subject:"\[TruthTalk\] apostles and prophets"









- Original Message - 
From: Dave Hansen 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/3/2006 10:32:22 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

DAVEH: Here I thought we might get to be friends, and then you suggest the LDS Church may have some obnoxious people in it. Shucks, Pastor.you're the first guy to say something that might make me want to leave Mormonism!   :-D BTWThanx for using DM / DH in your posts today. Makes my life easier!

cd: Easy Dah or you will get all worked up again -lose controlagain and be sent back to time out and be made to apologize to me all over again by Perry(wink) :-)











[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

People are people, DH. Your church has just as many Deegan's in it as any. Maybe Dean or Deegan use such circustances to "prove" a point -- but not me. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: Thanx for your consideration, Bishop.  Do your in-laws really speak of Protestants in a condescending way? If so, that surprises me and I would like to apologize for them doing so, as an LDS person myself. I think it reflects poorly on my religion of choice when I hear such. I just hope you realize that not all LDS folks act/think that way.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted. my in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or "pagan."The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private.DAVEH:n bsp; LOL.I think you are making this up, J
ohn. BR[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 

This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 

jd
-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/3/2006 10:13:48 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

People are people, DH. Your church has just as many Deegan's in it as any. Maybe Dean or Deegan use such circustances to "prove" a point -- but not me. 

jd
cd: Nor do we judge by the acts of the few-but the acts of the many is another matter entirely.

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: Thanx for your consideration, Bishop.  Do your in-laws really speak of Protestants in a condescending way? If so, that surprises me and I would like to apologize for them doing so, as an LDS person myself. I think it reflects poorly on my religion of choice when I hear such. I just hope you realize that not all LDS folks act/think that way.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted. my in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or "pagan."The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private.DAVEH: LOL.I think you are making this up, John.&
lt; BR[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 

This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 

jd
-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets

 [Original Message]
 From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Date: 1/3/2006 9:03:29 AM
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

 Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach
his 
 message?

cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.

 From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
 Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800

 * Protestants are just one detestable group of pagans in the group of 
 gentiles. *
 *
   Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a
pagan 
 group like the protestants.*

 DAVEH:   What's with the pagan stuff, Perry.  That sounds like something 
 you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think
for 
 one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.

 As for your mention of.

 /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/

 ..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so 
 you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you
don't.  
 It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.

 *he insists on calling us protestants as a disrespect.*

 DAVEH:  Nonsense.  I will give you the same advice I gave John.If
you 
 can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting 
 words in my mouth.  FTRI have much more respect for Protestants 
 than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect
for 
 Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.

 Charles Perry Locke wrote:

John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they 
 call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/.* Protestants are
just 
 one detestable group of pagans in the group of gentiles. *
 *
Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a
pagan 
 group like the protestants.* Their own founder claimed the mormon god 
 told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL
denominations 
 were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group
do 
 not consider themselves protestants per se and have identified 
 themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members
of 
 the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us protestants as a 
 disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members
of 
 the body of Christ. Christians.

 Perry

 David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word protestant? 
Do 
 you understand that I do not like that characterization?   Do you 
 understand that  it is gross sectarianism that insists on the
separation 
 between RCC and those who reject papel authority?  Do you know that
there 
 are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority?   Do you 
 understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a
Mormon 
 slang word used by them to describe all who are not of the [Mormon] 
 truth? protestant is another way of saying unbeleiver or pagan.

 We are not fooling anyone, here.  I have seen their chat rooms !! 

Do you understand that when DH uses this word,  he necessarily 
 attaches to it  ideas that are definitely not of my approveal?

 This should be an easily resolved issue.   But it is not.   The
Mormons 
 insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in
private. 
All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine
and 
 DH.   Get off the pot and smell the roses.   You are not scoring any 
 points with the Mormons in this.

 jd

 -- Original message --
 From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 John, do you understand the difference between a historical
perspective 
 and a philosophical one?

 Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely.  A 
 Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects
papal 
 authority.

 -
 Prot·es·tant
 [noun]
 member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of
any 
 denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal
authority 
 and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in 
 justification by faith.

 Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft 
 Corporation. All rights reserved.
 -

 Aimee rejected papal authority.  Do you, John, accept or reject the 
 authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?

 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

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

2006-01-04 Thread knpraise

What is this?

Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his message?cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Original Message] From: Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG> Date: 1/3/2006 9:03:29 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his message? cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is. From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800 * "Protestants" are just one detestable gro
up of pagans in the group of "gentiles". * *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan group like the "protestants".* DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds like something you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think for one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans. As for your mention of. /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/ ..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you don't. It reflects poorly on your image, Perry. *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.*
DAVEH: Nonsense. I will give you the same advice I gave John.If you can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting words in my mouth. FTRI have much more respect for Protestants than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect for Protestants than I do for those who misquote me. Charles Perry Locke wrote: John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/.* "Protestants" are just one detestable group of pagans in the group of "gentiles". * *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan group like the "protestants".* Their own founder claimed the mormon god told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL denominations were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group do not consider themselves "protestants" per se and have identified themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members of the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members of the body of Christ. Christians. PerryDavid, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you understand that it is gross sectarianism that insi
sts on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?" "protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in
; private.All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John, do you understand the difference between a historical perspective and a philosophical one? Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely. A Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects papal authority. - Prot·es·tant [noun] member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in justification by faith. Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. - Aimee rejected papal authority. Do you, John, accept or reject the authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/4/2006 2:43:00 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

What is this?


Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his message?cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.
cd: In one of the temple plays aBaptist preacher correctly preaches the Gospel-as told by the Bible -and then Satan enter the stage and rewards the preacher for his good work for him. I have not seen the play but have spoken to people who have and also have read upon the subject-I believe this play is also put on in Mormons schools but not sure-maybe Blain can enlighten us of this?DavH has heard your words before John.I mentioned your name to get your attention to this subject matter.

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]  [Original Message]   From: Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG>  Date: 1/3/2006 9:03:29 AM   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach  his   message?   cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.   From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets   Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800  * "Protestants" are just one detestable gro
 up of pagans in the group of   "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".*  DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds like something   you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think  for   one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.   As for your mention of.  /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/  ..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so   you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you  don't.   It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.  *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.*  DAVEH: Nonsense. I will give you the same advice I gave John.If  you   can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting   words in my mouth. FTRI have much more respect for Protestants   than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect  for   Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.  Charles Perry Locke wrote:   John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they   call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/.* "Protestants" are  just   one detestable group of pagans in the group of "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".* Their own founder claimed the mormon god <
B R>  told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL  denominations   were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group  do   not consider themselves "protestants" per se and have identified   themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members  of   the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a   disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members  of   the body of Christ. Christians.  PerryDavid, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?"  Do   you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you   understand that it is gross sectarianism that in
si sts on the  separation   between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that  there   are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you   understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a  Mormon   slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon]   truth?" "protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily   attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal?  This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The  Mormons   insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in 
 ; private.All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine  and   DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any   points with the Mormons in this.  jd  -- Original message --   From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John, do you understand the difference between a historical  perspective   and a philosophical one?  Let's c

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

2006-01-04 Thread knpraise


Next time you want to get my attention, you might try this, "HEY, JOHN "

:-) 

And I still miss the point. In your example, am I the hero or a pimp for Satan? 

jd

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/4/2006 2:43:00 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

What is this?


Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his message?cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.
cd: In one of the temple plays aBaptist preacher correctly preaches the Gospel-as told by the Bible -and then Satan enter the stage and rewards the preacher for his good work for him. I have not seen the play but have spoken to people who have and also have read upon the subject-I believe this play is also put on in Mormons schools but not sure-maybe Blain can enlighten us of this?DavH has heard your words before John.I mentioned your name to get your attention to this subject matter.

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]  [Original Message]   From: Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG>  Date: 1/3/2006 9:03:29 AM   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach  his   message?   cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.   From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets   Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800  * "Protestants" are just one detestable gro
 up of pagans in the group of   "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".*  DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds like something   you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think  for   one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.   As for your mention of.  /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/  ..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so   you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you  don't.   It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.  *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.*  DAVEH: Nonsense. I will give you the same advice I gave John.If  you   can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting   words in my mouth. FTRI have much more respect for Protestants   than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect  for   Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.  Charles Perry Locke wrote:   John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they   call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/.* "Protestants" are  just   one detestable group of pagans in the group of "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".* Their own founder claimed the mormon god &
lt; B R  told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL  denominations   were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group  do   not consider themselves "protestants" per se and have identified   themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members  of   the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a   disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members  of   the body of Christ. Christians.  PerryDavid, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?"  Do   you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you   understand that it is gross sectarianism 
that in si sts on the  separation   between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that  there   are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you   understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a  Mormon   slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon]   truth?" "protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily   attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal?  This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The  Mormons   insist on using this word because that is what their buds do,
 in  ; private.All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine  and   DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not s

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/4/2006 6:31:53 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Next time you want to get my attention, you might try this, "HEY, JOHN "

:-) 

And I still miss the point. In your example, am I the hero or a pimp for Satan? 

jd
cd: In my example you are the hero portrayed as a "pimp"-In actually Mormons would fill the role of "pimp" as they portray the gospel of Christ as evil. My advice would be to stay alert-once one look into the abyss it also looks back. No surprise that you Mormon relations didn't inform you of this play.Makes one wonder what is hidden in the darkrecesses of the Mormon Temple.

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/4/2006 2:43:00 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

What is this?


Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his message?cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.
cd: In one of the temple plays aBaptist preacher correctly preaches the Gospel-as told by the Bible -and then Satan enter the stage and rewards the preacher for his good work for him. I have not seen the play but have spoken to people who have and also have read upon the subject-I believe this play is also put on in Mormons schools but not sure-maybe Blain can enlighten us of this?DavH has heard your words before John.I mentioned your name to get your attention to this subject matter.

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]  [Original Message]   From: Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG>  Date: 1/3/2006 9:03:29 AM   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach  his   message?   cd: A Baptist Preacher/Pastor as JD is.   From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org   Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets   Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800  * "Protestants" are just one detestable gro
 up of pagans in the group of   "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".*  DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds like something   you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think  for   one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.   As for your mention of.  /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/  ..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so   you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you  don't.   It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.  *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.*  DAVEH: Nonsense. I will give you the same advice I gave John.If  you   can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting   words in my mouth. FTRI have much more respect for Protestants   than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect  for   Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.  Charles Perry Locke wrote:   John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they   call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"*/.* "Protestants" are  just   one detestable group of pagans in the group of "gentiles". *   *Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a  pagan   group like the "protestants".* Their own founder claimed the mormon god &
amp; lt; B R  told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL  denominations   were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group  do   not consider themselves "protestants" per se and have identified   themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members  of   the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a   disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members  of   the body of Christ. Christians.  PerryDavid, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?"  Do   you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you   understand that it is gross sectaria
nism that in si sts on the  separation   between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that  there   are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you   understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a  Mormon   slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon]   truth?&

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

2006-01-04 Thread Dave Hansen





cd: Easy Dah or you will get all worked up again
-lose controlagain and be sent back to time out and be made to
apologize to me all over again by Perry(wink) :-)

DAVEH: If nothing else, DeanYou do have a good sense of
humor...!  :-D 

Dean Moore wrote:


  
-
Original Message - 
From:
Dave
Hansen 
To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent:
1/3/2006 10:32:22 PM 
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


DAVEH: Here I thought we might get to be
friends, and then you suggest the LDS Church may have some obnoxious
people in it. Shucks, Pastor.you're the first guy to say something
that might make me want to leave Mormonism!   :-D

 BTWThanx for using DM / DH in your posts today. Makes my
life easier!

  
  
cd: Easy Dah or you will get all worked up
again -lose controlagain and be sent back to time out and be made to
apologize to me all over again by Perry(wink) :-)












[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  People are people, DH. Your church has just
as many Deegan's in it as any. Maybe Dean or Deegan use such
circustances to "prove" a point -- but not me. 
  
  jd
  
  -- Original message -- 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
DAVEH: Thanx for your consideration, Bishop. 

 Do your in-laws really speak of Protestants in a condescending
way? If so, that surprises me and I would like to apologize for them
doing so, as an LDS person myself. I think it reflects poorly on my
religion of choice when I hear such. I just hope you realize that not
all LDS folks act/think that way.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted.
my in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 
  
  jd
  







-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets

DAVEH:   Note to all TTers:   It would sure help if you would either 
address either of the Daves on TT with DM/DH or DavidM/DaveH, or some 
other way that will make it easier for us to quickly recognize posts 
meant for us.  Thanx in advance.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:



I meant to address the response below to Dave.



David,





--
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





I will consider this as agreement.

DAVEH: Yes.I don't think we are very far apart on this, Perry.
Just some minor details, in a sense. You are right though, it is the
larger picture of the resurrection that is most important. 

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

I meant to address the response below to "Dave".
  
  
David,


I will consider this as agreement. I believe it is the
resurrection that gave the gospel its power...you believe it was people
seeing the risen Jesuswhom they never would have seen had he NOT
been resurrected. I consider these ALL part of a larger picture called
"the resurrection". From the timeMary Magdalene, Mary the mother of
James, and Salome (Mark 16:1-8) saw the empty tomb until He ascended
into heaven. It all worked together to validate his Messiahship and
fulfill prophecy.


Perry


DAVEH: I really don't want to argue with
your comment in a way that you might think I'm denigrating it, Perry.
But, I will give you my short view in contrast.
  
  
 The guards were put there by those who feared Jesus' friends would
steal his body (in the middle of the night, I would think) in order to
make Jesus' prophecies appear to be true. The fact that his body did
disappear does not in itself mean he arose from the dead. (Please
don't think I'm minimizing the resurrectionI'm merely trying to
consider how the Romans would have thought about it in a logical
sense.) So...an empty cross in itself did not indicate a
resurrection. Not even an empty tomb would indicate it either, as the
Romans would have just thought his body had been removed.and, that
is the story they would have concocted in an attempt to convince others
that the disappearance of Jesus' body was a natural, though contrived,
event.
  
  
 Their attempt to prevent the disappearance, failed though. Have
you ever thought about what excuse the guards might have given for the
missing body? Since Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly
thereafter, the Biblical account really doesn't pursue this line of
thinking. But, had Jesus not appeared to his followers, the guards
would have had to contrived some story saying that Jesus' friends had
stolen him away, even though they had valiantly tried to stop them.
There is no way they could have admitted the resurrection of Christ,
without revealing the error of their ways. (Which they could have done
if they had repented, but then they probably would have been subject to
death for their incompetence.)
  
  
 I guess I'm rambling a bit here, Perry...sorry. What really gave
the resurrection power, so to speak, was the appearance of the
resurrected Christ to his believers. And...some of them weren't so
convinced of his resurrection, until they actually saw AND FELT the
prints of the nails. Once that happened, no excuses by the government,
or guards or anybody could overrule the fact that they had seen and
talked to the Risen Christ. I just don't think the empty
sepulcherwhich we know meant he had risen.had (or would have
had) nearly the same effect as his personal appearance.
  
  
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
  
  
  
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
 BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I agree
with your statement.
  



Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree
with my statement.


But, I'm not trying to argue with you
about itI just want to understand why you made it, and what you
meant by it.
  



I think it is pretty clear...my statement merely sunmmarizes the
scriptures I cited.


So, after you have taken the time to read the references in context, if
you then do not agree, please let me know where we differ.


Perry



Charles Perry Locke wrote:
  
  
  
From: Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
/*_*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead.
*_*/
  
  
DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that something
you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?
  




*Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it
up, right? *


Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on
the third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31;
10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on
the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that
he said and did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13).


Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think
the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)


Everything Jesus did and said was

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets





a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the
[Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or
"pagan."

DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it
was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in
good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that
you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know
them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I
certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or
"pagan."

The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their
buds do, in private.

DAVEH: LOL.I think you are making this up, John.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word
"protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that
characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism
that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel
authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not
accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to
expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to
describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is
another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling
anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you
understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it
ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 
  
  This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The
Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do,
in private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same
manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You
are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 


John,do you understand the difference between a historical
perspective and a philosophical one?

Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more
closely.A Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church
thatrejects papal authority.

-

Protestant
[noun]

  

  
  
  member
of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any
denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal
authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes
in justification by faith. 

  

Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2005.  1993-2004
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. 

-

Aimee rejected papal authority.Do you, John, accept or
reject the authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?

Peace be with you.
David Miller.


  -
Original Message - 
  From:
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
  To:
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
  
  Sent:
Monday, January 02, 2006 6:08 PM
  Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
  
  
  Poor DM. I have not been a part of the Churches of Christ
for some 32 years. My denominational background has nothing to do with
my theology at this late date. Secindly, Aimee Semple McPherson is
the founder of Four Square. She was not responding to a negative RCC
consideration.Certainly, I am no protestant and I have made the
reasoning for this claim quite clear. Mean versus green are the only
considrations I can see for the continued use of the word and the
continued need to attach me to the Churches of Christ. 
  
  jd 
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,


DAVEH: I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI
painted the CofC as Protestant as well. 

 However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood
John to say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to
me indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think
WIKI defined them.

David Miller wrote:

  DaveH wrote:
  
  

  If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  

  
  
John wrote:
  
  
 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

  
  
If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets





you might find something interesting here

DAVEH:  FWIW..Personally, I prefer Jeff Lindsay's
site.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml

http://www.jefflindsay.com/ldslinks.shtml

.over FAIR.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
I didn't have time to check all of the articles, but you
might find something interesting here:
  
  
http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai014.html
  
  
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] apostles and prophets





 "Protestants" are just one detestable group of pagans in the group
of "gentiles".


 Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a
pagan group like the "protestants".

DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds like
something you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers
to think for one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.

 As for your mention of.

they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile"

..You really do not understand the nature of what that means,
so you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you
don't. It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.

he insists on calling us "protestants" as a disrespect.

DAVEH: Nonsense. I will give you the same advice I gave John.If
you can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by
putting words in my mouth. FTRI have much more respect for
Protestants than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have
more respect for Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:
 John, there is a higher level division amongst the
mormons...they call everyone who is not a mormon a "gentile".
"Protestants" are just one detestable group of pagans in the group of
"gentiles".
  
  
 Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a
pagan group like the "protestants". Their own founder claimed the
mormon god told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL
denominations were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most
on this group do not consider themselves "protestants" per se and have
identified themselves as being members of the church Jesus started,
being members of the body of Christ, he insists on calling us
"protestants" as a disrespect. If he respected us he would call us
what we are...members of the body of Christ. Christians.
  
  
Perry
  
  

David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?"
Do you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you
understand that it is gross sectarianism that insists on the
separation between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you
know that there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel
authority? Do you understand that I have a right to expect not to be
branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are
not of "the [Mormon] truth?" "protestant" is another way of saying
"unbeleiver" or "pagan." We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen
their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this
word, he necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of
my approveal?


This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons
insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in
private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as
Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not
scoring any points with the Mormons in this.


jd


-- Original message --

From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]


John, do you understand the difference between a historical perspective
and a philosophical one?


Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely. A
Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects
papal authority.


-

Protestant

[noun]

member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any
denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal
authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes
in justification by faith.


Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2005.  1993-2004 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.

-


Aimee rejected papal authority. Do you, John, accept or reject the
authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?


Peace be with you.

David Miller.

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets





I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next to nothing
about Mormonism.

DAVEH: Care to say how you characterize me, Pastor? (If you would
rather not comment, that is OKI understand.)

 if you disagree with that characterization, my comment about the
Mormon Church is further affirmed. 

DAVEH: LOL

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next to
nothing about Mormonism. With that in mind, my answer is yes. I
do not think the Mormon Church is a Christian institution, however
 because it claims to be what it is not -- the restored chruch
of the biblcial message. And, if you disagree with that
characterization, my comment about the Mormon Church is further
affirmed. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Why would you insist on using the term in a differing
way?

