 08:40 Subject: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine Why not give David a rest Lance; you know as well as me that we have been over and over Greek verbs and present/passive tense ad nauseam and a lot of what I have written has been either rejected or made suspect by someone's perception ofGreek. David's _expression_ 'personally, I'm not so sure that...' is one he employs often. He does so rather than simply say 'Judy's position is my position'. I'm not so sure that this is not the case .From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Judy wrote: ... they can not know God or His Word unless they are Greek scholars and know every little translational nuance. John wrote: More ad hom and in this case a flasehood Please try to leave some of the moderation to the moderator. This is not an ad hominem argument. Discuss it in private if you disagree. Judy is simply communicating what she perceives how some of the intellectuals on this forum come across to her. If her perception is faulty, please try to correct it without attacking her. Teach her in meekness and humility. Personally, I'm not so sure she is too far off base with this characterization. We will know the truth of it by how the intellectuals respond. David Miller.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormon doctrine
In a message dated 1/11/2006 6:49:14 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The majority of your questions reflect a great deal of 'absence of forethought', Judy. LOL This is good!! TT is the greatest!! Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
Er, uh no, as a matter of fact, I was wondering why you were passing judgement on poor ol' Dylan? :) Maybe you are wrong about the poor fella. He might have his faults, but don't we all? Blaine In a message dated 1/8/2006 3:11:57 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" Jesus the Christ (John 7:24) Blaine are you saying that Dylan's pointing the finger at others is righteous? On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 01:32:37 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judge not that ye be not judged-- Blainerb In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:23:17 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmmm! Dylan ought to be much more concerned about being him on that day.
Re: [TruthTalk] Kevin Deegan??
Thanks--that answers my question, but raises some also-- :) Blaine In a message dated 1/8/2006 7:22:44 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Kevin is still around but got tired of the insults and doesn't contribute much.Shame as he had a lot to offer. - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/8/2006 12:48:08 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Kevin Deegan?? I guess I missed something--whatever happened to Deegan, my ol' sparring buddy? I got really far behind, so instead of reading a lot of the posts, I deleted like crazy--probably did not answer some posts as well as missing out on what happened to him. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob)
Blainerb: The Lord'swords never cease--he is the same yesterday, today and forever. Look in your Bible. The words of the Lord never ceased, except to fulfill the prophecy of Amos 8:11 "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord." This happened during the dark ages, when even the written word was in a dead language--Latin--and the only prophecies heard were those made by astrologers and the like--from uninspired lips. But as the scriptures were translated into native languages and were printed for the masses, the famine began to come to an end. But when more of the word of the Lord than whathad been theretofore printed came to light, the preachers of the day rejected it--"A Bible, A Bible, we have a Bible and we need no more Bible," they said, and they continue to say it today. They say it for gain. The Lord's work, which like his word never ceases, does not pay well if the clergy are laymen, which they are in the Lord's church, and which they were in the original church. They went out without purse or script--no money, no big salaries.You are a deceived people. You are deceived by your ministers, who preach for gain. In a message dated 1/8/2006 8:07:44 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Certainly not greater than what Christ has given- from the mouth of another? - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/7/2006 6:10:42 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob) Blainerb: What John andbrother Moore have written belowis the crux of what God meant when he told Joseph Smith that the Protestant ministers of the day taught doctrines of men, which had a form of Godliness, but denied the Power thereof. In other words, they denied the "greater revelation," or the possibility of "greater revelation" than that contained in the Bible. This will turn to their ultimate condemnation, in the great hereafter, because God has all power--and is the same today, yesterday, and forever--including having the right and ability to give forth "greater revelation."
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 1/8/2006 8:30:42 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Judy, I've got a question for you: When Street Preachers point their fingers at Blaine and say 'Repent or you're going to hell!" is that righteous? Blainerb: Answer, but from Blaine, not Judy: NO!! :) Street Preachers do more harm than good--that is the consensus of opinion, at least among the more righteous preachers of traditional Christianity. Even Rocky Anderson, Salt Lake City Mayor, a former ACLU Attorney, was turned off by the insolent behavior of the street preachers. He finally sided with the LDS Church on the Plaza issue, mainly because of the SPs.
Re: Fw: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 1/8/2006 11:29:43 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine are you saying that Dylan's pointing the finger at others is righteous? No. I was saying your doing that was, ahem, a little suspect, is all. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob)
Blainerb: The decision to allow Blacks the PH was made afterweeks and evenmonths of agonizing prayer and discussion, which prayer and discussion followed the great success Mormon missionaries were having in Africa. The decision was made solely on the basis of desire to include worthy Black malesfrom that continent in the on-going work of the Lord--mostly missionary work, but other aspects as well. The Mormon Priesthood has always been a lay priesthood, and it was necessary to get those Blacks busy taking care of their own, rather than having White men exercisingdominion over them. In a message dated 1/8/2006 12:51:44 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine: I have an audio tape, surreptitiously obtained, of the thenprophet (1978)describing the 'revelation' (political decision) to permit non-whites into the priesthood. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: January 07, 2006 18:10 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob) Blainerb: What John andbrother Moore have written belowis the crux of what God meant when he told Joseph Smith that the Protestant ministers of the day taught doctrines of men, which had a form of Godliness, but denied the Power thereof. In other words, they denied the "greater revelation," or the possibility of "greater revelation" than that contained in the Bible. This will turn to their ultimate condemnation, in the great hereafter, because God has all power--and is the same today, yesterday, and forever--including having the right and ability to give forth "greater revelation." If the ministers of Protestant religiondo not repent of this prideful stubbornness, then I am thinking one of the most immediate consequences will be for God to empower the Remnant of Jacob to go through, and destroy the wonderful civilizationthat hasbeen built upover the past two hundred years called the US of A. Those Mexicans, most of whom are descendants of the Aztecs, who by the way worshipped Quetzalquatl,who was described as being aWhite God who wore a white robe and a beard, just keep coming over the border, don't they? Despite efforts to stay them, and the prophecy contained in 3 Nephi of the BoM creeps closer and closer to being fulfilled every day. I hope when it happens, the "Remnant"will by then have recognized the LDS Church as something other than a "White Guy's" church. There is already evidence this is true. The Navajo language has two words for White men: Biligana, which is a derisive term, meaning something like, "White Enemy," and another term which simply means "White brother."The latterisusually applied to members of the LDS Church. I spent three years teaching Dine' (Navajos) in Southern Utah, and I know that among them are many who have adopted the Black man's symbol for Black Power--a raised, gloved hand--except the fingers of the glove have been cut off, allowing the red man's fingers to show through at the end of the glove, apparently symbolizing the Red Power Movement that has grown from the Black Power Movement. You Protestant cowboysmight do well tostrap on your six-shooters, 'cause I believe the day will soon come when the game we played as little kids--Cowboys and Indians--may become a nightmarish reality .. .
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob)
In a message dated 1/8/2006 12:51:44 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine: I have an audio tape, surreptitiously obtained, of the thenprophet (1978)describing the 'revelation' (political decision) to permit non-whites into the priesthood. I was present in a hospital waiting room when the announcement was made, and I remember it well. But thanks anyway. Blainer
Re: [TruthTalk] FW: January 6 - The Delusions of 2005 (deny the power thereo...
Blainerb: Where is smoke, there is usually a little fire. What these "outsiders" are saying is probably based on truth to some extent--whether perceived by outsiders or no. I had a German exchange student living with me for a year--he said the Germans seldom go to church, and when they do, they wear casual clothing and cutoffs, sometimes even flip-flops. As his dad told me once, "Nobody in Germany believes in the 'Yesus' story anymore." In a message dated 1/8/2006 12:52:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: EVERY REFORM MOVEMENT utilizes less than lauditory speech concerning those not themselves part of the 'reform'. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: January 07, 2006 18:47 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] FW: January 6 - The Delusions of 2005 ("deny the power thereof") Blainerb: Rev Jan Markell has it right (see below)--more evidence of truth of the warning from God to Joseph Smith: "They teach for doctrine the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof." In a message dated 1/7/2006 2:18:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: January 6 - The Delusions of 2005 · The church will save the world and make it perfect for Christ's return (Dominion/Kingdom Now Theology). Reality check: Many churches are not even preaching a sound gospel. They are preaching a bloodless gospel to fill up the pews and false doctrine is exploding as predicted. · We're in the "last days" and churches are encouraging their flock to get right with God while there is still time. Reality check: Visit most any church in America and you will not hear the wonderful news that Jesus is coming soon.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 1/8/2006 2:06:16 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Someone walking in the fear of God would be aware that he needs to clean up his own backyard before lamenting the fate of others.Excluding ministry gifts of course- but I don't seetravelling minstrels listedamong them. Blainerb: "If any ofye lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally . . . "
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
Blainerb: You may have a point there, David--the value of the propertybeing offered to the city by the LDS Church was no small amount (but it is conjectural only). Rocky gave his reasons, which appeared in print and on TV several times, and included were his personal experiences watching SPs on the Plaza--he also expressed fears that such would get worse, not better. His interest was mainly in bringing the divergent groups in the city together in a compromise situation, and the fact that the LDS Church sweetened thatsituation was only part of the deal. He maintained that the bottom line was the behavior of the SPs--he wasclearly afraid of that sort of thing creating more divisiveness, which, more than anything,would posea threat to his continuance as Mayor of the city--so, it had political overtones, I guess you might say, as well.Let's face it, SPs were not popular even among those opposed to thePlaza. In a message dated 1/8/2006 6:02:24 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, if money were not involved, don't you think the outcome would have been a bit different? Follow the money, Blaine. The love of money is the root of all evil. The Mormons supplied the money. The city leaders took it. Think about it.Peace be with you.David Miller.- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 7:48 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism FreemasonryIn a message dated 1/8/2006 8:30:42 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Hey Judy, I've got a question for you: When Street Preachers point their fingers at Blaine and say 'Repent or you're going to hell!" is that righteous?Blainerb: Answer, but from Blaine, not Judy: NO!! :) Street Preachers do more harm than good--that is the consensus of opinion, at least among the more righteous preachers of traditional Christianity. Even Rocky Anderson, Salt Lake City Mayor, a former ACLU Attorney, was turned off by the insolent behavior of the street preachers. He finally sided with the LDS Church on the Plaza issue, mainly because of the SPs.--"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
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry(update on remnant of Jacob)
Blainerb: What John andbrother Moore have written belowis the crux of what God meant when he told Joseph Smith that the Protestant ministers of the day taught doctrines of men, which had a form of Godliness, but denied the Power thereof. In other words, they denied the "greater revelation," or the possibility of "greater revelation" than that contained in the Bible. This will turn to their ultimate condemnation, in the great hereafter, because God has all power--and is the same today, yesterday, and forever--including having the right and ability to give forth "greater revelation." If the ministers of Protestant religiondo not repent of this prideful stubbornness, then I am thinking one of the most immediate consequences will be for God to empower the Remnant of Jacob to go through, and destroy the wonderful civilizationthat hasbeen built upover the past two hundred years called the US of A. Those Mexicans, most of whom are descendants of the Aztecs, who by the way worshipped Quetzalquatl,who was described as being aWhite God who wore a white robe and a beard, just keep coming over the border, don't they? Despite efforts to stay them, and the prophecy contained in 3 Nephi of the BoM creeps closer and closer to being fulfilled every day. I hope when it happens, the "Remnant"will by then have recognized the LDS Church as something other than a "White Guy's" church. There is already evidence this is true. The Navajo language has two words for White men: Biligana, which is a derisive term, meaning something like, "White Enemy," and another term which simply means "White brother."The latterisusually applied to members of the LDS Church. I spent three years teaching Dine' (Navajos) in Southern Utah, and I know that among them are many who have adopted the Black man's symbol for Black Power--a raised, gloved hand--except the fingers of the glove have been cut off, allowing the red man's fingers to show through at the end of the glove, apparently symbolizing the Red Power Movement that has grown from the Black Power Movement. You Protestant cowboysmight do well tostrap on your six-shooters, 'cause I believe the day will soon come when the game we played as little kids--Cowboys and Indians--may become a nightmarish reality .. . In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:55:32 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/6/2006 9:56:15 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry kidding, of course. Actually, I am going to use the bat at the local batting cages. The closest thing to physical excercise that I really want to get, in my old age. jd cd: How old are you John? I am 44 now and kinda like this age. Splitting firewood is enough exercise for me. -- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/6/2006 3:44:03 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry G, let me know when you get my check for the bat. That's right, Dean !! I'm buying a bat !! jd cd: What type of bat and what do you plan to do with this bat-shouldI be concernedof answering my door? I Should have kept the wolf/ dog. -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ..what if, perhaps. elemental to BTs commentary, there genuinely appears to bea qualitatively greater revelation thanyour 'greater revelation'? On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 20:18:48 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: e.g., let's say BT (of TT)confidently commentscreatively onnecessities (also, germane to Protestant thought, i suspect)disclosed discreetly from certain revelation per se and all that you(two cult-apostles like DavidM)would have to say about it is that he (too)rejects 'greater revelation'? On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:02:45 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Certainly, none on TT.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what Protestants would say they need it? On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:07:00 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || ..Protestants ..have rejected the greater revelation,
Re: [TruthTalk] FW: January 6 - The Delusions of 2005 (deny the power thereof)
Blainerb: Rev Jan Markell has it right (see below)--more evidence of truth of the warning from God to Joseph Smith: "They teach for doctrine the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof." In a message dated 1/7/2006 2:18:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: January 6 - The Delusions of 2005 · The church will save the world and make it perfect for Christ's return (Dominion/Kingdom Now Theology). Reality check: Many churches are not even preaching a sound gospel. They are preaching a bloodless gospel to fill up the pews and false doctrine is exploding as predicted. · We're in the "last days" and churches are encouraging their flock to get right with God while there is still time. Reality check: Visit most any church in America and you will not hear the wonderful news that Jesus is coming soon. ·. ·
[TruthTalk] Kevin Deegan??
