Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

DAVEH:
 Do you find or acknowledge an element of mysticism
 in your religious beliefs, DavidM?

Oh yes, but there are forms of mysticism that I believe are off limits for 
disciples of Christ.  Astrology is one of  them.  The reason for it being 
off limits is not because there is nothing to it.  Quite the opposite.  We 
are warned by God to stay away from astrology because there IS something to 
it.

For every true spiritual gift and manifestation of the Holy Spirit, there is 
a counterfeit.  God wants us to stay clear of the counterfeits and only 
dabble in the real thing.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave]

DAVEH: Do you consider the magi following the Star of Bethlehem to be
a form of astrology?

David Miller wrote:

  DAVEH:
  
  
Do you find or acknowledge an element of mysticism
in your religious beliefs, DavidM?

  
  
Oh yes, but there are forms of mysticism that I believe are off limits for 
disciples of Christ.  Astrology is one of  them.  The reason for it being 
off limits is not because there is nothing to it.  Quite the opposite.  We 
are warned by God to stay away from astrology because there IS something to 
it.

For every true spiritual gift and manifestation of the Holy Spirit, there is 
a counterfeit.  God wants us to stay clear of the counterfeits and only 
dabble in the real thing.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 
  

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

Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ttxpress]

is any one here a 
'disciple of JC' 

howso?

while to the 
writer, below, astrology is allegedly 'evil' it makesonecurious 
aboutwhat the writer contrasts as 'good' mysticism(?) 


is it astronomy 
(that's ok for 'disciples of Christ')?

wouldn't 
t/hisdistinction entailexcusing the darkness of Science from light 
of the Holy Spirit and Scripture?

also, then, the 
sole authorityof Science is what if nota philosophy which is 
fundamentally dualistic, like jt's?

also,from 
what other non-biblical source/s havethesewritersgleaned 
authoritativedata informing and embracing their views; e.g., in 
thiscontext, Mormonism?

On Sun, 29 May 2005 02:13:42 -0400 "David Miller" 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
..there are forms of mysticism that I believe 
are off limits for disciples of Christ..

Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

DAVEH:
 Do you consider the magi following the Star
 of Bethlehem to be a form of astrology?

Yes, and so the story of their visit to Christ to pay homage is powerful, 
because it shows that Christ is Lord over the occult of the Gentiles, even 
as an infant.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave]

DAVEH: Do you find or acknowledge an element of mysticism in your
religious beliefs, DavidM?

  
Thank you DaveH and
Blaine for sharing about astrology and mysticism in relation to
Mormonism. I found both your comments interesting to read.

Peace be with you.
David Miller.
  


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: Passing is for young football players, and race car drivers,
Terry. I don't think you qualify in either instance. Listen Terry,
don't you realize that the older you get, the worse your eyesight will
become. Just let those giggling scantily clad young ladies read the
mic for you! You wouldn't want to risk making an error while trying to
read all those little numbers, would you! Now do you see how a good
set of leathers will solve all your problems!

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
The price seems modest,Dave, and I appreciate your offer, but I find it
distracting to have to fight off scantily clad young ladies while
trying to read a micrometer. Afraid I will have to pass.
Terry
==
  
Dave Hansen wrote:
  

DAVEH: Have you never heard the cliche...to make big bucks,
you need to spend big bucks? Perhaps your fortunes would change
if you were properly attired, Terry. Think of how attractive you will
be to your (especially female) customers if you wear a leather pair of
trousers and perhaps leather shirt. The posh smell of a good quality
set of leathers will mask the foul oder of all that oils and metal that
permeates every crevice of your dusty shop. Nothing says class like a
nice set of leathers to improve your image, eh! Customers will
consider you upscale, and hasten to empty their wallets into the wagon
in which you will be using to haul their offerings to the bank. Just
how can you go wrong when dressed to the 9s in a spiffy set of
leathers, Terry!!!

 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution when wearing our
leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often strongly
attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I
envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who
knows what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe
bodies ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In
short Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply
irresistible!

 So.Let me offer assistance in your quest to become more
successful. I can build you a set of leathers that will help you
achieve your full potential, and give you the air of confidence you so
richly deserve if you will just let me, Terry. I look forward to
receiving your impending order and am anxious to point you in the
direction of financial success! (And Terry.Please don't forget to
enclose a big check with initial your order, as it will only speed you
on your journey to large financial rewards.)

 AlsoSince this is obviously a work related expense, ordering an
expensive set of leathers from me will greatly lesson your tax
liability, which in effect is how successful businessmen (such as
yourself!) let the government make them wealthy. Every buck you send
me, will surely be rewarded by fewer dollars you will be flushing down
the federal toilet. What can be sweeter.You get what you want, and
government pays you to do it! Wow!who would be so foolish
as not to let Uncle Sam assist them in becoming a wealthy taxpayer!
Just imaginethis can be a win-win-win situation for all of us.
Hurry Terryrush your order (and deposit) to me right away, before
the government comes to their senses and closes this loophole that is
now only available to independent businessmen like yourself! Even your
wife will appreciate your wisdom in improving both your personal
appearance AND providing her a source of wealth beyond her wildest
dreams when she married you. Ahh Terry.for a modest (say
$5000 or so) deposit, success is within your grasp!!!

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show up.

  
Dave Hansen wrote:
  

DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big bucks with you, bless you the
most!  :-$ 

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
Everyone
who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.
  

  

  


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

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

Terry if you follow Daves advice
you will need rubbers; not leathers. Better keep your Bride at your side
instead. Iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 1:55 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT





DAVEH: Passing is for young football
players, and race car drivers, Terry. I don't think you qualify in either
instance. Listen Terry, don't you realize that the older you get, the
worse your eyesight will become. Just let those giggling scantily clad
young ladies read the mic for you! You wouldn't want to risk making an
error while trying to read all those little numbers, would you! Now do
you see how a good set of leathers will solve all your problems!

Terry Clifton wrote: 

The price seems modest,Dave, and I appreciate your
offer, but I find it distracting to have to fight off scantily clad young
ladies while trying to read a micrometer. Afraid I will have to pass.
Terry
==

Dave Hansen wrote: 

DAVEH: Have you never heard the
cliche...to make big bucks, you need to
spend big bucks? Perhaps your fortunes would change if
you were properly attired, Terry. Think of how attractive you will be to
your (especially female) customers if you wear a leather pair of trousers and
perhaps leather shirt. The posh smell of a good quality set of leathers
will mask the foul oder of all that oils and metal that permeates every crevice
of your dusty shop. Nothing says class like a nice set of leathers to improve
your image, eh! Customers will consider you upscale, and hasten to empty
their wallets into the wagon in which you will be using to haul their offerings
to the bank. Just how can you go wrong when dressed to the 9s in a spiffy
set of leathers, Terry!!!

 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution when
wearing our leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often
strongly attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I
envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who knows
what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe bodies
ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In short
Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply irresistible!

 So.Let me offer assistance in your quest to become more
successful. I can build you a set of leathers that will help you achieve
your full potential, and give you the air of confidence you so richly deserve
if you will just let me, Terry. I look forward to receiving your
impending order and am anxious to point you in the direction of financial
success! (And Terry.Please don't forget to enclose a big check
with initial your order, as it will only speed you on your journey to large financial
rewards.)

 AlsoSince this is obviously a work related expense,
ordering an expensive set of leathers from me will greatly lesson your tax
liability, which in effect is how successful businessmen (such as yourself!)
let the government make them wealthy. Every buck you send me, will surely
be rewarded by fewer dollars you will be flushing down the federal
toilet. What can be sweeter.You get what you want, and government
pays you to do it! Wow!who
would be so foolish as not to let Uncle Sam assist them in becoming a wealthy
taxpayer! Just imaginethis can be a win-win-win situation for all of
us. Hurry Terryrush your order (and deposit) to me right away, before
the government comes to their senses and closes this loophole that is now only
available to independent businessmen like yourself! Even your wife will
appreciate your wisdom in improving both your personal appearance AND providing
her a source of wealth beyond her wildest dreams when she married you.
Ahh Terry.for a modest (say $5000 or so) deposit, success is within
your grasp!!!

Terry Clifton wrote: 

I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show
up.


Dave Hansen wrote: 

DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big
bucks with you, bless you the most! :-$ 

Terry Clifton wrote: 

Everyone who comes to my
shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming in. Others bless me by
leaving.





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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

ShieldsFamily wrote:

  
  


  
  
  
  Terry if you
follow Daves advice
you will need rubbers; not leathers. Better keep your Bride at your
side
instead. Iz
  
  
  
  
  
  

I intend to.
Couldn't do without her.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Blainerb473]

Blaine: I first got onto astrology in, I believe 1969, when a 
co-teacher I worked with taught me a lot of different things, mostly related to 
teaching, but one side benefit was astrology. He was a descendant of Mark 
Twain (Samuel Clemens), famous author, and was just about as colorful as 
Twain. His sun-sign was Leo. He was very warm and friendly, as Leos 
often are.I thought him to be a little pushy sometimes, wanting 
everything to run his way or no way, also often seen in Leos. Of course, 
he consideredhimself just a natural leader of men, as many Leos also see 
themselves (Napoleon was a Leo, btw). Anyway, I began a more intense 
investigation of the subject, expecting actually to find no consistencies. 
What I actually found, however, was a huge surprise. The truth is, 
there are many regularities in how people relate to one another in 
astrology. (A striking example is the relationship between Bill Clinton 
and his girlfriend, Monica--both had their suns inLeo and moons in 
Taurus--and then there were Adolf Hitler and Sadam Hussein, both with sun 
in Taurus and moon in Capricorn) Before I get too far into it, however, I 
have to say I do not in any way believe stars CAUSE behavior. They may 
predict it to a certain extent, but even there, one must always take into 
account the simple principle of choice--people may choose what they do or 
say.On the other hand, I also believe the MASTER PLAN of God 
is, if we were able to read it, written indelibly in the stars. There are 
many who think they can read it, many more who pretend to be able to do so, and 
a few who reach a small degree of competancy in doing so. It is, I 
believe, a subject worthy of serious investigation, but one must keep in mind 
that there is no Bible for astrology, or in other words, no absolute foundation 
to go to for settling individual differences of opinion as to what this or that 
may mean. There is a lot of tradition, and there seems to be some 
agreement on how to set up a horoscope, and read it, but as I said, and I need 
to emphasize, nothing ABSOLUTE. Yet, once you get into it, you definitely 
begin to notice regularities. In school situations, two of the fire signs, 
Leo and Aries, are commonly more difficult kids to handle. They are 
enthusiastic about almost everything they do. Of the two, Aries is 
definitely more headstrong and independant, often assuming they are never wrong 
(the Martha Stuart syndrome). But if a kid challenges the teacher for 
domination of the classroom, it is usually a Leo. Cancer kids are usually 
well-socialized, as is Pisces, and these two usually relate to one another 
well. The third water sign, Scorpio, is often a bundle of anger, but 
still he knows what he needs to do--just doesn't always want to do it. 
Scorpios also seem to favor Cancer-born partners. Cancers and Scorpios often 
seem to end upmarrying. Quite a few Scorpios seem to me to 
lean toward being socio-pathic--stealing, lying, etc. The earth signs, 
Virgo, Capricorn, and Taurus, are the most likely to be well-socialized, 
especially Virgos. But there is always an exception to the rule. 
Billy-the-Kid was a Virgo. One has to remember that the sun-sign is only 
part of the picture. There is also the moon sign, the Mars sign, the 
Jupiter sign, etc., along with the angles these planets form to one another and 
to the sun and moon. The best horoscope is one based upon the exact time 
and location of one's birth. I once read thatSigmund Freud 
would not take a patient unless he had this information. 
I am now running off at the keyboard, so will hope that what I have said 
answers your questions--and DaveH is right--none of this has to do with 
Mormonism, except as a Mormon, I believe we all make choices, and although 
the ones we make may be strongly influenced by our heredity and upbringing, 
itwas all written in the stars long before we were born. God knows 
all, past andpresent, including the choices each of us will make in 
the future. 




In a message dated 5/26/2005 12:32:44 AM Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Miller wrote: 
  Blaine wrote:
  
... it came through to me that she was one of my
immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway,
who had been active in converting her husband and
family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show
her approval of what we were in process of doing.

Blaine, I appreciate you sharing experiences like this.  While I might have 
a different understanding of what events like these are all about, it gives 
me insight into a side of Mormonism that I might not otherwise have.

Question for Dave Hansen:
Dave, I have noticed over the years that Blaine has many mystical 
experiences like this one that he has shared, and that he is actively 
engaged in astrology.  I have never seen you share of such experiences.  I 
am curious about how you perceive Blaine's reports like this one.  Do you 
readily accept them as stated and interpreted?DAVEH: 
  

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Thank you DaveH and Blaine for sharing 
about astrology and mysticism in relation to Mormonism. I found both your 
comments interesting to read.

Peace be with you.David 
Miller.

Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Lance Muir]

David:What's your sign?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  David Miller 
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: May 27, 2005 19:22
  Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses 
  Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
  
  Thank you DaveH and Blaine for 
  sharing about astrology and mysticism in relation to Mormonism. I found 
  both your comments interesting to read.
  
  Peace be with you.David 
  Miller.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Blainerb473]

In a message dated 5/26/2005 8:19:42 AM Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution 
  when wearing our leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often 
  strongly attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I 
  envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who 
  knows what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe bodies 
  ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In short 
  Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply 
irresistible!