DAVEH: What makes you think I'm insisting, John? I just thought it
was an interesting
perspective.

Catholics are Christians. 

DAVEH: Do you view LDS folks the same way?



  


-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





DAVEH: Because it seems you may have missed it, Bishop

 BTWWhy did you ignore my question about the dual nature of
salvation? Was that on purpose?.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  If you agree with Perry, then why the question?
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no
consequence.

DAVEH: Did I not say the very same thing in previous posts, Pastor?
If you failed to note that I had said virtually the same thing, then
FTR let it be known that the above is similar to the way I believe as
well.

 BTW...Do you remember me talking about the dual aspect of
salvation.the atonement, and the resurrection? I asked you if you
understood it in the same way, but do not recall your answer. Did I
overlook something, or did you just not respond?


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Again, DH, your question of Perry gives me further evidence
that the Mormon Church has no clue as to the atonement as taught in
preApostate scripture. Without the resurrection, all that Christ
said and did is of no consequence. We clearly do not share the
same gospel if that is not a part of your faith.
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 
 From: Dave 
 /*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the
dead. */ 
  
 DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that
something you 
 just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?

 
 Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made
it up, 
 right? 
 
 Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up
on the 
 third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31;
10:34; 
 Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on
the third 
 day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he
said and did 

; would have been for n aught. (1 Cor 15:13). 
 
 Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you
think the 
 seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66) 
 
 Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the
resurrection. So, 
 yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power. 
 
 Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18 
 
 Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4 
 
 If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13 
 
 The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10 
 
 Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3 
 
 Dave, do you still think I was making it up? 
 
 Perry 
 


--

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

, believing in the restoration of the
gifts of the Holy Spirit, healing, speaking in tongues, etc. Most
Four Square members are perfectly comfortable with the term Protestant.
I was a Four Square member myself back in 1972, and one of my best
friends today, his mom is a Four Square pastor and his late dad was too
when he was alive. I had better stop talking about myself before Lance
jumps on me for trumpeting something. :-)
  
  Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with
the LDS and the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly
Protestant, given Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist
church, his family's affiliation with the Presbyterian church, Joseph
Smith himselfhaving been baptized in a Baptist church... you get the
picture. But you do not consider yourself Protestant, and
neither do some of the members on this forum. I can understand the
disagreement when you look at the matter from a philosophical
perspective, but from a historical perspective, you guys are only
denying your historical roots.
  
  Peace be with you.
David Miller.
  
-
Original Message - 
From:
Dave

To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent:
Monday, January 02, 2006 5:31 PM
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,


DAVEH: I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI
painted the CofC as Protestant as well. 

 However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood
John to say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to
me indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think
WIKI defined them.

David Miller wrote:

  DaveH wrote:
  
  

  If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  

  
  
John wrote:
  
  
 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

  
  
If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
  
I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

  
  
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to 
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other "Protestants" is not unlike Mormons.

Peace be with you.
David Miller.

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

WITHOUT the INCARNATION there would have been NO GOSPEL! God the Eternal Son 
came as A MAN so as to REDEEM HUMANKIND.

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 14:35
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

David, I see your point...I, too, beleive that the cross is central, but 
still, without the resurrection the gospel would have been meaningless. 
Preaching would have been in vain...faith would have been in vain.

From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500

Perry wrote:
 In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection
 was implicit. Many were crucified, why would Jesus'
 be any different unless the resurrection was in view?

The difference is that Jesus is the only leader in history who ever went 
TO

the cross of his own will and doctrine.  Hitler was killed too, but it was
under very different circumstances.

The doctrine of the cross is very important.  Granted, the doctrine of the
resurrection is necessary for it to have meaning and fulfillment, but I
think the cross is primary with the resurrection being secondary rather 
than
the other way around.  The doctrine of the cross is where we live every 
day.

The doctrine of the resurrection is a hope we have that gives us the
strength to walk in the doctrine of the cross on a daily basis.

Perry wrote:
 The reference to crucifuxion also would bring
 to mind OT prophecies relating to the crucifixion
 of the Messiah, thus, the resurrection.

There is not much in the OT concerning the resurrection, Perry.  Several
veiled prophecies that can be read in a different way is about it.

Perry wrote:
 Both David and Isaiah prophecied the resurrection.
 Surely those familiar with the Prophets would have
 expected this, especially the Bereans (Acts 17:11),
 if, indeed, Jesus was the Messiah. Their accepting
 the gospel prior to the resurrection was based on the
 belief that Jesus WAS the messaiah, or at least that he
 was the Son of God, and on that faith their sins were
 forgiven. Had he NOT been resurrected, then their
 faith would have been in vain, and they still would be
 in sin. (1 Cor 15 again).

They had read these prophecies, but the meaning eluded them prior to the
resurrection event.  Why?  Partly because they had believed the gospel
already and had preached it and saw the power of the gospel even without
knowledge of the resurrection of Christ.  Again, I am not saying that the
resurrection is not important.  I'm simply saying that the preaching of 
the
gospel began before the resurrection.  For more than 3 years, the 
preaching

of the gospel did not include the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  The only
resurrection they had perhaps preached was the resurrection of the saints 
on
the last day, but even that took second fiddle to the primary message of 
the
gospel which was the message that the kingdom of God is here now... time 
to

get in.

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.

--
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] apostles and prophets

Perry: Bob Passentino is a name with which I'm familiar. My own interest in 
Mormonism commenced in 1980.

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 03, 2006 01:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

John,

  I have come across no such website as of yet. And probably for a good 
reason. In the mid 80's I met and became friends with a fellow named Bob 
Passentino who, with his wife, would eventually come to start a group 
called Answers in Action. I knew little, if anything, about the mormon 
church, but I do recall him telling me that the mormons refused to set a 
date indicating when the apostacy occurred, because doing so would tie 
their restoration to a specific period of the early church. If they set 
a date on the apostacy, then all could see that JS did not really restore 
anything.

Perry

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org, TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 02:54:08 +

 Unfortunately, I do agree.   Now that I think of it,  you are right in 
your statement of the use of the word gentile.

do you know of any websites , by Mormons , that give an outline of the 
Church suitable for comparison of the preApostate First Church?

jd

-- Original message --
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons...they call
 everyone who is not a mormon a gentile. Protestants are just one
 detestable group of pagans in the group of gentiles.

 Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan
 group like the protestants. Their own founder claimed the mormon god
told
 him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL denominations 
 were

an
 abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group do not
 consider themselves protestants per se and have identified themselves
as
 being members of the church Jesus started, being members of the body of
 Christ, he insists on calling us protestants as a disrespect. If he
 respected us he would call us what we are...members of the body of
Christ.
 Christians.

 Perry

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org,
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
 Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:50:33 +

 David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word protestant? 
 Do

 you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you
 understand that it is gross sectarianism that insists on the 
 separation

 between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that
there
 are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you
 understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a
Mormon
 slang word used by them to describe all who are not of the [Mormon]
 truth? protestant is another way of saying unbeleiver or pagan.
We
 are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do
 you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to
it
 ideas that are definitely not of my approveal?

 This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons
 insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in
private.
 All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and
DH.
 Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any points
with
 the Mormons in this.

 jd

 -- Original message --
 From: David Miller

 John, do you understand the difference between a historical 
 perspective

and
 a philosophical one?

 Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely. A
 Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects
papal
 authority.

 -
 Prot·es·tant
 [noun]
 member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of 
 any

 denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal
authority
 and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in
 justification by faith.

 Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft
 Corporation. All rights reserved.
 -

 Aimee rejected papal authority. Do you, John, accept or reject the
 authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?

 Peace be with you.
 David Miller.

 - Original Message -
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
 Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 6:08 PM
 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

 Poor DM. I have not been a part of the Churches of Christ for some 32
 years. My denominational background has nothing to do with my theology
at
 this late date. Secindly, Aimee Semple McPherson is the founder of 
 Four

 Square. She was not responding to a negative RCC consideration.
 Certainly, I am no protestant and I have made the reasoning

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh and, 'your' incursion 
into Iraq. What, pray tell, could be more sectarian or divisive than those?

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Not a myth, Gary, but rather your statement adds clarification, that the
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one who had
sent him.  You really should try not to be so sectarian and divisive.

John 7:16
(16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that
sent me.

John 10:30
(30) I and my Father are one.

John 10:17-18
(17) ... I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
(18) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power 
to

lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I
received of my Father.

Peace be with you.
David Miller.

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

myth (For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the 
will

of him who sent me.)

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:

Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and doctrine.

--
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] apostles and prophets




Currently DM, this would define neither ALL 
protestants nor ALL RCatholics.. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  David Miller 
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 18:32
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  John,do you understand the difference between a historical 
  perspective and a philosophical one?
  
  Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more 
  closely.A Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church 
  thatrejects papal authority.
  
  -
  
  
  Prot·es·tant
  [noun]
  


  
  member of church 
rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any denomination 
of the Western Christian church that rejects papal authority and some 
fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in justification by 
faith. 
  Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft 
  Corporation. All rights reserved. 
  -
  
  Aimee rejected papal authority.Do you, John, accept or reject 
  the authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?
  
  Peace be with you.David Miller.
  
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 6:08 
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophets

Poor DM. I have not been a part of the Churches of Christ 
for some 32 years. My denominational background has nothing to do with 
my theology at this late date. Secindly, Aimee 
Semple McPherson is the founder of Four Square. She was not responding 
to a negative RCC consideration.Certainly, I am no 
protestant and I have made the reasoning for this claim quite clear. 
Mean versus green are the only considrations I can see for the continued use 
of the word and the continued need to attach me to the Churches of 
Christ. 

jd 

-- 
  Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: 
  I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI 
  painted the CofC as Protestant as well.  
  However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to 
  say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me 
  indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI 
  defined them.David Miller wrote: 
  DaveH wrote:
  

  If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  
John wrote:
  
 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to 
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other "Protestants" is not unlike Mormons.

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.


  -- 
 ~~~
 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] apostles and prophets




A prophet who visited our store some weeks back 
identified the 'spirit' of Mormonism as the 'spirit' of Freemasonry DM. Any 
comments? As a prophet yourself, what do you make of his God-given 
discernment?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  David Miller 
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 18:02
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified the 
  LDS as a protestant group, but you did notagree with them. >From my 
  perspective, there are historical ways of looking at this classification, and 
  there are philosophical ways. Historically, the Church of Christ, the 
  Baptists, the Four Square, and the LDS, all have protestant roots. 
  Philosophically, however, it gets a little more complicated.One of 
  the Reformation philosophies was Sola Scriptura. The LDS certainly do 
  not agree with that. Then you have groups like the Church of Christ and 
  the LDS which believe that they are restoring the primitive church. 
  Therefore, they reject any affiliation with Protestants or Roman 
  Catholics. Then you have John Smithson, who has a history with the 
  Church of Christ. They have barraged him with the perspective 
  thatprotestant is adirty word, much like the LDS has done with 
  you. Now he had joinedthe Four Square Church which has its 
  own problems with Protestant roots, having a woman minister as a founder, 
  believing in the restoration of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, healing, 
  speaking in tongues, etc. Most Four Square members are perfectly 
  comfortable with the term Protestant. I was a Four Square member myself 
  back in 1972, and one of my best friends today, his mom is a Four Square 
  pastor and his late dad was too when he was alive. I had better stop 
  talking about myself before Lance jumps on me for trumpeting something. 
  :-)
  
  Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with the LDS 
  and the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly Protestant, 
  given Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist church, his family's 
  affiliation with the Presbyterian church, Joseph Smith himselfhaving 
  been baptized in a Baptist church... you get the picture. But you do not 
  consider yourself Protestant, and neither do some of the members on this 
  forum. I can understand the disagreement when you look at the matter 
  from a philosophical perspective, but from a historical perspective, you guys 
  are only denying your historical roots.
  
  Peace be with you.David Miller.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Dave 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:31 
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: 
I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI 
painted the CofC as Protestant as well.  
However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to say 
that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me indicates an 
association with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI defined 
them.David Miller wrote: 
DaveH wrote:
  
  
If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  
John wrote:
  
   That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
  I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to 
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other "Protestants" is not unlike Mormons.

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.


  -- 
 ~~~
 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] apostles and prophets





Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high passing hot 
air . like they have all the answers.


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh and, 
'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, pray tell, 
could be more sectarian or divisive than  those?  
- Original Message -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but rather your 
statement adds clarification,  that the  doctrine of Christ 
was not ultimately his own, but was of the one  who had  
sent him. You really should try not to be so sectarian and  
divisive.   John 7:16  (16) Jesus answered 
them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but  his that  sent 
me.   John 10:30  (30) I and my Father are 
one.   John 10:17-18  (17) ... I lay down my 
life, that I might take it again.  (18) No man taketh it from me, 
but I lay it down of myself. I have  power   to  
lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment  have 
I  received of my Father.   Peace be with 
you.  David Miller.   - Original Message 
-   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
 Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
[TruthTalk] apostles and prophetsmyth 
("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to  do the 
  will  of him who sent me.")   
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller"  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and 
doctrine.   --  "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] apostles and prophets




I would have said the same without the prophet moniker 
and have believed this for a long time. 
Bothhave the same rituals, handshakes etc. and 
Freemasonry tries to blend into the professing church
in spite of the fact that it isanything but 
Christian in nature... Today churches are full of them and they
have even infiltrated the Vatican. Go 
figure..

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:12:47 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  A prophet who visited our store some weeks back 
  identified the 'spirit' of Mormonism as the 'spirit' of Freemasonry DM. 
  
  Any comments? As a prophet yourself, what do you 
  make of his God-given discernment?
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
David 
Miller 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 18:02
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets

Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified the 
LDS as a protestant group, but you did notagree with them. 
From my perspective, there are historical ways of looking at this 
classification, and there are philosophical ways. Historically, the 
Church of Christ, the Baptists, the Four Square, and the LDS, all have 
protestant roots. Philosophically, however, it gets a little more 
complicated.One of the Reformation philosophies was Sola 
Scriptura. The LDS certainly do not agree with that. Then you 
have groups like the Church of Christ and the LDS which believe that they 
are restoring the primitive church. Therefore, they reject any 
affiliation with Protestants or Roman Catholics. Then you have John 
Smithson, who has a history with the Church of Christ. They have 
barraged him with the perspective thatprotestant is adirty word, 
much like the LDS has done with you. Now he had joinedthe 
Four Square Church which has its own problems with Protestant roots, having 
a woman minister as a founder, believing in the restoration of the gifts of 
the Holy Spirit, healing, speaking in tongues, etc. Most Four Square 
members are perfectly comfortable with the term Protestant. I was a 
Four Square member myself back in 1972, and one of my best friends today, 
his mom is a Four Square pastor and his late dad was too when he was 
alive. I had better stop talking about myself before Lance jumps on me 
for trumpeting something. :-)

Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with the LDS 
and the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly Protestant, 
given Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist church, his family's 
affiliation with the Presbyterian church, Joseph Smith himselfhaving 
been baptized in a Baptist church... you get the picture. But you do 
not consider yourself Protestant, and neither do some of the members on this 
forum. I can understand the disagreement when you look at the matter 
from a philosophical perspective, but from a historical perspective, you 
guys are only denying your historical roots.

Peace be with you.David Miller.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Dave 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:31 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: 
  I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI 
  painted the CofC as Protestant as well.  
  However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to 
  say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me 
  indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI 
  defined them.David Miller wrote: 
  DaveH wrote:
  

  If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  
John wrote:
  
 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to 
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other "Protestants" is not unlike Mormons.

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

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




The aforementioned prophet who visited our store a 
few weeks back also spoke of the 'spirit' of empire. Thereafter he spoke of the 
halting of the American 'war machine'. Talk to the prophet, Judy.
See http://www.darryl.com/badges/


  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 07:28
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  
  Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high passing hot 
  air . like they have all the answers.
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh and, 
  'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, pray tell, 
  could be more sectarian or divisive than  those? 
   - Original Message -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but rather your 
  statement adds clarification,  that the  doctrine of 
  Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one  who had 
   sent him. You really should try not to be so sectarian and  
  divisive.   John 7:16  (16) Jesus answered 
  them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but  his that  
  sent me.   John 10:30  (30) I and my 
  Father are one.   John 10:17-18  (17) ... 
  I lay down my life, that I might take it again.  (18) No man 
  taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have  power  
   to  lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This 
  commandment  have I  received of my Father. 
Peace be with you.  David Miller. 
- Original Message -   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
   Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] apostles and prophetsmyth 
  ("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to  do the 
will  of him who sent me.")  
   On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller"  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
  writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and 
  doctrine.   --  "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] apostles and prophets




An experiment for you, Judy. Ask your pastor to 
publicly request any freemasons who are in church next Sunday to stand 
up.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 07:33
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  I would have said the same without the prophet 
  moniker and have believed this for a long time. 
  Bothhave the same rituals, handshakes etc. and 
  Freemasonry tries to blend into the professing church
  in spite of the fact that it isanything but 
  Christian in nature... Today churches are full of them and they
  have even infiltrated the Vatican. Go 
  figure..
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:12:47 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
A prophet who visited our store some weeks back 
identified the 'spirit' of Mormonism as the 'spirit' of Freemasonry DM. 

Any comments? As a prophet yourself, what do 
you make of his God-given discernment?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  David 
  Miller 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 18:02
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified 
  the LDS as a protestant group, but you did notagree with them. 
  From my perspective, there are historical ways of looking at this 
  classification, and there are philosophical ways. Historically, the 
  Church of Christ, the Baptists, the Four Square, and the LDS, all have 
  protestant roots. Philosophically, however, it gets a little more 
  complicated.One of the Reformation philosophies was Sola 
  Scriptura. The LDS certainly do not agree with that. Then you 
  have groups like the Church of Christ and the LDS which believe that they 
  are restoring the primitive church. Therefore, they reject any 
  affiliation with Protestants or Roman Catholics. Then you have John 
  Smithson, who has a history with the Church of Christ. They have 
  barraged him with the perspective thatprotestant is adirty 
  word, much like the LDS has done with you. Now he had 
  joinedthe Four Square Church which has its own problems with 
  Protestant roots, having a woman minister as a founder, believing in the 
  restoration of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, healing, speaking in tongues, 
  etc. Most Four Square members are perfectly comfortable with the 
  term Protestant. I was a Four Square member myself back in 1972, and 
  one of my best friends today, his mom is a Four Square pastor and his late 
  dad was too when he was alive. I had better stop talking about 
  myself before Lance jumps on me for trumpeting something. :-)
  
  Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with the 
  LDS and the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly 
  Protestant, given Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist church, 
  his family's affiliation with the Presbyterian church, Joseph Smith 
  himselfhaving been baptized in a Baptist church... you get the 
  picture. But you do not consider yourself Protestant, and neither do 
  some of the members on this forum. I can understand the disagreement 
  when you look at the matter from a philosophical perspective, but from a 
  historical perspective, you guys are only denying your historical 
  roots.
  
  Peace be with you.David Miller.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Dave 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:31 
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
    and prophets
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: 
I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI 
painted the CofC as Protestant as well.  
However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to 
say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me 
indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI 
defined them.David Miller wrote: 
DaveH wrote:
  
  
If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  
John wrote:
  
   That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
  I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   T

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




Is this your "prophet" Lance? Stinking 
Badges? It's a website all about movies something a person
speaking for God, one who can separate the holy from 
the profane would have nothing to do with.. True
God will judge the nations but the office of the 
prophet in this sense is no longer valid. Today Jesus isour
Prophet, Priest, and King... and the spiritual giftings 
are primarily for the Church to prepare it for a time
when it will "judge the world in 
righteousness"


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:43:08 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  The aforementioned prophet who visited our store 
  a few weeks back also spoke of the 'spirit' of empire. 
  Thereafter he spoke of the halting of the 
  American 'war machine'. Talk to the prophet, Judy.
  See http://www.darryl.com/badges/
  
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 03, 2006 07:28
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophets


Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high passing 
hot air . like they have all the answers.