I guess I missed something--whatever happened to Deegan, my ol' sparring buddy? I got really far behind, so instead of reading a lot of the posts, I deleted like crazy--probably did not answer some posts as well as missing out on what happened to him. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
AMEN to Dylan's insightful song--liked especially the part about sweatin' . . . maybe like in the Garden of G? :) Blainerb In a message dated 1/7/2006 6:29:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, the G man has given us one of Dylan's better quotes. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hmmm! Dylan ought to be much more concerned about being him on that day. On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 21:25:35 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, your clock is gonna stopAt Saint Peter's gate.Ya gonna ask him what time it is,He's gonna say, "It's too late."Hey, hey!_I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day._ You're gonna start to sweatAnd you ain't gonna stop.You're gonna have a nightmareAnd never wake up.Hey, hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna cry for pillsAnd your head's gonna be in a knot,But the pills are gonna cost moreThan what you've got.Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna have to walk naked,Can't ride in no car.You're gonna let ev'rybody seeJust what you are.Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. Well, the good wine's a-flowin'For five cents a quart.You're gonna look in your moneybagsAnd find you're one cent short.Hey, hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna yell and scream,"Don't anybody care?"You're gonna hear out a voice say,"Shoulda listened when you heard the word down there."Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day.Bob Dylan :: Copyright © 1964
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
Judge not that ye be not judged-- Blainerb In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:23:17 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmmm! Dylan ought to be much more concerned about being him on that day. On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 21:25:35 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, your clock is gonna stopAt Saint Peter's gate.Ya gonna ask him what time it is,He's gonna say, "It's too late."Hey, hey!_I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day._ You're gonna start to sweatAnd you ain't gonna stop.You're gonna have a nightmareAnd never wake up.Hey, hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna cry for pillsAnd your head's gonna be in a knot,But the pills are gonna cost moreThan what you've got.Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna have to walk naked,Can't ride in no car.You're gonna let ev'rybody seeJust what you are.Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. Well, the good wine's a-flowin'For five cents a quart.You're gonna look in your moneybagsAnd find you're one cent short.Hey, hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day. You're gonna yell and scream,"Don't anybody care?"You're gonna hear out a voice say,"Shoulda listened when you heard the word down there."Hey, hey!I'd sure hate to be youOn that dreadful day.Bob Dylan :: Copyright © 1964 On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 20:18:48 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: e.g., let's say BT (of TT)confidently commentscreatively onnecessities (also, germane to Protestant thought, i suspect)disclosed discreetly from certain revelation per se and all that you(two cult-apostles like DavidM)would have to say about it is that he (too)rejects 'greater revelation'? On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:02:45 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Certainly, none on TT.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what Protestants would say they need it? On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:07:00 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || ..Protestants ..have rejected the greater revelation, ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep
Blainerb: There were many Jews throughout the Roman Empire. It doesn't really say whether this fellow with the unclean spirit was a Gentile or a Jew. More than likely he was considered by the Lord to be an Israelite, however, consideringHe had already explicitly stated his ministry was "but to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel." Regards the caveman from Geresa?? I would need a source for that one. In a message dated 1/4/2006 11:50:33 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine writes Jesus himself never went to the Gentiles. He never spoke to them except on one occasion thatwas an exception to his rule. NKJ Mark 5:1 Then they came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gadarenes. 2 And when He had come out of the boat, immediately there met Him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, ... 18 And when He got into the boat, he who had been demon-possessed begged Him that he might be with Him. 19 However, Jesus did not permit him, but said to him, "Go home to your friends, and tell them what great things the Lord has done for you, and how He has had compassion on you." 20 And he departed and began to proclaim in Decapolis all that Jesus had done for him; and all marveled. You might want to ruminate on this passage a while, Blaine. Only one of the "ten cities"which together made up the Decapolis was located to the west of the River Jordan (it was called Scythopolis, a.k.a. Bethshaen). The rest weresituated beyond the banks ofthe "promised land," in what could only be classified Gentile territory (the other nine cities were Hippos, Gadara, Pella, Philadelphia, Gerasa [home of the "Garasenes," a.k.a. "Gadarenes"], Dion, Canatha, Raphana, and Damascus).Indeed Jesus sent this duly impressed Gentile into the far country to "publish" (GR. karussein) his story until throughout Decapolis "all kept on marveling(imperfect tense) at what Jesus had done." And, Blaine, I find it quite noteworthy that Jesus did this without first proselytizing himin thedoctrines and duties of the Jewish people. IF I had a complaint, it would be that many Christians get bogged done in the minutiae of their peculiar forms of legalism and fail to realize this subtle but profound point. To their shame, the astonishing truthremains that Jesus sent this brand new Gentile convert out withoutany discipling at all,not permitting him tostay on with them and learn through the traditions of his peoplethe proper way of holiness.The truth is he sent him out without so much as a whisper from the lawand prophets, offwithout a word on thedo's and don'ts of godly living. No law. No commandments. No holy days. No feasts orordinances -- justa simple request: "Tell them what great things the Lord has done for you, and how He has had compassion on you." In your post you claim that Peter was the first to introduce the Gospel to the Gentiles. In fact,Blaine,he was not. A caveman from Gerasa gets credit for that one. What Peter was was the first JEW to go to the Gentiles. Ah yes, but before he was fit to go, he had to come to grips with the fact that what Jesus had done under law for the Jews, he had accomplished as well for the Gentiles -- and this he did for them apart from the law! Indeed before he could go, Peter had to grasp the fact that he dare not foist upon Greeks his Jewish customs: for who washe tocall unholy what God in Christhad cleansed? Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep
The Gentiles first received the gospel by way of the Apostles--Peter first received the command to carry the message to those whom God had cleansed as he saw the sheet lowered with the unclean animals on it, and was commanded to "Rise, Peter, Kill and eat." This was the introduction of any Gentile to a gospel message. Paul was then commissioned to carry the message to Gentiles, and was deemed the apostle to the Gentiles. Jesus himself never went to the Gentiles. He never spoke to them except on one occasion thatwas an exception to his rule. They never heard his voice, yet he says, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, and they too must Hear My Voice!" His personal appearances were ALWAYS reserved for the House of Israel, ONLY!! In a message dated 1/4/2006 6:33:16 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 1/3/2006 7:39:32 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep What about this? Matthew 15:22-26 "And behold a woman of Canaan came . . . but he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel . . . It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs." Do you not believe your Bible? Here He actually stated in so many words his mission was to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL only. The woman from Caanan, although a Gentile, was an exception because of her great faith. cd: Then does that mean that gentiles cannot be saved? If his words were for the "House of Israel" only then why are we told to live by those same words that Jesus spoke to the Jews? If so then the message that Jesus carried were for all men-this was foretold as the Jews had to first be offered the truth with the understanding that they would reject that truth-it was also foretold that Jesus would die for the sins of the whole world-so he was also here for the whole world not just the Jews. We then are grafted intothe tribes-and in a sense become a part of the promise given to Abraham and are actually grafted into Israel (ie. Romans 11:17) His mission to the Samaritans was due to the largeamount of the bloodof Israel in that group of people. The Samaritans were a mixture of Israelite bloodlines and Babylonian bloodlines--they were descendants ofthose Jews who were not taken captive in the Babylonian Captivity, and who intermarried with the Babylonians who were sent from Babylon to occupy the land. Because the Jews would not recognize their Israelite heritage, they even had a separate temple, alter, priests, etc. But Jesus, knowing all things, knewmany of themwere also Israelites. This was not a contradiction to his stance that he was sent "but to the House of Israel." cd: The Samaritans were more correctly termed half-Jews (ie mixture of gentile and Jewish blood) as such they were outcasts to which the Jews would have no part of-nor any dealing with-as a half Jew is regarded as a gentiles-It is my view that Jesus helped those whom asked for help-Jew or Gentile.After the Babylonian captivityEzra separated those that inner married with those Gentiles mentioned and the Jewish blood line remained pure (ie. see Ezra 10: 6-17). Not only that, but if his mission was "but to the House of Israel," what about those Israelites--ten tribes of them--who had already been taken captive many years earlier into the "Northlands" by Assyria? How was he to minister to them? The Jews were basically two tribes only--Judah and Benjamin--and parts of a third tribe, Levi. The other ten tribes had been takencaptive years earlier and were never heard from again. They are even today referred to as the "Lost Ten tribes." So what about them? Did THE SAVIOR NOT CARE ABOUT THEM? cd: In Bible prophecy we are told to look for Israel to become a nation again as a sign of the last days of the Gentile world rule-to wit the Messianic Jews and the converted Gentiles will rule the worldunder the leadership of Jesus Christ (ie. King of Kings) at this same time there is a seven year time of testing and the outpouring of Gods wrath-within this same time period God seals 12,000 from each tribe of Israel equaling 144,000 and each tribe is mentioned as being present in Israel (ie. Rev.7,14). The nation of Israel came into existence May 14,1947 and was ratified in 1969-This has never happened in the history of the world-no nation has ever ceased to exist for 2,000 years and returned-yet Israel has done so. The Jews have returned and all the tribes are present-so therefore logic would dictate there are no "lost tribes".The sheep of
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 1/3/2006 9:51:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, do you consider protestants to be pagans? Blainerb: No, I consider Protestants to be the Gentiles spoken of in the BoM who had the Bible, which was God's word, and upon whom the Spirit of God rested because they were righteous and sought to serve Jesus Christ as their Lord. They were given great power over the unrighteousseed of Jacob living in the Americasto the extent of scattering them, anddecimating their populations. I consider the Protestant movement to have been of God, as it furnished a prelude to the restoration of the full gospel through the Prophet Joseph Smith and others. Unfortunately, most present-day Protestants have rejected the greater revelation, and are presently under condemnation. The time will come when those Gentileswho reject thislatter-day message will be judged of God, however, and the power of the remnant of Jacob will be unleashed upon them. The BoM predicts that, "My people who are a remnant of Jacob (Lamanites, mostly) shall be among the Gentiles, yea, in the midst of them, as a young lion among the flocks of sheep, who, if he go through both treadeth down, and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver. Their hand shall be lifted up upon their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. Yea, wo be unto the Gentiles, except they repent. . . . And I will execute judgement and fury upon them, even as upon the Heathen, such as they have not heard." 3 Nephi 21: 12-22 In a message dated 1/3/2006 9:51:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, do you consider protestants to be pagans?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism FreemasonryDate: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 23:06:52 ESTNo doubt about it, those ancient groups were doing bad stuff, fertilitycultism included. But what I am saying is documenting something from ancienttimes is always hard, and I seriously doubt tracing Freemasonry back to thosetimes could be done with so much confidence in the findings as to be able tosay confidently that such and such is true, or such and such is not true. Infact, that would be true of almost anything. Even Mormonism, which is barelytwo hundred years old, despite an abundance of records on the subject, stillhas much that cannot be said for certain about it. What it boils down to intoo many cases is that basically, we express our opinions, pro and con, andthat's about the best we can do.But I can say with a high degree of confidence, that although there are somesimilarities between free Masonry and the temple Endowment ceremony, thereare far too many fundamental differences to conclude that one came from theother. I have, believe it or not, studied Free Masonry, and I am intimatelyfamiliar with the ceremony in the temple. There are just too many otherpossibilities.In a message dated 12/31/2005 4:00:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:No it is way before that; the ancient fertility cults were practised inCanaan before God destroyed the Amorites.On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:01:12 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED](mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:Blainerb: Freemasonry is obviously descended from the time when the Jewsreturned from the Babylonian captivity to Jerusalem to rebuild their temple andthe walls of the city. It is one thing to say such as you have statedbelow, but quite another to show beyond reasonable doubt that your assertions arecorrect. If you wouldn't mind, I would like to double-check your sources.In a message dated 12/27/2005 8:04:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:I have read the same Blaine and the Freemasonry rituals are based on the oldFertility Cult mystery religions which isthe same kind of paganism that got the Canaanite Nations exiled from thePromised Land and destroyed. There is asexual aspect to both. jtOn Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:06:14 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED](mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:I am not aware of one, except to say, as JS did, that he joined theFreemasons to obtain whatever friendship and support they might offer in times ofduress--as you are probably aware, he was arrested on false charges manytimes--0ver 40 times, as I recall--and abused both physically and verbally a lotof times by antis of his day.But I am sure if there is any official commentary from Church authorities,Kevin would know where it would be found. Especially if it could be usedagainst the Church. :)BlainerbIn a message dated 12/26/2005 10:08:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Does the Mormon Church have an expressed opinion regarding freemasonary?
