Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 7:23:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: while that's true, there's no reason to think of Mormonism as derived from Protestantism, partic while the S-CM itself ran counter to the Protestants..extending the thought, Mormonism may be as Christian as any cult (not related to NT Christianity), but it can't be Christian in the sense of Protestant reformers (related to NT Christianity).. Absolutely.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
while that's true, there's no reason to think of Mormonism as derived from Protestantism, partic while the S-CM itself ran counter to the Protestants..extending the thought, Mormonism may be as Christian as any cult (not related to NT Christianity), but it can't be Christian in the sense of Protestant reformers (related to NT Christianity).. On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 22:01:36 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 2/3/2005 3:33:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: an interesting aspect of this issue appears below--is Mormonism Protestantism(?); it's v unclear partic while it is 'distinct' from, e.g., the S-CM..is the S-CM 'Protestantism'? On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 04:01:32 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..Yes [the S-CM] came first but it provided fodder for the LDS[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: || The Stone/Campbell Movement ..was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings ||Actually, Stone/Campbell was a protest, of sorts, against protestants. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 3:33:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: an interesting aspect of this issue appears below--is Mormonism Protestantism(?); it's v unclear partic while it is 'distinct' from, e.g., the S-CM..is the S-CM 'Protestantism'? On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 04:01:32 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..Yes [the S-CM] came first but it provided fodder for the LDS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: || The Stone/Campbell Movement ..was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings || Actually, Stone/Campbell was a protest, of sorts, against protestants. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
an interesting aspect of this issue appears below--is Mormonism Protestantism(?); it's v unclear partic while it is 'distinct' from, e.g., the S-CM..is the S-CM 'Protestantism'? On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 04:01:32 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..Yes [the S-CM] came first but it provided fodder for the LDS[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: || The Stone/Campbell Movement ..was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. If you do not bear fruit what is that to me? Whatever you call it (success) My father said much fruit glorifies Him I suggest you talk to God about it. I doubt that you and I will find much "commonality" I do not care to. I care to find "Commonality" with Jesus Christ and His book shows me how! For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death More about Jesus would I know! I do not need the Greek to show me this.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/3/2005 6:04:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They are never dealt with because they carry a deeper meaning to those that hold the peculiar LDS doctrines. Not knowing all the doctrines issues and wordings makes one sort of out of the loop in some ways.As does a failure to understand the history of the times and the universal need from the patient application of grace. There are things that you write, on occasion, that make me think you are the only one involved in these discussions who has played a hand in the conversion of others. "Success" as defined in this manner is not necessarily success. I see much in the Mormon Faith that I will never be able to accept. Nor do I accept their scripture (i.e. The Book of Mormon, the D&C and the PoGP) as mine. But ditto for the Catholic Bible or the way Legalists use the same Bible I use. If we cannot find a point of commonality, the discussion becomes pointless after all arguments have been presented. John Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 6:04:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They are never dealt with because they carry a deeper meaning to those that hold the peculiar LDS doctrines. Not knowing all the doctrines issues and wordings makes one sort of out of the loop in some ways. As does a failure to understand the history of the times and the universal need from the patient application of grace. There are things that you write, on occasion, that make me think you are the only one involved in these discussions who has played a hand in the conversion of others. "Success" as defined in this manner is not necessarily success. I see much in the Mormon Faith that I will never be able to accept. Nor do I accept their scripture (i.e. The Book of Mormon, the D&C and the PoGP) as mine. But ditto for the Catholic Bible or the way Legalists use the same Bible I use. If we cannot find a point of commonality, the discussion becomes pointless after all arguments have been presented. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 6:06:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To which do you sentence do you refer to? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:52:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. You have funny "eyesight" if you can not see it in the Mormon church! Right Church or ONE True Church? Is there a difference? Sorry - sent before I was ready. Question: what does that second sentence above have to do with anything I wrote? JD The second one.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 6:05:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not an expert on this movement neither am I in the dark about it time will tell. J
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
To which do you sentence do you refer to?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:52:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. You have funny "eyesight" if you can not see it in the Mormon church! Right Church or ONE True Church? Is there a difference?Sorry - sent before I was ready. Question: what does that second sentence above have to do with anything I wrote? JD Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
I am not an expert on this movement neither am I in the dark about it[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:43:08 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Many people call it thus. A follower of Campbell is a CampbelliteThe original name for the LDS church seems Campbellish April 1830 "Church of Christ" It was Organized in Manchester NYAs I have said before -- only works salvationist Baptist use this wording. And I am speaking from personal experience, here. "Campbellite" is never used by anyone else except those who seek to disparage the Movement. The Movement splintered into a number of divisions but not nearly so divided as the Baptist Movement. When a people are zealot for their faith and do not understand "salvation by grace through faith apart from obedience," they often do such things. Sidney Rigdon was no more grounded in the Campbell/Stonde Movement than you are. Neither did he understand the significance of the Continual Flow. I must say one thing further - if there is anything I know, it is the history of Campbell/Stone. I hope, therefore, that you do not pretend to tell me about that Movement. Just stick to what you know or think you know. JD Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