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh and, 
'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, pray 
tell, could be more sectarian or divisive than  
those?  - Original Message -  From: 
"David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but rather your 
statement adds clarification,  that the  doctrine of 
Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one  who 
had  sent him. You really should try not to be so 
sectarian and  divisive.   John 7:16 
 (16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but 
 his that  sent me.   John 
10:30  (30) I and my Father are one.   
John 10:17-18  (17) ... I lay down my life, that I might take it 
again.  (18) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of 
myself. I have  power   to  lay it down, and 
I have power to take it again. This commandment  have I  
received of my Father.   Peace be with you. 
 David Miller.   - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
 Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
[TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
myth ("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to  do 
the   will  of him who sent me.") 
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller"  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and 
doctrine.   --  "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] apostles and prophets




For what purpose Lance? The former pastor of this 
Church met with them individually and gave them an
ultimatum. They would have to choose the Church 
or the Lodge; they didn't like it and a couple of rebellious
onesrefused to leave. I don't know where 
this pastor stands on this issue. I do know there are at least one
homosexual couple who sit in the church regularly that 
those in leadership know about.

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:44:54 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  An experiment for you, Judy. Ask your pastor to 
  publicly request any freemasons who are in church next Sunday to stand 
  up.
  
From: Judy Taylor 

I would have said the same without the prophet 
moniker and have believed this for a long time. 
Bothhave the same rituals, handshakes etc. 
and Freemasonry tries to blend into the professing church
in spite of the fact that it isanything but 
Christian in nature... Today churches are full of them and they
have even infiltrated the Vatican. Go 
figure..

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:12:47 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  A prophet who visited our store some weeks 
  back identified the 'spirit' of Mormonism as the 'spirit' of Freemasonry 
  DM. 
  Any comments? As a prophet yourself, what do 
  you make of his God-given discernment?
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
David 
Miller 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 18:02
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophets

Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified 
the LDS as a protestant group, but you did notagree with 
them. From my perspective, there are historical ways of 
looking at this classification, and there are philosophical ways. 
Historically, the Church of Christ, the Baptists, the Four Square, and 
the LDS, all have protestant roots. Philosophically, however, it 
gets a little more complicated.One of the Reformation 
philosophies was Sola Scriptura. The LDS certainly do not agree 
with that. Then you have groups like the Church of Christ and the 
LDS which believe that they are restoring the primitive church. 
Therefore, they reject any affiliation with Protestants or Roman 
Catholics. Then you have John Smithson, who has a history with the 
Church of Christ. They have barraged him with the perspective 
thatprotestant is adirty word, much like the LDS has done 
with you. Now he had joinedthe Four Square Church 
which has its own problems with Protestant roots, having a woman 
minister as a founder, believing in the restoration of the gifts of the 
Holy Spirit, healing, speaking in tongues, etc. Most Four Square 
members are perfectly comfortable with the term Protestant. I was 
a Four Square member myself back in 1972, and one of my best friends 
today, his mom is a Four Square pastor and his late dad was too when he 
was alive. I had better stop talking about myself before Lance 
jumps on me for trumpeting something. :-)

Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with the 
LDS and the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly 
Protestant, given Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist church, 
his family's affiliation with the Presbyterian church, Joseph Smith 
himselfhaving been baptized in a Baptist church... you get the 
picture. But you do not consider yourself Protestant, and neither 
do some of the members on this forum. I can understand the 
disagreement when you look at the matter from a philosophical 
perspective, but from a historical perspective, you guys are only 
denying your historical roots.

Peace be with you.David Miller.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Dave 
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 
  5:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophets
  DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: 
  I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI 
  painted the CofC as Protestant as well. 
   However, in a recent discussion with you, I 
  thought I understood John to say that he currently is worshiping with 
  a 4Sq group, which to me indicates an association with a Protestant 
  relationship, as I think WIKI defined them.David Miller wrote: 

  DaveH wrote:
  

  If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantis

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




'the office of the prophet in this sense is no 
longer valid'? Do you, Judy, believe DavidM to be a 'prophet' in any 
sense?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 08:10
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Is this your "prophet" Lance? Stinking 
  Badges? It's a website all about movies something a person
  speaking for God, one who can separate the holy from 
  the profane would have nothing to do with.. True
  God will judge the nations but the office of the 
  prophet in this sense is no longer valid. Today Jesus isour
  Prophet, Priest, and King... and the spiritual 
  giftings are primarily for the Church to prepare it for a time
  when it will "judge the world in 
  righteousness"
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:43:08 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
The aforementioned prophet who visited our 
store a few weeks back also spoke of the 'spirit' of empire. 
Thereafter he spoke of the halting of the 
American 'war machine'. Talk to the prophet, Judy.
See http://www.darryl.com/badges/


  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 07:28
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  
  Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high passing 
  hot air . like they have all the answers.
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh 
  and, 'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, 
  pray tell, could be more sectarian or divisive than  
  those?  - Original Message -  From: 
  "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but rather your 
  statement adds clarification,  that the  doctrine of 
  Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one  who 
  had  sent him. You really should try not to be so 
  sectarian and  divisive.   John 
  7:16  (16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not 
  mine, but  his that  sent me.  
   John 10:30  (30) I and my Father are one. 
John 10:17-18  (17) ... I lay down my life, 
  that I might take it again.  (18) No man taketh it from me, 
  but I lay it down of myself. I have  power   
  to  lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This 
  commandment  have I  received of my Father. 
Peace be with you.  David Miller. 
- Original Message -   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
   Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
  myth ("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to  
  do the   will  of him who sent me.") 
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller" 
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
  writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and 
  doctrine.   --  "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] apostles and prophets

2006-01-03 Thread Charles Perry Locke

Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach his 
message?

From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800

* Protestants are just one detestable group of pagans in the group of 
gentiles. *

*
 Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan 
group like the protestants.*

DAVEH:   What's with the pagan stuff, Perry.  That sounds like something 
you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think for 
one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.

   As for your mention of.

/*they call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/

..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so 
you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you don't.  
It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.

*he insists on calling us protestants as a disrespect.*

DAVEH:  Nonsense.  I will give you the same advice I gave John.If you 
can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting 
words in my mouth.  FTRI have much more respect for Protestants 
than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect for 
Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

  John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they 
call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/.* Protestants are just 
one detestable group of pagans in the group of gentiles. *

*
  Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan 
group like the protestants.* Their own founder claimed the mormon god 
told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL denominations 
were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most on this group do 
not consider themselves protestants per se and have identified 
themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, being members of 
the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us protestants as a 
disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what we are...members of 
the body of Christ. Christians.

Perry

David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word protestant?  Do 
you understand that I do not like that characterization?   Do you 
understand that  it is gross sectarianism that insists on the separation 
between RCC and those who reject papel authority?  Do you know that there 
are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority?   Do you 
understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a Mormon 
slang word used by them to describe all who are not of the [Mormon] 
truth? protestant is another way of saying unbeleiver or pagan.  
We are not fooling anyone, here.  I have seen their chat rooms !! 
  Do you understand that when DH uses this word,  he necessarily 
attaches to it  ideas that are definitely not of my approveal?

This should be an easily resolved issue.   But it is not.   The Mormons 
insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private. 
  All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and 
DH.   Get off the pot and smell the roses.   You are not scoring any 
points with the Mormons in this.

jd

-- Original message --
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

John, do you understand the difference between a historical perspective 
and a philosophical one?

Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely.  A 
Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects papal 
authority.

-
Prot·es·tant
[noun]
member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any 
denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal authority 
and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in 
justification by faith.

Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft 
Corporation. All rights reserved.

-

Aimee rejected papal authority.  Do you, John, accept or reject the 
authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?

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] apostles and prophets

We 'fill out' words, ceremonies, symbols and, traditions with MEANING. In 
one sense only those who live/experience that reality fully understand that 
particular MEANING. In quite another sense, as I discovered 25 years ago, 
one can understand the MEANING invested in words, ceremonies, symbols and 
traditions that are not one's own. (i.e. Mormonism) In yet another, and 
quite important sense, one dare not understand some of these. Example:IFF 
the spirit of freemasonry is also the spirit of mormonism then, one would 
wish to maintain 'arm's length' distance from that which is intrinsically 
'occupied' by such 'spirits'.


  Original Message - 
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 03, 2006 09:03
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


Dave, in your temple ceremony, who does it depict Satan paying to preach 
his message?




From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800

* Protestants are just one detestable group of pagans in the group of 
gentiles. *

*
 Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a pagan 
group like the protestants.*


DAVEH:   What's with the pagan stuff, Perry.  That sounds like something 
you guys have called me, but FTR..I do not want any TTers to think for 
one second that I consider any of you folks to be pagans.


   As for your mention of.

/*they call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/

..You really do not understand the nature of what that means, so 
you might want to be careful about pretending to know something you don't. 
It reflects poorly on your image, Perry.


*he insists on calling us protestants as a disrespect.*

DAVEH:  Nonsense.  I will give you the same advice I gave John.If you 
can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by putting 
words in my mouth.  FTRI have much more respect for Protestants 
than you will ever imagine, and as such I certainly have more respect for 
Protestants than I do for those who misquote me.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:

  John, there is a higher level division amongst the mormons.../*they 
call everyone who is not a mormon a gentile*/.* Protestants are just 
one detestable group of pagans in the group of gentiles. *

*
  Doesn't it seem interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with a 
pagan group like the protestants.* Their own founder claimed the 
mormon god told him that he should join NO denomination, and that ALL 
denominations were an abomination. As you have stated, even though most 
on this group do not consider themselves protestants per se and have 
identified themselves as being members of the church Jesus started, 
being members of the body of Christ, *he insists on calling us 
protestants as a disrespect.* If he respected us he would call us what 
we are...members of the body of Christ. Christians.


Perry




David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word protestant?  Do 
you understand that I do not like that characterization?   Do you 
understand that  it is gross sectarianism that insists on the separation 
between RCC and those who reject papel authority?  Do you know that 
there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority?   Do 
you understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a 
Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of the 
[Mormon] truth? protestant is another way of saying unbeleiver or 
pagan.  We are not fooling anyone, here.  I have seen their chat rooms 
!! Do you understand that when DH uses this word,  he 
necessarily attaches to it  ideas that are definitely not of my 
approveal?


This should be an easily resolved issue.   But it is not.   The Mormons 
insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in 
private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as 
Blaine and DH.   Get off the pot and smell the roses.   You are not 
scoring any points with the Mormons in this.


jd

-- Original message --
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

John, do you understand the difference between a historical perspective 
and a philosophical one?


Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely.  A 
Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church that rejects papal 
authority.


-
Prot·es·tant
[noun]
member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any 
denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal 
authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in 
justification by faith.


Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft 
Corporation. All rights reserved.

-

Aimee rejected papal authority.  Do you, John, accept or reject the 
authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?


Peace

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

2006-01-03 Thread knpraise


You appear to be well informed. My frustration with you and Blaine is the constant confusing of your personal beliefs and the official version. 

jd.

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next to nothing about Mormonism.DAVEH: Care to say how you characterize me, Pastor? (If you would rather not comment, that is OKI understand.)if you disagree with that characterization, my comment about the Mormon Church is further affirmed. DAVEH: LOL[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next to nothing about Mormonism. With that in mind, my answer is yes. I do not think the Mormon Church is a Christian institution, however  because it claims to be what it is not -- the restored chruch of the biblcial message. And, if you disagree with that characterization, my comment about the Mormon Church is further affirmed. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why would you insist on using the term in a differing way?DAVEH: What makes you think I'm insisting, John? I just thought it was an interestingperspective.Catholics are Christians. DAVEH: Do you view LDS folks the same way?
-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets

2006-01-03 Thread knpraise


Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted. my in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or "pagan."The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private.DAVEH: LOL.I think you are making this up, John.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word "protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 

This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do, in private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 

jd

-- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



John,do you understand the difference between a historical perspective and a philosophical one?

Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more closely.A Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church thatrejects papal authority.

-

Prot·es·tant
[noun]




member of church rejecting papal authority: a member or adherent of any denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in justification by faith. 
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. 
-

Aimee rejected papal authority.Do you, John, accept or reject the authority of the pope as being the vicar of Christ?

Peace be with you.David Miller.


- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Poor DM. I have not been a part of the Churches of Christ for some 32 years. My denominational background has nothing to do with my theology at this late date. Secindly, Aimee Semple McPherson is the founder of Four Square. She was not responding to a negative RCC consideration.Certainly, I am no protestant and I have made the reasoning for this claim quite clear. Mean versus green are the only considrations I can see for the continued use of the word and the continued need to attach me to the Churches of Christ. 

jd 

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH: I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI painted the CofC as Protestant as well.  However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI defined them.David Miller wrote: 
DaveH wrote:
  

If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
  
John wrote:
  
 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
  
I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

2006-01-03 Thread knpraise

Got lost in the shuffle. "Salvation"has more than one definition IMO. We are saved from judgment. We are saved from ourselves. Perhaps there are other considerations, We are not involved in the former. We are partners (ontologically speaking) in the latter.

jd
-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: Because it seems you may have missed it, Bishop BTWWhy did you ignore my question about the dual nature of salvation? Was that on purpose?.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

If you agree with Perry, then why the question?

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no consequence.DAVEH: Did I not say the very same thing in previous posts, Pastor? If you failed to note that I had said virtually the same thing, then FTR let it be known that the above is similar to the way I believe as well. BTW...Do you remember me talking about the dual aspect of salvation.the atonement, and the resurrection? I asked you if you understood it in the same way, but do not recall your answer. Did I overlook something, or did you just not respond?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Again, DH, your question of Perry gives me further evidence that the Mormon Church has no clue as to the atonement as taught in preApostate scripture. Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no consequence. We clearly do not share the same gospel if that is not a part of your faith.

-- Original message -- From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Dave /*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. */DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that something you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians? Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it up, right? Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on the third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he said and did
; ; would have been for n aught. (1 Cor 15:13). Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66) Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the resurrection. So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power. Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18 Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4 If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13 The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10 Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3 Dave, do you still think I was making it up? Perry --

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




You didn't answer my question Lance - Is Stinking 
Badges your prophet?
As regards DavidM, the jury is out because I have no 
way of knowing what he means by office; nor
do I have any frame of reference so far as testing any 
prophetic word that has come through his ministry.
Actually the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of 
Prophecy


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:19:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  'the office of the prophet in this sense is no 
  longer valid'? 
  Do you, Judy, believe DavidM to be a 'prophet' in 
  any sense?
  
From: Judy Taylor 

Is this your "prophet" Lance? Stinking 
Badges? It's a website all about movies something a 
person
speaking for God, one who can separate the holy 
from the profane would have nothing to do with.. True
God will judge the nations but the office of the 
prophet in this sense is no longer valid. Today Jesus 
isour
Prophet, Priest, and King... and the spiritual 
giftings are primarily for the Church to prepare it for a time
when it will "judge the world in 
righteousness"


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:43:08 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  The aforementioned prophet who visited our 
  store a few weeks back also spoke of the 'spirit' of empire. 
  Thereafter he spoke of the halting of the 
  American 'war machine'. Talk to the prophet, Judy.
  See http://www.darryl.com/badges/
  
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 03, 2006 07:28
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophets


Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high 
passing hot air . like they have all the answers.


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh 
and, 'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, 
pray tell, could be more sectarian or divisive than  
those?  - Original Message -  
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
    Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but rather 
your statement adds clarification,  that the  
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one 
 who had  sent him. You really should try not 
to be so sectarian and  divisive.   John 
7:16  (16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not 
mine, but  his that  sent me.  
 John 10:30  (30) I and my Father are one. 
  John 10:17-18  (17) ... I lay down my 
life, that I might take it again.  (18) No man taketh it 
from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have  power  
 to  lay it down, and I have power to take it again. 
This commandment  have I  received of my 
Father.   Peace be with you.  David 
Miller.   - Original Message -  
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
 Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
[TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
myth ("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to 
 do the   will  of him who sent 
me.")   On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David 
Miller"  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and 
doctrine.   --  "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] apostles and prophets





To do so would necessitate moving out of this world 
system Lance because
Freemasonry has roots everywhere. You can't go 
into a small town in the South
without seeing a DAR obelisk and Civil War monuments 
embellished with Masonic
symbols and the Lodge building is usually central 
also. A pastor told me once that
this is because the Lodge helped rebuild the South when 
it was so devastated and
held everything together - kind of. It also 
permeates my husband's family though I doubt
that any of them know what it is really all about - 
most of them think it is good because
they claim to be able to make good men even 
better. Our government is full of it and
I'm sure yours is also.


On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:22:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: We 'fill out' words, ceremonies, symbols and, traditions with 
 MEANING. In  one sense only those who live/experience that 
reality fully  understand that  particular MEANING. In quite 
another sense, as I discovered 25 years  ago,  one can 
understand the MEANING invested in words, ceremonies,  symbols and 
 traditions that are not one's own. (i.e. Mormonism) In yet another, 
 and  quite important sense, one dare not understand some of 
these.  Example:IFF  the spirit of freemasonry is also the 
spirit of mormonism then, one  would  wish to maintain 'arm's 
length' distance from that which is  intrinsically  'occupied' 
by such 'spirits'.   Original Message - 
 From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 03, 2006 09:03 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsDave, in your temple ceremony, who does 
it depict Satan paying to  preach   his message? 
  From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets Date: 
Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:21:18 -0800  * "Protestants" 
are just one detestable group of pagans in the  group of  
"gentiles". * *  Doesn't it seem 
interesting that DaveH finds such intrique with  a pagan  
 group like the "protestants".*  
DAVEH: What's with the pagan stuff, Perry. That sounds 
like  something  you guys have called me, but FTR..I 
do not want any TTers to  think for  one second that I 
consider any of you folks to be pagans.  
 As for your mention of. 
 /*they call everyone who is not a mormon a 
"gentile"*/  ..You really do not 
understand the nature of what that  means, so  you might 
want to be careful about pretending to know something  you don't. 
 It reflects poorly on your image, Perry. 
 *he insists on calling us "protestants" as a 
disrespect.*  DAVEH: Nonsense. I 
will give you the same advice I gave  John.If you  
can't quote me exactly, then don't pretend to quote me at all by 
 putting  words in my mouth. FTRI have 
much more respect for  Protestants  than you will ever 
imagine, and as such I certainly have more  respect for  
Protestants than I do for those who misquote me. 
 Charles Perry Locke wrote:  
 John, there is a higher level division amongst the 
 mormons.../*they   call everyone who is not a 
mormon a "gentile"*/.* "Protestants"  are just   one 
detestable group of pagans in the group of "gentiles". * 
*  Doesn't it seem interesting that 
DaveH finds such intrique  with a   pagan group like 
the "protestants".* Their own founder claimed  the   
mormon god told him that he should join NO denomination, and  that ALL 
  denominations were an abomination. As you have stated, 
even  though most   on this group do not consider 
themselves "protestants" per se  and have   
identified themselves as being members of the church Jesus  started, 
  being members of the body of Christ, *he insists on 
calling us   "protestants" as a disrespect.* If he respected 
us he would call  us what   we are...members of the 
body of Christ. Christians.  
Perry   
 David, do you understand how the 
Mormons use this word  "protestant?" Do  
you understand that I do not like that 
characterization? Do  you  
understand that it is gross sectarianism that insists on 
the  separation  between RCC and those who 
reject papel authority? Do you know  that  
there are millions of Catholics who do not accept Papel  
authority? Do  you understand that I have a 
right to expect not to be branded  with a  
Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of 
 "the  [Mormon] truth?" "protestant" is another 
way of saying  "unbeleiver" or  "pagan." 
We are not fooling anyone, here. I have seen their  chat rooms 
 !! Do 
you understand that when DH uses this word, he  
necessarily attaches to it ideas that are definitely not 
of my  approveal?  
This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is 
not. The  Mormons  insist on using 
this word because that is wha

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




Though somewhat anomalous as to my 
non-responsiveness, Judy, I shall answer your question. My answer is 
NO!