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep
What about this? Matthew 15:22-26 "And behold a woman of Canaan came . . . but he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel . . . It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs." Do you not believe your Bible? Here He actually stated in so many words his mission was to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL only. The woman from Caanan, although a Gentile, was an exception because of her great faith. His mission to the Samaritans was due to the largeamount of the bloodof Israel in that group of people. The Samaritans were a mixture of Israelite bloodlines and Babylonian bloodlines--they were descendants ofthose Jews who were not taken captive in the Babylonian Captivity, and who intermarried with the Babylonians who were sent from Babylon to occupy the land. Because the Jews would not recognize their Israelite heritage, they even had a separate temple, alter, priests, etc. But Jesus, knowing all things, knewmany of themwere also Israelites. This was not a contradiction to his stance that he was sent "but to the House of Israel." Not only that, but if his mission was "but to the House of Israel," what about those Israelites--ten tribes of them--who had already been taken captive many years earlier into the "Northlands" by Assyria? How was he to minister to them? The Jews were basically two tribes only--Judah and Benjamin--and parts of a third tribe, Levi. The other ten tribes had been takencaptive years earlier and were never heard from again. They are even today referred to as the "Lost Ten tribes." So what about them? Did THE SAVIOR NOT CARE ABOUT THEM? In a message dated 1/1/2006 8:48:23 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: I see no contradictions of my original statement Blain-The Gospel was first preached to the Jews and later given to the sheep of another fold(gentiles). You also failed to explain the gospel being given to the Samaritan women-please do so?? - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/24/2005 4:14:58 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep In a message dated 12/20/2005 4:18:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Jesus didn't stay he wasn't here for the Gentiles-He said that he was here first for the Jews-and later the gentiles upon the Jews rejection. Jew spoke to and healed many gentiles. The Samaritan woman at the well was one of those he preached to-there were many others.The other sheep mentioned were gentiles Your total lack of understanding of the NT record is showing Deano, buddy. Jesus sent ONLY to the House of Israel-- see Matthew 15:22-26 "And behold a woman of Canaan came . . . but he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel . . . It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs." Gentiles given the gospel Peter receivesa visionto preach to the Gentiles:(Read entire chapter 11 in Acts) " When they heard these things, they held their peace, , and glorified god, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." Acts 11:18 The Jews were to actually hear his voice, but the Gentiles were to receive the gospel via the Holy ghost and the preaching of the Apostles--
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
Blainerb: "Supposed to have?" Judging from the "plethora" of records about the Tower of Babel, and what went on then, can you even say "supposed" with any degree of assurance? :) I mean, let's face it, what we have on the Tower of Babel, is vry scant, indeed. The BoM gives a fairly detailed record of one group leaving the Tower . . . called the Book of Ether. But I have not read anything else that I would place much confidence in--perhaps you are aware of some very ancient documents In a message dated 12/31/2005 5:17:31 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, it is supposed to have started with the tower of Babel, and the master builders who were to construct it.TerryJudy Taylor wrote: No it is way before that; the ancient fertility cults were practised in Canaan before God destroyed the Amorites. On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:01:12 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: Freemasonry is obviously descended from the time when the Jews returned from the Babylonian captivity to Jerusalem to rebuild their temple and the walls of the city. It is one thing to say such as you have stated below, but quite another to show beyond reasonable doubt that your assertions are correct. If you wouldn't mind, I would like to double-check your sources. In a message dated 12/27/2005 8:04:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have read the same Blaine and the Freemasonry rituals are based on the old Fertility Cult mystery religions which is the same kind of paganism that got the Canaanite Nations exiled from the Promised Land and destroyed. There is a sexual aspect to both. jt On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:06:14 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not aware of one, except to say, as JS did, that he joined the Freemasons to obtain whatever friendship and support they might offer in times of duress--as you are probably aware, he was arrested on false charges many times--0ver 40 times, as I recall--and abused both physically and verballya lot of times by antis of his day. But I am sure if there is any official commentary from Church authorities, Kevin would know where it would be found. Especially if it could be used against the Church. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/26/2005 10:08:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the Mormon Church have an expressed opinion regarding freemasonary? judyt He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments is a liar (1 John 2:4)
[TruthTalk] Fwd: THE PASTOR'S CAT
In a message dated 12/31/2005 5:10:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Funniest thing I've read for a while. "Laughter does good like medicine."JoanTHE PASTOR'S CATThis particular story just made me laugh. Every time I think about it,the vision of that poor cat just amuses me. Hope the story leaves a brightspot in your day. Who says the Creator doesn't have a sense ofhumor?Dwight Nelson tells a true story about the pastor of his church.He had a kitten that had climbed up a tree in his backyard and then wasafraid to come down. The pastor coaxed, offered warm milk, etc., but thekitty just would not come down.The tree was not sturdy enough to climb, so the pastor decided that if hetied a rope to his car and drove away so that the tree bent down, hecould then reach up and get the kitten.So that's what he did, all the while checking his progress in the car.He then figured if he went just a little bit further, the tree would bebent sufficiently for him to reach the kitten. But as he moved the car alittle further forward, the rope broke.The tree went "boing!" and the kitten went sailing through the air and out of sight! The pastor felt terrible. He walked all over the neighborhood asking people if they'd seen a little kitten. No, nobody had seen a stray kitten. So he prayed, "Lord, I just commit this kitten to your keeping," and went on about his business.A few days later he was at the grocery store and met one of his church members. He happened to look into her shopping cart and was amazed to see cat food. This woman was a cat hater and everyone knew it, so he asked her, "Why are you buying cat food when you hate cats so much?"She replied, "You won't believe this, Pastor." And then told him how her littel girl had been begging her for a cat, but she kept refusing. Then, a few days before, the child had begged again, so Mom finally told her little girl, "Well, if God gives you a cat, I'll let you keep it."She told the pastor, "I watched my child go out in the yard, get on her knees, and ask God for a cat. And really, Pastor, you won't believe this, but I saw it with my own eyes. A kitten suddenly came flying out of the blue sky, with its paws outspread, and landed right in front of her." Never underestimate the Power of God and His unique sense of humor.JoanA candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.From: NED MEACHAM [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: THE PASTOR'S CAT [also from a year ago]Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 02:00:56 -0500 ---BeginMessage--- Funniest thing I've read for a while. Laughter does good like medicine. Joan THE PASTOR'S CAT This particular story just made me laugh. Every time I think about it, the vision of that poor cat just amuses me. Hope the story leaves a bright spot in your day. Who says the Creator doesn't have a sense of humor? Dwight Nelson tells a true story about the pastor of his church. He had a kitten that had climbed up a tree in his backyard and then was afraid to come down. The pastor coaxed, offered warm milk, etc., but the kitty just would not come down. The tree was not sturdy enough to climb, so the pastor decided that if he tied a rope to his car and drove away so that the tree bent down, he could then reach up and get the kitten. So that's what he did, all the while checking his progress in the car. He then figured if he went just a little bit further, the tree would be bent sufficiently for him to reach the kitten. But as he moved the car a little further forward, the rope broke. The tree went boing! and the kitten went sailing through the air and out of sight! The pastor felt terrible. He walked all over the neighborhood asking people if they'd seen a little kitten. No, nobody had seen a stray kitten. So he prayed, Lord, I just commit this kitten to your keeping, and went on about his business. A few days later he was at the grocery store and met one of his church members. He happened to look into her shopping cart and was amazed to see cat food. This woman was a cat hater and everyone knew it, so he asked her, Why are you buying cat food when you hate cats so much? She replied, You won't believe this, Pastor. And then told him how her littel girl had been begging her for a cat, but she kept refusing. Then, a few days before, the child had begged again, so Mom finally told her little girl, Well, if God gives you a cat, I'll let you keep it. She told the pastor, I watched my child go out in the yard, get on her knees, and ask God for a cat. And really, Pastor, you won't believe this, but I saw it with my own eyes. A kitten suddenly came flying out of the blue sky, with its paws outspread, and landed right in front of her. Never underestimate the Power of God and His unique sense of humor. Joan A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle. From:
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
No doubt about it, those ancient groups were doing bad stuff, fertility cultism included. But what I am saying is documenting something from ancient times is always hard, and I seriously doubt tracing Freemasonry back to those times could be done with so much confidence in the findingsas to be able to say confidently that such and such is true, or such and such is not true. In fact, that would be true of almost anything. Even Mormonism, which is barely two hundred years old, despite an abundance of records on the subject, still has much that cannot be said for certain about it. What it boils down to in too many cases is that basically, we express our opinions, pro and con, and that's about the best we can do. But I can say with a high degree of confidence, that although there are some similarities between free Masonry and the temple Endowment ceremony, there are far too many fundamental differences to concludethat one came from the other. I have, believe it or not, studiedFree Masonry, and I am intimately familiar with the ceremony in the temple. There are just too many other possibilities. In a message dated 12/31/2005 4:00:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No it is way before that; the ancient fertility cults were practised in Canaan before God destroyed the Amorites. On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:01:12 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: Freemasonry is obviously descended from the time when the Jews returned from the Babylonian captivity to Jerusalem to rebuild their temple and the walls of the city. It is one thing to say such as you have stated below, but quite another to show beyond reasonable doubt that your assertions are correct. If you wouldn't mind, I would like to double-check your sources. In a message dated 12/27/2005 8:04:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have read the same Blaine and the Freemasonry rituals are based on the old Fertility Cult mystery religions which is the same kind of paganism that got the Canaanite Nations exiled from the Promised Land and destroyed. There is a sexual aspect to both. jt On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:06:14 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not aware of one, except to say, as JS did, that he joined the Freemasons to obtain whatever friendship and support they might offer in times of duress--as you are probably aware, he was arrested on false charges many times--0ver 40 times, as I recall--and abused both physically and verballya lot of times by antis of his day. But I am sure if there is any official commentary from Church authorities, Kevin would know where it would be found. Especially if it could be used against the Church. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/26/2005 10:08:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the Mormon Church have an expressed opinion regarding freemasonary?
[TruthTalk] Church Plaza Fight Ends With a Whimper
ACLU throws in the towel . . . "..."I can't imagine perpetuating the situation where street preachers were standing on the plaza, hurling insults and even profanities at newly married brides," Anderson said. "There are plenty of areas [nearby] for freedom of speech." Mayor Rocky Anderson, former ACLU Lawyer see http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3356230 for complete article . . .