BLaine: I am convinced!! Would you mind sending me another 
leather belt, size 40. Make this one a 1 3/4 inch wide one, OK? 
Sorry, but that's as close asmy budget allowstowarda full body 
suit. But amen to the above, I don't doubt it would work. My 
problem is, what would I do with all those beautiful women at my age? They 
are now saying Viagra can make you blind. LOL

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

David Miller wrote:

  Blaine wrote:
  
  
... it came through to me that she was one of my
immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway,
who had been active in converting her husband and
family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show
her approval of what we were in process of doing.

  
  
Blaine, I appreciate you sharing experiences like this.  While I might have 
a different understanding of what events like these are all about, it gives 
me insight into a side of Mormonism that I might not otherwise have.

Question for Dave Hansen:
Dave, I have noticed over the years that Blaine has many mystical 
experiences like this one that he has shared, and that he is actively 
engaged in astrology.  I have never seen you share of such experiences.  I 
am curious about how you perceive Blaine's reports like this one.  Do you 
readily accept them as stated and interpreted?

DAVEH: Yeah...Pretty much so. Such experiences are not uncommon
in Mormonism. That however does not necessarily mean that each and
every one of them is accurately reported. Nor would I state for a fact
that every such experience is proof of what I believe. I know of one
personal example where an old friend (whose memory is worse than mine)
drew an incorrect conclusion based on mistaken identity and a lack of
background knowledge.

How many in Mormonism do you 
know who embrace astrology and the kind of mysticism that Blaine does?

DAVEH: This may surprise you, but Blaine is the first LDS person I can
recall to make such claims. If there are others, but I've not found
them to be open with their beliefs. You and I do know one former LDS
TTer who is in what might be called a fringe area thoughremote
viewing. GollyTT does seem to attract the weirdos, like Paul
Smith, Blaine and me, eh! In all my years (nearly a half century now)
of being a Mormon, I don't think I've seen such peculiar diversity in
the LDS people I've known!

 Now...before you think that I am decrying Blaine's
astro-beliefs.perhaps there is something to consider there. I'm
not well versed in such fields, but I suspect there are some Biblical
comments that might suggest a relationship to out of this world
happenings that influence our lives here in mortality. Blaine can
probably fill you in on that, if you want to ask him.

Do 
you, Dave, accept astrology too?

DAVEH: No. But that doesn't mean I outright reject it either.
Critics of Christianity might find a lot of mysticism and astrology in
what many TTers believe. Yet I bet most TTers would ascribe
stereotypical astrologers to be under the influence of Satanwhich
is pretty much the way I lean. Perhaps the truth falls somewhere
between the two extremes.

I guess I am trying to understand the kind 
of diversity in Mormonism in regards to present day mysticism.
  

DAVEH: I'd say Blaine is probably not your average Mormon when it
comes to accepting astrology. But maybe I am judging too swiftly, as I
really don't know much more about his beliefs in that regard than what
you and I've seen in his posts. Perhaps he'll
elaborate..though I will not encourage him to do so, as it will
just give a few other TTers added incentive to criticize.

  
Peace be with you.
David Miller. 

  


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show up.


Dave Hansen wrote:

  
DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big bucks with you, bless you the
most!  :-$ 
  
Terry Clifton wrote:
  


Everyone
who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.

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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: Have you never heard the cliche...to make big bucks,
you need to spend big bucks? Perhaps your fortunes would change
if you were properly attired, Terry. Think of how attractive you will
be to your (especially female) customers if you wear a leather pair of
trousers and perhaps leather shirt. The posh smell of a good quality
set of leathers will mask the foul oder of all that oils and metal that
permeates every crevice of your dusty shop. Nothing says class like a
nice set of leathers to improve your image, eh! Customers will
consider you upscale, and hasten to empty their wallets into the wagon
in which you will be using to haul their offerings to the bank. Just
how can you go wrong when dressed to the 9s in a spiffy set of
leathers, Terry!!!

 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution when wearing our
leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often strongly
attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I
envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who
knows what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe
bodies ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In
short Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply
irresistible!

 So.Let me offer assistance in your quest to become more
successful. I can build you a set of leathers that will help you
achieve your full potential, and give you the air of confidence you so
richly deserve if you will just let me, Terry. I look forward to
receiving your impending order and am anxious to point you in the
direction of financial success! (And Terry.Please don't forget to
enclose a big check with initial your order, as it will only speed you
on your journey to large financial rewards.)

 AlsoSince this is obviously a work related expense, ordering an
expensive set of leathers from me will greatly lesson your tax
liability, which in effect is how successful businessmen (such as
yourself!) let the government make them wealthy. Every buck you send
me, will surely be rewarded by fewer dollars you will be flushing down
the federal toilet. What can be sweeter.You get what you want, and
government pays you to do it! Wow!who would be so foolish
as not to let Uncle Sam assist them in becoming a wealthy taxpayer!
Just imaginethis can be a win-win-win situation for all of us.
Hurry Terryrush your order (and deposit) to me right away, before
the government comes to their senses and closes this loophole that is
now only available to independent businessmen like yourself! Even your
wife will appreciate your wisdom in improving both your personal
appearance AND providing her a source of wealth beyond her wildest
dreams when she married you. Ahh Terry.for a modest (say
$5000 or so) deposit, success is within your grasp!!!

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show up.

  
Dave Hansen wrote:
  

DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big bucks with you, bless you the
most!  :-$ 

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
Everyone
who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.
  


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


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

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

And dont forget the magical
protective mormon underwear, Terry! Iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 8:19
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT





DAVEH: Have you never heard the
cliche...to make big bucks, you need to
spend big bucks? Perhaps your fortunes would change if
you were properly attired, Terry. Think of how attractive you will be to
your (especially female) customers if you wear a leather pair of trousers and
perhaps leather shirt. The posh smell of a good quality set of leathers
will mask the foul oder of all that oils and metal that permeates every crevice
of your dusty shop. Nothing says class like a nice set of leathers to improve
your image, eh! Customers will consider you upscale, and hasten to empty
their wallets into the wagon in which you will be using to haul their offerings
to the bank. Just how can you go wrong when dressed to the 9s in a spiffy
set of leathers, Terry!!!

 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution when
wearing our leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often
strongly attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I
envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who knows
what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe bodies
ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In short
Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply irresistible!

 So.Let me offer assistance in your quest to become more
successful. I can build you a set of leathers that will help you achieve
your full potential, and give you the air of confidence you so richly deserve
if you will just let me, Terry. I look forward to receiving your
impending order and am anxious to point you in the direction of financial
success! (And Terry.Please don't forget to enclose a big check
with initial your order, as it will only speed you on your journey to large
financial rewards.)

 AlsoSince this is obviously a work related expense,
ordering an expensive set of leathers from me will greatly lesson your tax
liability, which in effect is how successful businessmen (such as yourself!)
let the government make them wealthy. Every buck you send me, will surely
be rewarded by fewer dollars you will be flushing down the federal
toilet. What can be sweeter.You get what you want, and government
pays you to do it! Wow!who
would be so foolish as not to let Uncle Sam assist them in becoming a wealthy
taxpayer! Just imaginethis can be a win-win-win situation for all of
us. Hurry Terryrush your order (and deposit) to me right away, before
the government comes to their senses and closes this loophole that is now only
available to independent businessmen like yourself! Even your wife will
appreciate your wisdom in improving both your personal appearance AND providing
her a source of wealth beyond her wildest dreams when she married you.
Ahh Terry.for a modest (say $5000 or so) deposit, success is within
your grasp!!!

Terry Clifton wrote: 

I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show
up.


Dave Hansen wrote: 

DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big
bucks with you, bless you the most! :-$ 

Terry Clifton wrote: 

Everyone who comes to my
shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming in. Others bless me by
leaving.





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







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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

The price seems modest,Dave, and I appreciate your offer, but I find it
distracting to have to fight off scantily clad young ladies while
trying to read a micrometer. Afraid I will have to pass.
Terry
==

Dave Hansen wrote:

  
DAVEH: Have you never heard the cliche...to make big bucks,
you need to spend big bucks? Perhaps your fortunes would change
if you were properly attired, Terry. Think of how attractive you will
be to your (especially female) customers if you wear a leather pair of
trousers and perhaps leather shirt. The posh smell of a good quality
set of leathers will mask the foul oder of all that oils and metal that
permeates every crevice of your dusty shop. Nothing says class like a
nice set of leathers to improve your image, eh! Customers will
consider you upscale, and hasten to empty their wallets into the wagon
in which you will be using to haul their offerings to the bank. Just
how can you go wrong when dressed to the 9s in a spiffy set of
leathers, Terry!!!
  
 BTWI must warn you to exercise extreme caution when wearing our
leathers near ladies other than your wife, as they are often strongly
attracted to the animal magnetism of leather covered cads such as I
envision you to be after ordering a custom set of our leathers. Who
knows what havoc your persona will generate with all those young writhe
bodies ooohing and aaahing over your leather clad physique! In
short Terry, a set of our leathers is going to make you simply
irresistible!
  
 So.Let me offer assistance in your quest to become more
successful. I can build you a set of leathers that will help you
achieve your full potential, and give you the air of confidence you so
richly deserve if you will just let me, Terry. I look forward to
receiving your impending order and am anxious to point you in the
direction of financial success! (And Terry.Please don't forget to
enclose a big check with initial your order, as it will only speed you
on your journey to large financial rewards.)
  
 AlsoSince this is obviously a work related expense, ordering an
expensive set of leathers from me will greatly lesson your tax
liability, which in effect is how successful businessmen (such as
yourself!) let the government make them wealthy. Every buck you send
me, will surely be rewarded by fewer dollars you will be flushing down
the federal toilet. What can be sweeter.You get what you want, and
government pays you to do it! Wow!who would be so foolish
as not to let Uncle Sam assist them in becoming a wealthy taxpayer!
Just imaginethis can be a win-win-win situation for all of us.
Hurry Terryrush your order (and deposit) to me right away, before
the government comes to their senses and closes this loophole that is
now only available to independent businessmen like yourself! Even your
wife will appreciate your wisdom in improving both your personal
appearance AND providing her a source of wealth beyond her wildest
dreams when she married you. Ahh Terry.for a modest (say
$5000 or so) deposit, success is within your grasp!!!
  
Terry Clifton wrote:
  


I am still waiting for the ones with big bucks to show up.


Dave Hansen wrote:

  
DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big bucks with you, bless you the
most!  :-$ 
  
Terry Clifton wrote:
  


Everyone
who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.

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


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Kevin wrote:
 I fail to see what your example of Angels has 
 to do with God having a body, anymore than 
 using an amoeba as an example.If angels have bodies, and 
angels are invisible, then the Biblical statement that God is invisible says 
nothing about whether or not he has a body. Do you really not understand 
this line of reasoning?

In like manner, saying that God is spirit does not mean that he does not 
have a body if we know that Jesus is spirit too, but he does have a body.

Do you know of any Biblical passage that says God does not have a 
body?

Peace be with you.David Miller.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Blaine wrote:
 ... it came through to me that she was one of my
 immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway,
 who had been active in converting her husband and
 family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show
 her approval of what we were in process of doing.

Blaine, I appreciate you sharing experiences like this.  While I might have 
a different understanding of what events like these are all about, it gives 
me insight into a side of Mormonism that I might not otherwise have.

Question for Dave Hansen:
Dave, I have noticed over the years that Blaine has many mystical 
experiences like this one that he has shared, and that he is actively 
engaged in astrology.  I have never seen you share of such experiences.  I 
am curious about how you perceive Blaine's reports like this one.  Do you 
readily accept them as stated and interpreted?  How many in Mormonism do you 
know who embrace astrology and the kind of mysticism that Blaine does?  Do 
you, Dave, accept astrology too?  I guess I am trying to understand the kind 
of diversity in Mormonism in regards to present day mysticism.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

So you believe angels are departed human
beings? Izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:19
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT









In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM
Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:





DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb
13:1

ShieldsFamily wrote:

Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy







BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been
reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your
queries.





In answer to your question, Izzy, I have
to say NO! I have never seen an angel. 





BUT--about a year or so after my
wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to
help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we
finished the class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were
sitting around drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's
basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was standing directly in front
of me. I could only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was
a woman--I just knewthat it was a her, not a him. She stood there
for a moment, and it came through to me that she was one of my immediate
ancestors, a woman born in Norway,
who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that
she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I
said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my
wife asked me, Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room
at the teacher's house tonight? I said
YES! She was one of my relatives!I
was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had
spokenof it at the time. 





That is the closest I have ever come to
seeing an angel, Izzy.

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

Bingo! Departed  Ressurected "gods"
Just waiting on their bodies.
Oh where o where can my Body be?
My Body lies over the ocean?ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:









So you believe angels are departed human beings? Izzy





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:19 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT



In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb 13:1ShieldsFamily wrote:Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your queries.

In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO! I have never seen an angel. 

BUT--about a year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we finished the class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me. I could only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just knewthat it was a her, not a him. She stood there for a moment, and it came through to me that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway, who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my wife asked me, "Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room at the teacher's house tonight?" I said "YES!" She was one of my relatives!"I was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spokenof it at the time. 

That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel, Izzy.
		Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[knpraise]

Would this includemy previously happy ex wife?

JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wed, 25 May 2005 13:41:18 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT






So you believe angels are departed human beings? Izzy





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:19 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT



In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb 13:1ShieldsFamily wrote:Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your queries.

