Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: A few days ago I tuned in a bit early to my favorite Bible preacher (Steve Brown) show on the radio and heard what struck me as rather strange. They were advertising The Bad Breath Bible .Wow, I've heard of some strange names for Bibles, but never one that odd. Naturally, I paid close attention through the remainder of the advertisement to make sure they were serious. As the commercial came to a close, it became obvious that they were seriousbut they were hawking a mouthwash and informational bible for with halitosis! BTW...It is all I can do to read thru the posts this weekI'm suffering from the flu, and don't have a lot of energy. ShieldsFamily wrote: JD, join the "Why We Can't Believe What We Read in the Bible Club". Izzy -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Kevin wrote: A fig leaf will never cover your SIN! http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200302.html Interesting how Bob links Mormonism to Islam, Judaism, and Native American religion. Bob wrote: [These other religous followers wear] Bits of cloth or string that are physical reminders of God and his bond with man. Sacred things, really. Prayer shawls or beads, head coverings or aprons, medicine bags. Things that are special to people, honorable and good things. He goes on to say that these things should be respected. Now, I have a question. Do I have to respect Islam or Native American paganism? And what does it mean to respect another religion I know to be false? I do beleive in loving those who do not know or even hate my God, but respect their false religion? Is it disrespectful to tell a homosexual that their actions are destructive to their immortal soul? Of course not. I don't and shouldn't respect the homosexual's actions or beleifs. Those whining about respect want to produce wimpy, mousey Christians who are too respectful to speak the truth. Blessings! --- Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why frame it as an undewrwear debate? We hold the fig leaf aprons also. in the Temple Satan tells the LDS it is a token of his priesthoods and they put them on. A fig leaf will never cover your SIN! http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200302.html I doubt that Bob was an eyewitness, but hey there is always poetic license to lie right? BOB lies or repeats a lie One man, dressed in his church clothes, walked past in the crowd, saw the insults and desecrations, and grabbed the piece of clothing. To protect it. He was charged with robbery and taken to jail. I was an eyewitness Mr Basilio assualted from behind with a choke hold a guy half his size, while he was praying not waving, to protect the sacred undies? If it is sacred surely LDS must assualt to protect it. MY Pastor does not assault people! What's with this HIGH PRIEST? http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?sid=51767nid=39template=print Jose Basilio Charged with Robbery This person was talking against the Church, saying bad things against the Prophet. He was showing a garment. It was a woman's garment. The ones we wear as members of the LDS Church. I'm a High Priest. I was angry. I tried to take it from himHe said I tried to hit him. But I did not hit him. I know martial arts and if I would have wanted to hurt him, I could have broken his arm or leg. He was just a youth and I am an adult. I had no intention to hurt him. DWAYNE BAIRD/SALT LAKE CITY POLICE: IN DOING SO IT TOOK THE MAN TO THE GROUND, THE VICTIM AND IT DRAGGED HIM A COUPLE OF FEET AS THIS MAN RAN AWAY WITH HIS PROPERTY. Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd Are you saying that somewhere in Salt Lake City there is a Mormon with no skivvies? That is common down here where it is still ninety degrees at bed time, but SLC is a little cool for that. Might freeze your equipment. - Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM more. Check it out! __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Thank you for a breath of Fresh Air! This is a device to beat christians into submission. SSH! Do not say anything to offend. In fact just keep it in the church! There are many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand.Christine Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin wrote: A fig leaf will never cover your SIN! http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200302.htmlInteresting how Bob links Mormonism to Islam, Judaism,and Native American religion. Bob wrote:[These other religous followers wear] Bits of cloth orstring that are physical reminders of God and his bondwith man. Sacred things, really. Prayer shawls orbeads, head coverings or aprons, medicine bags. Thingsthat are special to people, honorable and good things.He goes on to say that these things should berespected. Now, I have a question. Do I have torespect Islam or Native American paganism? And whatdoes it mean to "respect" another religion I know tobe false? I do beleive in loving those who do not know or evenhate my God, but respect their false religion? Is itdisrespectful to tell a homosexual that their actionsare destructive to their immortal soul? Of course not.I don't and shouldn't respect the homosexual's actionsor beleifs. Those whining about respect want toproduce wimpy, mousey Christians who are too"respectful" to speak the truth.Blessings!--- Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Why frame it as an undewrwear debate? We hold the fig leaf aprons also. in the Temple Satan tells the LDS it is "a token of his priesthoods" and they put them on. A fig leaf will never cover your SIN! http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200302.html I doubt that Bob was an eyewitness, but hey there is always poetic license to lie right? BOB lies or repeats a lie "One man, dressed in his church clothes, walked past in the crowd, saw the insults and desecrations, and grabbed the piece of clothing. To protect it. He was charged with robbery and taken to jail." I was an eyewitness Mr Basilio assualted from behind with a choke hold a guy half his size, while he was praying not "waving", to protect the sacred undies? If it is sacred surely LDS must assualt to protect it. MY Pastor does not assault people! What's with this HIGH PRIEST? http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?sid=51767nid=39template=print Jose Basilio Charged with Robbery "This person was talking against the Church, saying bad things against the Prophet. He was showing a garment. It was a woman's garment. The ones we wear as members of the LDS Church. I'm a High Priest. I was angry. I tried to take it from himHe said I tried to hit him. But I did not hit him. I know martial arts and if I would have wanted to hurt him, I could have broken his arm or leg. He was just a youth and I am an adult. I had no intention to hurt him." "DWAYNE BAIRD/SALT LAKE CITY POLICE: IN DOING SO IT TOOK THE MAN TO THE GROUND, THE VICTIM AND IT DRAGGED HIM A COUPLE OF FEET AS THIS MAN RAN AWAY WITH HIS PROPERTY." Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd Are you saying that somewhere in Salt Lake City there is a Mormon with no skivvies? That is common down here where it is still ninety degrees at bed time, but SLC is a little cool for that. Might freeze your equipment. - Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM more. Check it out!__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your "witness of the spirit" that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
IFF the object of my/your 'faith/belief' is other than our perception then, how and, in what way(s) does that matter? As I've 'read' you for some time now, I've seen you as one with the capacity to identify 'meaning'. Do you know what I mean? I shall not evade 'your' question. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 00:20 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: I find that interesting, Lance. May I ask how high (that may be a poor way of describing it) is your faith? IOW, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is an absolute abiding faith in Jesus, and 5 is a mediocre faith, and 1 is a bare shadow of a faithwhere do you feel you fit on that scale? AndIf you would rather not answer such a personal question, please do not feel compelled to respond to this post. Orif you feel like responding, but don't want to risk the possible mocking or vicious attack of other TTerspost it off-Forum. Perhaps I did not properly consider your original question. I don't consider my faith to be placed in JS, but rather in Jesus. So, if somebody chooses to attack JS for whatever reason, I'm not too bothered. To me it would be like they are attacking Moses, or Abraham or Paul. I hadn't thought about it before, but perhaps that explains why I don't get in a huff when some detractors say bad things about JS on TT.Lance Muir wrote: Speaking for myself...maybe.A not very good movie was made (look! he's at it again..does this guy do nothing but watch movies?) entitled 'The Body'; the premise of which was...wait for it...the discovery of the bones of Jesus..Well, there you go This would be comparable to discovering a document in the handwriting of JS saying...hey..I was just funnin' y'all!! - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 10:37 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Lance, from a subjective standpoint...Do you believe Jesus is the Christ? If so, could anything be said to move you from that truth as you perceive it? (I also wonder the same about other TTer's feelings about thishoping to hear some responses.)Lance Muir wrote: If I read you correctly then, absolutely nothing could be said ever to move you from your 'subjective truth'. I thought as much. DAVEH: If I'm following you correctly on this Lance, the answer would be yes to both questions. (But I have not given it any deep thought, as I'm a bit short on time this morning.)Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position?-- ~~~ 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] Perry vs DaveH
How would they know if theyve never tried? Anyway, proof-texting is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Can you blame them? Seems like it may be a defensive technique. If they quote a passage, they may fear being criticized as proof-texting. ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, regarding your previous question, please take note of this technique of the Bible quote haters: Instead of specifically quoting a particular statement to explain their views they throw an entire chapter at you and say, It's in there if you just can see it--find it for yourself! Thus they think they are justified for using the Bible, but have blurred the issues by not being specific (because it really isn't in there!). Izzy The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:16 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as adding to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called Prostestant bibleis a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:31 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy DAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear? ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:46 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:31 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Street preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:43 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:16 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as "adding" to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called "Prostestant bible"is a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:39 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH How would they know if theyve never tried? Anyway, proof-texting is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Can you blame them? Seems like it may be a defensive technique. If they quote a passage, they may fear being criticized as proof-texting.ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, regarding your previous question, please take note of this technique of the Bible quote haters: Instead of specifically quoting a particular statement to explain their views they throw an entire chapter at you and say, "It's in there if you just can see it--find it for yourself!" Thus they think they are justified for using the Bible, but have blurred the issues by not being specific (because it really isn't "in there"!). Izzy The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
1. Purgatory is one that is taken from 1 or 2 Macc- Izzy being a redeemed rc probably knows more 2. The rapture is one interpretation among others, it is not declared canon by the rcc or anyone else. Let's face it Lance - your Bishop has erred. On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:20:05 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess. From: ShieldsFamily And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as "adding" to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called "Prostestant bible"is a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenStreet preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