[TruthTalk] Fwd: Praise the Lord
In a message dated 12/29/2005 10:56:31 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There was a little old lady, who every morning stepped onto her frontporch, raised her arms to the sky, and shouted: "PRAISE THE LORD!"One day an atheist moved into the house next door.He became irritated at the little old lady.Every morning he'd step onto his front porch after her and yell:"THERE IS NO LORD!"Time passed with the two of them carrying on this way every day.One morning, in the middle of winter, the little old lady stepped ontoher front porch and shouted: "PRAISE THE LORD! Please Lord, I have nofood and I am starving, provide for me, oh Lord!The next morning she stepped onto her porch and there were two hugebags of groceries sitting there."PRAISE THE LORD!" she cried out. "HE HAS PROVIDED GROCERIES FOR ME!"The atheist neighbor jumped out of the hedges and shouted:"THERE IS NO LORD! I BOUGHT THOSE GROCERIES!!"The little old lady threw her arms into the air and shouted: "PRAISETHE LORD! HE HAS PROVIDED ME WITH GROCERIES AND MADE THE DEVIL PAY FOR THEM!JoanA candle loses nothing by lighting another candle. ---BeginMessage--- There was a little old lady, who every morning stepped onto her front porch, raised her arms to the sky, and shouted: PRAISE THE LORD! One day an atheist moved into the house next door. He became irritated at the little old lady. Every morning he'd step onto his front porch after her and yell: THERE IS NO LORD! Time passed with the two of them carrying on this way every day. One morning, in the middle of winter, the little old lady stepped onto her front porch and shouted: PRAISE THE LORD! Please Lord, I have no food and I am starving, provide for me, oh Lord! The next morning she stepped onto her porch and there were two huge bags of groceries sitting there. PRAISE THE LORD! she cried out. HE HAS PROVIDED GROCERIES FOR ME! The atheist neighbor jumped out of the hedges and shouted: THERE IS NO LORD! I BOUGHT THOSE GROCERIES!! The little old lady threw her arms into the air and shouted: PRAISE THE LORD! HE HAS PROVIDED ME WITH GROCERIES AND MADE THE DEVIL PAY FOR THEM! Joan A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle. ---End Message---
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 12/26/2005 11:52:23 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Add to this the fact that JS was himself a mason of at least the 32nd degree, Blainerb: I assure you there are not anywhere near 32 degrees in Mormon temple ceremonies. There are NO degrees in the ceremonies. :) There are three degrees of glory in the resurrection, in LDS theology, could this be whatLance was referring to? In a message dated 12/26/2005 5:14:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:..are one and the same 'spirit'. The 'degrees' in Mormonism correspond tothe 'degrees' in freemasonry. DANGEROUS STUFF!There is no provable relationship. If there was, you would do more thanmake a blanket statement.Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
I am not aware of one, except to say, as JS did, that he joined the Freemasons to obtain whatever friendship and support they might offer in times of duress--as you are probably aware, he was arrested on false charges many times--0ver 40 times, as I recall--and abused both physically and verballya lot of times by antis of his day. But I am sure if there is any official commentary from Church authorities, Kevin would know where it would be found. Especially if it could be used against the Church. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/26/2005 10:08:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the Mormon Church have an expressed opinion regarding freemasonary? jd -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 12/26/2005 5:14:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..are one and the same 'spirit'. The 'degrees' in Mormonism correspond to the 'degrees' in freemasonry. DANGEROUS STUFF! There is no provable relationship. If there was, you would do more than make a blanket statement. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 12/26/2005 11:52:23 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, I beg to differ. I have read two books, side by side, one of the Mormon temple endowment, and one of Freemasonry, and the similarities are unmistakable, from the the clothing and anointing to the secret grips, tokens, and penalties. Add to this the fact that JS was himself a mason of at least the 32nd degree, and it is quite obvious that JS adopted and adapted the Freemason ceremonies for his own use in the LDS temple endowments. Blainerb: I don't think the LDS Church has ever denied what you are saying, so it seems unnecessary to even point it out. The similarities are just that, however, and there are other aspects of the LDS ceremonies that are highly dissimilar.Your conclusions thatJS just went in and adapted/borrowed stuff seems a little rash, it seems to me. A charitable attitude towards JS and Mormons in general would suggest to me that his claims to have received the temple ceremonies by revelation should be given first priority. As in all dreams and other revelations, the Lord often makes use of symbols and etc familiar to the recipient-- I see nothing amiss in this happening with regards to JS's revelations, whether regarding temple ceremonies or otherwise. The Key word here is CHARITY.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 12/26/2005 11:52:23 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lets add to this some new information...the Freemasons, in their ceremonies, pay homage to several Egyptian gods. Now, you have told us that JS writes in the PoGP that one of hte names of god is Amun, or Ammon, an Egyptian god. See the siilarity. I am anxious to research if JS got that name fromt he pages fromt eh book of the dead he purchased and pretended to translate as the Book of Abraham, or if he learned it in his Masonic lodge. Blainerb: I simply stated that some words from the language of Adam had been revealed to Joseph Smith, among them the word Ahman, for God the Father. In pointing out the similarities between that word and some Egyptian names for deity, I was suggesting that perhaps the Egyptianshad throughtime corrupted the concept of God, but had retained the name to some extent. It is a well known fact that languages change, but still retain words or similar words to the original. An example is the Algonquin Indian word for father--Abba. The same word in Hebrew has the same meaning. I am not an expert on languages, but it seems pretty clear there had to be a linguistic/cultural sameness at some point in time. Again, CHARITYmight help you reach different conclusionsfrom the ones you draw.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
Blainerb: Freemasonry is obviously descended from the time when the Jews returned from the Babylonian captivity to Jerusalem to rebuild their temple and the walls of the city. It is one thing to say such as you have stated below, but quite another to show beyond reasonable doubt that your assertions are correct. If you wouldn't mind, I would like to double-check your sources. In a message dated 12/27/2005 8:04:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have read the same Blaine and the Freemasonry rituals are based on the old Fertility Cult mystery religions which is the same kind of paganism that got the Canaanite Nations exiled from the Promised Land and destroyed. There is a sexual aspect to both. jt On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:06:14 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not aware of one, except to say, as JS did, that he joined the Freemasons to obtain whatever friendship and support they might offer in times of duress--as you are probably aware, he was arrested on false charges many times--0ver 40 times, as I recall--and abused both physically and verballya lot of times by antis of his day. But I am sure if there is any official commentary from Church authorities, Kevin would know where it would be found. Especially if it could be used against the Church. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/26/2005 10:08:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the Mormon Church have an expressed opinion regarding freemasonary?
Re: [TruthTalk] Merry Christmas!
My thinking, too, jd. In fact, I wonder if Marlin collects antiques. Marlin, do you hold onto the past in other ways, too? Blainerb In a message dated 12/25/2005 9:57:09 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello Marlin. Christmas has a very different definition around our house. I am not one who cares about the history or even the etimology of words and events that have taken on definitions of their own. It is a blessed time of year. We think of and even celebrate the birth of Christ, knowing that His presense was all about emanuel. jd -- Original message -- From: "Marlin halverson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.) Christ 2.) Mass I think we all know that "Christ" refers to God's Son Jesus. The word "Mass" comes from Old English mæsse, a modification of (assumed) Vulgar Latin messa from the Late Latin missa, literally meaning "dismissal"; as in at the end of a religious service. The Middle English Christemasse, comes from Old English Cristes mæsse, literally, Christ's mass - shortened to "Christ-mas". Meaning the "dismissal" or passing away of Christ; or more directly, the death of Christ.. Those who understand a bit about the Catholic religion realize that the "Mass" always refers to the sacrificial death of Christ. The word "Christmas" comes from the Roman Catholic ritual. Folks walk around this time of year saying "Merry Christmas!" to each other. I wonder if it occurs to anyone they are saying "Merry Death of Christ." www.truthontheweb.org/NwsClpz/122405.htm- Maranatha
Re: [TruthTalk] Perhaps YOU can 'share', David!
Blainerb: I believe most people, being children of God, experience spiritual experiences, possibly termed miracles, at some time or other in their lives.I read of such accounts in crediblesources quite often. I have no real reason to doubt the sincerity of these people, who are not even Mormons, usually. However, the type of miracles mentioned in the scriptures, such as casting out devils, instantaneous healing by the laying on of hands, being healed by spiritual means, and doing such in the name of Jesus Christ, even raising the dead, are much rarer. They do appear in Mormon literature quite often. My own grandfather, while he was on missions (2) to Norway, reports such events happening. Hewrites a detailed account ofcasting out devils by the laying on of hands, and in the name of Jesus Christ. He reports healing people, also by the laying on hands, by authority of the priesthood after the order of the Son of God (Melchizedek PH), which he had received beforedeparting for his mission.He reports being healed, by the laying on of hands--hands that were felt tangibly but unseen. He reports seeing other Elders do these things also. As I said, Mormon literature is full of these things. As for me, my miracles have been restricted to personal spiritual experiences, of which I have had many--some confirming the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be true, and the BoM to be true. I have not healed anyone, nor cast out devils. Perhaps my faith needs to be strengthened before doing these things. In a message dated 12/26/2005 3:38:48 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: IFO would appreciate hearing from you on this.- Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: December 25, 2005 15:23Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Who decides Blainerb: Just for the record, I believe the Lord was speaking to his apostles, but was speaking concerning all whom they taught. That's how I read it too, but I will continue to consider Perry's comments. Blaine wrote: As Jesus said to Joseph Smith, concerning the Christians of that day, "They teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof." (Speaking of the power of God to perform miracles) The problem is, there is an almost universal disbelief in God's power to perform miraculous acts. Miracles are commonly reported among Mormon believers--I have experienced a number of them myself--almost always in connection with work in the church. Miracles are common among many of the Christian communities that operate in faith, but this unfortunately is a minority among all the Christians of the world. Most of the Mormons I have known and spoken to do not have direct experience with miracles. Perhaps you can share some of your testimony with us concerning how God has worked miraculously in your Mormon community. I watched a movie not too long ago about a Mormon missonary named John Groberg whose assignment was Tonga. It was called, "The Other Side of Heaven." Have you seen it? What do you think of it? It seemed a bit skimpy on the kind of miracles that I hear from most Christian missionaries. Peace be with you. David Miller.
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism Freemasonry
In a message dated 12/26/2005 5:14:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..are one and the same 'spirit'. The 'degrees' in Mormonism correspond to the 'degrees' in freemasonry. DANGEROUS STUFF! There is no provable relationship. If there was, you would do more than make a blanket statement. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath
Be careful what you pray for, Dean--and I have not felt any rebukes except from some of theTT witches and warlocks putting hex's on me. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/20/2005 4:00:56 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/19/2005 10:08:24 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath I love the Bible! In church, we are currently studying the DC, but will begin the Old Testament in January, for a year. Last year we studied the BoM, the year before, the New Testament. It is all scripture to us. We do not see the problems you see with the BoM. It is 100% compatible with the Bible--you just have to have the perspective we have. You have to first believe, even if just a little bit, and faith will grow within you, to take over you whole soul, Dean. cd: The Lord rebuke you Blain for such a evil suggestion. May God kill me before something that dark takes over my soul.
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep
In a message dated 12/20/2005 4:18:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: Jesus didn't stay he wasn't here for the Gentiles-He said that he was here first for the Jews-and later the gentiles upon the Jews rejection. Jew spoke to and healed many gentiles. The Samaritan woman at the well was one of those he preached to-there were many others.The other sheep mentioned were gentiles Your total lack of understanding of the NT record is showing Deano, buddy. Jesus sent ONLY to the House of Israel-- see Matthew 15:22-26 "And behold a woman of Canaan came . . . but he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel . . . It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs." Gentiles given the gospel Peter receivesa visionto preach to the Gentiles:(Read entire chapter 11 in Acts) " When they heard these things, they held their peace, , and glorified god, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." Acts 11:18 The Jews were to actually hear his voice, but the Gentiles were to receive the gospel via the Holy ghost and the preaching of the Apostles--
Re: [TruthTalk] Bats and the Blainer connection
Is this a good day for "bashing' Mormons? I don't need a bat to defend myself, guys, the truth cuts to the center of the heart, does it not? The full text, bros, reads, "And the person who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrine the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but they deny the power thereof." In a message dated 12/24/2005 12:11:56 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ok--i was hopin' maybe BB'd buy a bat too--to defend his honor as a devotee of JS to whom JC so wisely spaketh..say, do youknow why JC doesn'tspeak to DavidM partic so wisely? On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 06:56:09 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Let's do ahs. Get me a price and I will exchange cash card info. Also -- I think you misundstand the purpose for my purchase (lol -- really) -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maple or ash, Bro--hickory is way too heavy and Blaine bein' light on his feet and lightheaded too probably runs faster than youthink On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 05:36:27 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: G I want a bat. Small diameter grip. Signiture "Pops-- 2006" Hickory ??? Long and light -- is there such a thing? jd -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] true; JCdoesn't see Mormans as Christians--neither do I, Bro On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:49:48 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As Jesus said to Joseph Smith, concerning the Christians of that day, "They teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof."