In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO! I have never seen an angel. 

BUT--about a year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we finished the class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me. I could only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just knewthat it was a her, not a him. She stood there for a moment, and it came through to me that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway, who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my wife asked me, "Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room at the teacher's house tonight?" I said "YES!" She was one of my relatives!"I was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spokenof it at the time. 

That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel, Izzy.

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

If she was so happy why is she the ex?
Waiting as The World Turns. Izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 3:48
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT











Would this includemy previously happy ex wife?











JD




-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wed, 25 May 2005 13:41:18 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on
TT





So you believe angels are departed human
beings? Izzy



















From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:19
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

















In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM
Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:









DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb
13:1

ShieldsFamily wrote:

Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy











BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so
have not even been reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not
answered some of your queries.









In answer to your question, Izzy, I have
to say NO! I have never seen an angel. 









BUT--about a year or so after my
wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to
help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple.
On the evening that we finished the class, the teacher provided punch and
cookies, and as we were sitting around drinking the punch and eating the
cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was
standing directly in front of me. I could only sense her presence, so
don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just knewthat it was a her, not
a him. She stood there for a moment, and it came through to me that she
was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway,
who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that
she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I
said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my
wife asked me, Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room
at the teacher's house tonight? I said
YES! She was one of my relatives!I
was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had
spokenof it at the time. 









That is the closest I have ever come to
seeing an angel, Izzy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[knpraise]

She had no idea just how happy she was until she left. It's kind of like you and me. I am older than you, so I will probably die before you (God forbid). At that time -- you may discover just what a blessing I was in your life. 

JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:12:24 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT






If she was so happy why is she the ex? Waiting as The World Turns. Izzy





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 3:48 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT




Would this includemy previously happy ex wife?



JD
-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wed, 25 May 2005 13:41:18 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT


So you believe angels are departed human beings? Izzy







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:19 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT





In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb 13:1ShieldsFamily wrote:Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy


BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your queries.


In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO! I have never seen an angel. 


BUT--about a year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we finished the class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me. I could only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just knewthat it was a her, not a him. She stood there for a moment, and it
 came through to me that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway, who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my wife asked me, "Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room at the teacher's house tonight?" I said "YES!" She was one of my relatives!"I was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spokenof it at the time. 


That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel, Izzy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
  
  
She had no idea just how happy she was until she left. It's kind of
like you and me. I am older than you, so I will probably die before
you (God forbid). At that time -- you may discover just what a
blessing I was in your life. 
  
  JD
==
  

Everyone who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

J





==





Everyone who comes to my
shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming in. Others bless me by
leaving.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: Andthose who spend the big bucks with you, bless you the
most!  :-$ 

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
  Everyone
who comes to my shop is a blessing.. Some bless me by coming
in. Others bless me by leaving.
  


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

Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Lance Muir]

Amen Judy! May God always have His angels keep 
watch over you.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: May 23, 2005 14:49
  Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses 
  Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
  
  
  I haven't seen one but an sure one kept me out of a 
  head on collision on my way to church
  yesterday. I was a bit distracted as we have a 
  houseful of active and noisy children, was on
  my own and fiddling with the cell phone connection on 
  our road which is country and most of
  the time not a lot of traffic. I looked up and 
  was able to swerve at the very last minute. I am
  sure I had supernatural help of the kind that was not 
  there when I hit the deer a few months
  ago; that involved money, this would have been 
  devastating. Can't explain how I know but I
  know angels were involved with keeping me safe. 
  jt
  
  
  On Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? 
  Izzy Kevin wrote:  Just like on ressurection 
  morning he "vanished" from  the Tomb talked to some and made a bee 
  line to heaven  and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still 
  serving  breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How 
  fast  was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe 
   an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were  
  travelling with Him would He be invisible?  It is possible 
  that the fastness of his travel might account for his   
  vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it  
  also is  possible that he simply became invisible and then left. 
  The  language  focuses upon his vanishing rather than his 
  leaving or coming. If it  is  possible that he did just 
  become invisible, then this would be an  example of  
  someone who has a body yet is invisible.  What do you think 
  about angels around us? Sometimes they become  visible,  
  but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is  
  invisible to  us? The Bible seems to speak of every person 
  having a guardian  angel, yet  we don't see angels as often as 
  we see people. Wouldn't  invisibility be the  
  likely explanation for that? Don't you think angels have bodies? 
   Peace be with you. David Miller.
  -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, 
  that you  may know how you ought to answer every man." 
  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
  you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
  you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who 
  wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
  will be subscribed.-- "Let 
  your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  may 
  know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)  http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
  you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
  you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants to 
  join, tell him to send an e-mail to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
  will be subscribed.  
  
  

Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Judy Taylor]

Thank you Izzy and Lance, I was certainly grateful and 
the thankful heartcontinues ... If there had been
an accident it would have been my fault because I was 
on the wrong side. What an example of God's 
mercy and faithfulness - and how encouraging. I 
forget about angels until something like this - jt

On Tue, 24 May 2005 04:26:03 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Amen Judy! May God always have His angels keep 
  watch over you.
  
From: Judy Taylor 


I haven't seen one but an sure one kept me out of a 
head on collision on my way to church
yesterday. I was a bit distracted as we have 
a houseful of active and noisy children, was on
my own and fiddling with the cell phone connection 
on our road which is country and most of
the time not a lot of traffic. I looked up 
and was able to swerve at the very last minute. I am
sure I had supernatural help of the kind that was 
not there when I hit the deer a few months
ago; that involved money, this would have been 
devastating. Can't explain how I know but I
know angels were involved with keeping me 
safe. jt


On Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? 
Izzy Kevin wrote:  Just like on ressurection 
morning he "vanished" from  the Tomb talked to some and made a 
bee line to heaven  and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was 
still serving  breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How 
fast  was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in 
maybe  an hour, does that make him invisible? If you 
were  travelling with Him would He be invisible? 
 It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for 
his   vanishing, but the language used in this passage 
suggests that it  also is  possible that he simply became 
invisible and then left. The  language  focuses upon 
his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it  is 
 possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an 
 example of  someone who has a body yet is 
invisible.  What do you think about angels around us? 
Sometimes they become  visible,  but don't you think of 
angels as being in a dimension which is  invisible to  
us? The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian 
 angel, yet  we don't see angels as often as we see 
people. Wouldn't  invisibility be the  likely 
explanation for that? Don't you think angels have bodies? 
 Peace be with you. David Miller.
-- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with 
salt, that you  may know how you ought to answer every 
man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org  
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
and you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend 
who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
he will be subscribed.-- 
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  
may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)  
http://www.InnGlory.org 
 If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email 
to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
and you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants 
to join, tell him to send an e-mail to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
he will be subscribed.  


  

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

If you just get your theology upright the
rest will follow. Iz











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 11:14
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT











Whew !! Thanks forremoving the
pressure. But I just about have this upright
thing figured out. I will try it with shoes in the next day
ortwo. If I can learnto be bipedalistic, it
will free up an extra pair of shoes. 











Cool











JD




-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 23 May 2005 21:39:52 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on
TT



Okay, we'll also post photos of creatures
from the other end of the spectrum as needed. :-) 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:02
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT







You keep pressuring me for a picture. I am
working on it. 











JD




-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on
TT



Has anyone on TT
actually seen an angel? Izzy



-Original
Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of David Miller

Sent: Monday, May
23, 2005 9:14 AM

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine

on TT



Kevin wrote:

 Just like on
ressurection morning he vanished from

 the Tomb
talked to some and made a bee line to heaven

 and back all
while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving

 breakfast!
How far is it to heaven and back? How fast

 was He
travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe

 an hour,
does that make him invisible? If you were

 travelling
with Him would He be invisible?



It is possible
that the fastness of his travel might account for his 

vanishing, but
the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 

possible that he
simply became invisible and then left. The language 

focuses upon his
vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it is 

possible that he
did just become invisible, then this would be an example of



someone who has a
body yet is invisible.



What do you think
about angels around us? Sometimes they become visible, 

but don't you
think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 

us? The
Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 

we don't see
angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't invisibility be the



likely
explanation for that? Don't you think angels have bodies?



Peace be with
you.

David Miller. 





--

Let your
speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know

how you ought to
answer every man. (Colossians 4:6)

http://www.InnGlory.org



If you do not
want to receive posts from this list, send an email to

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a

friend who wants
to join, tell him to send an e-mail to

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and he will be subscribed.







--

Let your
speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how 

you ought to
answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org



If you do not
want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend 

who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and 

he will be
subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Blainerb473]

In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH:  Perhaps.Heb 13:1ShieldsFamily 
  wrote:Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? 
Izzy

BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been 
reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your 
queries.
In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO! I have never seen 
an angel. 
BUT--about a year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we 
began taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed 
together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we finished the 
class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around 
drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly 
became aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me. I could 
only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just 
knewthat it was a her, not a him. She stood there for a moment, and 
it came through to me that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born 
in Norway, who had been active in converting her husband and family to 
Mormonism, and that she was there to show her approval of what we were in 
process of doing. I said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. 
Later that same night, my wife asked me, "Could you feel that there was an angel 
present in the room at the teacher's house tonight?" I said 
"YES!" She was one of my relatives!"I was amazed 
she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spokenof it at 
the time. 
That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel, 
Izzy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Charles Perry Locke]

Blaine, I drank some punch like that one itme ;-)


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine 
on TT

Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 22:18:43 EDT


In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DAVEH:Perhaps.Heb 13:1

ShieldsFamily  wrote:

Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel?  Izzy


BLAINE:  I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been  reading
most of the posts.  Sorry if I have not answered some of your  queries.
In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO!  I have never seen  an
angel.
BUT--about a  year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we  
began
taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed  
together

in the Salt Lake Temple.  On the evening that we finished the  class, the
teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around  drinking 
the

punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly  became
aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me.  I could  only 
sense her
presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just  knew that it 
was

a her, not a him.  She stood there for a moment, and  it came through to me
that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born  in Norway, who 
had
been active in converting her husband and family to  Mormonism, and that 
she was

there to show her approval of what we were in  process of doing.  I said
nothing, just sat there taking it all in.   Later that same night, my wife 
asked

me, Could you feel that there was an angel  present in the room at the
teacher's house tonight?I said  YES!  She was  one of my relatives! 
  I was
amazed  she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spoken of 
it

at  the time.
That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel,  Izzy.



--
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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Blainerb473]

In a message dated 5/24/2005 9:35:56 PM Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Blaine, 
  I drank some punch like that one itme ;-)

 Very funny. 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

I have no idea why you would bring up an amoeba.

My point exactly.
I fail to see what your example of Angels has to do with God having a body, anymore than using an amoeba as an example.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin wrote: The amoeba has a body but what bearing does that have on whether God has a body or not?I have no idea why you would bring up an amoeba. My line of reasoning is that if we know of anybody (e.g., Jesus and angels) who might be invisible and yet also have a body at the same time, then the argument that God does not have a body simply because the Bible refers to him as invisible does not hold. Those with bodies might also be invisible.Peace be with you.David Miller. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to
 send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
		Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

I thought it very funny too. I did not know you had a sense of rumor, I mean humor Blaine.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


In a message dated 5/24/2005 9:35:56 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Blaine, I drank some punch like that one itme ;-)

 Very funny. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Kevin wrote:
 Just like on ressurection morning he vanished from
 the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving
 breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast
 was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe
 an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were
 travelling with Him would He be invisible?

It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his 
vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 
possible that he simply became invisible and then left.  The language 
focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming.  If it is 
possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of 
someone who has a body yet is invisible.

What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 
we don't see angels as often as we see people.  Wouldn't invisibility be the 
likely explanation for that?  Don't you think angels have bodies?

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Miller
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:14 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine
on TT

Kevin wrote:
 Just like on ressurection morning he vanished from
 the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving
 breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast
 was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe
 an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were
 travelling with Him would He be invisible?

It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his 
vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 
possible that he simply became invisible and then left.  The language 
focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming.  If it is 
possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of

someone who has a body yet is invisible.

What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 
we don't see angels as often as we see people.  Wouldn't invisibility be the

likely explanation for that?  Don't you think angels have bodies?

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.



--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend who wants to 
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

David Miller wrote:



What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  
 


=
I am more visable at some times than I am at others.


Terry
 



--
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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[knpraise]

You keep pressuring me for a picture. I am working on it. 

JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT


Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Miller
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:14 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine
on TT

Kevin wrote:
 Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" from
 the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving
 breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast
 was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe
 an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were
 travelling with Him would He be invisible?

It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his 
vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 
possible that he simply became invisible and then left.  The language 
focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming.  If it is 
possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of

someone who has a body yet is invisible.

What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 
we don't see angels as often as we see people.  Wouldn't invisibility be the

likely explanation for that?  Don't you think angels have bodies?

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.