They are never dealt with because they carry a deeper meaning to those that hold the peculiar LDS doctrines. Not knowing all the doctrines issues and wordings makes one sort of out of the loop in some ways. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:02:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The movement had many offshoots . Yes it came first but it provided fodder for the LDSIt's a "so what" from me on your observation above. Why not make your observation meaningful in your battle against Mormonism. Pursue this observation. Learn about the Restoration Movement. If you really understand the RM, the connection it had with a number of first generation Mormons, you could demonstrate the connection between a Movement that is obviously Christian and one which moved in a different direction. I beleieve that info could be used with degree of convincibility -- more so than what you do now. Presently, I see you arguing with Dave and Blaine about issues that assume specific issues on their part -- issues that are never dealt wiith. Your postings are interesting to me, even informative, but, for the most part, they do not get to the heart of the disagreement between Mormonism and Mainstream Christianity. John Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:52:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. You have funny "eyesight" if you can not see it in the Mormon church! Right Church or ONE True Church? Is there a difference? Sorry - sent before I was ready. Question: what does that second sentence above have to do with anything I wrote? JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:52:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. You have funny "eyesight" if you can not see it in the Mormon church! Right Church or ONE True Church? Is there a difference? Of course there is a difference -- at least in the way I use the terms. "Right Church" is a term used by combatants to maintain party lines by excluding all those who disagree. They are always legalistic when it comes to the receipt of Grace in the soteriological sense and never forgiving of differing "crucial" beliefs. "One church" is the church these Legalists are a part of -- along with those who have been excluded by their zealot exclusives. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:43:08 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Many people call it thus. A follower of Campbell is a Campbellite The original name for the LDS church seems Campbellish April 1830 "Church of Christ" It was Organized in Manchester NY As I have said before -- only works salvationist Baptist use this wording. And I am speaking from personal experience, here. "Campbellite" is never used by anyone else except those who seek to disparage the Movement. The Movement splintered into a number of divisions but not nearly so divided as the Baptist Movement. When a people are zealot for their faith and do not understand "salvation by grace through faith apart from obedience," they often do such things. Sidney Rigdon was no more grounded in the Campbell/Stonde Movement than you are. Neither did he understand the significance of the Continual Flow. I must say one thing further - if there is anything I know, it is the history of Campbell/Stone. I hope, therefore, that you do not pretend to tell me about that Movement. Just stick to what you know or think you know. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/3/2005 4:02:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The movement had many offshoots . Yes it came first but it provided fodder for the LDS It's a "so what" from me on your observation above. Why not make your observation meaningful in your battle against Mormonism. Pursue this observation. Learn about the Restoration Movement. If you really understand the RM, the connection it had with a number of first generation Mormons, you could demonstrate the connection between a Movement that is obviously Christian and one which moved in a different direction. I beleieve that info could be used with degree of convincibility -- more so than what you do now. Presently, I see you arguing with Dave and Blaine about issues that assume specific issues on their part -- issues that are never dealt wiith. Your postings are interesting to me, even informative, but, for the most part, they do not get to the heart of the disagreement between Mormonism and Mainstream Christianity. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. You have funny "eyesight" if you can not see it in the Mormon church! Right Church or ONE True Church? Is there a difference?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/2/2005 4:31:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kevin, Prove it first, apply it a little later, please, assuming it pans out as true..'give ppl a chance to process/discuss your allegations' seems like some sound advice.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:58:27 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite MinistersObviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them!Sounds like good advice. Most who have commentary regarding The Restoration Movement, Stone/Campbell Movement, Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, Christian Church -- usually miss the mark in significant ways when it comes to critical commentary regard this religious express or movement. In the end, the Movement placed too much emphasis on personal works and the "right church." But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. John Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
The change in the priesthood was to a response to the other teams in the conference refusing to play BYU. The popular Civil Rights and Government force potential applied to the situation all made for a good environment to recieve a "revelation" Although it is not technically a revelation but a "Official Proclamation" LDS trying to be "Christian" may pass when Hinckley does. There are still some Hardline Old line Mormons in the First presidency. Maybe there first acts as President will be to move back all the Joe Smith stuff into the vistors centers[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/2/2005 8:57:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith -> perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship.>>JohnJohn, will you please elaborate on what changes you have seen in Mormonism? As I understand it, other than removing some objectional material from the secret temple endowment ceremonies in the last decade or two, there have been no changes in their doctrine. They have, however, been trying to change their image from a cult to a Christian religion, primarily through TV ad campaigns.perryChanges? The black thing for one thing. Blacks were simply not permitted in the early Mormon church, as far as I know. Dialogical exchanges with those in the Christian mainstream is another. Such was not the case in the early Mormon church. Their move from polygamy -- before my time I might add -- is another. The fact that there are more than one Mormon church -- again before my time. And, on a more individual level, knowing and meeting several Mormons who fellowship those within the Mainstream based upon faith in Christ Jesus .. a very significant departure, I believe. All sects, whether Mormon or Baptist, Methodist or whatever -- started as exclusive. Foursquare, of which I am a member, was begun by a divorcee and perhaps, not that honest of a woman. It is now fully accepted by the mainstream Christianity. Charles Finney has his disciples, Kruger has his, Paul Tillick his and so on. It is the history of any dynamic construct to move away from it's beginning uniqueness and become less or more than it was in the beginning. Change is impossible to resist. The Mormon church lives under this rule of "being" as do all of us. John Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Many people call it thus. A follower of Campbell is a Campbellite The original name for the LDS church seems Campbellish April 1830 "Church of Christ" It was Organized in Manchester NY Rigdon Himself called it so: Messenger and Advocate June, 1837, Rigdon "One thing has been done by the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. It has puked the Campbellites effectually; no emetic could have done so half as well The Book of Mormon has revealed the secrets of Campbellism and unfolded the end of the system. " Sidney Rigdon was a Disciple of Christ Minister if you want to get technical. http://www.lds-mormon.com/sr.shtml Alex gets in the act: http://www.lds-mormon.com/campbell.shtml An analysis of the book of Mormon with an examination of its internal and external evidences, and a refutation of its pretenses to divine authority by Alexander Campbell Alexander Campbell and Sidney Rigdon were friends. After Mormonism evolved, Campell wrote http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/acampbell/delusions.htmlDELUSIONS. AN ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF MORMON WITH AN EXAMINATION OF ITS INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL EVIDENCES, AND A REFUTATION OF ITS PRETENCES TO DIVINE AUTHORITY by Alexander Campbell Mormonism Unvailed, Howe published in 1834 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:59:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite MinistersObviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them!There is no such thing as a "Cambellite [sic] Minister." Only works salvationist Baptist's ever use this wording. That much of the thinking of Mormonism came from Restorationist thought cannot be denied. Oliver Cowdry had exposure with the Stone/Campbell Movement. In addition, Smith keyed on biblical issues of some mystery, such as baptism for the dead and the Psalmist's statement that we were all gods. Smith knew absolutely nothing of the biblical doctrine of grace and because of that failure, developed what I see as a transparently fraudulent religion. But that action was completed nearly 200 years ago. Those who have their faith _expression_ in this religion, today, are dealt with (by a God of grace) in much the same manner as the pagan Gentile of Romans, chapter 2, or the hundreds of civilizations that co-existed during Old Testament times. I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith - perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship. John Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