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/23/2005 10:31:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb:Pe le El--from the language of Adam and Eve--sacred words that pertain specifically to the ceremony, so cannot discuss further. Sorry-- You lost me on this one. are you saying that Mormonism knows the language spoken by A and E? I may have been mistaken--the words Pe le El seem to be Hebrew, which reads from right to left. I will check it out next time I go to the temple. However, some clues regards the language of Adam were revealed to JS. Adam-Ondi-Ahman,which seems to mean "land of God, where Adam dwelt;" Ahman A name for God, means, Man of Holiness (see Egyptian name of God, Ammon, or Amon, or Amen--similar?) Son Ahman, means the Son of God sons Ahman, means "men" angloman, means angel and Moses, chap 6, PofGP, where it speaks of the language of Adam being a pure and undefiled written language.
Re: [TruthTalk] With Thankful Hearts
What I have concluded from intensive study concerning the life of Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, was born in the Spring, in a lambing cave, in a manger, on the outskirts of Bethlehem, in the Land of Jerusalem, in the year 1 AD. He was born in the Meridian of Time, probably at Midnight, on the eve of the Passover. The sun was in theconstellationAries, the first sign of the zodiac, sign of the young ram, and in medical astrology, representing the head; the moon would have been in the opposite sign Libra, the scales of justice--the great star was likely in the constellation Leo, the sign of the King, and the tribe of Judah. Heexpired on a cross 33 years, almost to a day, later, on a hill called Calvary, on the North end of the hill. It was the same hill upon which Abraham undertook to sacrifice Isaac, his only son, wherein God provided his own ram. Merry Christmas . . . Blainerb In a message dated 12/24/2005 1:17:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christmas blessings to you, Judy, and everyone on TT. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorSent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 7:39 AMTo: truthtalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: [TruthTalk] With Thankful Hearts Hey Everyone, Please pray for us - If I'm not available for a while it's because I have a houseful of needy people; I hope everyoneeveryone has a peaceful and joyous Christmasthat is focusedon the one true light during these diffficult times. In His Love, judyt P.S. Just a wee testimony to the Lord's faithfulness, love and grace. It appears as though the marriage of our TX daughter is not going to make it which is really sad for everyone involved and she is presently travelling a lot of miles from Austin TX to Norf VA with four kids, a dog, a rabbit, and a hamster in her minivan to be with us over Christmas. Yesterday while she was talking with me on the phone her van began to shudder and make a funny noise.They looked and she hadn't blown a tire. Her dad talked her thru what to do and helped her to figure out the mileage marker so she would know where she was at. She then called USAA and gotsome phone numbers anda man met them at a Wendys and drove them to a repair place. It turned out there was a big chunk out of one of her tires and he said they had seen this beforeand if she had been doing 70 mph and had a blowout it would havecaused her van to overturn -how we rejoiced in the Lords mercy and saving grace - and how we thanked him for that warning. The tires are just 6 months old.
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
I don't see that I was wrong--I was simply saying that there are other Christians besides myself who considered the possibility of tremendous blood loss in Gethsemane. I was also suggesting that perhaps my post as a Mormon was not being given the same due consideration it might have been if I had been just another traditional Christian with a different opinion. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/21/2005 5:15:24 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Congratulations, Blaine. So you are not the first to be wrong. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 6:40 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat Blainerb: Apparently I am not the first to wonder if the loss of blood at Gethsemane was considerable. See below: In a message dated 12/19/2005 8:53:15 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Although some authors have suggested that hematidrosis produced hypovolemia, we agree with Bucklin5 that Jesus actual blood loss probably was minimal. search help Printer-Friendly Format | Email to a Friend Definition of Hypovolemia Hypovolemia: An abnormal decrease in blood volume or, strictly speaking, an abnormal decrease in the volume of blood plasma. From hypo- + volume + emia (blood).
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormons and Christ
With paerry's permission, I would appreciate it if you would list the characteristics descriptive of Jesus in Mormon scripture -- not including the KJ Mormon bible. Just your scriptures. Speak as a Mormon, please and not with merely personal conviction. Thanks, jd Blainerb: Listing all His characteristics as indicated in "Mormon" scriptures would be difficult, time-wise at least. But will defer to your request as much as I have time to do so . . . The following are from the Doctrine and Covenants--they are either his words directly, or spoken under the influence of his Holy Spirit. I will try to go to the Book of Mormon tomorrow, or as soon as I find time. He is the only Savior of Mankind: "Hear, oh ye heavens, and give ear, oh earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof, for the Lord is God, and besides him, there is no Savior." "I am Alpha and Omega, Christ the Lord; yea, even I am he, the beginning and the end, the Redeemer of the world." Heis themost wise: "Great is his wisdom, marvelous are his ways, and the extent of his doings, nonecan find out." He is the most powerful: "His purposes fail not, neither are there any who can stay his hand." He lives!! "And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, that we give of him: that he lives. For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; (Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery speaking) He is the only begotten Son of the Father: And we heard the voice bearing record that he is the only begotten of the Father . . . He is the creator: That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God. He is subject to the will of the Father: "And we beheld the glory of the Son, on the right hand of the Father, (The following are all continuous, Jesus Christ speaking) "I, having accomplished and finished the will of Him whose I am, even the Father, concerning me--having done this that I might subdue all things unto myself . . . He will destroy Satan and his works at the last day: "retaining all power, even to the destroying of Satan and his works at the end of the world, and the last great day of judgement . . . He will reward men according to their deeds, good or evil "which I shall pass upon the inhabitants thereof, judging every man according to his works and the deeds which he has done." I fully believe these wordsareeither those ofthe living Christ, or were spoken under the influence of his spirit--either way, they are divine scripture, and therefore are binding on all who read them. Blainerb In a message dated 12/21/2005 6:39:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Jesus of the Bible is the same as the one in the BoM and the DC--if you knew the one in the Bible better, you would recognize him in the BoM and DC--unfortunately, your concepts of him come from your traditions, which are largely of men. The Mormon Jesus is one who still has power to perform miracles, and to do a new thing--the traditions you teach have emasculated him beyond recognition--your Jesus is impotent--unable to work or act without the approval of your confused ministers or your stand-in-your-own-light, self-appointed preachers. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Who decides
jd wrote: How many Christians have believed and been baptized but have not seen anyof these signs follow them? Again, we either have to conclude that theconcept of faith as taught by Jesus is something greater than the popular conceptof it, or that Jesus was bearing false testimony here, or perhaps that this passage only applies to the immediate believers to whom he spoke. I take the position that faith is something more than what most people thinkfaith is. Blainerb: Just for the record, I believe the Lord was speaking to his apostles, but was speaking concerning all whom they taught. As Jesus said to Joseph Smith, concerning the Christians of that day, "They teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof." (Speaking of the power of God to perform miracles) The problem is, there is an almost universal disbelief in God's power to perform miraculous acts. Miracles are commonly reported among Mormon believers--I have experienced a number of them myself--almost always in connection with work in the church. In a message dated 12/21/2005 8:24:24 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I stated that I do in my original post below.From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Who decidesDate: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:46:19 -0600Perry, so do you think the "He" in verse 16 refers only to the apostles,too? izzy-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean MooreSent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 5:54 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Who decidescd: I agree Perry. [Original Message] From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 12/21/2005 5:00:05 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Who decides David,Regarding your item 2, we might also conclude that Jesus was speaking specifically to the apostles, and that this does not apply to allbelievers. The key is to identify the antecedent of "He" in verse 16, which Ibelieve to exclusively be the apostles. Perry David wrote: 2. Mark 16:16-20 (16) He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he thatbelieveth not shall be damned. (17) And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (18) They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (19) So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (20) And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. How many Christians have believed and been baptized but have not seen anyof these signs follow them? Again, we either have to conclude that theconcept of faith as taught by Jesus is something greater than the popular conceptof it, or that Jesus was bearing false testimony here, or perhaps that this passage only applies to the immediate believers to whom he spoke. I take the position that faith is something more than what most people thinkfaith is.
Re: [TruthTalk] Back tot he garden
In a message dated 12/21/2005 9:22:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Excuse me, but were you actually under the impression that your opinion matters to me??? iz Blainer: Ha Ha! That's Iz, huh? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 8:57 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Back tot he garden Iz, Here's a suggestion. Sometime this Christmas season, try putting this sauce on your own goose: '..you derive your opinions from false premises, not God’s Word' One reason for it? Evidence suggests that legalism so consumes overwhelms your belief/sthat you really can't help being trapped in its ridiculous interpretations contradiction/s: On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 07:17:21 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || a)..we [must] keep the Commandments of God throughout scripture, from Genesis to Revelations that apply to everyone... b) Jesus ..make[s] it possible.. to KEEP His Commandments..something that [only a]Believer..can.. do...
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/22/2005 4:41:28 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Congratulations, Blaine. So you are not the first to be wrong. iz cd: Yes amen-Truth is having her perfect way Blain. Blainerb: Opinions . . .
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/22/2005 5:04:21 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am always happy to publish the great truths of Mormonism on TT or anywhere. :) Blainerb cd: Then please tell us of this Pay-Lay-Ale ceremony Blainerb:Pe le El--from the language of Adam and Eve--sacred words that pertain specifically to the ceremony, so cannot discuss further. Sorry-- The present-day ceremony is all in English, however. Pe le El is no longer used.
Re: [TruthTalk] DOCTRINAL DISPUTES SELDOM (DEFINE PLEASE) HAPPEN
In a message dated 12/20/2005 3:35:36 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LDS history, Blainer. So, what is it you are concerned about? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE ...
In a message dated 12/20/2005 4:35:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/18/2005 11:24:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE "... In a message dated 12/17/2005 5:09:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: To "be perfect," it seems one would first have to become perfect--which may take more time for some than others.I do OK in following the admonitions of Jesus Christ, and I believe I do better each day--but I am after all a son of Adam and Eve, from whom I inherited imperfections. 1 Cor 15:44-52 cd:Christians are son of Christ -the lost are sons of AE and will have no inheritance. Where does it say that, Dean? We are all sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, who inherit the conditions of the fall. Are you an exception? ICor 15:22:"For as in Adam all die so in Christ shall all be made alive". I no longer have eternal death as I am of Christ not Adam. Also read 1 Cor 15:44-52-because of Christ I am restored-that makes me an exception. Ooooh!! I see. An exception!! Hmmm, :) Iam guessingyou are trying to interpret this passage to mean youhave becomeabove temptation, and the other conditions of fallen humanity. Is this correct? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
The Jesus of the Bible is the same as the one in the BoM and the DC--if you knew the one in the Bible better, you would recognize him in the BoM and DC--unfortunately, your concepts of him come from your traditions, which are largely of men. The Mormon Jesus is one who still has power to perform miracles, and to do a new thing--the traditions you teach have emasculated him beyond recognition--your Jesus is impotent--unable to work or act without the approval of your confused ministers or your stand-in-your-own-light, self-appointed preachers. Blainerb In a message dated 12/20/2005 4:36:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/17/2005 5:18:02 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:59:42 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: discerning the difference . . . cd: And the sad part is you actually believe a man who said there were 6 ft quaker like people living on the moon-as a prophet of God-very sad indeed. He may have said that, but he also testified of the reality of Jesus Christ. Would you count that as being uninspired? Blainerb cd: You and DaveH both mention Jesus Christ but it is not the Christ on the Bible-as was Smiths Christ not of God.If he was inspired then Smiths word would reflect Christ words they do not do so.Therefore the only conclusion I can draw from that is Smith is speaking of another Christ.Simular to the Jesus that RCC teachs-They made unto themselves a Christ that allows for Idol worship and sell him to people for attendance to their Church. - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/16/2005 4:08:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross In a message dated 12/14/2005 5:00:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: The why don't Mormons live by Jesus's words instead of Smith's words. Blainerb: . Smith lived and died for his testimony of Jesus Christ, whom he saw and spoke with on several occasions. Smith was His prophet, just as Moses was his prophet.There are exciting parallels between the two, in fact. If JS ever spoke anything contrary to the mind and will of the Lord, he spoke of himself. Being a man, having the weaknesses of a man, he may have done that on occasion. But that did not mean he was not a prophet who revealed the mind and will of Jesus Christ to man in these last days. Use the Holy Spirit, and the spirit of charity to be your guide in discerning the difference . . . cd: And the sad part is you actually believe a man who said there were 6 ft quaker like people living on the moon-as a prophet of God-very sad indeed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Blainerb: Hmm, well, at least you are able to spell out why the RCC Jesus is the same as the Evangelical Jesus. Also, asI said in another post, if Dean knew the Biblical Jesus as well as he purports to, he would recognize him in the BoM and the DC. He is the same as you have indicated below for the RCC :) In a message dated 12/20/2005 8:14:16 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My Jesus, Dean, IS NOT DEFINED by the traditons of men. Was Jesus born of a virgin. Was He , at the same time, the Son of God? Is He the Creator of the worlds. Was he reased from the dead ? Is it His sacrifice that presents us with the forgiveness of sins? Yes to all this -- and the RCC is fully agreed on these ppoints. The RCC differs from my theology on two general levels - the importances of works and the place in worship for the traditions of the Church. A third consideration is the role of the Church as the revelator of God in Christ. But our God is the same. jd
Re: [TruthTalk] Sweat SHMEAT!! Let's move onto something important shall we?