--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how 
you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend 
who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
he will be subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Judy Taylor]

I haven't seen one but an sure one kept me out of a 
head on collision on my way to church
yesterday. I was a bit distracted as we have a 
houseful of active and noisy children, was on
my own and fiddling with the cell phone connection on 
our road which is country and most of
the time not a lot of traffic. I looked up and 
was able to swerve at the very last minute. I am
sure I had supernatural help of the kind that was not 
there when I hit the deer a few months
ago; that involved money, this would have been 
devastating. Can't explain how I know but I
know angels were involved with keeping me safe. 
jt


On Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy 
Kevin wrote:  Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" 
from  the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven 
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving  
breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast  was He 
travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe  an hour, does that 
make him invisible? If you were  travelling with Him would He be 
invisible?  It is possible that the fastness of his travel might 
account for his   vanishing, but the language used in this 
passage suggests that it  also is  possible that he simply 
became invisible and then left. The  language  focuses 
upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it  is 
 possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an 
 example of  someone who has a body yet is 
invisible.  What do you think about angels around us? 
Sometimes they become  visible,  but don't you think of angels 
as being in a dimension which is  invisible to  us? The 
Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian  angel, yet 
 we don't see angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't  
invisibility be the  likely explanation for that? Don't 
you think angels have bodies?  Peace be with you. David 
Miller.-- "Let your speech be always 
with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  may know how you ought 
to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants 
to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
will be subscribed.-- "Let 
your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  may know 
how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)  http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants to join, 
tell him to send an e-mail to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
will be subscribed.  

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet we don't see angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't invisibility be the likely explanation for that? Don't you think angels have bodies?

The amoeba has a body but what bearing does that have on whether God has a body or not?David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin wrote: Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" from the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were travelling with Him would He be invisible?It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is possible that he simply became invisible and then left. The language focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it is possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of someone who has a body yet is invisible.What do you think about
 angels around us? Sometimes they become visible, but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to us? The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet we don't see angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't invisibility be the likely explanation for that? Don't you think angels have bodies?Peace be with you.David Miller. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
		Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

Okay, we'll also post photos of creatures from the other end of 
the spectrum as needed. :-) 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:02 PMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses 
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT



You keep pressuring me for a picture. I am working on it. 


JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 
23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method 
of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT


Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Miller
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:14 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine
on TT

Kevin wrote:
 Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" from
 the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving
 breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast
 was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe
 an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were
 travelling with Him would He be invisible?

It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his 
vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 
possible that he simply became invisible and then left.  The language 
focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming.  If it is 
possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of

someone who has a body yet is invisible.

What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 
we don't see angels as often as we see people.  Wouldn't invisibility be the

likely explanation for that?  Don't you think angels have bodies?

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.



--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how 
you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend 
who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
he will be subscribed.

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

Thank You Jesus We would have missed you 
very much jt! Izzy


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy 
TaylorSent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:50 PMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses 
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT


I haven't seen one but an sure one kept me out of a 
head on collision on my way to church
yesterday. I was a bit distracted as we have a 
houseful of active and noisy children, was on
my own and fiddling with the cell phone connection on 
our road which is country and most of
the time not a lot of traffic. I looked up and 
was able to swerve at the very last minute. I am
sure I had supernatural help of the kind that was not 
there when I hit the deer a few months
ago; that involved money, this would have been 
devastating. Can't explain how I know but I
know angels were involved with keeping me safe. 
jt


On Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy 
Kevin wrote:  Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" 
from  the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven 
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving  
breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast  was He 
travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe  an hour, does that 
make him invisible? If you were  travelling with Him would He be 
invisible?  It is possible that the fastness of his travel might 
account for his   vanishing, but the language used in this 
passage suggests that it  also is  possible that he simply 
became invisible and then left. The  language  focuses 
upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it  is 
 possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an 
 example of  someone who has a body yet is 
invisible.  What do you think about angels around us? 
Sometimes they become  visible,  but don't you think of angels 
as being in a dimension which is  invisible to  us? The 
Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian  angel, yet 
 we don't see angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't  
invisibility be the  likely explanation for that? Don't 
you think angels have bodies?  Peace be with you. David 
Miller.-- "Let your speech be always 
with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  may know how you ought 
to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants 
to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
will be subscribed.-- "Let 
your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you  may know 
how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)  http://www.InnGlory.org  If 
you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
you will be unsubscribed. If you  have a friend who wants to join, 
tell him to send an e-mail to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he 
will be subscribed.  

RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ShieldsFamily]

Kevin: (clue) Amoeba's don't "disappear". :-) 
Izzy


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin 
DeeganSent: Monday, May 23, 2005 1:50 PMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses 
Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, 
yet we don't see angels as often as we see people. Wouldn't invisibility 
be the likely explanation for that? Don't you think angels have 
bodies?

The amoeba has a body but what bearing does that have on whether God has a 
body or not?David Miller 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin 
  wrote: Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" from 
  the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven and back all 
  while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving breakfast! How far is it 
  to heaven and back? How fast was He travelling? Going to heaven and 
  back in maybe an hour, does that make him invisible? If you 
  were travelling with Him would He be invisible?It is possible 
  that the fastness of his travel might account for his vanishing, but the 
  language used in this passage suggests that it also is possible that he 
  simply became invisible and then left. The language focuses upon his 
  vanishing rather than his leaving or coming. If it is possible that he did 
  just become invisible, then this would be an example of someone who has a 
  body yet is invisible.What do you think about angels around us? 
  Sometimes they become visible, but don't you think of angels as being in a 
  dimension which is invisible to us? The Bible seems to speak of every 
  person having a guardian angel, yet we don't see angels as often as we see 
  people. Wouldn't invisibility be the likely explanation for that? Don't 
  you think angels have bodies?Peace be with you.David Miller. 
  --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with 
  salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) 
  http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this 
  list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be 
  unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an 
  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.


Do You Yahoo!?Yahoo! Small Business - Try 
our new Resources site!

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[knpraise]

Whew !! Thanks forremoving the pressure. But I just about have this "upright" thing figured out. I will try it with shoes in the next day ortwo. If I can learnto be bipedalistic, it will free up an "extra" pair of shoes. 

Cool

JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 23 May 2005 21:39:52 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT



Okay, we'll also post photos of creatures from the other end of the spectrum as needed. :-) 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:02 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT



You keep pressuring me for a picture. I am working on it. 

JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:56:51 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT


Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Miller
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:14 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine
on TT

Kevin wrote:
 Just like on ressurection morning he "vanished" from
 the Tomb talked to some and made a bee line to heaven
 and back all while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving
 breakfast! How far is it to heaven and back? How fast
 was He travelling? Going to heaven and back in maybe
 an hour, does that make him invisible? If you were
 travelling with Him would He be invisible?

It is possible that the fastness of his travel might account for his 
vanishing, but the language used in this passage suggests that it also is 
possible that he simply became invisible and then left.  The language 
focuses upon his vanishing rather than his leaving or coming.  If it is 
possible that he did just become invisible, then this would be an example of

someone who has a body yet is invisible.

What do you think about angels around us?  Sometimes they become visible, 
but don't you think of angels as being in a dimension which is invisible to 
us?  The Bible seems to speak of every person having a guardian angel, yet 
we don't see angels as often as we see people.  Wouldn't invisibility be the

likely explanation for that?  Don't you think angels have bodies?

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.



--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how 
you ought to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend 
who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
he will be subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH:Perhaps.Heb 13:1

ShieldsFamily wrote:


Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy

 


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


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you 
ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend who wants to 
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

e other hand, if you firmly believe Satan is at the heart of Mormonism, why would you even entertain such a curiosity. From your recent posts, I would dare say the latter is most likely, which leads to the second reason. You have
 in effect proclaimed Mormonism to be evil, and are on a crusade to denigrate it every time it is presented in a positive light.  So, why do you.want to see if you have an answer I can find REASONABLE...unless it is to find some some weakness in my beliefs, faith or psyche in which to attackattackattack, hoping I'll succumb to mocking, humiliation, peer pressure or whatever. If you don't like Mormonism, Perrythat is your problem. Just don't expect me to allow you to make it my problem. Am I accurately portraying your position, Perry? 
or if you will use of smoke, mirrors, and prooftexts to explain it away, or if you will sidestep the issue. These are the three types of responses I have seen you provide for various discussions and questions in the past. Obviously, you also see the dilemma and have no REASONABLE answer, so sidestepping must be the best tool in your mormon toolbox to deal with the issue. Whining about my motives is a red herring. DAVEH: Believe what you want, Perry. I feel pretty comfortable in my understanding of what you perceive as a dilemma. I certainly don't have all the answers to each and every question you or Kevin might pose, but I don't let it worry me much. Perhaps what I lack in knowledge, I make up in faith. Furthermore, I feel so old and tired, I don't have much gumption to fight younger guys like you and Kevin. If
 you want to rule the sandbox...be my guest. I'll go find my own sandbox and take a nap. :-) 
Perry 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 23:59:35 -0700 DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your below question, you will merely ask
 another, and perhaps another after that, in effect causing me to/ teach Mormonism/.is that what you really want???  If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs. Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so.  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question:  1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again.  2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry 
DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your question??? Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man? Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email
 to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- 
 ~~~
 Dave Hansen
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.langlitz.com
 ~~~
 If you wish to receive
 things I find interesting,
 I maintain six email lists...
 JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
 STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.


		Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Charles Perry Locke]

Dave,
  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you 
don't want to answer it, just say so.

  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no 
answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you 
choose to answer the question:

  1) if you say yes then I will ask you why you did not retain any of 
your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to 
work to become a god all over again.

  2) if you say no, then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be 
a god before he became a man, but you didn't.

  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to 
figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to 
earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is.

Perry

From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine 
on TT
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 22:15:03 -0700

DAVEH:   Another leading question, Perry?  Do you intend to criticize me 
again for answering your question???

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, 
and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man?

Perry
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may 
know how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) 
http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a 
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.

--
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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to
know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know?
It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I
believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed
your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on
belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I
answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps
another after that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is
that what you really want???

 If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons
for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to
answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
  
  
 I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If
you don't want to answer it, just say so.
  
  
 It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no
answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should
you choose to answer the question:
  
  
 1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of
your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have
to work to become a god all over again.
  
  
 2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to
be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.
  
  
 Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to
figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to
earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is.
  
  
Perry
  
  
  DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do
you intend to criticize me again for answering your question???


Charles Perry Locke wrote:


Dave,
  
  
 If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated,
and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man?
  
  
Perry
  
  

  
  

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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me? Ordenigrate that which I believe?My intention isto get an answer so for the FIFTH time

*
Did you answer this?
Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?
If Jesusbecame a god before he became a man, How did he BECOME a god?
*
If you can not answer just say so, don't wiggle  squirm like a fish in a boat.
Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? NO
do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I wrong?
I can always read up or If I need some clarification on a point I can always call my buddies at FAIR.I am asking for the sake of discussion, not to learn.
you profess to know more truth than I know?I do not know MORE truth just The Truth JN 14:6
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? You've certainly been teaching a lot of it lately. Yet when you ask a question, I do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I wrong? Do you really want to know what I believe? If your answer is yes, then I would ask why you would care to know what a Mormon believes, when you profess to know more truth than I know? Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me? Ordenigrate that which I believe? Orcould it be all of the above..Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Perry just wants you to admit it. WhenI arrived you guys were passing a lot of LDS Theology, cloaked in christian terms, undiscovered by TT members and that is how you like it. Gentiles are not ready for the meat of Mormonism are they?

Feel like you are sucker punched? maybe God is trying to get your attention.

As far as Jesus being a god before being a man
How did he become a god?
What of his Mortal probation and learning to progress?

I do not follow what you ask  state in the rest of the post.
Did I not answer something? repost it
I would be happy to answer ANY question you pose. be persistant if I am not answering it is probably cause I am distracted not diverting. 


Did you answer this?
Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin?  If I did that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize??? Sometimes I feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me upright and diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me! :-)  BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion? Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?

Thanks Dave.Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you agree?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
		Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

OK Dave we can all see, your getting more  more transparent, we will just add these questions to the"Can NOT"  "WILL NOT" answer list


It is uncomfortable out of water Flip, Flop, wiggle and squirm.
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another after that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is that what you really want??? If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so.  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question:  1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again.  2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry 
DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your question??? Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man? Perry -- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

If I answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another 
WOW you just hit on why we are on TT! What a revelation.And you did this without a "prophet"Please people no more questions for DH,the thought of two or three more is overwhelming him.

Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another after that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is that what you really want??? If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so.  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question:  1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again.  2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry 
DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your question??? Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man? Perry -- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
		Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: For a guy who seems to have all the answers, why do you feel
the need to ask another question, Kevin? I asked you the 3 below
questions and you just ignored them. Then why would you be surprised
that I simply ignore your questions?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate
me? Ordenigrate that which I believe?
My intention isto get an answer so for the FIFTH time
  
  *
  Did you answer this?
  Can you tell me why the lectures
taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT
not a tabernacle or BODY?
  If Jesusbecame a god before he
became a man, How did he BECOME a god?
  *
  If you can not answer just say so, don't wiggle  squirm
like a fish in a boat.
  
  Does it really bother you to think that my intention for
coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? NO
  do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I
believe. Am I wrong?
  I can always read up or If I need some clarification on a point I
can always call my buddies at FAIR.I am asking for the sake of
discussion, not to learn.
  you profess to know more truth than I know?
I do not know MORE truth just The Truth JN 14:6
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  DAVEH:
Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT
is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? You've certainly been
teaching a lot of it lately. Yet when you ask a question, I do not
detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I
wrong? Do you really want to know what I believe? If your answer is
yes, then I would ask why you would care to know what a Mormon
believes, when you profess to know more truth than I know?

 Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me?
Ordenigrate that which I believe?

 Orcould it be all of the above..