The movement had many offshoots . Yes it came first but it provided fodder for the LDS[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:22:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Hugh??? The Stone/Campbell Movement was something that was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings by a number of years. The movement continues today and is not defined in terms of denominational considerations. JD Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 4:31:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kevin, Prove it first, apply it a little later, please, assuming it pans out as true..'give ppl a chance to process/discuss your allegations' seems like some sound advice.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:58:27 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! Sounds like good advice. Most who have commentary regarding The Restoration Movement, Stone/Campbell Movement, Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, Christian Church -- usually miss the mark in significant ways when it comes to critical commentary regard this religious express or movement. In the end, the Movement placed too much emphasis on personal works and the "right church." But I see the same problem with most evangelical/fundamentalist churches. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 8:57:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith - > perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship. > >John John, will you please elaborate on what changes you have seen in Mormonism? As I understand it, other than removing some objectional material from the secret temple endowment ceremonies in the last decade or two, there have been no changes in their doctrine. They have, however, been trying to change their image from a cult to a Christian religion, primarily through TV ad campaigns. perry Changes? The black thing for one thing. Blacks were simply not permitted in the early Mormon church, as far as I know. Dialogical exchanges with those in the Christian mainstream is another. Such was not the case in the early Mormon church. Their move from polygamy -- before my time I might add -- is another. The fact that there are more than one Mormon church -- again before my time. And, on a more individual level, knowing and meeting several Mormons who fellowship those within the Mainstream based upon faith in Christ Jesus .. a very significant departure, I believe. All sects, whether Mormon or Baptist, Methodist or whatever -- started as exclusive. Foursquare, of which I am a member, was begun by a divorcee and perhaps, not that honest of a woman. It is now fully accepted by the mainstream Christianity. Charles Finney has his disciples, Kruger has his, Paul Tillick his and so on. It is the history of any dynamic construct to move away from it's beginning uniqueness and become less or more than it was in the beginning. Change is impossible to resist. The Mormon church lives under this rule of "being" as do all of us. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith - perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship. John John, will you please elaborate on what changes you have seen in Mormonism? As I understand it, other than removing some objectional material from the secret temple endowment ceremonies in the last decade or two, there have been no changes in their doctrine. They have, however, been trying to change their image from a cult to a Christian religion, primarily through TV ad campaigns. perry -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
sounds like a radical concession, Kevin--(ask) what's being absorbd while mesmerized with their material/s(?); some think that 'effective propaganda is published on fly paper' (perhaps: some stick to it buzzing about it:) On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:04:08 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Isn't it self evident? LDS have the "RESTORED" Gospel ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:59:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! There is no such thing as a "Cambellite [sic] Minister." Only works salvationist Baptist's ever use this wording. That much of the thinking of Mormonism came from Restorationist thought cannot be denied. Oliver Cowdry had exposure with the Stone/Campbell Movement. In addition, Smith keyed on biblical issues of some mystery, such as baptism for the dead and the Psalmist's statement that we were all gods. Smith knew absolutely nothing of the biblical doctrine of grace and because of that failure, developed what I see as a transparently fraudulent religion. But that action was completed nearly 200 years ago. Those who have their faith _expression_ in this religion, today, are dealt with (by a God of grace) in much the same manner as the pagan Gentile of Romans, chapter 2, or the hundreds of civilizations that co-existed during Old Testament times. I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith - perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:22:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Hugh??? The Stone/Campbell Movement was something that was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings by a number of years. The movement continues today and is not defined in terms of denominational considerations. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 7:49:31 PM Pacific Standard Time, Knpraise writes: In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:59:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! There is no such thing as a "Cambellite [sic] Minister." Only works salvationist Baptist's ever use this wording. That much of the thinking of Mormonism came from Restorationist thought cannot be denied. Oliver Cowdry had exposure with the Stone/Campbell Movement. In addition, Smith keyed on biblical issues of some mystery, such as baptism for the dead and the Psalmist's statement that we were all gods. Smith knew absolutely nothing of the biblical doctrine of grace and because of that failure, developed what I see as a transparently fraudulent religion. But that action was completed nearly 200 years ago. Those who have their faith _expression_ in this religion, today, are dealt with (by a God of grace) in much the same manner as the pagan Gentile of Romans, chapter 2, or the hundreds of civilizations that co-existed during Old Testament times. I have seen some changes in the Mormon Faith - perhaps indicating that the move of God effects even that fellowship. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 2/2/2005 7:29:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, Knpraise writes: In a message dated 2/2/2005 3:22:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Hugh??? The Stone/Campbell Movement was something that was quite distinct from LDS and pre-dated LDS beginnings by a number of years. The movement continues today and is not defined in terms of denominational considerations. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Isn't it self evident? LDS have the "RESTORED" Gospel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin, Prove it first, apply it a little later, please, assuming it pans out as true..'give ppl a chance to process/discuss your allegations' seems like some sound advice.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:58:27 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! || Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo!