Blainerb: Lance, haven't you learned yet that if it is advocated by myself or DaveH, it is automatically either denigrated or in some way discredited. :) You are right, this topic should have been left alone and chalked up to being just another Christian interpretation of some Biblical passages dealing with events leading up to the crucifixion--but since it was "Mormon," it had to be discounted and put down, lest anyone believe--the last thing the anti's want, and the one thing they are most fearful of happening. In a message dated 12/21/2005 5:13:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainer:I'VE NO IDEA WHAT THE ANTI'S CONSIDER IMPORTANT!! IFO would prefer to keep the conversation between the MC and myself on WHO IS JESUS! IMO, signs/symbols/practices, though not without significance, lead us on a rabbit trail of little import. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: December 20, 2005 19:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat Blainerb: Apparently I am not the first to wonder if the loss of blood at Gethsemane was considerable. See below: In a message dated 12/19/2005 8:53:15 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Although some authors have suggested that hematidrosis produced hypovolemia, we agree with Bucklin5 that Jesus actual blood loss probably was minimal. search help Printer-Friendly Format | Email to a Friend Definition of Hypovolemia Hypovolemia: An abnormal decrease in blood volume or, strictly speaking, an abnormal decrease in the volume of blood plasma. From hypo- + volume + emia
Fwd: [TruthTalk] sweat
I am always happy to publish the great truths of Mormonism on TT or anywhere. :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/21/2005 5:57:26 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thank you for proving my point. You are in error because you derive your opinions from false premises, not God’s Word. Please discuss this further on TT rather than private posts, thank you. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:14 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat In a message dated 12/19/2005 10:06:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, there is NOTHING in scripture to back up what you are saying. It is entirely your speculation. Where did you get that idea? Is that another mormon doctrine thingy? So what was the anecdote that convinced you of this regarding Jesus Himself? iz Blainerb: Kevin posted some of the Mormon doctrine sources for this belief--guess you did not read them--definitely Mormon doctrines: Encyclopedia of Mormonism ... For Latter-day Saints, Gethsemane was the scene of Jesus' greatest agony, even surpassing that which he suffered on the cross, an understanding supported by Mark's description of Jesus' experience (Mark 14:33-39). ... The evidence for Jesus' extreme agony in Gethsemane is buttressed by a prophecy in the Book of Mormon and a statement by the resurrected Savior recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants. About 125 B.C., a Book of Mormon king, Benjamin, recounted in an important address a prophecy of the coming messiah spoken to him by an angel during the previous night. Concerning the Messiah's mortal experience, the angel declared that "he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people" (Mosiah 3:7). The Doctrine and Covenants gives the following poignant words of the resurrected Jesus: "Behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; …which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit" (DC 19:16, 18). Modern LDS leaders have emphasized that Jesus' most challenging experience came in Gethsemane. Speaking in a general conference of the Church in 1982, Marion G. Romney, a member of the First Presidency, observed that Jesus suffered "the pains of all men, which he did, principally, in Gethsemane, the scene of his great agony" (Ensign 12 [May 1982]:6). Church President Ezra Taft Benson wrote that "it was in Gethsemane that Jesus took on Himself the sins of the world, in Gethsemane that His pain was equivalent to the cumulative burden of all men, in Gethsemane that He descended below all things so that all could repent and come to Him" (Benson, p. 7). (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, edited by Daniel H. Ludlow, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1992, p. 542) ---BeginMessage--- Thank you for proving my point. You are in error because you derive your opinions from false premises, not Gods Word. Please discuss this further on TT rather than private posts, thank you. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat In a message dated 12/19/2005 10:06:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, there is NOTHING in scripture to back up what you are saying. It is entirely your speculation. Where did you get that idea? Is that another mormon doctrine thingy? So what was the anecdote that convinced you of this regarding Jesus Himself? iz Blainerb: Kevin posted some of the Mormon doctrine sources for this belief--guess you did not read them--definitely Mormon doctrines: Encyclopedia of Mormonism ... For Latter-day Saints, Gethsemane was the scene of Jesus' greatest agony, even surpassing that which he suffered on the cross, an understanding supported by Mark's description of Jesus' experience (Mark 14:33-39). ... The evidence for Jesus' extreme agony in Gethsemane is buttressed by a prophecy in the Book of Mormon and a statement by the resurrected Savior recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants. About 125 B.C., a Book of Mormon king, Benjamin, recounted in an important address a prophecy of the coming messiah spoken to him by an angel during the previous night. Concerning the Messiah's mortal experience, the angel declared that he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Blainerb: Apparently I am not the first to wonder if the loss of blood at Gethsemane was considerable. See below: In a message dated 12/19/2005 8:53:15 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Although some authors have suggested that hematidrosis produced hypovolemia, we agree with Bucklin5 that Jesus actual blood loss probably was minimal. search help Printer-Friendly Format | Email to a Friend Definition of Hypovolemia Hypovolemia: An abnormal decrease in blood volume or, strictly speaking, an abnormal decrease in the volume of blood plasma. From hypo- + volume + emia (blood).
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath
I love the Bible! In church, we are currently studying the DC, but will begin the Old Testament in January, for a year. Last year we studied the BoM, the year before, the New Testament. It is all scripture to us. We do not see the problems you see with the BoM. It is 100% compatible with the Bible--you just have to have the perspective we have. You have to first believe, even if just a little bit, and faith will grow within you, to take over you whole soul, Dean. In a message dated 12/19/2005 4:40:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/18/2005 11:05:09 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath Just another little disagreement as to what conclusions can be reached in reading a particular passage in the Bible. Blainerb cd: The bible say to study to show thyself approved. Some passages must be studied-I see no problem here-you bias against the Bible is showing Blain-better cover it.
Re: [TruthTalk] DOCTRINAL DISPUTES SELDOM (DEFINE PLEASE) HAPPEN
Are we talking about my personal history, or the history of the LDS Church? I have volumes on the latter. Only one autobiog on myself. Blainerb In a message dated 12/19/2005 5:04:54 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainer: Just how well (seriously) do you know your own history? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: December 19, 2005 00:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE "... Most Bishops have so much to do that they have little time to answer petty questions to resolve doctrinal disputes. I would not take a problem of that nature to my Bishop. No one I know would. Doctrinal disputes seldom happen, since the BoM and the DC are very clear. I know this sounds weird, but it happens to be true. If I have a doctrinal misunderstanding, I just study it out in my own mind, and the answer usually presents itself via the Spirit of the Lord. Blainerb In a message dated 12/18/2005 9:36:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, if you and a fellow mormon disagreed on the meaning of a verse, you would go to your Bishop, he would tell you what it means, and regardless of the answer, you both would acceot that, am I right? If not, how would you resolve it?
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath/Other lost Israelite sheep
JD was just stating a biblical truth, Dean. Jesus said several times he was sent to the house of Israel ONLY!!! He never went to the Gentiles. His apostles did that. But he did visit the Israelite branches in the Americas and the isles of the sea--these werehis "other sheep." And because the visit was in person, they heard his voice. Blainerb In a message dated 12/19/2005 4:42:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: VERY GOOD, jd!! Jesus said several times he was sentonly to the House of Israel, which is why he even went to the Samaritans, many of whom had Jewish bloodlines. That being concluded, what do you think when he said, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, and they too I must visit, and they too must Hear My Voice!" cd: Is John and the LDS in agreement now? In a message dated 12/17/2005 3:25:29 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christ's physical ministry was to the Jew, only. He lived under the law and was the fulfillment of that law. In Him is the end of the law.
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/18/2005 7:28:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. I have trodden the winepress alone, . . . Sure seems to be a strong emphasis on lots of blood--Gethsemane? Blainer
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Thank you Iz, this is talking about none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, right? John also calls him "the Word." Blainerb In a message dated 12/18/2005 1:33:45 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: rev.11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. iz
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Oh, well, at least we have agreed he bled in Gethsemane, is that a conclusion I can count on? :) Maybe not so much as I thought tho, huh? Blainerb In a message dated 12/19/2005 8:14:29 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Although this is a very rare phenomenon, bloody sweat (hematidrosis or hemihidrosis) may occur in highly emotional states or in persons with bleeding disorders. (18,20) As a result of hemorrhage into the sweat glands, the skin becomes fragile and tender. (2,11) Luke's description supports the diagnosis of hematidrosis rather than eccrine chromidrosis (brown or yellow-green sweat) or stigmatization (blood oozing from the palms or elsewhere). (18-21) Although some authors have suggested that hematidrosis produced hypovolemia, we agree with Bucklin5 that Jesus actual blood loss probably was minimal. http://www.holytrinity.ok.goarch.org/Interesting%20Stuff/Special%20Communication%20Plus%20Picture.html A Physician Looks at the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Condition of heart of unregenerate gentiles
In a message dated 12/17/2005 12:41:17 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: you manipulate it too, as clearly proven On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:28:17 -0500 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || I quote..scripture as written in the KJV Bible I think it was Lance who asked DaveH and/or I what our perception of traditional Christianity was. Please forgive me for not having the post ready at hand--I think it got lost somewhere, but I recall it well enough to talk about it, anyway, I believe. The short but sweet discussion above about covers my perception of one of the main characteristics of Traditional Christianity--lots of disagreement, even when it comes to the same passages in the Bible. Mainstream Christians talk about the "Church" as if it were one, but this appears to be more lip service than reality. The hard reality, as I see it, is that although we have been blessed with a bible, we can't agree on what it says. I am very much impressed with the work of the great reformers, especially Tyndale, who had eight different languages at his disposal, but I see his work and the works of most other reformers as being a prelude to the restoration of the Gospel as contained in the Book of Mormon and other books, not an end in itself. To my view, the Protestant reformation was of God--most definitely!! Unfortunately, most Protestants reached the unjustified conclusion that making the Bible available to the common man, which again I believe was clearly one of God's great works, meant it was OK to say "lo here," and "lo there," as every man and his brother then became self-styled experts on what it all meant. Fortunately, God saw the confusion, and called upon his servant Joseph Smith and others to rectify the condition--thus the coming forth of the Book of Mormon!! End of first installment. More later, if I do not get submerged in one of TT's endless controversies!
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
In a message dated 12/17/2005 2:18:03 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, DaveH kicked himself off. The Moderator told him that it was his last warning - that's all... because they kept ignoring him and went on with a thread he told them to take offline. Who told you he was kicked off?? judyt I got it that he was actually kicked off after discussion with DaveM and Perry, with conditions being set to get back on. DaveH sent me a private e-mail.