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 13:00
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  You didn't answer my question Lance - Is Stinking 
  Badges your prophet?
  As regards DavidM, the jury is out because I have no 
  way of knowing what he means by office; nor
  do I have any frame of reference so far as testing 
  any prophetic word that has come through his ministry.
  Actually the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of 
  Prophecy
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:19:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
'the office of the prophet in this sense is no 
longer valid'? 
Do you, Judy, believe DavidM to be a 'prophet' 
in any sense?

  From: Judy Taylor 
  
  Is this your "prophet" Lance? Stinking 
  Badges? It's a website all about movies something a 
  person
  speaking for God, one who can separate the holy 
  from the profane would have nothing to do with.. True
  God will judge the nations but the office of the 
  prophet in this sense is no longer valid. Today Jesus 
  isour
  Prophet, Priest, and King... and the spiritual 
  giftings are primarily for the Church to prepare it for a 
time
  when it will "judge the world in 
  righteousness"
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:43:08 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
The aforementioned prophet who visited our 
store a few weeks back also spoke of the 'spirit' of empire. 

Thereafter he spoke of the halting of the 
American 'war machine'. Talk to the prophet, Judy.
See http://www.darryl.com/badges/


  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 03, 2006 
07:28
      Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophets
  
  
  Canadians who sit in lofty towers on high 
  passing hot air . like they have all the answers.
  
  
  On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:38 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Sectarian, DM? Divisive, DM? You've commended Limbaugh 
  and, 'your'  incursion  into Iraq. What, pray tell, could be more sectarian or divisive 
  than  those?  - Original Message 
  -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
      Sent: January 02, 2006 14:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophetsNot a myth, Gary, but 
  rather your statement adds clarification,  that the 
   doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one 
   who had  sent him. You really should try 
  not to be so sectarian and  divisive.  
   John 7:16  (16) Jesus answered them, and said, My 
  doctrine is not mine, but  his that  sent 
  me.   John 10:30  (30) I and my 
  Father are one.   John 10:17-18  
  (17) ... I lay down my life, that I might take it again.  
  (18) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have 
   power   to  lay it down, and I have 
  power to take it again. This commandment  have I  
  received of my Father.   Peace be with 
  you.  David Miller.   - 
  Original Message -   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
   Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM  Subject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets   
   myth ("For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to 
   do the   will  of him who sent 
  me.")   On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 
  "David Miller"  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   writes: Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own 
  will and doctrine.   --  
  "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." (Colossian

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets





DAVEH: Thanx for your consideration, Bishop. 

 Do your in-laws really speak of Protestants in a condescending
way? If so, that surprises me and I would like to apologize for them
doing so, as an LDS person myself. I think it reflects poorly on my
religion of choice when I hear such. I just hope you realize that not
all LDS folks act/think that way.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted. my
in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not of
"the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying
"unbeleiver" or "pagan."

DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it
was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in
good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that
you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know
them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I
certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or "pagan."

The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what
their buds do, in private.

DAVEH: LOL.I think you are making this up, John.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word
"protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that
characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism
that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel
authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not
accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to
expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to
describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is
another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling
anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you
understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it
ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 
  
  This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is not. The
Mormons insist on using this word because that is what their buds do,
in private. All Mormons I know use this word and in the same
manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the roses. You
are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 
  
  jd
  
  


  


-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





official version

DAVEH: I find that comment to be very interesting. You see, I think
many of the TTers have exactly the same problem with LDS theology.
They seem to want to take any given member's comment and consider it to
be an official statement. That simply is not the case. 

 Regardless of what any particular LDS person says, and I think I
will go so far to say it even applies to the leadership of the Church
(including the prophet), IFF what they say is not included in the
Standard Works of the Church (Bible, BofM, DC  PoGP) it is
not official doctrine. That is a very broad statement that is probably
not true, so please don't assume what I just said is 100%
accurateit is just what is swimming around in my head at the
moment. I'd like to hear Blaine's thoughts about that though.

 There are certainly some Church sanctioned material (comments,
books, etc) that is not in the Standard Works that is considered to be
official material, but I wouldn't go so far to say that it is official
doctrine, if that makes any sense. I know there are many times the
Church leaders make off the cuff comments that are based on personal
opinion. Many of them make their living that way, but publishing books
related to the Church, but they are not represented as being official
doctrines. They are simply opinions that many feel are inspired. And,
I should say that some LDS people hang on every word that is spoken by
the leaders, assuming that they only speak doctrinal truths. I
personally do not feel that way though. Blainewhat is your
perspective on this?

 Getting back to your comment about , I should qualify what I
mentioned above. The Church does publish official material (course
studies, governing rules, suggested programs, etc.) that are certainly
officially from the Church. But such does not make them officially
doctrinal. The use of the word Ward or Stake to describe the
communities of Saints might be an example of such an official Church
sanctioned term that is not Scripturally based, to the best of my
knowledge. I guess it is best to consider the difference between the official
version and official doctrine. Maybe that is where the
confusion arises.

 BTW PastorI think some LDS folks have the same problem you
have understanding Blaine and me. As you might know, many LDS folks do
not drink caffeinated soft drinks, like Coke or Pepsi. I've heard some
LDS folks say that it is breaking a commandment to do so. As I
understand it, that is simply hogwash. I occasionally (though rarely)
drink a Coke/Pepsi and have no such feelings of guilt. Some folks just
here one thing, and then errantly conclude something else. It isn't
logical to do so, but it is humanand LDS folks are human
too...even me...though...some TTers may disagree.



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  You appear to be well informed. My frustration with you and
Blaine is the constant confusing of your personal beliefs and the official
version. 
  
  jd.
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next to
nothing about Mormonism.

DAVEH: Care to say how you characterize me, Pastor? (If you would
rather not comment, that is OKI understand.)

if you disagree with that characterization, my comment about
the Mormon Church is further affirmed. 

DAVEH: LOL

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I know some to be followers of Christ , who know next
to nothing about Mormonism. With that in mind, my answer is yes.
I do not think the Mormon Church is a Christian institution, however
 because it claims to be what it is not -- the restored chruch
of the biblcial message. And, if you disagree with that
characterization, my comment about the Mormon Church is further
affirmed. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Why would you insist on using the term in a
differing way?

DAVEH: What makes you think I'm insisting, John? I just thought it
was an interesting
perspective.

Catholics are Christians. 

DAVEH: Do you view LDS folks the same way?

  


-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





DAVEH: Here I thought we might get to be friends, and then you
suggest the LDS Church may have some obnoxious people in it. Shucks,
Pastor.you're the first guy to say something that might make me
want to leave Mormonism!   :-D 

 BTWThanx for using DM / DH in your posts today. Makes my life
easier!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  People are people, DH. Your church has just as many Deegan's in
it as any. Maybe Dean or Deegan use such circustances to "prove" a
point -- but not me. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
DAVEH: Thanx for your consideration, Bishop. 

 Do your in-laws really speak of Protestants in a condescending
way? If so, that surprises me and I would like to apologize for them
doing so, as an LDS person myself. I think it reflects poorly on my
religion of choice when I hear such. I just hope you realize that not
all LDS folks act/think that way.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Your personal use of the word is noted and accepted. my
in-laws are Mormon. I make nothing up. 
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
a Mormon slang word used by them to describe all who are not
of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is another way of saying
"unbeleiver" or "pagan."

DAVEH: At first, I was not going to respond to this, Johnsince it
was a discussion that you are having with DavidM. However, I cannot in
good conscience let you make such an accusation without explaining that
you are mischaracterizing the way I (and most LDS folks, as I know
them) think. FTR..While I may view you to be a Protestant, I
certainly do not consider you a "unbeleiver" or "pagan."

The Mormons insist on using this word because that is
what their buds do, in private.

DAVEH:n bsp; LOL.I think you are making this up,
John.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  David, do you understand how the Mormons use this word
"protestant?" Do you understand that I do not like that
characterization? Do you understand thatit isgross sectarianism
that insists on the separation between RCC and those who reject papel
authority? Do you know that there are millions of Catholics who do not
accept Papel authority? Do you understand that I have a right to
expect not to be branded with a Mormon slang word used by them to
describe all who are not of "the [Mormon] truth?""protestant" is
another way of saying "unbeleiver" or "pagan."We are not fooling
anyone, here. I have seen their chat rooms !! Do you
understand that when DH uses this word, he necessarily attaches to it
ideas that are definitely not of my approveal? 
  
  This should be an easily resolved issue. But it is
not. The Mormons insist on using this word because that is what
their buds do, in private. All Mormons I know use this word and
in the same manner as Blaine and DH. Get off the pot and smell the
roses. You are not scoring any points with the Mormons in this. 
  
  jd
  
  


  


-- 
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made
it up, right?


DAVEH: No, I did not automatically make that assumption. I did not
take the time to research it on the net though, as I've been trying to
clean up my inbox tonight.tomorrow, I've got to head for home and
then back to work on Tuesday. 

 If that is commonly believed by Protestants, I do find it very
interesting and would like to hear more about what the comment
specifically means to them. If it is just your wild speculative
comment that is not commonly accepted in the Protestant realmno
need to explain it.

Dave, do you still think I was making it up?


DAVEH: I should have read further before writing the above. No, I
don't think you are making it up, or you probably would not have gone
to the effort you did to explain it. And...I thank you for that,
Perry. 

 From my perspective, the original statement was a bit too concise,
and easy to misunderstand

The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the
dead. 

..Now that I understand your perspective a little better, it makes
a bit more sense to me. Thanx again.

 BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I
agree with your statement. But, I'm not trying to argue with you about
itI just want to understand why you made it, and what you meant by
it.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

  From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]

/*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the
dead. */


DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that something
you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?

  
  
  Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made
it up, right?
  
  
Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on
the third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31;
10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on
the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that
he said and did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13).
  
  
Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think
the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)
  
  
Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the
resurrection. So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's
power.
  
  
Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18
  
  
Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4
  
  
If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13
  
  
The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10
  
  
Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3
  
  
Dave, do you still think I was making it up?
  
  
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] apostles and prophets


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I agree 
with your statement.


Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree with 
my statement.


But, I'm not trying to argue with you about itI just want to understand 
why you made it, and what you meant by it.


I think it is pretty clear...my statement merely sunmmarizes the scriptures 
I cited.


So, after you have taken the time to read the references in context, if you 
then do not agree, please let me know where we differ.


Perry



Charles Perry Locke wrote:




From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/*_*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. 
*_*/


DAVEH:   Wow!  I'd never heard that before, Perry.  Is that something you 
just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?



*Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it up, 
right? *


Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on the 
third day  (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34; 
Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on the third 
day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he said and 
did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13).


Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think the 
seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)


Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the resurrection. 
So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power.


Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18

Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4

If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13

The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10

Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3
*
Dave, do you still think I was making it up? *

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] apostles and prophets





what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical
references

DAVEH: The easy example is from 1Cor 15:29. I bet there was a
shepherd there by the name of Perriwinkle Lockenstein who when he heard
Paul say

Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the
dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

.it somewhat confused him, so Perriwinkle asked Paul...

What do you mean, by baptized for the dead? Is that a pagan
practice you are using to teach the Christian principle of the
resurrection?

..and I think Paul's response to Perriwinkle might have been
something similar to this.

 Don't you know, little Perriwinkle, that For as many of you
as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.?
And, surely you know that Except a man be born of water and of
the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Wouldn't
you think that those who never had the chance to be baptized into
Christ would like that opportunity? 

 As we know that even baptism doth also now save us,
Jesus went and preached unto the spirits in prison after
his death. For for this cause was the gospel preached also to
them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the
flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. Do you not
understand that Jesus said, He that believeth and is baptized
shall be saved? Jesus also said, And whoso believeth
not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. 

 For that reason, little Perriwinkle, it was not pagans I was
referring to, but rather Christians are baptized for the dead,
because they believe that baptism is a necessary covenant to make with
the Lord in order to obtain salvation.

book, chapter, and verse of course.

DAVEH: of courseIf you really want me to provide the
references for the above quotes, PerryI'd be happy to do so. But
you smilie indicated you were not really seriously requesting such.
However, it is easy enough for you to google each one that you want to
reference.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

  /*Is it that you know Paul preached something
that is not in the Bible? */


DAVEH: Yes, I do think so.

  
  
Dave, what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need
Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse of course.
:-)
  
  
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] apostles and prophets

John wrote:
 When you read this word, you see office
 and argue from that perspective.   When
 I see the word apostle.  I see function,
 assignment, a specific and personal calling
 to the exclusion of office.

I'm not sure what you mean by to the exclusion of office, but you have 
basically given a definition for how I use the word office.

John wrote:
 ... [apostles were] presented with the assignment of
 imparting the message of Christ in word and script.

Where in Scripture do you see the apostles being given the assignment of 
imparting the message of Christ in script?  I don't think that was part of 
their assignment because most of them did not leave us script, and it seems 
likely to me that most of them never wrote anything.  I believe their 
assignment was oral preaching and ministry to the poor and sick.

John wrote:
 It is a function to me and an office to you.

No, it is a function to me too, but the word office helps describe an 
assigned function in the body of Christ.  It is a stewardship, a 
responsibility to the body of Christ that they have.

John wrote:
 IMO, a faith healer is one who thinks he/she has
 identical powers and purpose as that of Jesus and
 the typical 12.  That power emanates from their
 person.

Say what  I don't know of any faith healer who has ever claimed that 
power emanates from their person.  Even the apostles decried such 
characterizations (Acts 14).  Please name me one faith healer who has ever 
held to such a position.

I have brought up Smith Wigglesworth as a faith healer of the last century. 
If you like, we can talk about him from my perspective of what a faith 
healer is.

John wrote:
 He [Wigglesworth] does not seem to fit into the mold
 of the faith healer.  But, I really do not know.

If Smith Wigglesworth does not fit the mold of a faith healer, then I don't 
know of anyone, including the apostles of Scripture, who would.  He prayed 
for the sick, had healing lines in his meetings where he would lay hands 
upon the sick, and he had tremendous testimonies of people being healed and 
raised from the dead.

John wrote:
 You and I cannot point to a single healer, not one,
 David,  who healed all who made appearances at
 their services IN SPITE OF AN EFFORT TO DO
 SO.

I am not aware of any effort to do so, but I would agree with you that I do 
not know of anyone who healed all who came to them.  The problem from my 
perspective is that unbelief is far too prevalent for us to expect such to 
happen.

John wrote:
 I do not see that same failure when I consider
 Jesus and the apostles or those whom they
 commissioned.

The Bible gives us an example of where the apostles failed to heal, and even 
Jesus too was unable to heal sometimes.

Matthew 17:16
(16) And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.

Mark 6:5
(5) And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a 
few sick folk, and healed them.

John wrote:
 I have given you reference !!
 I have quoted from several biblical writers.

I'm talking about your assertion that you are on the side of theologians and 
I am not.  Which theologians hold to this viewpoint of yours that the 
prophets today are guys like Barth, Wright, etc.

John wrote:
 What is not going to work, in this discussion, is
 for you to continue to pretend that I might be
 making up stuff.  I do not do this.

Please reference for me those who have fed you the thoughts you have, that 
there are no faith healers today, that the last apostle was John, and that 
prophets are theologians like Barth, Wright, etc.  If you are not making 
this stuff up, then who is teaching it to you?  If possible, give me some 
Pentecostal references please.

John wrote:
 In the current discussion, who have you
 referenced other than H.  ??

The Didache.

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] apostles and prophets

John wrote:
 I say that because the Mormon Church is so very
 different from the first and pre-apostate church
 found in the First and PreApostate Scriptures.

For the record, this is one area where John and I agree!

The greatest mistake the Mormon church did was re-establish a priesthood 
that did not exist in the primitive church.  This led to calling young boys 
elders and sending them out as missionaries, an extremely confusing and 
unbiblical practice.

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] apostles and prophets

Perry wrote:
 The gospel didn't even have POWER until
 he was rose from the dead.

I'm a little surprised by this statement.  There are many Scriptures that 
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did have 
power.  Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom of God. 
They did many miracles and healed a great many people.  I certainly 
understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, being a 
kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to say that the 
gospel did not even have power until he was raised from the dead is a bit of 
an overstatement from my perspective.  Would you like me to take time to 
cite some Scripture indicating salvation before the resurrection, and of the 
power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?

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] apostles and prophets

DaveH wrote:
 If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
 adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
 of Protestantism.

John wrote:
  That denomination did not come from the
 Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church 
is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been 
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the 
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:
 I see protestant as clubhouse name for
 those who are apostate.   That is how I
 believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
 from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
 opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ, 
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to 
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other Protestants is not unlike Mormons.

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] apostles and prophets


Dave,

  Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions. You can't add 
conjecture and assumptions to scripture to make it mean what you want. That 
is called scripture-twisting and proof-texting.


  I ask again, What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need 
Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse of course. Notice: no 
smilie.


Perry


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:55:38 -0800

*what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical 
references*


DAVEH:   The easy example is from 1Cor 15:29.  I bet there was a shepherd 
there by the name of Perriwinkle Lockenstein who when he heard Paul say


_/Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise 
not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?/_


.it somewhat confused him, so Perriwinkle asked Paul...

/What do you mean, by _baptized for the dead_?  Is that a pagan practice 
you are using to teach the Christian principle of the resurrection?/


..and I think Paul's response to Perriwinkle might have been something 
similar to this.


   Don't you know, little Perriwinkle, that _/For as many of you as have 
been baptized into Christ have put on Christ/_.?   And, surely you know 
that _/Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter 
into the kingdom of God/_.  Wouldn't you think that those who never had the 
chance to be /baptized into Christ/ would like that opportunity?


   As we know that _/even baptism doth also now save us/_, Jesus _/went 
and preached unto the spirits in prison/_ after his death.   _/For for this 
cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might 
be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the 
spirit/_.  Do you not understand that Jesus said, _/He that believeth and 
is baptized shall be saved/_?  Jesus also said, /_And whoso believeth not 
in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned_.  /


   For that reason, little Perriwinkle, it was not pagans I was referring 
to, but rather Christians are _/baptized for the dead/_, because they 
believe that baptism is a necessary covenant to make with the Lord in order 
to obtain salvation.


*book, chapter, and verse of course.*

DAVEH:  *of course*If you really want me to provide the references 
for the above quotes, PerryI'd be happy to do so.  But you smilie 
indicated you were not really seriously requesting such.  However, it is 
easy enough for you to google each one that you want to reference.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:

/*Is it that you know Paul preached something that is not in the Bible? 
*/


DAVEH:   Yes, I do think so.



Dave, *what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical 
references*, as in *book, chapter, and verse of course.* :-)


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] apostles and prophets

Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the gospel? The 
pre-existing God, incarnating as a  Jew, living, dying, descending, 
resurrecting, ascending, sitting and interceding. Why truncate the gospel?

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Perry wrote:

The gospel didn't even have POWER until
he was rose from the dead.

I'm a little surprised by this statement.  There are many Scriptures that
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did 
have

power.  Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom of God.
They did many miracles and healed a great many people.  I certainly
understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, being a
kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to say that 
the
gospel did not even have power until he was raised from the dead is a bit 
of

an overstatement from my perspective.  Would you like me to take time to
cite some Scripture indicating salvation before the resurrection, and of 
the

power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?

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] apostles and prophets

Why, DavidM, do you so specialize on minutiae? John is who he has become. He 
is the aggregate of all that has comprised his life up to now. But then, 
who'd ya be without multitudinous 'bunny trails' to go down?

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:21
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

DaveH wrote:

If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.

John wrote:

 That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square 
church

is Baptist.  Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been
ordained by the Baptists.  I think later on she was ordained by the
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:

I see protestant as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate.   That is how I
believe the term is used.   I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to
Mormonism.  Their attitude toward other Protestants is not unlike 
Mormons.