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Kevin, Prove it first, apply it a little later, please, assuming it pans out as true..'give ppl a chance to process/discuss your allegations' seems like some sound advice.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:58:27 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
A number of the original LDS Apostles and leaders were previously Cambellite Ministers Obviously they brought some of their "Restorationist" Theology with them! That makes you "Country Cousins"[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ftr, origins, destinations, routes, arrivals, etc. are aspects of journeys...e.g., Tim McVey, a graduate of Gulf War#1 has roots traceable to a radical cultic/militia enclave in Oklahoma abt 1992, before during his bomb test operations in Arizona--it's alleged that that cult militia's controlled by a former Mennonite..this question by Kevin relates in a certain perhaps strange way to identifying evangelicals..i'll leave it at this for now.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:20:50 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
ftr, origins, destinations, routes, arrivals, etc. are aspects of journeys...e.g., Tim McVey, a graduate of Gulf War#1 has roots traceable to a radical cultic/militia enclave in Oklahoma abt 1992, before during his bomb test operations in Arizona--it's alleged that that cult militia's controlled by a former Mennonite..this question by Kevin relates in a certain perhaps strange way to identifying evangelicals..i'll leave it at this for now.. G On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:20:50 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John
[TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
So you and the LDS trace your roots back to same origin. Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 7/27/2004 7:04:20 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: There I go again.I seem to easily loose your train of thought. What do you mean by ex-fellowship? Does that refer to your wandering from the Stone Cambell movement? If so, I don't quite understand how that applies to the apostles.. Yes. Actually there is a difference between the movement (S/C) and the "Church of Christ" from winch I came. Truth be told, I have a lot of respect for the movement and the original participants. The C of C is another story. Scripture does give us more than 12 apostles. And there does not appear to any concern for succession in their writings. John
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry DAve, I did not do a good job on my response. DAVEH: No problem. Thanx for the explanation thoughI was beginning to wonder.! :-) I was being somewhat sarcastic in my post DAVEH: Ahh.Sarcasm has a way of getting lost in email sometimes. -- but even I missed the point when I reread that original email. I do tend to sarcasm when reviewing what my ex-fellowship sometimes presents for consideration. DAVEH: There I go again.I seem to easily loose your train of thought. What do you mean by ex-fellowship? Does that refer to your wandering from the Stone Cambell movement? If so, I don't quite understand how that applies to the apostles.. John In a message dated 7/26/2004 11:59:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture DAVEH: Do you not consider the additional apostles to be legitimate apostles? It doesn't seem to me that there were only meant to be 12, but it seemed logical for there to be a succession of apostles as they died off. I would have not reason not to accept the others listed in scripture as "apostles" including the replacement for Judas, Paul, Barnabas, DAVEH: I guess I was just confused by your earlier comment of only 12..sorry, John. and there is one or two others list As far as a succession of apostles, I do not see any concern for apostolic succession in the writings of the few apostles who addressed scripture (Peter, John, Paul). Do you see it differently? and the "prophets" became unnecessary DAVEH: Why would you think that, John? Actually, I don't think that. DAVEH: O.Again, I'm having trouble following you, I guess. I have never spoken in tongues but I am charismatic to the bone. I see lots of problems in the pentecostal side of the aisle, but they are the same problems Paul had to deal with in the first church. As a charismatic, I would say that there are not as many prophets as are claimed but more than we many suppose. The proof is in the ministry. as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Sorry DAve, I did not do a good job on my response. I was being somewhat sarcastic in my post -- but even I missed the point when I reread that original email. I do tend to sarcasm when reviewing what my ex-fellowship sometimes presents for consideration. John In a message dated 7/26/2004 11:59:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture DAVEH: Do you not consider the additional apostles to be legitimate apostles? It doesn't seem to me that there were only meant to be 12, but it seemed logical for there to be a succession of apostles as they died off. I would have not reason not to accept the others listed in scripture as "apostles" including the replacement for Judas, Paul, Barnabas, DAVEH: I guess I was just confused by your earlier comment of only 12..sorry, John. and there is one or two others list As far as a succession of apostles, I do not see any concern for apostolic succession in the writings of the few apostles who addressed scripture (Peter, John, Paul). Do you see it differently? and the "prophets" became unnecessary DAVEH: Why would you think that, John? Actually, I don't think that. DAVEH: O.Again, I'm having trouble following you, I guess. I have never spoken in tongues but I am charismatic to the bone. I see lots of problems in the pentecostal side of the aisle, but they are the same problems Paul had to deal with in the first church. As a charismatic, I would say that there are not as many prophets as are claimed but more than we many suppose. The proof is in the