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
In a message dated 12/17/2005 2:26:31 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: IFO have thought of DaveH as one of the more discrimitating contributors to TT.Should he be invited back with an accompanying apology and full complicity? I enjoy his insights, altho lately he has not been pulling punches as he usually does. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
I think they know who they are, too, but that doesn't seem to faze them. Blainerb In a message dated 12/17/2005 2:53:13 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He is certainly not nearly as disruptive as at least two others on this forum. I jwill tnot refer kto them by dname but they probably know who they are? jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] IFO have thought of DaveH as one of the more discrimitating contributors to TT.Should he be invited back with an accompanying apology and full complicity? - Original Message -
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath
Just another little disagreement as to what conclusions can be reached in reading a particular passage in the Bible. Blainerb In a message dated 12/17/2005 3:10:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean, the words of Romans 14 eliminates all holy days. To escape this conclusion, one must add some sort of contextual consideration.Such is perfectedly permissible ... the larger context of a passage is always an important consideration. But, your conclusions regarding the observance of the sabbath is based upon this contextual consideration and not upon the literal wording of the passage. You could be right BUT not necessarily. Agreed? So there is room for disagreement on this issue (?) jd cd:If Romans 14 eliminates all Holy Days why then did Christ and Paul keep those Holy Days? Why did the early Christians keep the Sat. Sabb. and honor the first day?On considering the Contextual meaning relating of the passage in Question one must insert the passage into the context of the entirechapter or the meaning of the passage will be lost-and once that is done insert the chapter into the entire Bible. The context of thechapter deals with eating herbs or meats on Holy days and to not judge ones brother if they eat herbs or eat other foods. No where in the context of this passage does it mention the Sabbath-it is speaking of the Feasts of Israel (ie called Holy Days). Is there not a Commentary available for you or Terry to research?If not E-Sword is a good starting place.Your argument would be better fought using Col 2:6. Romans 14:5 Is teaching us to be fully persuaded that there is not sin involved-breaking a commandment is sin therefore the Sabbath is obligatory.
Re: [TruthTalk] Saturday Sabbath
Blainerb: VERY GOOD, jd!! Jesus said several times he was sentonly to the House of Israel, which is why he even went to the Samaritans, many of whom had Jewish bloodlines. That being concluded, what do you think when he said, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, and they too I must visit, and they too must Hear My Voice!" In a message dated 12/17/2005 3:25:29 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christ's physical ministry was to the Jew, only. He lived under the law and was the fulfillment of that law. In Him is the end of the law. As to Paul, it is Paul who writes against holy days. Why did he continue to keep them (and I believe he kept ALL of them) : he became all things to all men that by all means he might save some. He was a Jew to the Jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles. jd
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/17/2005 4:03:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: English nuancecaptures the foregoingNT concept in the compounded wording, blood shed, or, shed blood, which, as is obvious,isproperly associatedwith Golgotha, not Gethsemane Then you must not really believe everything the Bible says--he sweated great drops of blood in Gethsemane--recall the officers of the High Priest, who came to take him? When he identified himself as the one they wanted, they fell backwards. Ever wonder why? Probably because he was so bloodied--even his clothes probably had blood on them. His hair was probably matted with blood at that point. Also, what about his forty stripes? You think he she blood there and then? Probably lots of it. I am amazed he wasn't so dehydrated and weak from loss of blood, by the time he picked up his cross, that he was even alive.
Re: [TruthTalk] Condition of heart of unregenerate gentiles
Note please, disagreement on the meaning of Matt 7-11? More Christian disagreement? Blainerb :) In a message dated 12/17/2005 4:25:33 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Read what I said again JD and stop putting words in my mouth I was not interpreting Matt 7:11 to mean this; I merely said that ppl in churches that believe in the spiritual gifts use this verse to encourage people to seek the baptism in the Holy Spirit. This is not my view, it is theirs... You sure don't read too accurately do you JD? On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 21:48:10 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Your view that Mattt 7:11 is talking about the reception of the baptism of the Holy spirit is the most recent case in point.
Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE ...
In a message dated 12/17/2005 5:09:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: To "be perfect," it seems one would first have to become perfect--which may take more time for some than others.I do OK in following the admonitions of Jesus Christ, and I believe I do better each day--but I am after all a son of Adam and Eve, from whom I inherited imperfections. cd:Christians are son of Christ -the lost are sons of AE and will have no inheritance. Where does it say that, Dean? We are all sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, who inherit the conditions of the fall. Are you an exception?
Re: [TruthTalk] Mormonism: some important differences
You raise far too many issues for me to take time with--one of the rules of TT as I have understood them is to keep it simple--so, choose whatever, and I will try to deal with it. But the shotgun approach is too time consuming, OK? Thanks for you reply and your interest Blainerb In a message dated 12/17/2005 6:30:41 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BLOOD is the key word, I think--which he shed in large quantitiesin Gethsemane--apparently more than he actually shed on Calvary Sweat AS IF drops of blood.Isn't this thewording of the biblical text? I don't know that there was any blood in Gethsemaneexcept by thehand ofPeter. But, if there was , it was "drops." After the garden, He was beaten nearly to death and on the cross, we have the wounds in his hands and feet, the blood from the thorny crown and the wound to His side. Blaine, really, you couldn't be more mistaken on this one. But more than this, the First Scriptures do not attach atonement significance to Gethsemane. So, for me, I have learned from the Mormon representatives several issues that separate us : 1. They have a "right church" view of the Christian assembly and membership in the "right church" is critical to what happens in the next life. 2. The grace that saves is neither separated from works of law, nor is it unmerited in that sense. Mormonism is a works salvationist religion. 3 The Mormon view of Jewish history is vastly different from the Jewish view of Jewish history - especially as it applies to the "lost tribes," but, also as it applies to the Jewish teachings of blood sacrifice for sin, the failings of a law-basedrelationship with God and the importance of the death of Christ from a Jewish point of view ... crtical differences, all. 4.Mormon scripture cannot be verified by anyone other than the Mormon faithful. 5. The biblical doctrine (the "Frist Scriptures") teaches a very different Jesus than that of the Mormon religion. 6. The "atonement" doctrine between Christianity and Mormonism is markedly different. This difference can be most easily seen as one Faith gives emphasis to the crossand the shedding of blood while the other does not. If the two representatives of Mormonism are typical, those in the Christian Faith may assume that the notion of the shedding of blood is not understood as it relates to the Law, to the cross or to the continuing forgiveness of the saint. 7. They cannot answer questions as to the differences between the First Scriptures (written and given to a church the Mormons believe to be in good standing - before the "apostasy") and the those scriptures given some 1800 years later. The differences are remarkablein termsquanity and substance. TheMormon notion that the First Chruch wasthe Right Church demands that the teaching of that first church is both completely revealed and correct. There should be no difference between the First Scriptures and the Mormon seconds. 8. Mormon organization and church terminology is markedly different from the biblical church or the pre-apostate church of history. If we beleive that God "did it right" the first time, in regards to the church, there should be no reason for any differences between the Mormon church and scripture and that of the First Church and the First Scriptures. Note: it is not my intention to outline all of the difference, only those that are of significance to me, those that make the Mormon Faith an impossible religion to defend as "Christian" from my point of view. I would love the opportunity to share in a public discussion of these issues. How does this affect their place in the sight of God? My personal view is this: Joe Smith knew full well that he was an imposture. Few others would have this knowledge. I do believe that God will take this into consideration as the judge of such things. Only because of the truth of the incarnation and the unmerited nature of grace do any of us have a chance at all. God is bigger than any of our failings and the name of Jesus need not be uttered to have redeeming value. jd -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BLOOD is the key word, I think--which he shed in large quantitiesin Gethsemane--apparently more than he actually shed on Calvary. When he returns he will be wearing red--right? This is a symbol of his blood drenching his entire body, which it did not do on the cross. In fact, other than the wounds in his hands, feet, and sides, little blood was shed on the Calvary cross. Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] ** Moderator comment **
In a message dated 12/17/2005 11:21:23 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, Dean, we are in full agreement on this one. jd -- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kevin, Blain-while I am not the Moderator I would like to remind you guys that according to the Holy Spirit we are suppose to be subject to authority-Here Perry is that authority.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: The tree
Lots of confusion, huh? Blainerb In a message dated 12/18/2005 10:51:21 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Confusion only comes from questioning God words. We only do that when we prefer the snake’s words. Confusion is the result of attempted compromise. Compromise is simply disobedience wearing grey. Iz PS The snake offers immediate gratification. The result is inevitable degradation. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 9:51 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: The tree One other thought: it seems to me that Eve is first confused by outside influences (the snake) and then - out of this confusion -- she commits the sin. I mean, she is created in the image of God and , yet, the temptation is "you will become like God." Can it be said that sin springs from this same confusion? If we all share in the same sin (Ro 5:12), do we not share in the same confusion? And, so what?? jd
Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE ...
Most Bishops have so much to do that they have little time to answer petty questions to resolve doctrinal disputes. I would not take a problem of that nature to my Bishop. No one I know would. Doctrinal disputes seldom happen, since the BoM and the DC are very clear. I know this sounds weird, but it happens to be true. If I have a doctrinal misunderstanding, I just study it out in my own mind, and the answer usually presents itself via the Spirit of the Lord. Blainerb In a message dated 12/18/2005 9:36:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, if you and a fellow mormon disagreed on the meaning of a verse, you would go to your Bishop, he would tell you what it means, and regardless of the answer, you both would acceot that, am I right? If not, how would you resolve it?From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE "...Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 23:24:46 ESTIn a message dated 12/17/2005 5:09:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Blainerb: To "be perfect," it seems one would first have to becomeperfect--which may take more time for some than others. I do OK in following theadmonitions of Jesus Christ, and I believe I do better each day--but I am afterall a son of Adam and Eve, from whom I inherited imperfections.cd:Christians are son of Christ -the lost are sons of AE and will have noinheritance.Where does it say that, Dean? We are all sons and daughters of Adam andEve, who inherit the conditions of the fall. Are you an exception?
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/18/2005 10:00:08 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine that is SO ridiculous. Where do you get this stuff?? iz Sorry my thinking does not jive with yours--Actually, this is not necessarily Mormon doctrine, just my own thinking out loud. But the blood of Gethsemane was a reality. And it WAS there that the sins of mankind were atoned for. The cross was where he died, in order that he might be resurrected and over come death, brought into the world by the fall of Adam-- As in Adam all men die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Restoration - BAAL Worship/ Kevin projecting evil
Blainerb: A true angel of light is just that--an angel of light.Not all angels of light are Satan masquerading as such. Most are real. Moroni was real, but when Satan appeared on the banks of the Susquehanna River masquerading as an angel of light, he was detected by Michael, the archangel (of light). That is the only account I know where Satan tried to pass himself off as an angel of light. In a message dated 12/15/2005 6:08:21 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: IT was the DC that said Moroni was an Angel of light thus SATAN By the way he was not "posing" he was Transformed like your false apostles are transformed. Remember this "heavenly" messenger came on the occult Autumn Equinox and told joe to observe the same for the next few years. Moroni APPEARS as an angel of Light JSH 2:30I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday Autumn Equinox Visitations Introductory page of the DC, 3rd paragraph says; “This took place in the early spring of 1820. In September, 1823, and at later times, Joseph Smith received visitations from Moroni, an angel of light" For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. http://www.lifeafter.org/angel.asp Angel of LightAggelos; a messenger. Phos; face, luminous, fire, light It is one of Satan’s most blatant exposé’s of the whole Mormon legend. The sad thing about it is that the Mormon won’t see it because he believes that he’s untouchable in his garments. Don’t be fooled my friend, Satan is indeed an angel of light, just like Moroni. Think about it, he even took the place of the cross on top of the temples. He’s there trumpeting to the whole world that he’s in charge. He’s not there to proclaim the return of Jesus, guaranteed. Don't think you can be deceived? Is this your Jesus? Occultists look for Angels of light [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blainerb: "RIDLED?" You mean "RIDDLED?" You and your street preacher friends have eyes but are blind to the truth. You see occult stuff all over, I suppose, even in American flags, American war planes, medals of honor, etc. If an angel appeared to you, you would say it was Satan posing as an angel of light. By the way, when are you going to tell us more about the beat up star you showed, with 666 on it? We want a URL on that please. In a message dated 12/13/2005 4:18:43 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Your religion is RIDLED with occult Themes and you want to joke?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blainerb: LOL The maintenance people in and around the temple wear ordinary work clothing--no red suits or pitchforks. Have you been having nightmares, or, worse yet, hallucinations? Don't let these things get to you, Kevin. You must get a hold of yourself! In a message dated 12/13/2005 4:38:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LOL and the guy with the red suit pitchfork is just the maintenance man[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blainerb: If Kevin were honest with TT'rs, he would tell you the truth--the stars"plastered all over" the Salt Lake Temple, altho all five-sided, are not all inverted. Some are, some are not. They were placed there for decorative purposes, as well as symbolizing the North Star, the Morning star, the Star of Bethlehem, the Telestial Kingdom, the creations of God, etc.