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] apostles and prophets

Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth?

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

John wrote:

When you read this word, you see office
and argue from that perspective.   When
I see the word apostle.  I see function,
assignment, a specific and personal calling
to the exclusion of office.

I'm not sure what you mean by to the exclusion of office, but you have
basically given a definition for how I use the word office.

John wrote:

... [apostles were] presented with the assignment of
imparting the message of Christ in word and script.

Where in Scripture do you see the apostles being given the assignment of
imparting the message of Christ in script?  I don't think that was part of
their assignment because most of them did not leave us script, and it 
seems

likely to me that most of them never wrote anything.  I believe their
assignment was oral preaching and ministry to the poor and sick.

John wrote:

It is a function to me and an office to you.

No, it is a function to me too, but the word office helps describe an
assigned function in the body of Christ.  It is a stewardship, a
responsibility to the body of Christ that they have.

John wrote:

IMO, a faith healer is one who thinks he/she has
identical powers and purpose as that of Jesus and
the typical 12.  That power emanates from their
person.

Say what  I don't know of any faith healer who has ever claimed that
power emanates from their person.  Even the apostles decried such
characterizations (Acts 14).  Please name me one faith healer who has ever
held to such a position.

I have brought up Smith Wigglesworth as a faith healer of the last 
century.

If you like, we can talk about him from my perspective of what a faith
healer is.

John wrote:

He [Wigglesworth] does not seem to fit into the mold
of the faith healer.  But, I really do not know.

If Smith Wigglesworth does not fit the mold of a faith healer, then I 
don't

know of anyone, including the apostles of Scripture, who would.  He prayed
for the sick, had healing lines in his meetings where he would lay hands
upon the sick, and he had tremendous testimonies of people being healed 
and

raised from the dead.

John wrote:

You and I cannot point to a single healer, not one,
David,  who healed all who made appearances at
their services IN SPITE OF AN EFFORT TO DO
SO.

I am not aware of any effort to do so, but I would agree with you that I 
do

not know of anyone who healed all who came to them.  The problem from my
perspective is that unbelief is far too prevalent for us to expect such to
happen.

John wrote:

I do not see that same failure when I consider
Jesus and the apostles or those whom they
commissioned.

The Bible gives us an example of where the apostles failed to heal, and 
even

Jesus too was unable to heal sometimes.

Matthew 17:16
(16) And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.

Mark 6:5
(5) And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon 
a

few sick folk, and healed them.

John wrote:

I have given you reference !!
I have quoted from several biblical writers.

I'm talking about your assertion that you are on the side of theologians 
and

I am not.  Which theologians hold to this viewpoint of yours that the
prophets today are guys like Barth, Wright, etc.

John wrote:

What is not going to work, in this discussion, is
for you to continue to pretend that I might be
making up stuff.  I do not do this.

Please reference for me those who have fed you the thoughts you have, that
there are no faith healers today, that the last apostle was John, and that
prophets are theologians like Barth, Wright, etc.  If you are not making
this stuff up, then who is teaching it to you?  If possible, give me some
Pentecostal references please.

John wrote:

In the current discussion, who have you
referenced other than H.  ??

The Didache.

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] apostles and prophets

THE GREATEST MISTAKE?? Yikes! Maybe you need a short course on Mormonism, 
DavidM.
- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:52
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

John wrote:

I say that because the Mormon Church is so very
different from the first and pre-apostate church
found in the First and PreApostate Scriptures.

For the record, this is one area where John and I agree!

The greatest mistake the Mormon church did was re-establish a priesthood
that did not exist in the primitive church.  This led to calling young 
boys

elders and sending them out as missionaries, an extremely confusing and
unbiblical practice.

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] apostles and prophets

Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - Methinks
you need to clean out your pipes
since it is aNew Year
now and revise some things

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the
gospel? The pre-existing God, incarnating as a Jew,
living, dying, descending, resurrecting, ascending, sitting
and interceding. Why truncate the gospel?
- Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophetsPerry wrote: The gospel
didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead.
I'm a little surprised by this statement. There are many
Scriptures that indicate that the preaching of the gospel
by Jesus and his apostles did have
power. Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom
of God. They did many miracles and healed a great many
people. I certainly understand how the resurrection
is a central part of the gospel, being a kind of climax of
the extent of the power of the gospel, but to say that
the gospel did not even have power until he was raised from the
dead is a bit of an overstatement from my
perspective. Would you like me to take time to cite
some Scripture indicating salvation before the resurrection, and of
the power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise
the dead? 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] apostles and prophets

Why not?
All spiritual giftings reside in the Holy Spirit rather
than men - why couldn't DavidM
be used the same as Smith Wigglesworth?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:34:27 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth?
- Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophetsJohn wrote: When you
read this word, you see "office" and argue from that
perspective. When I see the word "apostle." I
see function, assignment, a specific and personal
calling to the exclusion of "office."
I'm not sure what you mean by "to the exclusion of office," but you
have basically given a definition for how I use the word
office. John wrote: ... [apostles
were] presented with the assignment of imparting the message of
Christ in word and script. Where in Scripture do you
see the apostles being given the assignment of imparting
the message of Christ in script? I don't think that was part
of their assignment because most of them did not leave us script,
and it seems likely to me that most of them
never wrote anything. I believe their assignment was
oral preaching and ministry to the poor and sick. John
wrote: It is a function to me and an office to you.
No, it is a function to me too, but the word "office" helps
describe an assigned function in the body of Christ.
It is a stewardship, a responsibility to the body of Christ that
they have. John wrote: IMO, a faith
healer is one who thinks he/she has identical powers and
purpose as that of Jesus and the typical "12." That power
emanates from their person. Say
what I don't know of any "faith healer" who has ever claimed
that "power emanates from their person." Even the apostles
decried such characterizations (Acts 14). Please
name me one faith healer who has ever held to such a
position. I have brought up Smith Wigglesworth as a
faith healer of the lastcentury. If you
like, we can talk about him from my perspective of what a faith
healer is. John wrote: He
[Wigglesworth] does not seem to fit into the mold of the "faith
healer." But, I really do not know. If Smith
Wigglesworth does not fit the mold of a faith healer, then I
don't know of anyone, including the apostles of Scripture, who
would. He prayed for the sick, had healing lines in
his meetings where he would lay hands upon the sick, and
he had tremendous testimonies of people being healed
and raised from the dead. John
wrote: You and I cannot point to a single healer, not
one, David, who healed all who made appearances
at their services IN SPITE OF AN EFFORT TO DO
SO. I am not aware of any effort to do so, but I would
agree with you that I do not know of anyone
who healed all who came to them. The problem from my
perspective is that unbelief is far too prevalent for us to expect such
to happen. John wrote: I
do not see that same failure when I consider Jesus and the
apostles or those whom they commissioned.
The Bible gives us an example of where the apostles failed to
heal, and even Jesus too was unable to heal
sometimes. Matthew 17:16 (16) And I
brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.
Mark 6:5 (5) And he could there do no mighty
work, save that he laid his hands upon a few
sick folk, and healed them. John wrote:
I have given you reference !! I have quoted from
several biblical writers. I'm talking about your
assertion that you are on the side of theologians
and I am not. Which theologians hold to this viewpoint of
yours that the prophets today are guys like Barth, Wright,
etc. John wrote: What is not going to
work, in this discussion, is for you to continue to pretend
that I might be making up "stuff." I do not do
this. Please reference for me those who have fed you
the thoughts you have, that there are no faith healers
today, that the last apostle was John, and that prophets
are theologians like Barth, Wright, etc. If you are not
making this stuff up, then who is teaching it to you? If
possible, give me some Pentecostal references
please. John wrote: In the current
discussion, who have you referenced other than H.
?? The Didache. 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] apostles and prophets

Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 'pipes'
are clean.

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

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: January 02, 2006 10:38
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets

Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - Methinks
you need to clean out your pipes
since it is aNew
Year now and revise some things

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the
gospel? The pre-existing God, incarnating as a Jew,
living, dying, descending, resurrecting, ascending, sitting
and interceding. Why truncate the gospel?
- Original Message - From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophetsPerry wrote: The
gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the
dead. I'm a little surprised by this
statement. There are many Scriptures that indicate
that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did
have power. Jesus indicated that people were
pressing into the kingdom of God. They did many miracles
and healed a great many people. I certainly
understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel,
being a kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel,
but to say that the gospel did not even
have power until he was raised from the dead is a bit
of an overstatement from my perspective. Would you like me
to take time to cite some Scripture indicating salvation
before the resurrection, and of the power
of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?
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] apostles and prophets

Perry wrote:
 If Paul says he fully preached the gospel of
 Christ...then I believe he fully preached the
 gospel of Christ. What is your point?

DAVEH:
 You have apparently made the assumption that
 everything Paul taught is included in the Bible.
 IMO, that is not logical.

Good point, DaveH.  Saying that Paul fully preached the gospel and then 
concluding that Paul fully preached the gospel in Scripture is not logical. 
It assumes that Paul wrote everything that he preached orally.

Some think that Paul wrote Hebrews.  Heb. 9:5 hints upon certain teaching 
concerning the cherubims that are not elaborated upon at this time in 
Scripture, and to my knowledge, not anywhere else.  It is likely that he 
taught on these things verbally at times, or perhaps even wrote about them 
in other letters.

2 Thess. 2:5 indicates that Paul taught the Thessalonians much about the end 
times for which the letters are only a synopsis.  It makes sense, because 
most of us have taught much more orally than we have ever written.

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] apostles and prophets




I don't think so Lance, if they were you would 
understand that God CAN NOT die or are
you of the same persuasion a certain Germanwho 
proclaimedGod was dead?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 
  'pipes' are clean.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 10:38
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets


Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - 
Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
since it is aNew 
Year now and revise some things

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the 
gospel?  The  pre-existing God, incarnating as a Jew, 
living, dying, descending,   resurrecting, ascending, 
sitting and interceding. Why truncate the  gospel?  
 - Original Message -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsPerry wrote:  The 
gospel didn't even have POWER until  he was rose from the 
dead.   I'm a little surprised by this 
statement. There are many  Scriptures that  
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his  apostles 
did   have  power. Jesus indicated that people 
were pressing into the kingdom  of God.  They did many 
miracles and healed a great many people. I  certainly 
 understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, 
 being a  kind of climax of the extent of the power of 
the gospel, but to  say that   the  gospel 
did not even have power until he was raised from the dead  is a bit 
  of  an overstatement from my perspective. 
Would you like me to take  time to  cite some Scripture 
indicating salvation before the resurrection,  and of   
the  power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the 
dead?   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] apostles and prophets




A believing man with the kind of childlike faith in 
God's Word that gets results.
Amazing what can happen when we give God our all 


On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:44:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  I did not say he might not be another SW, JT. I 
  just asked him if he is. I carry pretty much all of the writings of SW. He was 
  an amazing man.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 10:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets


Why not?
All spiritual giftings reside in the Holy Spirit 
rather than men - why couldn't DavidM
be used the same as Smith 
Wigglesworth?


On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:34:27 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth? 
  - Original Message -  From: "David Miller" 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsJohn wrote:  When 
you read this word, you see "office"  and argue from that 
perspective. When  I see the word 
"apostle." I see function,  assignment, a specific and 
personal calling  to the exclusion of "office." 
  I'm not sure what you mean by "to the exclusion of 
office," but  you have  basically given a definition for 
how I use the word office.   John wrote: 
 ... [apostles were] presented with the assignment of 
 imparting the message of Christ in word and script. 
  Where in Scripture do you see the apostles being given the 
 assignment of  imparting the message of Christ in 
script? I don't think that was  part of  their 
assignment because most of them did not leave us script, and  it 
  seems  likely to me that most of them never wrote 
anything. I believe  their  assignment was oral 
preaching and ministry to the poor and sick.   John 
wrote:  It is a function to me and an office to you. 
  No, it is a function to me too, but the word "office" 
helps  describe an  assigned function in the body of 
Christ. It is a stewardship, a  responsibility to the body 
of Christ that they have.   John wrote: 
 IMO, a faith healer is one who thinks he/she has  
identical powers and purpose as that of Jesus and  the 
typical "12." That power emanates from their  
person.   Say what I don't know of any 
"faith healer" who has ever  claimed that  "power 
emanates from their person." Even the apostles decried  
such  characterizations (Acts 14). Please name me one 
faith healer who  has ever  held to such a 
position.   I have brought up Smith Wigglesworth as 
a faith healer of the lastcentury.  If 
you like, we can talk about him from my perspective of what a  
faith  healer is.   John wrote: 
 He [Wigglesworth] does not seem to fit into the mold 
 of the "faith healer." But, I really do not know. 
  If Smith Wigglesworth does not fit the mold of a faith 
healer,  then I   don't  know of anyone, 
including the apostles of Scripture, who would.  He 
prayed  for the sick, had healing lines in his meetings where he 
would lay  hands  upon the sick, and he had tremendous 
testimonies of people being  healed   and  
raised from the dead.   John wrote:  
You and I cannot point to a single healer, not one,  
David, who healed all who made appearances at  their 
services IN SPITE OF AN EFFORT TO DO  SO. 
  I am not aware of any effort to do so, but I would agree 
with you  that I   do  not know of anyone 
who healed all who came to them. The problem  from my 
 perspective is that unbelief is far too prevalent for us to expect 
 such to  happen.   John 
wrote:  I do not see that same failure when I 
consider  Jesus and the apostles or those whom they 
 commissioned.   The Bible gives us an 
example of where the apostles failed to  heal, and   
even  Jesus too was unable to heal sometimes. 
  Matthew 17:16  (16) And I brought him to thy 
disciples, and they could not cure  him.   
Mark 6:5  (5) And he could there do no mighty work, save that he 
laid his  hands upon   a  few sick folk, and 
healed them.   John wrote:  I have 
given you reference !!  I have quoted from several biblical 
writers.   I'm talking about your assertion that you 
are on the side of  theologians   and  I am 
not. Which theologians hold to this viewpoint of yours that  
the  prophets today are guys like Barth, Wright, etc. 
  John wrote:  What is not going to work, in 
this discussion, is  for you to continue to pretend that I 
might be

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




Him (SW), yes! Others? Sporadically maybe. Not much 
in the Western world by Western 'christians', IMO. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:50
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  A believing man with the kind of childlike faith in 
  God's Word that gets results.
  Amazing what can happen when we give God our all 
  
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:44:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
I did not say he might not be another SW, JT. I 
just asked him if he is. I carry pretty much all of the writings of SW. He 
was an amazing man.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:39
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  
  Why not?
  All spiritual giftings reside in the Holy Spirit 
  rather than men - why couldn't DavidM
  be used the same as Smith 
  Wigglesworth?
  
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:34:27 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth? 
- Original Message -  From: "David 
  Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 09:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophetsJohn wrote:  When 
  you read this word, you see "office"  and argue from that 
  perspective. When  I see the word 
  "apostle." I see function,  assignment, a specific 
  and personal calling  to the exclusion of 
  "office."   I'm not sure what you mean by "to the 
  exclusion of office," but  you have  basically given a 
  definition for how I use the word office.   John 
  wrote:  ... [apostles were] presented with the assignment 
  of  imparting the message of Christ in word and 
  script.   Where in Scripture do you see the 
  apostles being given the  assignment of  imparting the 
  message of Christ in script? I don't think that was  part 
  of  their assignment because most of them did not leave us 
  script, and  it   seems  likely to me that 
  most of them never wrote anything. I believe  their 
   assignment was oral preaching and ministry to the poor and 
  sick.   John wrote:  It is a 
  function to me and an office to you.   No, it is a 
  function to me too, but the word "office" helps  describe 
  an  assigned function in the body of Christ. It is a 
  stewardship, a  responsibility to the body of Christ that they 
  have.   John wrote:  IMO, a faith 
  healer is one who thinks he/she has  identical powers and 
  purpose as that of Jesus and  the typical "12." That 
  power emanates from their  person.  
   Say what I don't know of any "faith healer" who has ever 
   claimed that  "power emanates from their 
  person." Even the apostles decried  such  
  characterizations (Acts 14). Please name me one faith healer who 
   has ever  held to such a position. 
I have brought up Smith Wigglesworth as a faith healer 
  of the lastcentury.  If you like, we 
  can talk about him from my perspective of what a  faith 
   healer is.   John wrote:  He 
  [Wigglesworth] does not seem to fit into the mold  of the 
  "faith healer." But, I really do not know.   
  If Smith Wigglesworth does not fit the mold of a faith healer,  
  then I   don't  know of anyone, including the 
  apostles of Scripture, who would.  He prayed  
  for the sick, had healing lines in his meetings where he would lay 
   hands  upon the sick, and he had tremendous 
  testimonies of people being  healed   and  
  raised from the dead.   John wrote: 
   You and I cannot point to a single healer, not one, 
   David, who healed all who made appearances at 
   their services IN SPITE OF AN EFFORT TO DO  
  SO.   I am not aware of any effort to do so, but I 
  would agree with you  that I   do  not 
  know of anyone who healed all who came to them. The problem  
  from my  perspective is that unbelief is far too prevalent for 
  us to expect  such to  happen.  
   John wrote:  I do not see that same failure when I 
  consider  Jesus and the apostles or those whom 
  they  commissioned.   The Bible 
  gives us an example of where the apostles failed to  heal, and 
even  Jesus too was unable to heal 
  sometimes.   Matthew 17:16  (16) And I 
  brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure  
  him.   Mark 6:5  (5) And he could 
  there do no mighty work, save t

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets



David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25; 2:1-2; 15:12-18.

After saying many times that he would be raised on the third day, had He not 
been, He would have been proven a false prophet. All that He taught would 
have been nullified. There would be no gospel (1 Cor 15:12-18). After all, 
isn't the resurrection part of the gospel? It was not complete until the 
resurrection.


Perry



From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:01:51 -0500

Perry wrote:
 The gospel didn't even have POWER until
 he was rose from the dead.

I'm a little surprised by this statement.  There are many Scriptures that
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did 
have

power.  Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom of God.
They did many miracles and healed a great many people.  I certainly
understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, being a
kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to say that 
the
gospel did not even have power until he was raised from the dead is a bit 
of

an overstatement from my perspective.  Would you like me to take time to
cite some Scripture indicating salvation before the resurrection, and of 
the

power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?

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] apostles and prophets




Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what 
is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior to His birth? Was/Is 
Jesus truly God, JT?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:48
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  I don't think so Lance, if they were you would 
  understand that God CAN NOT die or are
  you of the same persuasion a certain Germanwho 
  proclaimedGod was dead?
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 
'pipes' are clean.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:38
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  
  Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - 
  Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
  since it is aNew 
  Year now and revise some things
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the 
  gospel?  The  pre-existing God, incarnating as a 
  Jew, living, dying, descending,   resurrecting, ascending, 
  sitting and interceding. Why truncate the  gospel? 
- Original Message -  From: "David 
  Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophetsPerry wrote:  The 
  gospel didn't even have POWER until  he was rose from the 
  dead.   I'm a little surprised by this 
  statement. There are many  Scriptures that  
  indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his  
  apostles did   have  power. Jesus indicated 
  that people were pressing into the kingdom  of God.  
  They did many miracles and healed a great many people. I  
  certainly  understand how the resurrection is a central part 
  of the gospel,  being a  kind of climax of the extent 
  of the power of the gospel, but to  say that   
  the  gospel did not even have power until he was raised from 
  the dead  is a bit   of  an overstatement 
  from my perspective. Would you like me to take  time 
  to  cite some Scripture indicating salvation before the 
  resurrection,  and of   the  power of the 
  gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?   
  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] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote to Judy:
 When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what
 is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish
 baby prior to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God,
 JT?