ministry. as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture DAVEH: Do you not consider the additional apostles to be legitimate apostles? It doesn't seem to me that there were only meant to be 12, but it seemed logical for there to be a succession of apostles as they died off. I would have not reason not to accept the others listed in scripture as "apostles" including the replacement for Judas, Paul, Barnabas, DAVEH: I guess I was just confused by your earlier comment of only 12..sorry, John. and there is one or two others list As far as a succession of apostles, I do not see any concern for apostolic succession in the writings of the few apostles who addressed scripture (Peter, John, Paul). Do you see it differently? and the "prophets" became unnecessary DAVEH: Why would you think that, John? Actually, I don't think that. DAVEH: O.Again, I'm having trouble following you, I guess. I have never spoken in tongues but I am charismatic to the bone. I see lots of problems in the pentecostal side of the aisle, but they are the same problems Paul had to deal with in the first church. As a charismatic, I would say that there are not as many prophets as are claimed but more than we many suppose. The proof is in the ministry. as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 7/26/2004 9:41:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/25/2004 11:28:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Hi John.I am curious about how the SCM believes about current day prophets. Were apostles and prophets a part of the restoration as they viewed it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture DAVEH: Do you not consider the additional apostles to be legitimate apostles? It doesn't seem to me that there were only meant to be 12, but it seemed logical for there to be a succession of apostles as they died off. I would have not reason not to accept the others listed in scripture as "apostles" including the replacement for Judas, Paul, Barnabas, and there is one or two others list As far as a succession of apostles, I do not see any concern for apostolic succession in the writings of the few apostles who addressed scripture (Peter, John, Paul). Do you see it differently? and the "prophets" became unnecessary DAVEH: Why would you think that, John? Actually, I don't think that. I have never spoken in tongues but I am charismatic to the bone. I see lots of problems in the pentecostal side of the aisle, but they are the same problems Paul had to deal with in the first church. As a charismatic, I would say that there are not as many prophets as are claimed but more than we many suppose. The proof is in the ministry. as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/25/2004 11:28:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Hi John.I am curious about how the SCM believes about current day prophets. Were apostles and prophets a part of the restoration as they viewed it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture DAVEH: Do you not consider the additional apostles to be legitimate apostles? It doesn't seem to me that there were only meant to be 12, but it seemed logical for there to be a succession of apostles as they died off. Do you see it differently? and the "prophets" became unnecessary DAVEH: Why would you think that, John? as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 7/25/2004 11:28:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Hi John.I am curious about how the SCM believes about current day prophets. Were apostles and prophets a part of the restoration as they viewed it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John Not really. There were only 12 apostles, you know, dispite the 15 or 16 that are named in scripture and the "prophets" became unnecessary as soon as God gave us the Protestant (ah, one of your favoright words) Bible ((as per a misuse of I Co 13 the closing verses - in my humble but correct opinion.) John
SMITHSON -- Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07/25/2004 3:16 AM Subject: Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity In a message dated 7/24/2004 4:49:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? You are oneness. I am not. But I do not doubt that you are honest in your disagreement, as I am. Perhaps I disagree because my IQ is somewhere around 85 or so. Whatever the reason, dishonesty is not a part our inability to solve the problem. John Now you must know that that IQ comment could be leapt upon but ultimately it is the foolish things of this world with which The Almighty confounds the wise so IQ isn't that much of a consideration. As to the issue of who The Almighty is ... well, The Saviour said that that ONLY comes by direct revelation from Him (Matt. 11:27) so that pretty much makes IQ moot. Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Chris Barr a servant of YHVH - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07/25/2004 3:16 AM Subject: Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity In a message dated 7/24/2004 4:49:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." Since the early 1800's that has been the admonition. It does not work..Unity is only possible in a loving acceptance of those who follow Christ and claim Him as their God. The appraoch assumes, in the face of disagreement, that at least one brother is dishonest. You are oneness. I am not. But I do not doubt that you are honest in your disagreement, as I am. Perhaps I disagree because my IQ is somewhere around 85 or so. Whatever the reason, dishonesty is not a part our inability to solve the problem. John
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