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Blainerb: Yeah, Kevin, I repeat Dave's question--will Jesus be wearing a chain around his neck with a cross dangling on it when he comes? I always understood he would be dressed in red, symbol of the blood he spilt in the Garden of Gethsemene. And, if he is not wearing his cross, what then? In a message dated 12/15/2005 6:16:56 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LDS buildings have a Golden Angel on top pointing east just another coincident? Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you hate the cross also?DAVEH: No Kevin..I do not hate the cross. I just find it peculiarly interesting that many Christians seem so attached to the device used to torture and kill our Lord. When Jesus returns to the earth, do you think it likely he will be wearing a chain around his neck with a cross attached? Furthermore, why do you feel the implied need to categorize people as cross lovers or cross haters? Is it not possible that one can look upon the cross in its historical context, by recognizing what it did to our Savior without categorizing him (not referring to Jesus) as a cross hater? How would you categorize Jesus.is he a cross lover or hater?
Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE ...
In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:59:46 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So a Satanist is on vacation in Utah he decides to take a tour of the temple. What do you think his thoughts would be when he sees his symbol for his god on your buildings? Blainerb: Actually, that is not outside the realm of possibility--a lot of people vacationing in Utah see the stars and etc. on the temples. Most are not concerned, unless they have been brainwashed by the Street Preachers. But, in answer to your question, I hope he would investigate the LDS religion and become enlightened as we are--he would have to give up his Satan worship, however, to be baptized into the Church.
Re: [TruthTalk] SO THEN it is safe to assume that NO MORMON RESPONSE TO THE ...
Blainerb: To "be perfect," it seems one would first have to become perfect--which may take more time for some than others.I do OK in following the admonitions of Jesus Christ, and I believe I do better each day--but I am after all a son of Adam and Eve, from whom I inherited imperfections. In a message dated 12/16/2005 9:03:41 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect." Notice it does not say become perfect it says BE - Present TENSE How are you doing?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are entitled to your opinion, Lance, however, I do not see that such Mormon beliefs as you have outlined detract from traditional Christianity--they do go beyond it, but I see no reason this should be an arrow in the side of Christians who are trying to live Christianity as they understand it.I see nothing unhallowed in the God-was-a-man-who-became-perfect beliefs of the Mormon Church--in fact, it seems to be quite a lofty idea, aimed at improving one's motivationto become perfect and more god-like. As Jesus said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect." Do you not intend to keep this commandment, Lance? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] ** Moderator comment **
Oh, yeah, now I remember writing that. I should have just said I was holding my breath, huh? :) Blainerb In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:54:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can you print the entire context, please? Blainerb From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:00 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Izzy's sex lifeHi Izzy, I was looking through some of my old e-mails and came upon one with the above subject title--jus' thought I'd let you know I am still waiting with 'bated breath for your more complete description . . .Blainerb[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/16/2005 2:03:37 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sinceyou have been asked to stop stirring the pot And some subjects have been identified as OFF LIMITS I have declined to comment But since you guys can not leave it alone I was refering to your PRIVATE email off list to a member of this list stating you were "waiting with 'bated breath for your more complete description . . ." First of all, I don't recall writing to anyone in private. If I did, it may have been becauseI had not noticed it was private. Who was it that got the letter in private, Kevin? Are you the one? It must have been you, or Dean--both of you have brought this up--and if it was private why did you post it contrary to the rules?. Secondly, I vaguely remember making that comment, but I don't recall the context in whichI made it. Can you print the entire context, please? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:59:42 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: discerning the difference . . . cd: And the sad part is you actually believe a man who said there were 6 ft quaker like people living on the moon-as a prophet of God-very sad indeed. He may have said that, but he also testified of the reality of Jesus Christ. Would you count that as being uninspired? Blainerb - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/16/2005 4:08:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross In a message dated 12/14/2005 5:00:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: The why don't Mormons live by Jesus's words instead of Smith's words. Blainerb: . Smith lived and died for his testimony of Jesus Christ, whom he saw and spoke with on several occasions. Smith was His prophet, just as Moses was his prophet.There are exciting parallels between the two, in fact. If JS ever spoke anything contrary to the mind and will of the Lord, he spoke of himself. Being a man, having the weaknesses of a man, he may have done that on occasion. But that did not mean he was not a prophet who revealed the mind and will of Jesus Christ to man in these last days. Use the Holy Spirit, and the spirit of charity to be your guide in discerning the difference . . . cd: And the sad part is you actually believe a man who said there were 6 ft quaker like people living on the moon-as a prophet of God-very sad indeed.
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
A good reason, but there had to be a more profound reason, huh? In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:59:46 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How about to fulfill prophecy? Is that a good reason? Blainer wrote I am not sure why dying had to take place on the cross, eventually, unless it has something to do with overcoming death--which had to be done in order to overcome the effects of Adam's transgression and fall, wherein death was brought into the world.
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Then what do youthink Gethsemane was all about? He shed blood then, as well as on the cross, and was in such an agony as to almost die. Dying was not the only sacrifice he made. He suffered for sin in Gethsemane,he died on Calvary, in order to overcome death, and made it possible for us to do the same. He had to die, but I am not so sure it had to be on the cross. In a message dated 12/16/2005 8:59:53 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/16/2005 6:17:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat Hmm, good points, Kevin, but I doubt there is really a discrepancy or contradiction, otherwise how are you going to explain the agony of Gethsemene? What he suffered on the cross was more physical, which lead to his death--but there obviously was the agony of Gethsemene, wherein he suffered for the sins of mankind, to such an extent as to come justshort of dying. I am not sure why dying had to take place on the cross, eventually, unless it has something to do with overcoming death--which had to be done in order to overcome the effects of Adam's transgression and fall, wherein death was brought into the world. That would make sense to me--but let's face it, the entire matter of his being able to reconcile man with God after the fall of Adam which brought sin and death into the world was a great miracle. I am not sure any man fully comprehends it. We see in part through the glass darkly now, but someday we will see more clearly, hopefully.nbs p; cd: The simple fact that Jesus walked out of the garden and failed to walk away from the cross (yes,I Know He rose 3 days later) but he had to be carried from the cross should prove the crosswas life threaten not the garden-In the Garden he was praying hard for the believers and the world-so hard that blood fell as drops of sweat would fall.John chapter 17 is the prayer he prayed in the Garden -you should read it-good stuff. There have been other Believers-through out history-who have also prayedin this mannerhard and had blood also come out of their pours as sweat would. In a message dated 12/16/2005 1:29:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
BLOOD is the key word, I think--which he shed in large quantitiesin Gethsemane--apparently more than he actually shed on Calvary. When he returns he will be wearing red--right? This is a symbol of his blood drenching his entire body, which it did not do on the cross. In fact, other than the wounds in his hands, feet, and sides, little blood was shed on the Calvary cross. Blainerb In a message dated 12/16/2005 9:06:53 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, your question reveals why you don’t understand Christian reverence for the Cross. Jesus had to die on the cross as the payment for our sins. He was the innocent, perfect sacrificial Passover lamb, slain for the sins of the world. Just as the Jews, who were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, had to paint the blood of the Passover lamb on their doorposts to make the Destroyer pass by them during judgment on that horrible night in Egypt when all the firstborn were slain, Jesus serves as our blood sacrifice, that we might be spared death for our slavery to sin, and deliverance from sin—just as the Jews were delivered from Egypt. Jesus, the Firstborn, who was without sin, was the only one qualified to be that perfect holy sacrifice for our sins. It was His Blood, shed on the Cross (nowhere else, because THAT is where He actually was slain), that redeems all those who take cover under it, just as the Jews did under their doorposts. THAT is why satan HATES the mention of THE BLOOD OF CHRIST—because THAT is what OVERCAME his evil devices and has sealed his eternal doom, as well as the Believer’s eternal deliverance from damnation. May God help you to understand this. Izzy
Re: ***Moderator Comment** Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Blainerb: There are none so blind as he who will not see. Ad libbing, flapping the gums, rationalizing the truth, gainsaying, etc., sets up a snow storm intended to do but one thing--deceive.Whenthat fails, one resorts to being unreasonable--it always comes down to stubborn, obstinate refusal to be reasonable. So goes it on TT, and Kevin? Whew! Is this the epitome of this tactic or what? In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:23:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You have turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, Kevin. This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one tooth. I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian. I met your challenge and what did we get for that -- yet another challenge of someone else. You are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to be proud of. You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of us. jd
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Blainerb: Kevin, you quoted the passage in the DC where the doctrine of the garden is taught. Now you are asking where it was taught? It all began in the garden. He suffered there , "even unto death." Did you miss that part or something? In a message dated 12/15/2005 5:45:54 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Holy Bible is the authority. The bible does not teach any such thing As a Matter of fact where does the BoM or DC teach such? In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:47:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jesus Christ did not ATONE for our sins by suffering in the Garden Thanks Kevin, we were waiting for the final word from your Royal Highness . . . Now we know the truth because you said it--What greater authority can we have, than Kevin of TT? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Blainerb: Here's your quote, Kevin. This is where the doctrine of the garden is taught. But it is also taught in the Bible. Luke 22:41-44; Mark 14:33-36; Matt 26: 37-39 In a message dated 12/15/2005 5:44:10 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DC 19:15-19 Therefore I command you to repent,”repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore,”how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not. For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit”and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink.” Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.
[TruthTalk] URL on beat up star with 666 on it
Kevin, we still need a URL on the star with 666--you were obviously suggesting it is from a Mormon building---I have not been able to find it in any way associated with any building built or owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Blainerb
Re: ***Moderator Comment** Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
In a message dated 12/16/2005 12:26:25 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, please don't stir up the pot. You contribute nothing with your comments. Also, you say below, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:", but you have not included anything I wrote! You must have removed the part I wrote without removing the attribution. I doubt it was intentional, but please be careful to properly attribute comments to the original authors.Perry This happens to me all the time, especially on Kevin's posts. But you are right, I did not even notice it until you pointed it out. Sorry. Blainerb From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: ***Moderator Comment** Re: [TruthTalk] CrossDate: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:50:03 ESTBlainerb: There are none so blind as he who will not see. Ad libbing,flapping the gums, rationalizing the truth, gainsaying, etc., sets up a snowstorm intended to do but one thing--deceive. When that fails, one resorts tobeing unreasonable--it always comes down to stubborn, obstinate refusal to bereasonable. So goes it on TT, and Kevin? Whew! Is this the epitome ofthis tactic or what?
[TruthTalk] Fwd: Alpha Trooper Speaks Out
In a message dated 12/16/2005 10:28:20 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Home from Iraq--temporarily One of Minnesota's Finest: Minnesota's LTC Joe Repya volunteered to return to active duty for service in Iraq at age 59. Joe's previous service includes command of a rifle platoon in Vietnam and flying helicopters in the first Gulf War. Joe is a classic citizen patriot and activist. He first came to public attention in March 2003 when, disturbed by the anti-war campaign mounted by Minnesota liberals, he arranged for the production of lawn signs saying "Liberate Iraq -- Support Our Troops." His effort garnered a lot of publicity, and Joe eventually distributed 30,000 signs. - Today he writes: Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq in January to finish my tour. I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired: I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through. I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough. I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they "Support the Troops" by wanting them to "Cut and Run" before victory is achieved. I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield. I'm tired that so many American's think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night. I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliament. I'm tired of the so called "Elite Left" that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War. I'm tired of anti-war protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful. I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom - Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory. I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives then they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies. I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news. Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory. Sincerely, Joe Repya Lieutenant Colonel U. S. Army 101st Airborne Division ---BeginMessage--- Home from Iraq--temporarily One of Minnesota's Finest: Minnesota's LTC Joe Repya volunteered to return to active duty for service in Iraq at age 59. Joe's previous service includes command of a rifle platoon in Vietnam and flying helicopters in the first Gulf War. Joe is a classic citizen patriot and activist. He first came to public attention in March 2003 when, disturbed by the anti-war campaign mounted by Minnesota liberals, he arranged for the production of lawn signs saying "Liberate Iraq -- Support Our Troops." His effort garnered a lot of publicity, and Joe eventually distributed 30,000 signs. - Today he writes: Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq in January to finish my tour. I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired: I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through. I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough. I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they "Support the Troops" by wanting them to "Cut and Run" before victory is achieved. I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to