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Perry just wants you to admit it. WhenI arrived you guys
were passing a lot of LDS Theology, cloaked in christian terms,
undiscovered by TT members and that is how you like it. Gentiles are
not ready for the meat of Mormonism are they?
  
  Feel like you are sucker punched? maybe God is trying to get
your attention.
  
  As far as Jesus being a god before being a man
  How did he become a god?
  What of his Mortal probation and learning to progress?
  
  I do not follow what you ask  state in the rest of the
post.
  Did I not answer something? repost it
  I would be happy to answer ANY question you pose. be
persistant if I am not answering it is probably cause I am distracted
not diverting. 
  
  
  Did you answer this?
  Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are
ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or
BODY?
  
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  DAVEH:
Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin?  If I did
that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize??? Sometimes I
feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me upright and
diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me! :-) 

 BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you
edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion?
Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Can you tell me why the lectures taught there
are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a
tabernacle or BODY?
  
  Thanks Dave.
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  DAVEH:
I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in
asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you
agree?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  So was Jesus a god before he became a man or
not?
  
  

  

  

  
  

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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

I know you just see no reason to reply to the questions, and besides Perry will scold you, and then Golly Gee there will be another and another and maybe even a third!Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Yaawn.Kevin Deegan wrote: 

OK Dave we can all see, your getting more  more transparent, we will just add these questions to the"Can NOT"  "WILL NOT" answer list


It is uncomfortable out of water Flip, Flop, wiggle and squirm.
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another after that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is that what you really want??? If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so.  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question:  1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again.  2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry 
DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your question??? Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man? Perry -- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

HELLO Dave look below I answered every single question, in the previous post that you sent there they are. 

Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me? Ordenigrate that which I believe?MY ANSWER My intention isto get an answer so for the FIFTH(scratch that - SIXTH)time

*
Did you answer this?
Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?
If Jesusbecame a god before he became a man, How did he BECOME a god?
*

Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? MY ANSWER NO

do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I wrong?
MY ANSWER I can always read up or If I need some clarification on a point I can always call my buddies at FAIR.I am asking for the sake of discussion, not to learn.Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: For a guy who seems to have all the answers, why do you feel the need to ask another question, Kevin? I asked you the 3 below questions and you just ignored them. Then why would you be surprised that I simply ignore your questions?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me? Ordenigrate that which I believe?My intention isto get an answer so for the FIFTH time

*
Did you answer this?
Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?
If Jesusbecame a god before he became a man, How did he BECOME a god?
*
If you can not answer just say so, don't wiggle  squirm like a fish in a boat.
Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? NO
do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I wrong?
I can always read up or If I need some clarification on a point I can always call my buddies at FAIR.I am asking for the sake of discussion, not to learn.
you profess to know more truth than I know?I do not know MORE truth just The Truth JN 14:6
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? You've certainly been teaching a lot of it lately. Yet when you ask a question, I do not detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I wrong? Do you really want to know what I believe? If your answer is yes, then I would ask why you would care to know what a Mormon believes, when you profess to know more truth than I know? Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me? Ordenigrate that which I believe? Orcould it be all of the above..Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Perry just wants you to admit it. WhenI arrived you guys were passing a lot of LDS Theology, cloaked in christian terms, undiscovered by TT members and that is how you like it. Gentiles are not ready for the meat of Mormonism are they?

Feel like you are sucker punched? maybe God is trying to get your attention.

As far as Jesus being a god before being a man
How did he become a god?
What of his Mortal probation and learning to progress?

I do not follow what you ask  state in the rest of the post.
Did I not answer something? repost it
I would be happy to answer ANY question you pose. be persistant if I am not answering it is probably cause I am distracted not diverting. 


Did you answer this?
Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin?  If I did that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize??? Sometimes I feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me upright and diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me! :-)  BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion? Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?

Thanks Dave.Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you agree?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: You're finally getting pretty close to the truth, Kevin. I see
little reason to be fodder for your cannon. You and Perry seem to have
your own agenda. That's OK by me, but it bewilders me why you would
think I would want to be in the center ring of your circus. If you
intend to barbecue me, do you expect me to simply comply with your
every wish and whim? The game you want to play tends to bore
me..and I suspect others as well. Hon the other hand,
maybe other TTers do want to see me slowly roasting over your
coals.  :-\ 

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  I know you just see no reason to reply to the questions, and
besides Perry will scold you, and then Golly Gee there will be another
and another and maybe even a third!
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  DAVEH:
Yaawn.

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  OK Dave we can all see, your getting more  more
transparent, we will just add these questions to the"Can NOT" 
"WILL NOT" answer list
  
  
  It is uncomfortable out of water Flip, Flop, wiggle and
squirm.
  
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  DAVEH:
I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know,
Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It
seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe,
since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire
to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my
faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your
below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another after
that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is that what
you really want???

 If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons
for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to
answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave, 
  
 I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If
you don't want to answer it, just say so. 
  
 It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no
answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should
you choose to answer the question: 
  
 1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of
your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have
to work to become a god all over again. 
  
 2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to
be a god before he became a man, but you didn't. 
  
 Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to
figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to
earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. 
  
Perry 
  
  DAVEH: Another leading question,
Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your
question??? 

Charles Perry Locke wrote: 

Dave, 
  
 If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated,
and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man?
  
  
Perry 
  

  

  
  


-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
  
  
  __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

Ruben wantedthe Bar B Q

You are not BORED just without an answer!Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: You're finally getting pretty close to the truth, Kevin. I see little reason to be fodder for your cannon. You and Perry seem to have your own agenda. That's OK by me, but it bewilders me why you would think I would want to be in the center ring of your circus. If you intend to barbecue me, do you expect me to simply comply with your every wish and whim? The game you want to play tends to bore me..and I suspect others as well. Hon the other hand, maybe other TTers do want to see me slowly roasting over your coals. :-\ Kevin Deegan wrote: 

I know you just see no reason to reply to the questions, and besides Perry will scold you, and then Golly Gee there will be another and another and maybe even a third!Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
DAVEH: Yaawn.Kevin Deegan wrote: 

OK Dave we can all see, your getting more  more transparent, we will just add these questions to the"Can NOT"  "WILL NOT" answer list


It is uncomfortable out of water Flip, Flop, wiggle and squirm.
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know? It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps another after that, in effect causing me to teach Mormonism.is that what you really want??? If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
Dave,  I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so.  It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question:  1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again.  2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't.  Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry 


		Discover Yahoo! 
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Terry Clifton]

Dave Hansen wrote:

  
DAVEH: You're finally getting pretty close to the truth, Kevin. I see
little reason to be fodder for your cannon. You and Perry seem to have
your own agenda. That's OK by me, but it bewilders me why you would
think I would want to be in the center ring of your circus. If you
intend to barbecue me, do you expect me to simply comply with your
every wish and whim? The game you want to play tends to bore
me..and I suspect others as well. Hon the other hand,
maybe other TTers do want to see me slowly roasting over your
coals.  :-\ 
===

No need for paranoia, Dave. Like the IRS, we are here to help yoou.
Terry

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ttxpress]

myth(weak, 
defective logic; not biblically meaningful)

On Fri, 20 May 2005 09:56:48 -0400 "David Miller" 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:"he vanished out of their sight.".. immediately Jesus became 
invisible., 
the glory of the Father is 
invisibility 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave]

DAVEH: LOL..Thanx Terry---that's what I was afraid of!

Terry Clifton wrote:

  
  
Dave Hansen wrote:
  

DAVEH: You're finally getting pretty close to the truth, Kevin. I see
little reason to be fodder for your cannon. You and Perry seem to have
your own agenda. That's OK by me, but it bewilders me why you would
think I would want to be in the center ring of your circus. If you
intend to barbecue me, do you expect me to simply comply with your
every wish and whim? The game you want to play tends to bore
me..and I suspect others as well. Hon the other hand,
maybe other TTers do want to see me slowly roasting over your
coals.  :-\ 
===
  
No need for paranoia, Dave. Like the IRS, we are here to help yoou.
Terry
  


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave]

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
  
  
 I see a dilemma in your statement that Jesus was a god before he came
to earth as a human, when compared to your own position (not a god)
prior to coming to earth as a human. In my non-mormon mind that is
contradictive. I am trying to understand how YOU resolve that conflict.
I want to see if you have an answer I can find REASONABLE,
DAVEH: Perryit doesn't matter what answer I
give youyou won't find it reasonable. You've made it quite clear
that even a truth spoken from the lips of a Mormon is to be abused.

 For what possible reason do you need to have an answer that seems
reasonable, Perry. Look at it logically...You believe LDS theology is
wrong. So why do you waste your time trying to understand it? Your
previous attitude has been to attack anything emanating from Mormonism,
even if it is true. So...I can explain my beliefs to you in detail,
but your attitude towards them (and me) will remain the same, will it
not? You cannot conceive that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints is as we claim, the True Churchso why would you possibly
want to know how I resolve conflicts of beliefs that you perceive to be
false.

 As I see it, there are two possible reasons for you to ask such a
question knowing that you wouldn't agree with the answer. If you have
a similar curiosity as I do to why people believe as they do, then you
might want to know what is there about Mormonism that attracts people
or why Mormons tend to be so committed to their peculiar beliefs. On
the other hand, if you firmly believe Satan is at the heart of
Mormonism, why would you even entertain such a curiosity. From your
recent posts, I would dare say the latter is most likely, which leads
to the second reason. You have in effect proclaimed Mormonism to be
evil, and are on a crusade to denigrate it every time it is presented
in a positive light. 

 So, why do you.

want to see if you have an answer I can find REASONABLE

...unless it is to find some some weakness in my beliefs, faith or
psyche in which to attackattackattack, hoping I'll succumb to
mocking, humiliation, peer pressure or whatever. If you don't like
Mormonism, Perrythat is your problem. Just don't expect me to
allow you to make it my problem.

 Am I accurately portraying your position, Perry?

 
 or if you will use of smoke, mirrors, and prooftexts to
explain it away, or if you will sidestep the issue. These are the three
types of responses I have seen you provide for various discussions and
questions in the past.
  
  
Obviously, you also see the dilemma and have no REASONABLE answer, so
sidestepping must be the best tool in your mormon toolbox to deal with
the issue. Whining about my motives is a red herring.
  

DAVEH: Believe what you want, Perry. I feel
pretty comfortable in my understanding of what you perceive as a
dilemma. I certainly don't have all the answers to each and every
question you or Kevin might pose, but I don't let it worry me much.
Perhaps what I lack in knowledge, I make up in faith. Furthermore, I
feel so old and tired, I don't have much gumption to fight younger guys
like you and Kevin. If you want to rule the sandbox...be my guest.
I'll go find my own sandbox and take a nap.  :-) 

Perry
  
  
  From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS
doctrine on TT

Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 23:59:35 -0700


DAVEH: I've got no problem answering somebody who really wants to
know, Perry. I just question your motives. Why do you want to know?
It seems obvious that you don't particularly care to know what I
believe, since you think my beliefs are in error and have proclaimed
your desire to prove it false. Like Kevin, you seem more intent on
belittling my faith than in participating in a viable exchange. If I
answer your below question, you will merely ask another, and perhaps
another after that, in effect causing me to/ teach Mormonism/.is
that what you really want???


 If you persist in insisting that I am deceptive about my reasons for
joining TT, then I do find it strange that you would expect me to
answer your questions using my LDS rooted beliefs.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:


Dave,
  
  
 I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If
you don't want to answer it, just say so.
  
  
 It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no
answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should
you choose to answer the question:
  
  
 1) if you say "yes" then I will ask you why you did not retain any of
your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have
to work to become a god all over again.
  
  
 2) if you say "no", then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to
be a 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Charles Perry Locke]

DAVEH:I certainly don't have all the answers to each and every question 
you or Kevin might pose...


Finally, reasonable answer.


--
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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
DaveH wrote: "Just how do you want me to respond to
questions posed to me on TT?"
  
  
I want you to respond as you feel is appropriate.
DAVEH: I did, and for doing so you criticized me. You are a hard guy
to please, Perry! 
 I am just saying that if you are going to teach mormon
doctrine, that you admit that is what you are doing instead of hiding
it behind some pat phrase about NOT teaching it.
  

DAVEH: Why do you make inaccurate accusations, Perry? When did I say
I was NOT teaching it??? Go back and read my posts. I said my
purpose in coming to TT was not to teach Mormonism or convert people.
That was not my intention at all. If somebody asks what a Mormon (me)
what he believes, would you not expect for that Mormon (me) to explain
(teach) the questioner the answer to his question??? My reason for
being in TT remains as I have previously claimed. IF you want to know
what I believe, just ask. That I give you an honest answer in reply
(effectively teaching you what I believe) is not my primary reason for
being here though.
DaveH also said, " My interest in being here is based on
my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think
about things like this",
  
  
You have stated this before,
DAVEH: So why do you repeatedly ask a question for which I have
previously answered in a consistent fashion?
 yet when a protestant tells you what he/show thinks, you
do not learn from ti.
 Instead, you debate the issue, arguing the mormon point
of view.
DAVEH: I do admit to having a short memory. But that is not always
why I ask follow-up questions. The first part of why I am here is to
find out what Protestants believe, and the second part is to
find out
why they believe as they do. My LDS perspective is an integral
part of why I ask those questions (to compare to my background
belief). To not ask questions framed from my LDS perspective would not
fulfill the needs of my second reason for being on TTto find out why
Protestants believe as they do.
 That is NOT learning what protestants beleive, it is
baiting them so you can push the mormon perspective. Call it what it
is, Dave.
  