I think what Judy might be getting at could be said this way.  As a man, 
Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus died.  The temptation to sin 
and the experience of death are the experiences of man, not God.  Yes, Jesus 
was God, but he was also man.  The mystery of godliness, God manifest in the 
flesh.  I think you might perhaps understand the problems with using Jesus 
to be talking about God being tempted to sin.  In the same way, it is 
problematic to use him to speak about God dying.  There is a kind of cultic 
element that goes along with such thinking, IMO.

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] apostles and prophets

Thus, as said, a 'truncated gospel' as apparently preached by DavidM.

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:02
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25; 2:1-2; 15:12-18.

After saying many times that he would be raised on the third day, had He 
not been, He would have been proven a false prophet. All that He taught 
would have been nullified. There would be no gospel (1 Cor 15:12-18). 
After all, isn't the resurrection part of the gospel? It was not complete 
until the resurrection.

Perry

From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:01:51 -0500

Perry wrote:
 The gospel didn't even have POWER until
 he was rose from the dead.

I'm a little surprised by this statement.  There are many Scriptures that
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did 
have

power.  Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom of God.
They did many miracles and healed a great many people.  I certainly
understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, being a
kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to say that 
the
gospel did not even have power until he was raised from the dead is a bit 
of

an overstatement from my perspective.  Would you like me to take time to
cite some Scripture indicating salvation before the resurrection, and of 
the

power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead?

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.

--
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] apostles and prophets




He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, the Angel of 
His Presence; whoever He needed to be
as the second member of the Godhead and he layed aside 
the glory he had with the Father to take upon
himself a body in the likeness of men. He was 
called the Son of God as well as theson of man and
he layed his humanity down as a sinless sacrifice for 
us but this does not change the fact that God can
not die. God is a Spirit and spirits are eternal 
- they do not die.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what 
  is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior to His birth? Was/Is 
  Jesus truly God, JT?
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 10:48
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets

I don't think so Lance, if they were you would 
understand that God CAN NOT die or are
you of the same persuasion a certain 
Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 
  'pipes' are clean.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 10:38
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophets


Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - 
Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
since it is aNew Year now and revise some things

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is 
the gospel?  The  pre-existing God, incarnating as 
a Jew, living, dying, descending,   resurrecting, 
ascending, sitting and interceding. Why truncate the  
gospel?   - Original Message -  
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophetsPerry wrote: 
 The gospel didn't even have POWER until  he was 
rose from the dead.   I'm a little surprised by 
this statement. There are many  Scriptures that 
 indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his  
apostles did   have  power. Jesus 
indicated that people were pressing into the kingdom  of 
God.  They did many miracles and healed a great many 
people. I  certainly  understand how the 
resurrection is a central part of the gospel,  being a 
 kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to 
 say that   the  gospel did not even 
have power until he was raised from the dead  is a bit  
 of  an overstatement from my perspective. Would 
you like me to take  time to  cite some Scripture 
indicating salvation before the resurrection,  and of  
 the  power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the 
dead?   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] apostles and prophets

JESUS IS GOD. JESUS WAS TEMPTED WITH REAL, NOT PRETEND, TEMPTATIONS. JESUS 
DIED. I leave it to others to sort out the LOGIC of the matter.

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:07
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote to Judy:

When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what
is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish
baby prior to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God,
JT?

I think what Judy might be getting at could be said this way.  As a man,
Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus died.  The temptation to sin
and the experience of death are the experiences of man, not God.  Yes, 
Jesus
was God, but he was also man.  The mystery of godliness, God manifest in 
the

flesh.  I think you might perhaps understand the problems with using Jesus
to be talking about God being tempted to sin.  In the same way, it is
problematic to use him to speak about God dying.  There is a kind of 
cultic

element that goes along with such thinking, IMO.

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] apostles and prophets




You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology 
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted (Bill, John and, even 
DavidM) with no success.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:19
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Why Lance?
  Why not think about these things and ask the Holy 
  Spirit for insight rather than parrot
  the teachings of Anathasius and the rest of the rcc 
  church fathers? No wonder it can get so
  confusing for children and new 
believers.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:08:28 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go down 
that road one more time. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:01
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, the 
  Angel of His Presence; whoever He needed to be
  as the second member of the Godhead and he layed 
  aside the glory he had with the Father to take upon
  himself a body in the likeness of men. He 
  was called the Son of God as well as theson of man and
  he layed his humanity down as a sinless sacrifice 
  for us but this does not change the fact that God can
  not die. God is a Spirit and spirits are 
  eternal - they do not die.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, 
Lance', what is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior 
to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God, JT?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
10:48
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophets
  
  I don't think so Lance, if they were you 
  would understand that God CAN NOT die or are
  you of the same persuasion a certain 
  Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. 
My 'pipes' are clean.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
  10:38
      Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
  apostles and prophets
  
  
  Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die 
  - Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
  since it is aNew Year now and revise some things
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: 
  Who is the gospel?  The  pre-existing God, 
  incarnating as a Jew, living, dying, descending,  
   resurrecting, ascending, sitting and interceding. Why 
  truncate the  gospel?   - 
  Original Message -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
      Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
  apostles and prophetsPerry 
  wrote:  The gospel didn't even have POWER 
  until  he was rose from the dead. 
I'm a little surprised by this statement. 
  There are many  Scriptures that  indicate that 
  the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his  apostles did 
have  power. Jesus indicated that 
  people were pressing into the kingdom  of God. 
   They did many miracles and healed a great many people. 
  I  certainly  understand how the resurrection 
  is a central part of the gospel,  being a  
  kind of climax of the extent of the power of the gospel, but to 
   say that   the  gospel did not 
  even have power until he was raised from the dead  is a 
  bit   of  an overstatement from my 
  perspective. Would you like me to take  time 
  to  cite some Scripture indicating salvation before 
  the resurrection,  and of   the  
  power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead? 
Peace be with you

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Perry wrote:
 David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25;
 2:1-2; 15:12-18.

Your first two passages speak of him CRUCIFIED and not a word about his 
resurrection.

Perry wrote:
 After saying many times that he would be raised
 on the third day, had He not been, He would have
 been proven a false prophet.

I don't have the perspective that he said it many times.  What I mean is 
that the resurrection was not central to the gospel of Christ BEFORE the 
actual event of his resurrection.  Otherwise, why were they not expecting 
it?

Perry wrote:
 All that He taught would have been nullified.
 There would be no gospel (1 Cor 15:12-18).

The point of 1 Cor. 15:12-18 is that their testimony would be nullified if 
there is no resurrection of the dead because their testimony is that Jesus 
was raised from the dead.  Nowhere are we instructed that the teachings of 
Jesus would have been nullified if there was no resurrection or will be no 
resurrection.  Truth is truth, and his teachings stand even if part of them 
are not believed.

As for there being no gospel, I disagree.  I can go through and list the 
Scriptures for you, but I'm not going to take the time right now because I 
think you already know them.  You can search on the word gospel and study 
them for yourself.  The gospel was preached by Jesus Christ and his apostles 
with power, without any mention of the resurrection.  It is the gospel of 
the kingdom.  Think about what Jesus and the apostles were preaching prior 
to the resurrection.  Do you recognize that people were being born again and 
entering the kingdom prior to the resurrection and without any mention of it 
in their gospel preaching?  If not, simply say that you would like some 
passages on this and I will take the time to teach on this from the 
Scriptures.

I'm not trying to strip away the resurrection from the gospel.  The 
resurrection is the climax of the gospel.  It is the ultimate good news. 
But to say that there is NO GOSPEL without including the resurrection is 
overstating the case.

Perry wrote:
 After all, isn't the resurrection part of the gospel?

Yes.

Perry wrote:
 It was not complete until the resurrection.

The gospel was complete enough before the resurrection to save souls, heal 
the sick, raise the dead, and bring the reign of Christ on this earth.  Was 
the gospel completely finished prior to the resurrection of Christ?  No. 
The realization of the gospel's power is not even yet completely finished 
until we ourselves are resurrected from the dead.  That will be the ultimate 
climax of the gospel in which we all place our hope.

Luke 7:20-23
(20) When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us 
unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?
(21) And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, 
and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight.
(22) Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what 
things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the 
lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the 
gospel is preached.
(23) And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.

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] apostles and prophets




Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go down that 
road one more time. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:01
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, the Angel 
  of His Presence; whoever He needed to be
  as the second member of the Godhead and he layed 
  aside the glory he had with the Father to take upon
  himself a body in the likeness of men. He was 
  called the Son of God as well as theson of man and
  he layed his humanity down as a sinless sacrifice for 
  us but this does not change the fact that God can
  not die. God is a Spirit and spirits are 
  eternal - they do not die.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', 
what is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior to His birth? 
Was/Is Jesus truly God, JT?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:48
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  I don't think so Lance, if they were you would 
  understand that God CAN NOT die or are
  you of the same persuasion a certain 
  Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 
'pipes' are clean.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
10:38
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophets
  
  
  Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - 
  Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
  since it is aNew Year now and revise some things
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is 
  the gospel?  The  pre-existing God, incarnating as 
  a Jew, living, dying, descending,   
  resurrecting, ascending, sitting and interceding. Why truncate the 
   gospel?   - Original Message 
  -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophetsPerry wrote: 
   The gospel didn't even have POWER until  he 
  was rose from the dead.   I'm a little 
  surprised by this statement. There are many  Scriptures 
  that  indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus 
  and his  apostles did   have  
  power. Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the 
  kingdom  of God.  They did many miracles and 
  healed a great many people. I  certainly  
  understand how the resurrection is a central part of the gospel, 
   being a  kind of climax of the extent of the 
  power of the gospel, but to  say that   
  the  gospel did not even have power until he was raised 
  from the dead  is a bit   of  an 
  overstatement from my perspective. Would you like me to take 
   time to  cite some Scripture indicating salvation 
  before the resurrection,  and of   the 
   power of the gospel to heal the sick and raise the dead? 
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] apostles and prophets





JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God Lance made 
in the LIKENESS of
man. He did say during 
his time here "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) so
what does that mean. How can the Father be 
greater than God Himself?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:27:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: JESUS IS GOD. JESUS WAS TEMPTED WITH REAL, NOT PRETEND, 
TEMPTATIONS.  JESUS  DIED. I leave it to others to sort out the 
LOGIC of the matter.   - Original Message - 
 From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:07 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsLance wrote to Judy:  
When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what  is it that you are 
saying? Who was 'the Jewish  baby prior to His birth? Was/Is 
Jesus truly God,  JT?   I think what 
Judy might be getting at could be said this way. As  a 
man,  Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus died. The 
 temptation to sin  and the experience of death are the 
experiences of man, not God.  Yes,   Jesus 
 was God, but he was also man. The mystery of godliness, God  
manifest in   the  flesh. I think you might 
perhaps understand the problems with  using Jesus  to be 
talking about God being tempted to sin. In the same way, it  
is  problematic to use him to speak about God dying. There is 
a kind  of   cultic  element that goes along 
with such thinking, IMO.   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] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote:
 You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
 of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
 (Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.

The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness.  Therefore, if you 
accept that Judy is a godly woman, then it is impossible for her to have a 
heretical theology of Jesus.  Perhaps what you mean to say is that there is 
some room for improvement in her understanding of the incarnation.

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] apostles and prophets




Talk to the hand, Judy.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:49
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  
  JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God Lance 
  made in the LIKENESS of
  man. He did say 
  during his time here "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) 
  so
  what does that mean. How can the Father be 
  greater than God Himself?
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:27:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: JESUS IS GOD. JESUS WAS TEMPTED WITH REAL, NOT PRETEND, 
  TEMPTATIONS.  JESUS  DIED. I leave it to others to sort out 
  the LOGIC of the matter.   - Original Message 
  -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:07 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophetsLance wrote to Judy:  
  When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what  is it that you 
  are saying? Who was 'the Jewish  baby prior to His birth? 
  Was/Is Jesus truly God,  JT?   I think 
  what Judy might be getting at could be said this way. As  a 
  man,  Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus died. 
  The  temptation to sin  and the experience of death are 
  the experiences of man, not God.  Yes,   
  Jesus  was God, but he was also man. The mystery of 
  godliness, God  manifest in   the  
  flesh. I think you might perhaps understand the problems with  
  using Jesus  to be talking about God being tempted to sin. 
  In the same way, it  is  problematic to use him to speak 
  about God dying. There is a kind  of   
  cultic  element that goes along with such thinking, IMO. 
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] apostles and prophets

Thanks for the opportunity to avoid a 'Davidic rebuke' but, no, I meant what 
I said just the way I said it.

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:52
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote:

You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
(Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.

The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness.  Therefore, if you
accept that Judy is a godly woman, then it is impossible for her to have a
heretical theology of Jesus.  Perhaps what you mean to say is that there 
is

some room for improvement in her understanding of the incarnation.

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] apostles and prophets




I say "let God be true and every man a 
liar"
His Word is where it is at Lance regardless of what 
Bill, John, you, or even DavidM says
though I don't think I am in disagreement with him 
about the important things.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:32:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology 
  of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted (Bill, John and, even 
  DavidM) with no success.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 11:19
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophets

Why Lance?
Why not think about these things and ask the Holy 
Spirit for insight rather than parrot
the teachings of Anathasius and the rest of the rcc 
church fathers? No wonder it can get so
confusing for children and new 
believers.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:08:28 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go down 
  that road one more time. 
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 11:01
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophets

He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, the 
Angel of His Presence; whoever He needed to be
as the second member of the Godhead and he 
layed aside the glory he had with the Father to take upon
himself a body in the likeness of men. He 
was called the Son of God as well as theson of man 
and
he layed his humanity down as a sinless 
sacrifice for us but this does not change the fact that God 
can
not die. God is a Spirit and spirits are 
eternal - they do not die.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, 
  Lance', what is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior 
  to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God, JT?
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 
10:48
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
apostles and prophets

I don't think so Lance, if they were you 
would understand that God CAN NOT die or are
you of the same persuasion a certain 
Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed 
  JT. My 'pipes' are clean.
  
- Original Message - 

From: 
Judy Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 
    10:38
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
apostles and prophets


Lance, God the Eternal Father can not 
die - Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
since it is aNew Year now and revise some 
things

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: 
Who is the gospel?  The  pre-existing God, 
incarnating as a Jew, living, dying, descending,  
 resurrecting, ascending, sitting and interceding. Why 
truncate the  gospel?   - 
Original Message -  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
apostles and prophetsPerry 
wrote:  The gospel didn't even have POWER 
until  he was rose from the dead. 
  I'm a little surprised by this 
statement. There are many  Scriptures that 
 indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his 
 apostles did   have  
power. Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the 
kingdom  of God.  They did many miracles and 
healed a great many people. I  certainly 
 understand how the

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




No - I'm talking to the face here ... about the real 
rather than the pretend...

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:52:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Talk to the hand, Judy.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 11:49
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets


JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God Lance 
made in the LIKENESS of
man. He did say 
during his time here "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) 
so
what does that mean. How can the Father be 
greater than God Himself?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:27:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes: JESUS IS GOD. JESUS WAS TEMPTED WITH REAL, NOT PRETEND, 
TEMPTATIONS.  JESUS  DIED. I leave it to others to sort out 
the LOGIC of the matter.   - Original Message 
-  From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:07 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
prophetsLance wrote to Judy: 
 When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what  is it 
that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish  baby prior to His 
birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God,  JT?  
 I think what Judy might be getting at could be said this way. As 
 a man,  Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus 
died. The  temptation to sin  and the experience 
of death are the experiences of man, not God.  Yes,  
 Jesus  was God, but he was also man. The mystery of 
godliness, God  manifest in   the  
flesh. I think you might perhaps understand the problems with  
using Jesus  to be talking about God being tempted to sin. 
In the same way, it  is  problematic to use him to speak 
about God dying. There is a kind  of   
cultic  element that goes along with such thinking, IMO. 
  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] apostles and prophets




As to the latter concerning DavidM, I suspect that 
you are quite correct. It just may be the raison detre for TT.He (DavidM) was 
perhaps hoping to discover that his understanding was not quite so far afield 
from orthodoxy as it has turned out to be. I also believe this to be one of the 
underlying causes for the interminable nature of his conversations when he can 
find a 'taker'.. . 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 12:01
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  I say "let God be true and every man a 
  liar"
  His Word is where it is at Lance regardless of what 
  Bill, John, you, or even DavidM says
  though I don't think I am in disagreement with him 
  about the important things.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:32:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical 
theology of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted (Bill, 
John and, even DavidM) with no success.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 11:19
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Why Lance?
  Why not think about these things and ask the Holy 
  Spirit for insight rather than parrot
  the teachings of Anathasius and the rest of the 
  rcc church fathers? No wonder it can get so
  confusing for children and new 
  believers.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:08:28 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go 
down that road one more time. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
11:01
      Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
  and prophets
  
  He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, 
  the Angel of His Presence; whoever He needed to be
  as the second member of the Godhead and he 
  layed aside the glory he had with the Father to take upon
  himself a body in the likeness of men. 
  He was called the Son of God as well as theson of man 
  and
  he layed his humanity down as a sinless 
  sacrifice for us but this does not change the fact that God 
  can
  not die. God is a Spirit and spirits 
  are eternal - they do not die.
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, 
Lance', what is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby 
prior to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God, JT?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
  10:48
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
  apostles and prophets
  
  I don't think so Lance, if they were you 
  would understand that God CAN NOT die or are
  you of the same persuasion a certain 
  Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed 
JT. My 'pipes' are clean.

  - Original Message - 
  
  From: 
  Judy Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 
      10:38
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
  apostles and prophets
  
  
  Lance, God the Eternal Father can not 
  die - Methinks you need to clean out your pipes 
  since it is aNew Year now and revise some 
  things
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have 
  been: Who is the gospel?  The  pre-existing 
  God, incarnating as a Jew, living, dying, descending, 
resurrecting, ascending, sitting

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets




Lance - wait just a minute. Did Orthodoxy go to 
the cross for you? Didn't Paul warn about those who say
I am of this one or I am of that one? Is the 
servant greater than his Lord? Jesus didn't chase after the 
kill
hereticks - like the roots of orthodoxy did. In 
Geneva it was a crime to speak against Calvin, yet Jesus
didn't take offense when ppl spoke against Him and made 
Himself of NO REPUTATION. My, how things
have changed.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 12:11:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  As to the latter concerning DavidM, I suspect 
  that you are quite correct. It just may be the raison detre for TT.He (DavidM) 
  was perhaps hoping to discover that his understanding was not quite so far 
  afield from orthodoxy as it has turned out to be. I also believe this to be 
  one of the underlying causes for the interminable nature of his conversations 
  when he can find a 'taker'.. . 
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 12:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
    prophets

I say "let God be true and every man a 
liar"
His Word is where it is at Lance regardless of what 
Bill, John, you, or even DavidM says
though I don't think I am in disagreement with him 
about the important things.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:32:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical 
  theology of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted (Bill, 
  John and, even DavidM) with no success.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 11:19
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles 
and prophets

Why Lance?
Why not think about these things and ask the 
Holy Spirit for insight rather than parrot
the teachings of Anathasius and the rest of the 
rcc church fathers? No wonder it can get so
confusing for children and new 
believers.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:08:28 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go 
  down that road one more time. 
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 
11:01
    Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
apostles and prophets

He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, 
the Angel of His Presence; whoever He needed to be
as the second member of the Godhead and he 
layed aside the glory he had with the Father to take 
upon
himself a body in the likeness of 
men. He was called the Son of God as well as theson of 
man and
he layed his humanity down as a sinless 
sacrifice for us but this does not change the fact that God 
can
not die. God is a Spirit and spirits 
are eternal - they do not die.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:54:51 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, 
  Lance', what is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby 
  prior to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God, JT?
  
- Original Message - 

From: 
Judy Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: January 02, 2006 
    10:48
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
apostles and prophets

I don't think so Lance, if they were 
you would understand that God CAN NOT die or are
you of the same persuasion a certain 
Germanwho proclaimedGod was dead?