DAVEH: Hi John.I am curious about how the SCM believes about current day prophets. Were apostles and prophets a part of the restoration as they viewed it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." John -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 7/24/2004 6:38:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh my my, once bitten twice shy!, It seems that I struck a nerve with dear ol' Brother Chris! Why is it that he cannot seem to admit that he is deceptively peeing on someone's leg and telling them that it is raining. Chris, the liner notes have nothing to do with Dylans conversion, They only provide a biographical source to Bob Dylan's background. Yet you speak of Dylan as if you personally know the man and have insights into the mind of a genius that the rest of the world, possibly even Dylan himself, know nothing about. DOCUMENT YOUR COMMENTS! Prove them to me and the rest of the list or keep your nose out of things of which you know nothing. Folks, I have to tell you that Chris' story about his "Christian Rock Bands" and being "Way ahead of their time", is purely amazing! Chris, have you forgotten that I know your skill at the keyboard? I also know the quality of your voice. Rudimentary at best. Certainly not of a caliber that would ever draw an audience. But in Chris' defence, he does play and sing from the heart. Chris, you hate slander and gossip, why do you attack me with the very same things you hate? You mentioned my hair color and my piercings. Why? Are you threatened by my appearence? I have not dyed my hair for about a year now, since I left the youth ministry I spent 5 years with. I have another piercing, so what? As Rav Sha'ul said, "To the weak I became as the weak, that I might gain the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I may by ALL MEANS SAVE SOME." 1Corinthians 9:22 Jeff Wow, this is just what the doctor ordered -- another kind and gentle prognosticator. JD
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
In a message dated 7/24/2004 4:49:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? Bill and I both came from a fellowship (the Restoration Movemen aka Stone-Campbell Movement) that embraced that very principle. The Resotration motto was "speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent; call Bible things by Bible names." Since the early 1800's that has been the admonition. It does not work..Unity is only possible in a loving acceptance of those who follow Christ and claim Him as their God. The appraoch assumes, in the face of disagreement, that at least one brother is dishonest. You are oneness. I am not. But I do not doubt that you are honest in your disagreement, as I am. Perhaps I disagree because my IQ is somewhere around 85 or so. Whatever the reason, dishonesty is not a part our inability to solve the problem. John
Re: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor Sent: 07/24/2004 7:10 PM Subject: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity jt: Thank you Chris, this is interesting but entirely too much for me to comprehend right now tonight. You won't mind if I put it on the shelf until later will you. I have a lot of questions but this is probably not a good time - I'm still looking to see if and where Moses addressed original sin as Gary claims. You're welcome Judy. Thanks for the kind words. I don't mind if you put this on the shelf until later. It is much to comprehend and is something that I have continually grown in for decades. Better to take time with it than be hasty ... James 1:19 comes to mind. I'll tend to the rest of your post later as well. Hope you don't mind my putting this on the shelf until later. I also have a lot of other things that I am tending to myself at this time. PLUS one of our boys arrived a short time ago to visit and it has been several years since we have visited. He is going to college in Hawaii. Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Chris Barr a servant of YHVH - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07/24/2004 7:10 PM Subject: JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! jt: Do you believe that there is a Godhead Chris? How would you explain it? If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? jt: It is a reasonable request First of all, toss out the made-up-by-King James translators-word "Godhead". Look up the word "head" in Scripture and find the Greek for it. You will find absolutely no aspect of that word in any of the words translated nefariously as "Godhead". This word was an English invention to prop up the unholy trinity doctrine. In each of the three instances this 'word' "Godhead" appears in the King James Version, it is 'translated'/made-up from a different (though related to the others) Greek word every time. The words each are a derivation of deity or divinity. There is no plurality, implied or otherwise. King James translators merely spawned it by inference to support their commonly held polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrapping Trinity. jt: What about Genesis - "Let us make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness? There is also a plural name for the diety in Genesis. With the 'word' "Godhead" disposed of we can then eliminate what it has spawned - "God-family" and "God-kind". These words are not derived from Scriptural words, but rather from the made-up-King James-translator 'word' "Godhead". Throw out also duality, dualism and "dual anything else". These are not to be found in Scripture. We are left with 'ONE' from which you can derive the noun 'ONENESS' if you like. That is a term commonly used to label the Scriptural Truth of the Nature of the Almighty. jt: So you don't believe there are three aspects of the "divine nature"? The Father, Son, Holy Spirit? Briefly stated, the Almighty is One (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29). He is Spirit (John 4:24). As He is Holy and Spirit He is the Holy Spirit. This Holy Spirit that is Eternal fathered the physical form of Yahshua (Matt. 1:20) and was therefore the Eternal Father. This physical form is the embodiment or en-flesh-ment of deity, the literal and physical form of the Father (Isa. 9:6; John 14:7-9). jt: Thank you Chris, this is interesting but entirely too much for me to comprehend right now tonight. You won't mind if I put it on the shelf until later will you. I have a lot of questions but this is probably not a good time - I'm still looking to see if and where Moses addressed original sin as Gary claims.
JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! jt: Do you believe that there is a Godhead Chris? How would you explain it? If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? jt: It is a reasonable request First of all, toss out the made-up-by-King James translators-word "Godhead". Look up the word "head" in Scripture and find the Greek for it. You will find absolutely no aspect of that word in any of the words translated nefariously as "Godhead". This word was an English invention to prop up the unholy trinity doctrine. In each of the three instances this 'word' "Godhead" appears in the King James Version, it is 'translated'/made-up from a different (though related to the others) Greek word every time. The words each are a derivation of deity or divinity. There is no plurality, implied or otherwise. King James translators merely spawned it by inference to support their commonly held polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrapping Trinity. jt: What about Genesis - "Let us make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness? There is also a plural name for the diety in Genesis. With the 'word' "Godhead" disposed of we can then eliminate what it has spawned - "God-family" and "God-kind". These words are not derived from Scriptural words, but rather from the made-up-King James-translator 'word' "Godhead". Throw out also duality, dualism and "dual anything else". These are not to be found in Scripture. We are left with 'ONE' from which you can derive the noun 'ONENESS' if you like. That is a term commonly used to label the Scriptural Truth of the Nature of the Almighty. jt: So you don't believe there are three aspects of the "divine nature"? The Father, Son, Holy Spirit? Briefly stated, the Almighty is One (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29). He is Spirit (John 4:24). As He is Holy and Spirit He is the Holy Spirit. This Holy Spirit that is Eternal fathered the physical form of Yahshua (Matt. 1:20) and was therefore the Eternal Father. This physical form is the embodiment or en-flesh-ment of deity, the literal and physical form of the Father (Isa. 9:6; John 14:7-9). jt: Thank you Chris, this is interesting but entirely too much for me to comprehend right now tonight. You won't mind if I put it on the shelf until later will you. I have a lot of questions but this is probably not a good time - I'm still looking to see if and where Moses addressed original sin as Gary claims.
JUDY -- Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! jt: Do you believe that there is a Godhead Chris? How would you explain it? If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject from Scripture only, using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? First of all, toss out the made-up-by-King James translators-word "Godhead". Look up the word "head" in Scripture and find the Greek for it. You will find absolutely no aspect of that word in any of the words translated nefariously as "Godhead". This word was an English invention to prop up the unholy trinity doctrine. In each of the three instances this 'word' "Godhead" appears in the King James Version, it is 'translated'/made-up from a different (though related to the others) Greek word every time. The words each are a derivation of deity or divinity. There is no plurality, implied or otherwise. King James translators merely spawned it by inference to support their commonly held polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrapping Trinity. With the 'word' "Godhead" disposed of we can then eliminate what it has spawned - "God-family" and "God-kind". These words are not derived from Scriptural words, but rather from the made-up-King James-translator 'word' "Godhead". Throw out also duality, dualism and "dual anything else". These are not to be found in Scripture. We are left with 'ONE' from which you can derive the noun 'ONENESS' if you like. That is a term commonly used to label the Scriptural Truth of the Nature of the Almighty. Briefly stated, the Almighty is One (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29). He is Spirit (John 4:24). As He is Holy and Spirit He is the Holy Spirit. This Holy Spirit that is Eternal fathered the physical form of Yahshua (Matt. 1:20) and was therefore the Eternal Father. This physical form is the embodiment or en-flesh-ment of deity, the literal and physical form of the Father (Isa. 9:6; John 14:7-9). Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Chris Barr a servant of YHVH
[TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
It is an oft repeated error since the 2nd century ... hence "church fathers" leading away from the faith once delivered. You see, the "rock stars" from the early centuries of the common era were the philosophers. Justin Martyr and Tertullian (as well as countless others) were pagan philosophers pressed into evangelical service and made LEADERS (despite Rav Shaul's admonition in I Timothy 3:6) immediately upon their conversion. jt: Thomas Aquinas (another so called Church Father is one I find most frustrating. He spent years trying to blend the philosophy of Aristotle with scripture. Luther called him a "pagan rascal" and said his writings deceived the best Christians. That must have been a hard time to live in since the Bible was chained to the pulpit. THAT is why Christianity became mixed with paganism, because pagans were just trying to reconcile their new found faith with their old pagan ways. THAT is whence and why came the polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrappings trinity (just for starters). jt: Do you believe that there is a Godhead Chris? How would you explain it? I saw it happening with Dylan ... I spoke against it ... I was not at all surprised at what happened ... although Dylan is responsible for his own decisions there are MANY (including many leaders) who bear much responsibility for the decision he made. Shabbat Shalom! Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Chris Barr a servant of YHVH - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07/24/2004 10:24 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] 400+ different theologies and systems I really like those lyrics, Gso true!!! BTW, didnt Dylan get saved and then lapse back into his old ways? Im not trying to slander him or anything, but Ive wondered what happened to him. Whats the latest on his walk with the Lord? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 9:14 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 400+ different theologies and systems On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 10:59:33 -0400 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..I'm willing to submit to and walk in fellowship with anyone through whom I hear the voice of the Savior. are you sure? <> http://bobdylan.com/songs/property.html
RE: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