  
DaveH also wrote: "I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert
TTers to Mormonism.", and " I repeatI did not come to TT to preach
LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. "
  
  
 My point exactly. Then why do you teach it?
DAVEH: Because some folks continue to ask what I believe. Just look
down at the questions Kevin asked me below.I'm surprised would you
even ask why I would teach Kevin my beliefs. It's pretty simple
Perry..He asked, and I answered. Furthermore Perry, I would much
rather have somebody ask me what I believe than have them tell me what
I believe, which as you must know, has happened more than a few times
on TT. Interestingly though, even after being asked a question, and
honestly answering itsome TTers apparently refuse to believe what I
tell them.such as you asking me why I am here.
 I repeat, I think it is okay if you try to teach it, but
when you say you did not join to teach it, but end up teaching it
anyway, I just wonder about that. 
DAVEH: Have you ever gotten hungry and went to the supermarket to buy
food, and then on the way to the checkout counter saw a magazine that
caught your eye and purchased it? Perry, if I asked you why you went
to the store, and you told me to get foodwhat would you think of me
if I accused you of lying, and that you really went there to buy a
book
Please examine what your motives are and what you are
doing and OWN it.
  

DAVEH: I have Perry. Do you want me to lie as to why I came to TT?

(Gee, that road sure is familiar!)
  

DAVEH: Perhaps it is because you want to travel that same road even
after you have seen the scenery before. I'm not sure why you think I
would now make up a different reason for coming to TT than that I've
already given. Like I said before, IF you want to know what I
believe, just ask me. But to then criticize me for answering causes me
to wonder about your motives, Perry.

 Now.If you want to criticize me of somethinggo aheadbut
don't expect me to ignore your false accusations. If you want me to
change my reasons for coming to TTdo you really expect me to lie,
Perry?

Perry
  
  
  From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS
doctrine on TT

Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:32:37 -0700


DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to
answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is
congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs? I've not heard of the SM
method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem
for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely
quoting a single passage as evidence i

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

DAVEH wrote:
 I've not heard of the SM method of teaching

The Socratic Method is where the teacher asks questions to cause the pupil 
to discover the answer for himself rather than lecture him with declarative 
statements.  Sometimes the questions are such that they cause the pupil to 
realize the foolishness of his premises.  Other times the questions simply 
bring out assumptions that had not been considered.

DaveH wrote:
 Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon
 quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what
 I said above.  At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible
 teaches that God has body parts.  (Am I loosely quoting you right
 on that, DavidM?)

Yes, based upon Biblical study, I think that our heavenly Father has a body. 
It seems to me that the concept of a body is very important.  Even evil 
spirits (demons) desire a body and it appears to be a form of punishment for 
demons not to have one.  Remember how they begged to be sent into the swine? 
Jesus spoke of how when they were cast out, they went through the dry 
places, looking for a body.  The hope of our own bodily resurrection appears 
to be a very important aspect of the gospel message.  If a body is important 
for spirits, then God the Father must have one.  Otherwise, we would make 
him like unto a demon, which is a spirit without a body.  The Scriptures 
speak of God the Father having a form and shape, of having a face beheld by 
angels, of having a mouth, lips, tongue, eyes, head, arms, hands, fingers, 
loins, and back parts, etc.  The Scriptures speak of the Father sitting down 
in the mountain and eating with Moses and the elders of Israel.  It seems to 
me that the idea of the Father having a spiritual body should not be so 
objectionable.  I think perhaps they think of body only as that mortal body 
which we all have, and this mortal body must die and be shed.  Father God 
certainly does not have a body like we do, but the body he has, if he has 
one, would be something very different from our physical bodies.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

DH says If he is invisible to you now, what do you suppose he will look like when you do see him?

JN 14 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
When I look at Jesus I will have seen God. I can not see something that is invisible. That is why Jesus came as the express IMAGE of his PERSON, notthe Fathersnonexistant body
JN 1 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Jesus says plainly THEY have seen the Father and known Him because they knew Jesus and saw jesus!
JN 14 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
WHY DID THE "LECTURES" TEACH GOD IS A SPIRIT???
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: AhHe was a spirit in the past. I assume you believe he now is a spirit clothed in a physical bodyis that correct, Kevin? If he is invisible to you now, what do you suppose he will look like when you do see him? You do anticipate seeing him, don't you Kevin??? BTWI really do want to know if you think you will be able to see God, Kevinwhat say ye?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? 

God is a spirit
God is invisible.-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
		Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Charles Perry Locke wrote: 
DaveH wrote: "Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT?" I want you to respond as you feel is appropriate.DAVEH: I did, and for doing so you criticized me. You are a hard guy to please, Perry! 
I am just saying that if you are going to teach mormon doctrine, that you admit that is what you are doing instead of hiding it behind some pat phrase about NOT teaching it. DAVEH: Why do you make inaccurate accusations, Perry? When did I say I was NOT teaching it??? Go back and read my posts. I said my purpose in coming to TT was not to teach Mormonism or convert people. That was not my intention at all. If somebody asks what a Mormon (me) what he believes, would you not expect for that Mormon (me) to explain (teach) the questioner the answer to his question??? My reason for being in TT remains as I have previously claimed. IF you want to know what I believe, just ask. That I give you an honest answer in reply (effectively teaching you what I believe) is not my primary reason for being here though.
DaveH also said, " My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this", You have stated this before,DAVEH: So why do you repeatedly ask a question for which I have previously answered in a consistent fashion?
yet when a protestant tells you what he/show thinks, you do not learn from ti.
Instead, you debate the issue, arguing the mormon point of view.DAVEH: I do admit to having a short memory. But that is not always why I ask follow-up questions. The first part of why I am here is to find out what Protestants believe, and the second part is to find out why they believe as they do. My LDS perspective is an integral part of why I ask those questions (to compare to my background belief). To not ask questions framed from my LDS perspective would not fulfill the needs of my second reason for being on TTto find out why Protestants believe as they do.
That is NOT learning what protestants beleive, it is baiting them so you can push the mormon perspective. Call it what it is, Dave. DaveH also wrote: "I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism.", and " I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. "  My point exactly. Then why do you teach it?DAVEH: Because some folks continue to ask what I believe. Just look down at the questions Kevin asked me below.I'm surprised would you even ask why I would teach Kevin my beliefs. It's pretty simple Perry..He asked, and I answered. Furthermore Perry, I would much rather have somebody ask me what I believe than have them tell me what I believe, which as you must know, has happened more than a few times on TT. Interestingly though, even after being asked a question, and
 honestly answering itsome TTers apparently refuse to believe what I tell them.such as you asking me why I am here.
I repeat, I think it is okay if you try to teach it, but when you say you did not join to teach it, but end up teaching it anyway, I just wonder about that. DAVEH: Have you ever gotten hungry and went to the supermarket to buy food, and then on the way to the checkout counter saw a magazine that caught your eye and purchased it? Perry, if I asked you why you went to the store, and you told me to get food.what would you think of me if I accused you of lying, and that you really went there to buy a book
Please examine what your motives are and what you are doing and OWN it. DAVEH: I have Perry. Do you want me to lie as to why I came to TT?
(Gee, that road sure is familiar!) DAVEH: Perhaps it is because you want to travel that same road even after you have seen the scenery before. I'm not sure why you think I would now make up a different reason for coming to TT than that I've already given. Like I said before, IF you want to know what I believe, just ask me. But to then criticize me for answering causes me to wonder about your motives, Perry. Now.If you want to criticize me of somethinggo aheadbut don't expect me to ignore your false accusations. If you want me to change my reasons for coming to TTdo you really expect me to lie, Perry?
Perry 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:32:37 -0700 DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs? I've not heard of the SM method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single passage as evidence i

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

What biblical support do you have, for this?
Is this orthodox belief? Any historical/Church fathersupport?
Does the Holy Spirit have a body? 
Since God is invisible can you see his invisible body?


God does have a body His name is Jesus the "image of the invisible God"David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH wrote: I've not heard of the SM method of teachingThe Socratic Method is where the teacher asks questions to cause the pupil to discover the answer for himself rather than lecture him with declarative statements. Sometimes the questions are such that they cause the pupil to realize the foolishness of his premises. Other times the questions simply bring out assumptions that had not been considered.DaveH wrote: Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said above. At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God has body parts. (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?)Yes, based upon Biblical study, I think that our heavenly Father has a body. It seems to me that the
 concept of a body is very important. Even evil spirits (demons) desire a body and it appears to be a form of punishment for demons not to have one. Remember how they begged to be sent into the swine? Jesus spoke of how when they were cast out, they went through the dry places, looking for a body. The hope of our own bodily resurrection appears to be a very important aspect of the gospel message. If a body is important for spirits, then God the Father must have one. Otherwise, we would make him like unto a demon, which is a spirit without a body. The Scriptures speak of God the Father having a form and shape, of having a face beheld by angels, of having a mouth, lips, tongue, eyes, head, arms, hands, fingers, loins, and back parts, etc. The Scriptures speak of the Father sitting down in the mountain and eating with Moses and the elders of Israel. It seems to me that the idea of the Father having a spiritual body should not be so
 objectionable. I think perhaps they think of body only as that mortal body which we all have, and this mortal body must die and be shed. Father God certainly does not have a body like we do, but the body he has, if he has one, would be something very different from our physical bodies.Peace be with you.David Miller. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
		Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist
in asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you
agree?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?
  
  


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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Kevin wrote:
 What biblical support do you have, for this?

Plenty, but not a lot of time right now to lay it out for you.

Kevin wrote:
 Is this orthodox belief?
 Any historical/Church father support?

With the exception of Tertullian, most church fathers did not accept the 
idea of God having a body.  However, there are problems with definitions in 
regards to this.  For example, Origen's argument was that any body would be 
material substance, and since we know that material substance is 
corruptible, God could not have a body because he is incorruptible.  Well, 
what about an incorruptible body?  He never considered such an idea.

By the way, Tertullian was a guy kind of like you.  He slashed and dashed 
those he disagreed with, making them look quite foolish when he finished his 
arguments.  Since he was one who did argue that Father God has a body, you 
might find it interesting to read him on this subject; howbeit, most of the 
time is taken to argue that the soul itself is coporeal.  :-)

Kevin wrote:
 Does the Holy Spirit have a body?

I tend to think that the Holy Spirit inhabits the bodies of the Father and 
the Son and the redeemed also; therefore, he does not have his own body. 
The Holy Spirit's work is to make the Father and Son omniscient and to 
connect the saints to the Father and the Son. Remember when Stephen saw 
heaven opened up, he saw the Father and the Son at the right hand of the 
Father, but he did not see a third person.

Kevin wrote:
 Since God is invisible can you see his invisible body?

The term invisible does not mean non-existent, nor does it mean impossible 
to be seen.  It means that it is not discernible to the physical eye.  When 
Jesus talked with the two on the road to Emmaeus, he vanished (became 
invisible).  This does not mean that he no longer had a body.

Kevin wrote:
 God does have a body His name is Jesus
 the image of the invisible God

True.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

I do not see how this squares with LDS Theology. The purpose of this Mortal life is to progress to become a god. Yet here we have a god who became a man, not a man who became a god?
Who else skiped this required probation or learning experience?
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you agree?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

By the way, Tertullian was a guy kind of like you. He slashed and dashed those he disagreed with, making them look quite foolish when he finished his arguments.
Is that a compliment ora slam? OR are you saying he was a Baptist/Militant Fundamentalist?
Remember when Stephen saw heaven opened up, he saw the Father and the Son at the right hand of the Father, but he did not see a third person.
So when David described being under the feathers of His wing? Did Stephen SEE this or describe Jesus at God's right hand as in Power  Authority? If he was literally standing on God's right hand, then Jesus may have hurt his hand as he probably wieghed at least 150lbs.
When Jesus talked with the two on the road to Emmaeus, he vanished (became invisible). This does not mean that he no longer had a body.
Not anymore than when he walked through a door. Not anymore then when he said early in the morning Touch me not for I have not ascended to the father. We later see him touched that morning because he left this planet traveled to heaven and back while the Jerusalem Grille was still serving breakfast! Who said he became invisible? Are you going to start inserting your philosophy into the scriptures?
Lu 24:16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
Here we SEE that Jesus held their eyes from knowing his identity as the next verse testifies they thought him a stranger.
Lu 24:17-18 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
I don't know about you but if a invisible man had a conversation we me I would have hightailed it outa there!
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Kevin wrote: What biblical support do you have, for this?Plenty, but not a lot of time right now to lay it out for you.Kevin wrote: Is this orthodox belief? Any historical/Church father support?With the exception of Tertullian, most church fathers did not accept the idea of God having a body. However, there are problems with definitions in regards to this. For example, Origen's argument was that any body would be material substance, and since we know that material substance is corruptible, God could not have a body because he is incorruptible. Well, what about an incorruptible body? He never considered such an idea.By the way, Tertullian was a guy kind of like you. He slashed and dashed those he disagreed with, making them look quite foolish when he finished his arguments. Since he was one who did argue that Father God has a body, you might find it interesting to read him on this subject;
 howbeit, most of the time is taken to argue that the soul itself is coporeal. :-)Kevin wrote: Does the Holy Spirit have a body?I tend to think that the Holy Spirit inhabits the bodies of the Father and the Son and the redeemed also; therefore, he does not have his own body. The Holy Spirit's work is to make the Father and Son omniscient and to connect the saints to the Father and the Son. Remember when Stephen saw heaven opened up, he saw the Father and the Son at the right hand of the Father, but he did not see a third person.Kevin wrote: Since God is invisible can you see his invisible body?The term "invisible" does not mean non-existent, nor does it mean impossible to be seen. It means that it is not discernible to the physical eye. When Jesus talked with the two on the road to Emmaeus, he vanished (became invisible). This does not mean that he no longer had a body.Kevin wrote: God
 does have a body His name is Jesus the "image of the invisible God"True.Peace be with you.David Miller. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
		Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[David Miller]

Kevin wrote:
 Is that a compliment or a slam?