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Jesus is God, JT! Jesus 
  pre-existed JT. My 'pipes' are clean.
  
- Original Message - 

From: 
Judy Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets







myth(jt's doctrinal 
demands*contortmythological god-men:men of 
godlinessbirthed fromhergod of 
manliness)

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:52:33 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:The only 
value of [jt] doctrine is to produce godliness

--

*
"JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God Lance made 
in the LIKENESS of man."

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


David wrote:

Perry wrote:
 David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25;
 2:1-2; 15:12-18.



Your first two passages speak of him CRUCIFIED and not a word about his
resurrection.


In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection was implicit. Many 
were crucified, why would Jesus' be any different unless the resurrection 
was in view? The reference to crucifuxion also would bring to mind OT 
prophecies relating to the crucifixion of the Messiah, thus, the 
resurrection.



Perry wrote:
 After saying many times that he would be raised
 on the third day, had He not been, He would have
 been proven a false prophet.

I don't have the perspective that he said it many times.  What I mean is 
that the resurrection was not central to the gospel of Christ BEFORE the 
actual event of his resurrection.  Otherwise, why were they not expecting 
it?


Both David and Isaiah prophecied the resurrection. Surely those familiar 
with the Prophets would have expected this, especially the Bereans (Acts 
17:11), if, indeed, Jesus was the Messiah. Their accepting the gospel prior 
to the resurrection was based on the belief that Jesus WAS the messaiah, or 
at least that he was the Son of God, and on that faith their sins were 
forgiven. Had he NOT been resurrected, then their faith would have been in 
vain, and they still would be in sin. (1 Cor 15 again).


Acts 13:32-37:

  32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was 
made unto the fathers,


[NOTE: glad tidings: Strongs: G2097
#949;#965;#787;#945;#947;#947;#949;#955;#953;#769;#950;#969;
euaggelizo#772;
yoo-ang-ghel-id'-zo
From G2095 and G32; to announce good news (evangelize) especially the 
gospel: - declare, bring (declare, show) glad (good) tidings, preach (the 
gospel).]


  33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath 
raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art 
my Son, this day have I begotten thee.


  34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to 
return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies 
of David.


  35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine 
Holy One to see corruption.


  36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, 
fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:


  37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

Cross references:

 Acts 13:33 - Psalm 2:7
 Acts 13:34 - Isaiah 55:3
 Acts 13:35 - Psalm 16:10

References from http://www.lamblion.com/articles/prophecy/fcp/fcp-07.php

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] apostles and prophets

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, you are re-establishing the correct interpretation of the Bible?DAVEH: No, that is not what I said, or impliedbut now that you have mentioned it, I do believe the restoration does have that effect. I can see where post Biblical revelations have made interpreting the Bible in some places much easier.You give these words as a defense:couldn't there still be a need for continued revelation to clarify the parts of the Bible that are being misinterpreted?Revelation that "clarifies"parts of the Bible that are being misinterpreted isjust what you said, unless, of course, you believe that Mormon
"revelation has not solved the misterpretiveproblems!

Now, if you claim there is no difference, then why additional scripture?DAVEH: I think you are putting words in my mouth, Bishop. I do not recall claiming there is no difference. If I did so, would you please quote my statement. If I did not make that claim, I would appreciate you not continuing to suggest I did. FTR.I think I inferred that continuing revelation allows for differences. Sorry. I have been told by many Mormons that the reason for their existence, the reason why God spoke to JS had to do with apostasy of the "primitive church," Mormonism being the restoration of that church. If you are now saying that this is not the case, well and good. So, FTR, which is it? Is the Mormon church the Restored church or not. If not, then you are forced to the conclusion that God Himself did not get it right the first time or He would not have done it differently the second time. Big problem !!how do you know that you have "restored" anything? DAVEH: The same way you know Jesus is your Savior, John. However, your question doesn't exactly make sense, from a technical perspective. The you is not me, nor is it JS...or the LDS Church. The you you are referring to is Jesus, and those he commissioned to do the work. That may not make much sense to you, but to LDS folks it is a technical detail of significant importance. Let me restate: if you cannot find the pattern within the pages of those scriptures that pre-date the Apostasy, HOW DO YOU MORMO
N FOLK KNOW YOU HAVE RESTORED ANYTHING??Who, pray tell, do you regard as a representative of Portestantism on this forum?DAVEH: Collectively, it seems most of you are in the same doctrinal boat, which is rooted in Protestant dogma. Individually, I would guess that few of you would feel very comfortable in a Protestant setting. If I were to speculate, I would tend to think that most TTers are too independent to fit into a denominational sect for very long. Which is maybe why there is such a negative reaction whenever TTers think I'm labeling them as Protestant. Could intellectual arrogance be a factor? Do some TTers find mainstream pastors to be to dogmatic, and competitive? Perhaps there is room for only one pastor in a traditional setting, and too many chiefs in a tribe just doesn't work in Protestantism. This is certainly an area of Protestantism that fascinates me, but
I suspect it is too sensitive to discuss with most TTers. As I have indicated before, "Protestant" is a box Mormons used to label all who are not Mormon but claim some knowledge of Christ. That is exactly why you cannot bring yourself to discontinue it use. It is how you speak of the Apostasy in modern form. It is the same sort of thing Judy, Deegan, Dean and Shields do with the word "liberal." They, too, do not understand the usage of the word they have chosen to use and continue with the word in spite of opposing objection. To conveniently refuse to consider the thinking of the "fringe" is to avoid dealing with the difficult issues and to ignore the millions of Christian participants who actually work most fervently against MormonismDAVEH: It is not that I refuse to chat with the fringe, but rather their input is much less important to me. Being on the fringe, would suggest their thinking is slightly (or perhaps greatly) out of whack with mainstream Protestant thoughtwhich is where the focus of my interest is rooted. Then, why in the world do you remain on this site? There is nothing here that you would regard as "mainstream".nothing. As for finding those who work most fervently against Mormonism, they can be found anywhere, in or out of mainstream Protestantism. Their perspective does not particularly interest me either, regardless of where they are rooted.I have been told countless times that Mormonism is about the restoration of the "primitive church." DAVEH: I don't know who told you what, John. So it is dif
ficult for me to explain what you may have heard, or rather what you may have heard and misunderstood. There is a cause and effect relationship in the restoration. Was it LDS people who told you about the restoration? Ordid you hear it from anti-Mormons? I was first told such by a bishop in the mormon church some 45 years ago -- back in the day when

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

-- Original message -- From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. */DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that something you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians? Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it up, right? Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on the third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he said and did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13). Why did you think
the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66) Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the resurrection. So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power. Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18 Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4 If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13 The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10 Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3 Dave, do you still think I was making it up? 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 unsubscribe
d. 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] apostles and prophets




Again I say unto you, A DIFFERENT JESUS = A 
DIFFERENT GOSPEL. 

Again I say unto you, IT IS THE GEOCENTRIC UNIVERSE 
THINGY

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: January 02, 2006 13:30
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and 
  prophets
  
  Again, DH, your question of Perry gives me further evidence that the 
  Mormon Church has no clue as to the atonement as taught in preApostate 
  scripture. Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did 
  is of no consequence. We clearly do not share the same gospel if 
  that is not a part of your faith.
  
  jd
  
  -- 
Original message -- From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
 From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /*The gospel didn't 
even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. */
DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that something you 
 just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians? 
  Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, 
thinking I made it up,  right?   Jesus had 
prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on the  
third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34; 
 Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on 
the third  day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all 
that he said and did  would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13). 
  Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why 
do you think the  seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66) 
  Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the 
resurrection. So,  yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel 
it's power.   Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18 
  Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4   If 
not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13   The 
power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10   Begotten unto a 
lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3   Dave, do you 
still think I was making it up?   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 unsubscribe d. 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] apostles and prophets

suggests the term Protestant can infer more than simply protesting the RCC,

I do not make that separation. Protestantism is a response , an objection, to the RCC. Why would you insist on using the term in a differing way? I , for one, do not think the RCC is any further from the truth of God in Christ than what I have read of several on this forum or what I see in the Christian denominational world. Catholics are Christians.

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes you are. That denomination did not come from the Portestant response to RCC theology. DAVEH: OKhelp me out, Bishop. I must be missing something. WIKI..Originally, "protestant" meant "to be a witness for something" rather than "to be against something", as the current popular interpretation of the word seems to imply. The prefix pro means "for" in Latin. The Latin adjective protestans refers to "a person who gives public testimony for something or who proves or demonstrates something"suggests the term Protestant can infer more than simply protesting the RCC, which is the common popular understanding. WIKI further discusses the Protestant denominations.The largest division in many classification schemes is between the families of Eastern and West
ern Christianity. After these two larger families come distinct branches of Christianity. Most classification schemes list six (in order of size: Catholicism, Protestantism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, Oriental Orthodoxy, and Assyrians). Others may include Restorationism as a seventh, but classically this is included among Protestant movements. After these branches comes denominational families. In some traditions, these families are precisely defined (such as the autocephalous churches in both Orthodox branches), in others, they may be loose ideological groups with overlap (this is especially the case in Protestantism, which includes Anabaptists, Adventists, Baptists, Congregationalists, Pentecostals, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Reformed churches, and possibly others, depending on who is organizing the scheme. From there come denominations, which in the West, have complete independence to establish doctrine (for instance, national churches in the Anglican Communion or the Lutheran Ch
urch-Missouri Synod in Lutheranism). At this point, the scheme becomes more difficult to apply to the Eastern churches and Catholic faiths, due to their top-down hierarchical structures. More precise units after denominations include kinds of regional councils and individual congregations and church bodies.and..Unlike the other branches (Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, the Assyrians, and Anglicans), Protestantism is a general movement that has no internal governing structure. As such, diverse groups such as Presbyterians, Reformed churches, Lutherans, Methodists, Congregationalists, Anabaptists, Baptists, Adventists, Pentecostals, and even possibly Restorationists (depending on one's classification scheme) are all a part of the same family.it seems that Pentecostals are loosely defined as a Protestant denomination. I understood that 4Sq was a branch of Pentecostalism. If both those assumptions are correct, then how/why do you beli
eve you are not part of them? Now I should say that I made the assumption that you are rooted in the 4Sq due to your discussion with DavidM. Perhaps I'm wrong about that. Please correct me if you do not ally yourself with the 4Sq folks.I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for those who are apostate. That is how I believe the term is used. I have seen posts from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this opinion. DAVEH: I've never used that way.. Nor have I heard LDS folks discussing it in that sense. I have always given the term respect, and have noted such by capitalizing it in all my posts. (NoteNot all TTers have returned the courtesy.I thank you for capitalizing Mormon, Pastor!) However.I have noted that you do not seem to have the same respect for Protestant that you have afforded Mormon. Below, you have said..I am not a protestant, in any event.
Is that simply a typo, or did you intend on denigrating Protestantism by not capitalizing it?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Yes you are. That denomination did not come from the Portestant response to RCC theology.

I am not a protestant, in any event. One of our daughters is RCC and full of faith. My degree came from a Catholic University and I have a deeply felt consideation for the Catholic historian. You should check out some of their websites. Just punch in "Church fathers" and you will find yourself in the midst of a number of Catholic sites dealing with the subject.

I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for those who are apostate. That is how I believe the term is used. I have seen posts from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this opinion.

-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Amen JD! Kinda difficult convincin' the 'antis' on
TT, though.

- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: January 02, 2006 13:37
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets

suggests the term Protestant can infer more than simply protesting the
RCC,

I do not make that separation. Protestantism is a response
, an objection, to the RCC. Why would you insist on using the term in a
differing way? I , for one, do not think the RCC is any further from the
truth of God in Christ than what I have read of several on this forum or what
I see in the Christian denominational world. Catholics are
Christians.

--
Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes you are. That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology. DAVEH: OKhelp me
out, Bishop. I must be missing something.
WIKI..Originally, "protestant" meant "to be a witness for
something" rather than "to be against something", as the current popular
interpretation of the word seems to imply. The prefix pro means "for" in
Latin. The Latin adjective protestans refers to "a person who gives public
testimony for something or who proves or demonstrates
something"suggests the term Protestant can infer more
than simply protesting the RCC, which is the common popular
understanding. WIKI further discusses the Protestant
denominations.The largest division in many classification
schemes is between the families of Eastern and West ern Christianity. After
these two larger families come distinct branches of Christianity. Most
classification schemes list six (in order of size: Catholicism,
Protestantism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, Oriental Orthodoxy, and
Assyrians). Others may include Restorationism as a seventh, but classically
this is included among Protestant movements. After these branches comes
denominational families. In some traditions, these families are precisely
defined (such as the autocephalous churches in both Orthodox branches), in
others, they may be loose ideological groups with overlap (this is
especially the case in Protestantism, which includes Anabaptists,
Adventists, Baptists, Congregationalists, Pentecostals, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians,
Reformed churches, and possibly others, depending on who is organizing the
scheme. From there come denominations, which in the West, have complete
independence to establish doctrine (for instance, national churches in the
Anglican Communion or the Lutheran Ch urch-Missouri Synod in Lutheranism).
At this point, the scheme becomes more difficult to apply to the Eastern
churches and Catholic faiths, due to their top-down hierarchical structures.
More precise units after denominations include kinds of regional councils
and individual congregations and church
bodies.and..Unlike the other branches
(Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, the Assyrians, and Anglicans),
Protestantism is a general movement that has no internal governing
structure. As such, diverse groups such as Presbyterians, Reformed churches,
Lutherans, Methodists, Congregationalists, Anabaptists, Baptists,
Adventists, Pentecostals, and even possibly
Restorationists (depending on one's classification scheme) are all a part of
the same family.it seems that Pentecostals are loosely
defined as a Protestant denomination. I understood that 4Sq was a
branch of Pentecostalism. If both those assumptions are correct, then
how/why do you beli eve you are not part of them? Now I should say
that I made the assumption that you are rooted in the 4Sq due to your
discussion with DavidM. Perhaps I'm wrong about that. Please
correct me if you do not ally yourself with the 4Sq folks.I see
"protestant" as clubhouse name for those who are apostate. That
is how I believe the term is used. I have seen posts from Mormon
to Mormon that gives me this opinion. DAVEH: I've never
used that way.. Nor have I heard LDS folks discussing it in that
sense. I have always given the term respect, and have noted such by
capitalizing it in all my posts. (NoteNot all TTers have returned
the courtesy.I thank you for capitalizing Mormon,
Pastor!) However.I have noted that you do not
seem to have the same respect for Protestant that you have afforded
Mormon. Below, you have said..I am not a
protestant, in any event. Is that simply a typo, or
did you intend on denigrating Protestantism by not capitalizing
it?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Yes you are. That denomina

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote:
 You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
 of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
 (Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.

David Miller wrote:
 The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness.
 Therefore, if you accept that Judy is a godly woman,
 then it is impossible for her to have a heretical theology
 of Jesus.  Perhaps what you mean to say is that there
 is some room for improvement in her understanding of
 the incarnation.

Lance wrote:
 I meant what I said just the way I said it.

If your theology does not produce godliness, and Judy's theology does, then 
may I suggest that you consider that it is your theology that has problems 
and not her's?  Is that possible in your mind?

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] apostles and prophets

All suggestions by you, DavidM, are welcomed.

- Original Message - 
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 13:51
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Lance wrote:

You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
(Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.

David Miller wrote:

The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness.
Therefore, if you accept that Judy is a godly woman,
then it is impossible for her to have a heretical theology
of Jesus.  Perhaps what you mean to say is that there
is some room for improvement in her understanding of
the incarnation.

Lance wrote:

I meant what I said just the way I said it.

If your theology does not produce godliness, and Judy's theology does, 
then

may I suggest that you consider that it is your theology that has problems
and not her's?  Is that possible in your mind?

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] apostles and prophets

Perry wrote:
 In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection
 was implicit. Many were crucified, why would Jesus'
 be any different unless the resurrection was in view?

The difference is that Jesus is the only leader in history who ever went TO 
the cross of his own will and doctrine.  Hitler was killed too, but it was 
under very different circumstances.

The doctrine of the cross is very important.  Granted, the doctrine of the 
resurrection is necessary for it to have meaning and fulfillment, but I 
think the cross is primary with the resurrection being secondary rather than 
the other way around.  The doctrine of the cross is where we live every day. 
The doctrine of the resurrection is a hope we have that gives us the 
strength to walk in the doctrine of the cross on a daily basis.

Perry wrote:
 The reference to crucifuxion also would bring
 to mind OT prophecies relating to the crucifixion
 of the Messiah, thus, the resurrection.

There is not much in the OT concerning the resurrection, Perry.  Several 
veiled prophecies that can be read in a different way is about it.

Perry wrote:
 Both David and Isaiah prophecied the resurrection.
 Surely those familiar with the Prophets would have
 expected this, especially the Bereans (Acts 17:11),
 if, indeed, Jesus was the Messiah. Their accepting
 the gospel prior to the resurrection was based on the
 belief that Jesus WAS the messaiah, or at least that he
 was the Son of God, and on that faith their sins were
 forgiven. Had he NOT been resurrected, then their
 faith would have been in vain, and they still would be
 in sin. (1 Cor 15 again).

They had read these prophecies, but the meaning eluded them prior to the 
resurrection event.  Why?  Partly because they had believed the gospel 
already and had preached it and saw the power of the gospel even without 
knowledge of the resurrection of Christ.  Again, I am not saying that the 
resurrection is not important.  I'm simply saying that the preaching of the 
gospel began before the resurrection.  For more than 3 years, the preaching 
of the gospel did not include the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  The only 
resurrection they had perhaps preached was the resurrection of the saints on 
the last day, but even that took second fiddle to the primary message of the 
gospel which was the message that the kingdom of God is here now... time to 
get in.

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] apostles and prophets




DAVEH:  I really don't want to argue with your comment in a way that you 
might think I'm denigrating it, Perry.  But, I will give you my short 
view in contrast. 

   The guards were put there by those who feared Jesus' friends would 
steal his body (in the middle of the night, I would think) in order to 
make Jesus' prophecies appear to be true.  The fact that his body did 
disappear does not in itself mean he arose from the dead.  (Please don't 
think I'm minimizing the resurrectionI'm merely trying to consider 
how the Romans would have thought about it in a logical sense.)  So...an 
empty cross in itself did not indicate a resurrection.  Not even an 
empty tomb would indicate it either, as the Romans would have just 
thought his body had been removed.and, that is the story they would 
have concocted in an attempt to convince others that the disappearance 
of Jesus' body was a natural, though contrived, event.


   Their attempt to prevent the disappearance, failed though.   Have 
you ever thought about what excuse the guards might have given for the 
missing body?  Since Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly thereafter, 
the Biblical account really doesn't pursue this line of thinking.  But, 
had Jesus not appeared to his followers, the guards would have had to 
contrived some story saying that Jesus' friends had stolen him away, 
even though they had valiantly tried to stop them.  There is no way they 
could have admitted the resurrection of Christ, without revealing the 
error of their ways.  (Which they could have done if they had repented, 
but then they probably would have been subject to death for their 
incompetence.)


   I guess I'm rambling a bit here, Perry...sorry.   What really gave 
the resurrection power, so to speak, was the appearance of the 
resurrected Christ to his believers.  And...some of them weren't so 
convinced of his resurrection, until they actually saw AND FELT the 
prints of the nails.  Once that happened, no excuses by the government, 
or guards or anybody could overrule the fact that they had seen and 
talked to the Risen Christ.  I just don't think the empty 
sepulcherwhich we know meant he had risen.had (or would have 
had) nearly the same effect as his personal appearance.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I 
agree with your statement.



Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree 
with my statement.


But, I'm not trying to argue with you about itI just want to 
understand why you made it, and what you meant by it.



I think it is pretty clear...my statement merely sunmmarizes the 
scriptures I cited.


So, after you have taken the time to read the references in context, 
if you then do not agree, please let me know where we differ.