Bob Dylan, who was born a Jew, converted to Christianity in 1978-79. Just thought you guys might want to know. I wonder where Chris's "backyard" was back then and if he was smokin' the fringe of his tunic, got a bit confused and has remained that way. If anyone doubts the information on Dylan, it's in the liner notes on one of his albums: either volume 1 or 2 of Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits. Dylan is a Messianic Jew today and has been for many years. --Jeff Powers (from Slade's computer) A BIOGRAPHY: The grandchild of Jewish-Russian immigrants, Dylan was born Robert Allen Zimmerman, on May 24, 1941, in Duluth, Minnesota, where his father, Abe, worked for the Standard Oil Company. In 1947, the Zimmerman family moved to the small town of Hibbing, where an unexceptional childhood did little to hint at the brilliance to come. Robert started writing poems around the age of ten, and taught himself rudimentary piano and guitar in his early teens. Falling under the spell of Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, and other early rock stars,he started forming his own bands, including the Golden Chords and Elston Gunn and His Rock Boppers. According to the 1959 Hibbing high school yearbook, his goal was "to join Little Richard." The young Zimmerman left Hibbing for Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota in the fall of 1959. The sights and sounds of the big city opened new vistas for him, and he began to trace contemporary rock and roll back to its roots, listening to the work of country, rock, and folk pioneers like Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, and Woody Guthrie. The following year, he dropped out of college and went to New York with two things on his mind: to become a part of Greenwich Village's burgeoning folk-music scene, and to meet Guthrie, who was hospitalized in New Jersey with a rare, hereditary disease of the nervous system. He succeeded on both counts, becoming a fixture in the Village's folk clubs and coffee houses and at Guthrie's hospital bedside, where he would perform the folk legend's own songs for an audience of one. Spending all of his spare time in the company of other musicians, Dylan amazed them with his ability to learn songs perfectly after hearing them only once. He also began writing songs at a remarkable pace, including a tribute to his hero entitled "Song to Woody." Indeed, his interest in music had become so intense that he rarely found the time to go to class. He began to perform solo at local nightspots like the Ten O'Clock Scholar cafe and St. Paul's Purple Onion Pizza Parlor, honing his guitar and harmonica work and developing the expressive nasal voice that would become the nucleus of his trademark sound. It was around this time, too, that he adopted the stage name Bob Dylan, presumably in honor of the late Welsh poet Dylan Thomas, though this is an origin he has continued to deny throughout his career. In the fall of 1961, Dylan's legend began to spread beyond folk circles and into the world at large after critic Robert Shelton saw him perform at Gerde's Folk City and raved in the New York Times that he was "bursting at the seams with talent." A month later, Columbia Records executive John Hammond signed Dylan to a recording contract, and the young singer songwriter began selecting material for his eponymous debut album. Not yet fully confident in his own songwriting abilities, he cut only two original numbers, rounding out the collection with traditional folk tunes and songs by blues singers like Blind Lemon Jefferson and Bukka White. The result (released early in 1962) was an often haunting, death-obsessed record that, culminating in Dylan's gravel-voiced reading of "See That My Grave Is Kept Clean," sounded as much like the work of an aging black blues man as a twenty-one-year-old Jewish folksinger from Minnesota. Next up was Blonde on Blonde, a two-record set recorded in Nashville in early 1966, which took the stream-of-consciousness lyrics and edgy rock sounds of Highway 61 Revisited to the next level of artistry. >From the raucous party rock of "Rainy Day Women #12 & 35" to the rambling, hallucinogenic folk 'n' blues of "Stuck Inside of Mobile With the Memphis Blues Again" to the poignant, apocalyptic balladry of "Visions of Johanna" and "Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands," Blonde on Blonde took rock and roll to places no one else had even dreamed of. A tour of England with the Hawks (who would later change their name to the Band) produced music that was even wilder and more astonishing, though many of Dylan's old fans continued to be baffled. The tour reached its peak at the Manchester Free Trade Hall on May 17, 1966, when the combo recorded a live set that was bootlegged--and mis-titled--as Live at the Royal Albert Hall. (If you're lucky enough to find the two-CD bootleg Guitars Kissing & the Contemporary Fix-- which features a pristine recording of the entire show--buy it; it's the greatest album never re
Re: [TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 11:05:50 -0500 "Chris Barr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..Dylan..emphasizing his new found faith were not enough for them...
[TruthTalk] Dylan wrecked by reckless Christianity
\o/ !HALALU Yah! \o/ JOYOUS Sabbath Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua ! My background was in the midst of the growing 'Jesus' movement right in my backyard from 1970. I was part of it both in the foreground and moreso in the background. I knew many of todays "contemporary Christian" stars before very many knew them at all. Dylan was pushed and cajoled to use his fame to preach Jesus. His excellent songs, singing and concerts emphasizing his new found faith were not enough for them. They wanted him to preach and be like Billy Graham. He has never been a speaker but they wanted him to be a preacher. The same thing happened with BJ Thomas and there have been others in similar straits (not of the straight and narrow variety). Dylan fell victim to evangelicals pushing him to preach rather than establishing him in the faith, and he departed for Judaism which is not "pushy" driven. It is an oft repeated error since the 2nd century ... hence "church fathers" leading away from the faith once delivered. You see, the "rock stars" from the early centuries of the common era were the philosophers. Justin Martyr and Tertullian (as well as countless others) were pagan philosophers pressed into evangelical service and made LEADERS (despite Rav Shaul's admonition in I Timothy 3:6) immediately upon their conversion. THAT is why Christianity became mixed with paganism, because pagans were just trying to reconcile their new found faith with their old pagan ways. THAT is whence and why came the polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrappings trinity (just for starters). I saw it happening with Dylan ... I spoke against it ... I was not at all surprised at what happened ... although Dylan is responsible for his own decisions there are MANY (including many leaders) who bear much responsibility for the decision he made. Shabbat Shalom! Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, (Bless The LORD) Chris Barr a servant of YHVH - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07/24/2004 10:24 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] 400+ different theologies and systems I really like those lyrics, Gso true!!! BTW, didnt Dylan get saved and then lapse back into his old ways? Im not trying to slander him or anything, but Ive wondered what happened to him. Whats the latest on his walk with the Lord? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 9:14 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 400+ different theologies and systems On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 10:59:33 -0400 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ..I'm willing to submit to and walk in fellowship with anyone through whom I hear the voice of the Savior. are you sure? <