Compliment.

David Miller wrote:
 Remember when Stephen saw heaven opened up, he
 saw the Father and the Son at the right hand of the
 Father, but he did not see a third person.

Kevin wrote:
 So when David described being under the feathers
 of His wing?

This was probably poetic and figurative, although it also is possible that 
God the Father has wings like the cherubim over the ark of the covenant.  I 
wouldn't find that strange if he did, considering the descriptions of the 
cherubims and seraphims (see Isaiah 6).

Kevin wrote:
 Did Stephen SEE this or describe Jesus at God's right hand
 as in Power  Authority?

He saw this.  That's the record of Scripture.

Kevin wrote:
 If he was literally standing on God's right hand,  then
 Jesus may have hurt his hand as he probably wieghed
 at least 150lbs.

Nah, 150 lbs is no problem for Jesus's hand.  :-)

Kevin wrote:
 Who said he became invisible? Are you going to start
 inserting your philosophy into the scriptures?
 Lu 24:16 But their eyes were holden that they should
 not know him.  Here we SEE that Jesus held their eyes
 from knowing his identity as the next verse testifies they
 thought him a stranger.
 Lu 24:17-18 And he said unto them, What manner of
 communications are these that ye have one to another,
 as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose
 name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou
 only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things
 which are come to pass there in these days?
 I don't know about you but if a invisible man had a
 conversation we me I would have hightailed it outa there!

I was thinking of later on when he broke bread with them.

Luke 24:31
(31) And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of 
their sight.

The Greek word here is aphantos, which means, without visibility.  It is a 
negative of the word used in Heb. 11:3 where it says that which is seen was 
not made of that which is visible.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know 
how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org

If you do not want to receive posts from this 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

And their eyes were opened
The plain understanding is that they were beholden from "know"ing who he was not that he was present and visible or invisible.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin wrote: Is that a compliment or a slam?Compliment.David Miller wrote: Remember when Stephen saw heaven opened up, he saw the Father and the Son at the right hand of the Father, but he did not see a third person.Kevin wrote: So when David described being under the feathers of His wing?This was probably poetic and figurative, although it also is possible that God the Father has wings like the cherubim over the ark of the covenant. I wouldn't find that strange if he did, considering the descriptions of the cherubims and seraphims (see Isaiah 6).Kevin wrote: Did Stephen SEE this or describe Jesus at God's right hand as in Power  Authority?He saw this. That's the record of Scripture.Kevin wrote: If he was literally standing on
 God's right hand, then Jesus may have hurt his hand as he probably wieghed at least 150lbs.Nah, 150 lbs is no problem for Jesus's hand. :-)Kevin wrote: Who said he became invisible? Are you going to start inserting your philosophy into the scriptures? Lu 24:16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him. Here we SEE that Jesus held their eyes from knowing his identity as the next verse testifies they thought him a stranger. Lu 24:17-18 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? I don't know about you but if a invisible man had a conversation we me I would have hightailed it
 outa there!I was thinking of later on when he broke bread with them.Luke 24:31(31) And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.The Greek word here is aphantos, which means, without visibility. It is a negative of the word used in Heb. 11:3 where it says that which is seen was not made of that which is visible.Peace be with you.David Miller. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the
 best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin? 
If I did that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize???
Sometimes I feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me
upright and diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me!
 :-) 

 BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you
edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion?
Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2
Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or
BODY?
  
  Thanks Dave.
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  DAVEH:
I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in
asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you
agree?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?
  
  

  
  
   

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

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

DaveH maybe you better get a hold of Hinckley, he is not sure about LDS theology!
Don Lattin (religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1) 
Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man? Hinckley: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about. [emphasis added] Q: So you're saying the church is still struggling to understand this? Hinckley: Well, as God is, man may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly. We believe that the glory of God is intelligence and whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the Resurrection.  ...that's one thing that's different. Modern revelation. We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, we believe he has yet to reveal many great
 and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Gordon B. Hinckley, as quoted in Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997: 
"On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man, [Hinckley] sounded uncertain, `I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it... I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it.'"Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin?  If I did that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize??? Sometimes I feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me upright and diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me! :-)  BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion? Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or BODY?

Thanks Dave.Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you agree?Kevin Deegan wrote: 

So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

Then comes the damage control at the homefront:
http://www.desnews.com/confer/97fall/talks/op0vzq7q.htm
 The media have been kind and generous to us. This past year of pioneer celebrations has resulted in very extensive, favorable press coverage. There have been a few things we wish might have been different. I personally have been much quoted, and in a few instances misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine. I think I understand them thoroughly, and it is unfortunate that the reporting may not make this clear. I hope you will never look to the public press as the authority on the doctrines of the Church.

New YorkerIn the Mormon scheme, every person is a potential divinity. The adage "As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be" expresses the Mormon belief that God was once a human being, with a wife and children. But Hinckley did not seem interested in discussing matters of theology. When I asked him to characterize God's connubial relationship, he replied, "We don't speculate on that a lot. Brigham Young said if you went to Heaven and saw God it would be Adam and Eve. I don't know what he meant by that." Pointing to a grim-faced portrait of the Lion of the Lord, as Young was called, he said, "There he is, right there. I'm not going to worry about what he said about those things."I asked whether Mormon theology was a form of polytheism."I don't have the remotest idea what you mean," he said impatiently."More than one god.""Yes, but that's a very
 loose term," he replied. "We believe in eternal progression." By that he meant that human beings can evolve toward godhood by following the Mormon path. "You want to be a reporter always?" he said. "You want to be a scrub forever, through all eternity? We believe that life, eternal life, is real, that it's purposeful, that it has meaning, that it can be realized. I wouldn't describe us as polytheistic."
WHAT ELSE DOES HE the LDS CEO, NOT KNOW?
"Now we are at war. Great forces have been mobilized and will continue to be. Political alliances are being forged. We do not know how long this conflict will last. We do not know what it will cost in lives and treasure. We do not know the manner in which it will be carried out. It could impact the work of the Church in various ways.""No one knows how long it will last. No one knows precisely where it will be fought. No one knows what it may entail before it is over. We have launched an undertaking the size and nature of which we cannot see at this time.""I do not know what the future holds. I do not wish to sound negative, but I wish to remind you of the warnings of scripture and the teachings of the prophets which we have had constantly before us.""Now, I do not wish to be an alarmist. I do not wish to be a prophet of doom. I am optimistic. I do not believe the time is here when an all-consuming calamity will overtake us. I
 earnestly pray that it may not. There is so much of the Lord’s work yet to be done. We, and our children after us, must do it. I can assure you that we who are responsible for the management of the affairs of the Church will be prudent and careful as we have tried to be in the past. The tithes of the Church are sacred."- Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Times in Which We Live,” October 2001 General Conference (Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 72)"I hope that prayer will take on a new luster in our lives. None of us knows what lies ahead. We may speculate, but we do not know."- Gordon B. Hinckley, “Till We Meet Again,” Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 89
Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

DaveH maybe you better get a hold of Hinckley, he is not sure about LDS theology!
Don Lattin (religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1) 
Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man? Hinckley: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about. [emphasis added] Q: So you're saying the church is still struggling to understand this? Hinckley: Well, as God is, man may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly. We believe that the glory of God is intelligence and whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the Resurrection.  ...that's one thing that's different. Modern revelation. We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, we believe he has yet to reveal many great
 and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Gordon B. Hinckley, as quoted in Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997: 
"On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH:   Another leading question, Perry?  Do you intend to criticize me 
again for answering your question???

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
  If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you 
stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became 
a a man?

Perry
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you 
ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: Does it really bother you to think that my intention for coming
to TT is not to preach/teach Mormonism, Kevin? You've certainly been
teaching a lot of it lately. Yet when you ask a question, I do not
detect sincerity in your quest for knowing what I believe. Am I
wrong? Do you really want to know what I believe? If your answer is
yes, then I would ask why you would care to know what a Mormon
believes, when you profess to know more truth than I know?

 Is it your intention to entrap me? Orhumiliate me?
Ordenigrate that which I believe?

 Orcould it be all of the above..

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Perry just wants you to admit it. WhenI arrived you guys were
passing a lot of LDS Theology, cloaked in christian terms, undiscovered
by TT members and that is how you like it. Gentiles are not ready for
the meat of Mormonism are they?
  
  Feel like you are sucker punched? maybe God is trying to get
your attention.
  
  As far as Jesus being a god before being a man
  How did he become a god?
  What of his Mortal probation and learning to progress?
  
  I do not follow what you ask  state in the rest of the post.
  Did I not answer something? repost it
  I would be happy to answer ANY question you pose. be persistant
if I am not answering it is probably cause I am distracted not
diverting. 
  
  
  Did you answer this?
  Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are ONLY 2
Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or
BODY?
  
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  DAVEH:
Do you really want me to teach LDS theology on TT, Kevin?  If I did
that, would not Perry feel more compelled to criticize??? Sometimes I
feel like you two work as a tag team. One of you stands me upright and
diverts my attention while the other sucker punches me! :-) 

 BTWWhy did you not answer my below question?  I noticed you
edited out my explanationdid you do so to divert the discussion?
Do you agree with what I said in the previous post, Kevin?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Can you tell me why the lectures taught there are
ONLY 2 Personages in the Godhead?
  Why God is a personage of SPIRIT not a tabernacle or
BODY?
  
  Thanks Dave.
  
  Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  DAVEH:
I've answered this before, Kevin. I'm not sure why you persist in
asking again, but the answer remains the same.yes. I assume you
agree?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  So was Jesus a god before he became a man or not?
  
  

  
  
  
  


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

[TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Charles Perry Locke]

Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is exactly 
what you are doing. You may not be aware of the Socratic Method of 
teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now, as far as I am 
concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever you think is the truth 
using whatever method you feel compelled to use (within the gudelines) on 
TT. But at least be honest about it when you ar teaching LDS doctrine, 
rather than saying you do not do it, then doing it anyway.

Perry
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700
Judy Taylor wrote:
  On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DAVEH:   SureGod does look like a man, Kevin.   If Jesus was
the Son of man (Jn 3:13), then do you not think his Father in
Heaven was a Holy Man?  No; God is a Spirit (John 4:24) - 
Jesus took our likeness upon
Himself for a purpose.  Psalm 91:4 speaks of God's feathers and
wings, do you suppose he looks like a bird/ a chicken

DAVEH:  Do you believe you have a spirit as well, Judy?  Does having a 
spirit change the way one looks?   If you do not believe God looks like a 
man, then what do you think he looks like???  Do you believe Jesus is in 
the express image of his Father in Heaven?  (Heb 1:3)

  And, if Jesus' physical body was in the form of a man, do you 
not
think his pre-mortal spiritual body may have been in a similar
form?No; before he took a body upon Himself he was God 
the Word who
appeared in His preincarnate state as
an angel, a cloud, fire, water from the rock. You can't figure out
God with a carnal mind Dave.

DAVEH:  Do you believe it is important to understand the nature of God, 
Judy?

 To answer your last questionyes, many things are created in 
a
form before they become the actual entity. If we were created
in the image of God (Gen 1:26), and we will be like him when he
appears (1Jn 3:2), then does it not follow that God looks like a man?
 No; the image of God speaks of nature and character.

DAVEH:  Really?!?!?!   So you would believe (don't let me put words in your 
mouth) that we could have been born with 4 legs and a tail and still been 
in the image of God?

  You are trying to mix the spiritual with the temporal.
The temporal is passing away - only the spiritual is eternal. 
Transformed bodies are part of it but this does
not mean that Good looks like a man.  He did not leave us any
representation of Jesus, noone knows what
he looks like other than he wasn't all that good looking.

DAVEH:  You are losing me on that one, Judy.  Do you not believe Jesus 
currently has a resurrected physical body that resembles that of a man?

God knows our frame, we are such idolaters that
we would do the same with him as Israel did with the bronze serpent.
As for him being seen.is there any question about it?  
The passages that suggest one cannot see God are obviously
referring to those who are carnal, since there are Biblical
characters (such as Moses  Stephen) who did see God. 
Furthermore, Gen 32:30 pretty much illustrates that holy men can
see God, and live.  Was it not Jesus who said...
 Moses didn't see God, he only saw his hind parts as he passed by
and even that caused his face to shine so
that he had to wear a veil before the ppl.  Stephen had a vision
of Jesus standing at the RH of the Father but there is no
indication that he saw the face of God.

DAVEH:What difference does it make that Moses did not see God's face.  
That wasn't the question.Did Moses see God, and you stipulated that he 
did..saw his hind parts .  So what's to debate.Moses saw God and 
lived.  God has a body (you've stipulated Moses saw part of that body) 
which can be seen. Case closed, is it not?

  He said that because the man he wrestled with represented God. 
Do you really think that God Himself left his throne in heaven and
came down to earth to wrestle with
Jacob?  It was an angel.