Perry



Charles Perry Locke wrote:




From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/*_*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the 
dead. *_*/


DAVEH:   Wow!  I'd never heard that before, Perry.  Is that 
something you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many 
Christians?




*Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made 
it up, right? *


Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on 
the third day  (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 
9:31; 10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been 
resurrected on the third day, that would have made him a false 
prophet, and all that he said and did would have been for naught. (1 
Cor 15:13).


Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you 
think the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)


Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the 
resurrection. So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel 
it's power.


Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18

Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4

If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13

The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10

Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3
*
Dave, do you still think I was making it up? *

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] apostles and prophets





myth ("For I have come down 
from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent 
me.")

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:Jesus.. went TO the cross of his own will and 
doctrine.

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Not a myth, Gary, but rather your statement adds clarification, that the 
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one who had 
sent him.  You really should try not to be so sectarian and divisive.

John 7:16
(16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that 
sent me.

John 10:30
(30) I and my Father are one.

John 10:17-18
(17) ... I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
(18) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to 
lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I 
received of my Father.

Peace be with you.
David Miller.

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


myth (For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will 
of him who sent me.)

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
Jesus .. went TO the cross of his own will and doctrine. 

--
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] apostles and prophets





Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no
consequence.

DAVEH: Did I not say the very same thing in previous posts, Pastor?
If you failed to note that I had said virtually the same thing, then
FTR let it be known that the above is similar to the way I believe as
well.

 BTW...Do you remember me talking about the dual aspect of
salvation.the atonement, and the resurrection? I asked you if you
understood it in the same way, but do not recall your answer. Did I
overlook something, or did you just not respond?


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Again, DH, your question of Perry gives me further evidence that
the Mormon Church has no clue as to the atonement as taught in
preApostate scripture. Without the resurrection, all that Christ
said and did is of no consequence. We clearly do not share the
same gospel if that is not a part of your faith.
  
  jd
  
  --
Original message -- 
From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 
 From: Dave 
 /*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the
dead. */ 
  
 DAVEH: Wow! I'd never heard that before, Perry. Is that
something you 
 just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?

 
 Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made
it up, 
 right? 
 
 Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up
on the 
 third day (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31;
10:34; 
 Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on
the third 
 day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he
said and did 
 would have been for n aught. (1 Cor 15:13). 
 
 Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you
think the 
 seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66) 
 
 Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the
resurrection. So, 
 yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power. 
 
 Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18 
 
 Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4 
 
 If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13 
 
 The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10 
 
 Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3 
 
 Dave, do you still think I was making it up? 
 
 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] apostles and prophets

David, I see your point...I, too, beleive that the cross is central, but 
still, without the resurrection the gospel would have been meaningless. 
Preaching would have been in vain...faith would have been in vain.

From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500

Perry wrote:
 In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection
 was implicit. Many were crucified, why would Jesus'
 be any different unless the resurrection was in view?

The difference is that Jesus is the only leader in history who ever went TO
the cross of his own will and doctrine.  Hitler was killed too, but it was
under very different circumstances.

The doctrine of the cross is very important.  Granted, the doctrine of the
resurrection is necessary for it to have meaning and fulfillment, but I
think the cross is primary with the resurrection being secondary rather 
than
the other way around.  The doctrine of the cross is where we live every 
day.

The doctrine of the resurrection is a hope we have that gives us the
strength to walk in the doctrine of the cross on a daily basis.

Perry wrote:
 The reference to crucifuxion also would bring
 to mind OT prophecies relating to the crucifixion
 of the Messiah, thus, the resurrection.

There is not much in the OT concerning the resurrection, Perry.  Several
veiled prophecies that can be read in a different way is about it.

Perry wrote:
 Both David and Isaiah prophecied the resurrection.
 Surely those familiar with the Prophets would have
 expected this, especially the Bereans (Acts 17:11),
 if, indeed, Jesus was the Messiah. Their accepting
 the gospel prior to the resurrection was based on the
 belief that Jesus WAS the messaiah, or at least that he
 was the Son of God, and on that faith their sins were
 forgiven. Had he NOT been resurrected, then their
 faith would have been in vain, and they still would be
 in sin. (1 Cor 15 again).

They had read these prophecies, but the meaning eluded them prior to the
resurrection event.  Why?  Partly because they had believed the gospel
already and had preached it and saw the power of the gospel even without
knowledge of the resurrection of Christ.  Again, I am not saying that the
resurrection is not important.  I'm simply saying that the preaching of the
gospel began before the resurrection.  For more than 3 years, the preaching
of the gospel did not include the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  The only
resurrection they had perhaps preached was the resurrection of the saints 
on
the last day, but even that took second fiddle to the primary message of 
the

gospel which was the message that the kingdom of God is here now... time to
get in.

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] apostles and prophets





myth 
(ultimately God's doctrine is God's)

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:28:23 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:the 
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets








  
  cult-apostolic 
  myth ("For I have come down from 
  heaven..do the will of him who sent me.")
  
  On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:Jesus.. went TO the cross of his own will 
..

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets


David,

I will consider this as agreement. I believe it is the resurrection that 
gave the gospel its power...you believe it was people seeing the risen 
Jesuswhom they never would have seen had he NOT been resurrected. I 
consider these ALL part of a larger picture called the resurrection. From 
the timeMary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1-8) 
saw the empty tomb until He ascended into heaven. It all worked together to 
validate his Messiahship and fulfill prophecy.


Perry


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:10:16 -0800



DAVEH:  I really don't want to argue with your comment in a way that you 
might think I'm denigrating it, Perry.  But, I will give you my short view 
in contrast.


   The guards were put there by those who feared Jesus' friends would 
steal his body (in the middle of the night, I would think) in order to make 
Jesus' prophecies appear to be true.  The fact that his body did disappear 
does not in itself mean he arose from the dead.  (Please don't think I'm 
minimizing the resurrectionI'm merely trying to consider how the Romans 
would have thought about it in a logical sense.)  So...an empty cross in 
itself did not indicate a resurrection.  Not even an empty tomb would 
indicate it either, as the Romans would have just thought his body had been 
removed.and, that is the story they would have concocted in an attempt 
to convince others that the disappearance of Jesus' body was a natural, 
though contrived, event.


   Their attempt to prevent the disappearance, failed though.   Have you 
ever thought about what excuse the guards might have given for the missing 
body?  Since Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly thereafter, the 
Biblical account really doesn't pursue this line of thinking.  But, had 
Jesus not appeared to his followers, the guards would have had to contrived 
some story saying that Jesus' friends had stolen him away, even though they 
had valiantly tried to stop them.  There is no way they could have admitted 
the resurrection of Christ, without revealing the error of their ways.  
(Which they could have done if they had repented, but then they probably 
would have been subject to death for their incompetence.)


   I guess I'm rambling a bit here, Perry...sorry.   What really gave the 
resurrection power, so to speak, was the appearance of the resurrected 
Christ to his believers.  And...some of them weren't so convinced of his 
resurrection, until they actually saw AND FELT the prints of the nails.  
Once that happened, no excuses by the government, or guards or anybody 
could overrule the fact that they had seen and talked to the Risen Christ.  
I just don't think the empty sepulcherwhich we know meant he had 
risen.had (or would have had) nearly the same effect as his personal 
appearance.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I agree 
with your statement.



Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree 
with my statement.


But, I'm not trying to argue with you about itI just want to 
understand why you made it, and what you meant by it.



I think it is pretty clear...my statement merely sunmmarizes the 
scriptures I cited.


So, after you have taken the time to read the references in context, if 
you then do not agree, please let me know where we differ.


Perry



Charles Perry Locke wrote:




From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/*_*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. 
*_*/


DAVEH:   Wow!  I'd never heard that before, Perry.  Is that something 
you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?




*Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it 
up, right? *


Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on the 
third day  (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 
10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on 
the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that he 
said and did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13).


Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think 
the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)


Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the resurrection. 
So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's power.


Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18

Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4

If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13

The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10

Begotten unto a lively hope by His resurrection : 1 Pet 1:3
*
Dave, do you still think I was making it up? *

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

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

I meant to address the response below to Dave.

From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:39:27 -0800

David,

I will consider this as agreement. I believe it is the resurrection that 
gave the gospel its power...you believe it was people seeing the risen 
Jesuswhom they never would have seen had he NOT been resurrected. I 
consider these ALL part of a larger picture called the resurrection. From 
the timeMary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1-8) 
saw the empty tomb until He ascended into heaven. It all worked together to 
validate his Messiahship and fulfill prophecy.

Perry

From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:10:16 -0800

DAVEH:  I really don't want to argue with your comment in a way that you 
might think I'm denigrating it, Perry.  But, I will give you my short view 
in contrast.

   The guards were put there by those who feared Jesus' friends would 
steal his body (in the middle of the night, I would think) in order to 
make Jesus' prophecies appear to be true.  The fact that his body did 
disappear does not in itself mean he arose from the dead.  (Please don't 
think I'm minimizing the resurrectionI'm merely trying to consider how 
the Romans would have thought about it in a logical sense.)  So...an empty 
cross in itself did not indicate a resurrection.  Not even an empty tomb 
would indicate it either, as the Romans would have just thought his body 
had been removed.and, that is the story they would have concocted in 
an attempt to convince others that the disappearance of Jesus' body was a 
natural, though contrived, event.

   Their attempt to prevent the disappearance, failed though.   Have you 
ever thought about what excuse the guards might have given for the missing 
body?  Since Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly thereafter, the 
Biblical account really doesn't pursue this line of thinking.  But, had 
Jesus not appeared to his followers, the guards would have had to 
contrived some story saying that Jesus' friends had stolen him away, even 
though they had valiantly tried to stop them.  There is no way they could 
have admitted the resurrection of Christ, without revealing the error of 
their ways.  (Which they could have done if they had repented, but then 
they probably would have been subject to death for their incompetence.)

   I guess I'm rambling a bit here, Perry...sorry.   What really gave the 
resurrection power, so to speak, was the appearance of the resurrected 
Christ to his believers.  And...some of them weren't so convinced of his 
resurrection, until they actually saw AND FELT the prints of the nails.  
Once that happened, no excuses by the government, or guards or anybody 
could overrule the fact that they had seen and talked to the Risen Christ. 
 I just don't think the empty sepulcherwhich we know meant he had 
risen.had (or would have had) nearly the same effect as his personal 
appearance.

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I agree 
with your statement.

Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree 
with my statement.

But, I'm not trying to argue with you about itI just want to 
understand why you made it, and what you meant by it.

I think it is pretty clear...my statement merely sunmmarizes the 
scriptures I cited.

So, after you have taken the time to read the references in context, if 
you then do not agree, please let me know where we differ.

Perry

Charles Perry Locke wrote:

From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/*_*The gospel didn't even have POWER until he was rose from the dead. 
*_*/

DAVEH:   Wow!  I'd never heard that before, Perry.  Is that something 
you just made up, or is that commonly believed by many Christians?

*Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made it 
up, right? *

Jesus had prophesied on many occasions that he would be raised up on 
the third day  (Mat 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 26:61; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 
10:34; Loke 9:22; 18:33; 24:6,7; 24:46). Had he not been resurrected on 
the third day, that would have made him a false prophet, and all that 
he said and did would have been for naught. (1 Cor 15:13).

Why did you think the guards were placed at the tomb? Why do you think 
the seal was placed on the tomb? (Mat 27:62-66)

Everything Jesus did and said was ultimately hinged on the 
resurrection. So, yes, the resurrection is what gives the gospel it's 
power.

Paul taught the resurrection: Acts 17:18

Power by the resurrection: Romans 1:4

If not risen, preaching and faith in vain: 1 Cor 15:13

The power of His resurrection: Phil 3:10

Begotten unto

Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,

DAVEH: I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI
painted the CofC as Protestant as well.

However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood
John to say that he currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to
me indicates an association with a Protestant relationship, as I think
WIKI defined them.

David Miller wrote:

DaveH wrote:

If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.

John wrote:

That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church
is Baptist. Aimee Semple McPherson at one time claimed to have been
ordained by the Baptists. I think later on she was ordained by the
Assemblies of God, but later disowned those credentials.

John wrote:

I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate. That is how I
believe the term is used. I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,
which is another restoration movement with historial roots similar to
Mormonism. Their attitude toward other "Protestants" is not unlike Mormons.

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.

--
~~~
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] apostles and prophets





 Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions.

DAVEH: LOL.Is that a problem for you, Perry? Isn't that what you
asked for..?  :-) 

 I ask again, "What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible?

DAVEH: I see you did not really read what I posted below, Perry. I
quoted one passage of Jesus speaking to the BofM people that clarified
what I believe was taught in the Bible, but not clarified to the point
that many Christians misunderstand what Jesus (and hence, Paul who
claims to have taught the gospel fully) taught.

I will need Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse
of course"

DAVEH: Were you too lazy to look it up?  Mk 16:16

 FWIWthis Bible browser works very well...

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/kjv/



Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
  
  
   Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions.
You can't add conjecture and assumptions to scripture to make it mean
what you want. That is called "scripture-twisting" and "proof-texting".
  
  
   I ask again, "What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible?
  I will need Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse
of course". Notice: no smilie.
  
  
Perry
  
  
  From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
    
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets

Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:55:38 -0800


*what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical
references*


DAVEH: The easy example is from 1Cor 15:29. I bet there was a
shepherd there by the name of Perriwinkle Lockenstein who when he heard
Paul say


_/Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead
rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?/_


.it somewhat confused him, so Perriwinkle asked Paul...


/What do you mean, by _baptized for the dead_? Is that a pagan
practice you are using to teach the Christian principle of the
resurrection?/


..and I think Paul's response to Perriwinkle might have been
something similar to this.


 Don't you know, little Perriwinkle, that _/For as many of you as
have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ/_.? And, surely
you know that _/Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God/_. Wouldn't you think that those
who never had the chance to be /baptized into Christ/ would like that
opportunity?


 As we know that _/even baptism doth also now save us/_, Jesus _/went
and preached unto the spirits in prison/_ after his death. _/For for
this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that
they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according
to God in the spirit/_. Do you not understand that Jesus said, _/He
that believeth and is baptized shall be saved/_? Jesus also said,
/_And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be
damned_. /


 For that reason, little Perriwinkle, it was not pagans I was
referring to, but rather Christians are _/baptized for the dead/_,
because they believe that baptism is a necessary covenant to make with
the Lord in order to obtain salvation.


*book, chapter, and verse of course.*


DAVEH: *of course*If you really want me to provide the
references for the above quotes, PerryI'd be happy to do so. But
you smilie indicated you were not really seriously requesting such.
However, it is easy enough for you to google each one that you want to
reference.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:



  /*Is it that you know Paul preached
something that is not in the Bible? */


DAVEH: Yes, I do think so.

  
  
  
Dave, *what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need
Biblical references*, as in *book, chapter, and verse of course.* :-)
  
  
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] apostles and prophets

Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified the LDS
as a protestant group, but you did notagree with them. From my
perspective, there are historical ways of looking at this classification, and
there are philosophical ways. Historically, the Church of Christ, the
Baptists, the Four Square, and the LDS, all have protestant roots.
Philosophically, however, it gets a little more complicated.One of
the Reformation philosophies was Sola Scriptura. The LDS certainly do not
agree with that. Then you have groups like the Church of Christ and the
LDS which believe that they are restoring the primitive church. Therefore,
they reject any affiliation with Protestants or Roman Catholics. Then you
have John Smithson, who has a history with the Church of Christ. They have
barraged him with the perspective thatprotestant is adirty word,
much like the LDS has done with you. Now he had joinedthe Four
Square Church which has its own problems with Protestant roots, having a woman
minister as a founder, believing in the restoration of the gifts of the Holy
Spirit, healing, speaking in tongues, etc. Most Four Square members are
perfectly comfortable with the term Protestant. I was a Four Square member
myself back in 1972, and one of my best friends today, his mom is a Four Square
pastor and his late dad was too when he was alive. I had better stop
talking about myself before Lance jumps on me for trumpeting something.
:-)

Anyway, what you are facing here is the same thing I face with the LDS and
the label Protestant. I consider the LDS to be clearly Protestant, given
Joseph Smith's affiliations with the Methodist church, his family's affiliation
with the Presbyterian church, Joseph Smith himselfhaving been baptized in
a Baptist church... you get the picture. But you do not consider yourself
Protestant, and neither do some of the members on this forum. I can
understand the disagreement when you look at the matter from a philosophical
perspective, but from a historical perspective, you guys are only denying your
historical roots.

Peace be with you.David Miller.

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

Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:31
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,DAVEH:
I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI painted
the CofC as Protestant as well. However, in a
recent discussion with you, I thought I understood John to say that he
currently is worshiping with a 4Sq group, which to me indicates an association
with a Protestant relationship, as I think WIKI defined them.David
Miller wrote:
DaveH wrote:

If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.

John wrote:

That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.

John wrote:

I see "protestant" as clubhouse name for
those who are apostate. That is how I
believe the term is used. I have seen posts
from Mormon to Mormon that gives me this
opinion.

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

--
~~~
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] apostles and prophets

Dave, this discussion has become a joke. Eitgher you don't get it or you are 
just playing. Either way, I'm out.


Perry



From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:43:55 -0800

*  Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions.*

DAVEH:  LOL.Is that a problem for you, Perry?   Isn't that what you 
asked for..?   :-)


*  I ask again, What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible?*

DAVEH:   I see you did not really read what I posted below, Perry.  I 
quoted one passage of Jesus speaking to the BofM people that clarified what 
I believe was taught in the Bible, but not clarified to the point that many 
Christians misunderstand what Jesus (and hence, Paul who claims to have 
taught the gospel fully) taught.


/*I will need Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse of 
course*/


DAVEH:   Were you too lazy to look it up?   Mk 16:16

   FWIWthis Bible browser works very well...

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/kjv/



Charles Perry Locke wrote:


Dave,

*  Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions.* You can't 
add conjecture and assumptions to scripture to make it mean what you want. 
That is called scripture-twisting and proof-texting.


*  I ask again, What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible?* /*I will 
need Biblical references, as in book, chapter, and verse of course*/. 
Notice: no smilie.


Perry


From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:55:38 -0800

*what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical 
references*


DAVEH:   The easy example is from 1Cor 15:29.  I bet there was a shepherd 
there by the name of Perriwinkle Lockenstein who when he heard Paul 
say


_/Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead 
rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?/_


.it somewhat confused him, so Perriwinkle asked Paul...

/What do you mean, by _baptized for the dead_?  Is that a pagan practice 
you are using to teach the Christian principle of the resurrection?/


..and I think Paul's response to Perriwinkle might have been 
something similar to this.


   Don't you know, little Perriwinkle, that _/For as many of you as have 
been baptized into Christ have put on Christ/_.?   And, surely you 
know that _/Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot 
enter into the kingdom of God/_.  Wouldn't you think that those who never 
had the chance to be /baptized into Christ/ would like that opportunity?


   As we know that _/even baptism doth also now save us/_, Jesus _/went 
and preached unto the spirits in prison/_ after his death.   _/For for 
this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they 
might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God 
in the spirit/_.  Do you not understand that Jesus said, _/He that 
believeth and is baptized shall be saved/_?  Jesus also said, /_And whoso 
believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned_.  /


   For that reason, little Perriwinkle, it was not pagans I was 
referring to, but rather Christians are _/baptized for the dead/_, 
because they believe that baptism is a necessary covenant to make with 
the Lord in order to obtain salvation.


*book, chapter, and verse of course.*

DAVEH:  *of course*If you really want me to provide the 
references for the above quotes, PerryI'd be happy to do so.  But you 
smilie indicated you were not really seriously requesting such.  However, 
it is easy enough for you to google each one that you want to reference.


Charles Perry Locke wrote:

/*Is it that you know Paul preached something that is not in the Bible? 
*/


DAVEH:   Yes, I do think so.




Dave, *what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need 
Biblical references*, as in *book, chapter, and verse of course.* :-)


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] apostles and prophets