DAVEH:  Do you believe the hindparts Moses saw were God's hindparts, or do 
you believe they were hindparts of an angel?

Probably another manifestation of Jesus in His preincarnate state.
*Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.*   (Mt 5:8)
...Do you believe you can see God, Kevin?  If not, perhaps
you are not pure enough in heart.
 Takes more than presumptuous belief DaveH - It takes a pure 
heart
(that is what God calls pure)

DAVEH:   You are losing me on this, Judy.   So you *do *believe those with 
a pure heart the shall see God?  If so, then why would you take issue with 
my assertion that God has a body that can be seen?

Kevin Deegan wrote:
So what would he look like? a man?
*Can he 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[ttxpress]

very interesting, 
CP

 g :: tt moderator

On Wed, 18 May 2005 07:41:49 -0700 "Charles Perry 
Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that 
is  exactlywhat you are doing..
||

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH:  Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to 
answer it.  Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is 
congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs?I've not heard of the SM method 
of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, 
Perry.  It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a 
single passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for 
prooftexting.  When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, 
now you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine.  I'm perplexed, Perry.  
Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT?

   BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I 
answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just 
egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions 
to draw out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault.  I 
repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert 
other TTers to Mormonism.  My interest in being here is based on my 
curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think 
about things like this.  To me it is pretty obvious that God has the 
form of a man, and that he can be seen by man.  I derived my thinking on 
this from my LDS background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports 
my belief.  Yet apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably 
you disagree...is that correct?  Why?  Is not the Bible plain in 
revealing that men have seen God in the form of a man in Bible times?  
Do you not see why I am so curious to learn why any Bible believing 
Christian would not see it as I do?  To me it is simply illogical to 
think God is not in the form of a man.  If you don't agree with me, 
please tell me what you think God looks like Perry???  Do you really 
think he does not exist in the form of a man?

   Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon 
quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said 
above.  At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that 
God has body parts.  (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?)   
And logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead 
to, Perry?

   So Perrywhat's the problem?  If you feel that I am teaching 
Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same?  And...I 
stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism 
or convert TTers to Mormonism.  I'm hear to find out what others 
believe, and why they believe it.   If you do not want to know what I 
believe, don't ask me what I believeand be sure to delete (without 
reading) any of my responses to questions that are asked of me by others.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is 
exactly what you are doing. You may not be aware of the Socratic 
Method of teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now, 
as far as I am concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever 
you think is the truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use 
(within the gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you 
ar teaching LDS doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then 
doing it anyway.

Perry
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700
Judy Taylor wrote:
  On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DAVEH:   SureGod does look like a man, Kevin.   If Jesus was
the Son of man (Jn 3:13), then do you not think his Father in
Heaven was a Holy Man?  No; God is a Spirit (John 4:24) 
- Jesus took our likeness upon
Himself for a purpose.  Psalm 91:4 speaks of God's feathers and
wings, do you suppose he looks like a bird/ a chicken

DAVEH:  Do you believe you have a spirit as well, Judy?  Does having 
a spirit change the way one looks?   If you do not believe God looks 
like a man, then what do you think he looks like???  Do you believe 
Jesus is in the express image of his Father in Heaven?  (Heb 1:3)

  And, if Jesus' physical body was in the form of a man, do 
you not
think his pre-mortal spiritual body may have been in a similar
form?No; before he took a body upon Himself he was 
God the Word who
appeared in His preincarnate state as
an angel, a cloud, fire, water from the rock. You can't figure out
God with a carnal mind Dave.

DAVEH:  Do you believe it is important to understand the nature of 
God, Judy?

 To answer your last questionyes, many things are 
created in a
form before they become the actual entity. If we were created
in the image of God (Gen 1:26), and we will be like him when he
appears (1Jn 3:2), then does it not follow that God looks like a 
man?
 No; the image of God speaks of nature and character.

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? 

God is a spirit
God is invisible.Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs? I've not heard of the SM method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for prooftexting. When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, now you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine. I'm perplexed, Perry. Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT?BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions to draw
 out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault. I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this. To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man, and that he can be seen by man. I derived my thinking on this from my LDS background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports my belief. Yet apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably you disagree...is that correct? Why? Is not the Bible plain in revealing that men have seen God in the form of a man in Bible times? Do you not see why I am so curious to learn why any Bible believing Christian would not see it as I do? To me it is simply illogical to think God is not in the form of a man. If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? Do you
 really think he does not exist in the form of a man?Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said above. At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God has body parts. (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?) And logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead to, Perry?So Perrywhat's the problem? If you feel that I am teaching Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same? And...I stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism. I'm hear to find out what others believe, and why they believe it. If you do not want to know what I believe, don't ask me what I believeand be sure to delete (without reading) any of my responses to questions that are asked of me by others.Charles Perry Locke
 wrote: Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is  exactly what you are doing. You may not be aware of the "Socratic  Method" of teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now,  as far as I am concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever  you think is the truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use  (within the gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you  ar teaching LDS doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then  doing it anyway. Perry From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700 Judy Taylor wrote: On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
 writes: DAVEH: SureGod does look like a man, Kevin. If Jesus was the Son of man (Jn 3:13), then do you not think his Father in Heaven was a Holy Man? No; God is a Spirit (John 4:24)  - Jesus took our likeness upon Himself for a purpose. Psalm 91:4 speaks of God's feathers and wings, do you suppose he looks like a bird/ a chicken DAVEH: Do you believe you have a spirit as well, Judy? Does having  a spirit change the way one looks? If you do not believe God looks  like a man, then what do you think he looks like??? Do you believe  Jesus is in the express image of his Father in Heaven? (Heb 1:3) And, if Jesus' physical body was in the form of a man, do  you not think his pre-mortal spiritual body may have been in a similar form? No;
 before he took a body upon Himself he was  God the Word who appeared in His preincarnate state as an angel, a cloud, fire, water from the rock. You can't figure out God with a carnal mind Dave. DAVEH: Do you believe it is important to understand the nature of  God, Judy? To answer your last questionyes, many things are  created in a form before they become the actual entity. If we were created in the image of God (Gen 1:26), and we will be like him when he appears (1Jn 3:2), then does it not follow that God looks like a  man? No; the "image of God" speaks of nature and character. DAVEH: Really?!?!?! So you would 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

God’s revelation of Himself is complete in Jesus 
JN 14:8-9 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 
Jesus is the image of God 
2 Co 4:3-4 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. 
Jesus is the express image of God 
Hb 1:3 the express image of his person 
What is the image of? "THE Invisible God"
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God 
"is the image of the invisible God" (Colossians 1:15). The Greek word for "image" is eikon, referring to a representation of something, and denoting the manifestation of a substance. Notice that Paul contrasted Jesus' image to that of the invisible God. The point Paul was trying to get acrosswas that Jesus is the visible representation of God to man. That is why Jesus could say, "he that has seen Me has seen the Father" (John 14:9; also 12:45).
Jesus is the bodily representation 
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs? I've not heard of the SM method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for prooftexting. When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, now you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine. I'm perplexed, Perry. Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT?BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions to draw
 out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault. I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this. To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man, and that he can be seen by man. I derived my thinking on this from my LDS background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports my belief. Yet apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably you disagree...is that correct? Why? Is not the Bible plain in revealing that men have seen God in the form of a man in Bible times? Do you not see why I am so curious to learn why any Bible believing Christian would not see it as I do? To me it is simply illogical to think God is not in the form of a man. If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? Do you
 really think he does not exist in the form of a man?Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said above. At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God has body parts. (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?) And logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead to, Perry?So Perrywhat's the problem? If you feel that I am teaching Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same? And...I stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism. I'm hear to find out what others believe, and why they believe it. If you do not want to know what I believe, don't ask me what I believeand be sure to delete (without reading) any of my responses to questions that are asked of me by others.Charles Perry Locke
 wrote: Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is  exactly what you are doing. You may not be aware of the "Socratic  Method" of teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now,  as far as I am concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever  you think is the truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use  (within the gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you  ar teaching LDS doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then  doing it anyway. Perry From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700 Judy Taylor wrote: On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
 writes: DAVEH: SureGod does look like a man, Kevin. If Jesus was the Son of man (Jn 3:13), then do you not think his Father in Heaven was a Holy Man? No; God is a Spirit (John 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Kevin Deegan]

To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man
Man fell and lost the image of God, the image is not in the form of a man. it is in being a rational, emotional being, that knows right from wrong.
Matthew Henry Commentary"Man was not made in the likeness of any creature that went before him, but in the likeness of his Creator; yet still between God and man there is an infinite distance. Christ only is the express image of God’s person, as the Son of his Father, having the same nature. It is only some of God’s honour that is put upon man, who is God’s image only as the shadow in the glass" 
"Adam was made in the image of God; but, when he was fallen and corrupt, he begat a son in his own image, sinful and defiled, frail, mortal consisting of body and soul, but a sinner like himself, guilty and obnoxious"
"Such remains of God’s image are still even upon fallen man as that he who unjustly kills a man defaces the image of God and does dishonour to him."
Mrk 12:29-30 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 
HEART HB 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience 
FALLEN NATURE "out of the heart proceed evil thoughts... fornications... blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man." Matt 15:19-20
MIND RM 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 
FALLEN NATURE "Set your mind on things above..." Col 3:2
FALLEN MT 16:23 Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
FALLEN "...those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh." Rom 8:5
FALLEN HUMAN NATURE "...they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destructionwho set their mind on earthly things." Phil 3:18-19
Emotions "fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace..." Gal 5:22
FALLEN "works of the fleshhatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath..." Gal 5:19-21Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs? I've not heard of the SM method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for prooftexting. When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, now you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine. I'm perplexed, Perry. Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT?BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions to draw
 out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault. I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this. To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man, and that he can be seen by man. I derived my thinking on this from my LDS background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports my belief. Yet apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably you disagree...is that correct? Why? Is not the Bible plain in revealing that men have seen God in the form of a man in Bible times? Do you not see why I am so curious to learn why any Bible believing Christian would not see it as I do? To me it is simply illogical to think God is not in the form of a man. If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? Do you
 really think he does not exist in the form of a man?Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said above. At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God has body parts. (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?) And logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead to, Perry?So Perrywhat's the problem? If you feel that I am teaching Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same? And...I stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism. I'm hear to find out what others believe, and why they believe it. If you do not want to know what I believe, don't ask me what I believeand be sure to delete (without reading) any of my responses to questions that are asked of 

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Charles Perry Locke]

DaveH wrote: Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on 
TT?

 I want you to respond as you feel is appropriate. I am just saying that if 
you are going to teach mormon doctrine, that you admit that is what you are 
doing instead of hiding it behind some pat phrase about NOT teaching it.

DaveH also said,  My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why 
Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like 
this,

You have stated this before, yet when a protestant tells you what he/show 
thinks, you do not learn from ti. Instead, you debate the issue, arguing the 
mormon point of view. That is NOT learning what protestants beleive, it is 
baiting them so you can push the mormon perspective. Call it what it is, 
Dave.

DaveH also wrote: I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to 
Mormonism., and  I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, 
nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. 

  My point exactly. Then why do you teach it? I repeat, I think it is okay 
if you try to teach it, but when you say you did not join to teach it, but 
end up teaching it anyway, I just wonder about that. Please examine what 
your motives are and what you are doing and OWN it.

(Gee, that road sure is familiar!)
Perry
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine 
on TT
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:32:37 -0700

DAVEH:  Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to 
answer it.  Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent 
with my LDS rooted beliefs?I've not heard of the SM method of 
teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, 
Perry.  It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single 
passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for 
prooftexting.  When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, now 
you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine.  I'm perplexed, Perry.

   BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I 
answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just 
egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions to 
draw out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault.  I repeatI 
did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to 
Mormonism.  My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why 
Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like 
this.  To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man, and that 
he can be seen by man.  I derived my thinking on this from my LDS 
background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports my belief.  Yet 
apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably you disagree...is 
that correct?  Why?  Is not the Bible plain in revealing that men have seen 
God in the form of a man in Bible times?  Do you not see why I am so 
curious to learn why any Bible believing Christian would not see it as I 
do?  To me it is simply illogical to think God is not in the form of a man. 
 If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like 
Perry???  Do you really think he does not exist in the form of a man?

   Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon 
quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said 
above.  At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God 
has body parts.  (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?)   And 
logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead to, 
Perry?

   So Perrywhat's the problem?  If you feel that I am teaching 
Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same?  And...I 
stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or 
convert TTers to Mormonism.  I'm hear to find out what others believe, and 
why they believe it.   If you do not want to know what I believe, don't ask 
me what I believeand be sure to delete (without reading) any of my 
responses to questions that are asked of me by others.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is exactly 
what you are doing. You may not be aware of the Socratic Method of 
teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now, as far as I am 
concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever you think is the 
truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use (within the 
gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you ar teaching LDS 
doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then doing it anyway.

Perry
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700
Judy Taylor wrote:
  On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes

Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH: AhHe was a spirit in the past. I assume you
believe he now is a spirit clothed in a physical bodyis that
correct, Kevin? If he is invisible to you now, what do you suppose he
will look like when you do see him? You do anticipate seeing him,
don't you Kevin???

 BTWI really do want to know if you think you will be able to
see God, Kevinwhat say ye?

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you
think God looks like Perry??? 
  
  God is a spirit
  God is invisible.
  
  
  

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