MY POINT HERE HAD TO DO WITH THE FINE ART OF 'proof-texting' not with either of these two gentlemen or, with politics, where such takes place on a daily basis. It also takes place herein (TT). - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:33 Subject: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH After hearing them once who would payany mind to what Michael Moore and John Kerry have to say? From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. From: ShieldsFamily How would they know if theyve never tried? Anyway, proof-texting is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen DAVEH: Can you blame them? Seems like it may be a defensive technique. If they quote a passage, they may fear being criticized as proof-texting.ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, regarding your previous question, please take note of this technique of the Bible quote haters: Instead of specifically quoting a particular statement to explain their views they throw an entire chapter at you and say, "It's in there if you just can see it--find it for yourself!" Thus they think they are justified for using the Bible, but have blurred the issues by not being specific (because it really isn't "in there"!). Izzy The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
As to #2, Judy, whether the 'rapture doctrine' serves best to illustrate my point or not, that heretical doctrines arise in greater numbers from the canon itself, THAT WAS MY POINT. It was a 'non-rcc' point. Believers do the same thing with the non-apocryphal scriptures. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:26 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 1. Purgatory is one that is taken from 1 or 2 Macc- Izzy being a redeemed rc probably knows more 2. The rapture is one interpretation among others, it is not declared canon by the rcc or anyone else. Let's face it Lance - your Bishop has erred. On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:20:05 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess. From: ShieldsFamily And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as "adding" to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called "Prostestant bible"is a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenStreet preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
I guess it depends upon your perspective. To me mormon underwear is not a sacred thing (but a silly thing!). Maybe it is to you. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:17 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:46 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:31 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy DAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear? ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Actually I am not a former RCC. My parents were RCC and my brother. It never took with me. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:27 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 1. Purgatory is one that is taken from 1 or 2 Macc- Izzy being a redeemed rc probably knows more 2. The rapture is one interpretation among others, it is not declared canon by the rcc or anyone else. Let's face it Lance - your Bishop has erred. On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:20:05 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess. From: ShieldsFamily And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as adding to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called Prostestant bibleis a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Kevin Deegan wrote: Matthew Mark, Luke, bel the Dragon? only in the Catholic counterfiets! You left out first and second Ralph.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Before you get carried away here Lance, I seem to recall that not so long ago you referred to me on this public internet list as 'one funny broad' - and as a child of God I find this term offensive; are you aware of it'sorigin? - if not I will enlighten you (this is from Plateau Press.com): jennifer: How/where/when/why did the word 'broad' get used to describe a woman?Doug: This term started out as US criminal slang. The original meaning was 'a prostitute' and when it entered mainstream usage it broadened (sorry for the pun, I just couldn't resist) its meaning to include so-called women of loose morals and later women of the uneducated or lower classes. So as you can see the term has never been what you might call respectful. It is first cited in 1914. In these days of 'enlightened behaviour' the term is considered apropos and is fast falling into disuse. I understand that you were 'well meaning' and am using this to show how easy it is to offend when ppl are prone to take up an offense. I don't do that because I live by Psalm 119:165 and so God's peace guards my heart and mind. jt On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:09:42 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenStreet preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Lance your comment is irrelevant to the discussion. Izzy From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. From: ShieldsFamily How would they know if theyve never tried? Anyway, proof-texting is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen DAVEH: Can you blame them? Seems like it may be a defensive technique. If they quote a passage, they may fear being criticized as proof-texting. ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, regarding your previous question, please take note of this technique of the Bible quote haters: Instead of specifically quoting a particular statement to explain their views they throw an entire chapter at you and say, It's in there if you just can see it--find it for yourself! Thus they think they are justified for using the Bible, but have blurred the issues by not being specific (because it really isn't in there!). Izzy The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Lance, FYI: It isnt sacred if God doesnt say it is sacred. Somebody thinking it is doesnt make it so. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:10 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy DAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear? ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Oh sorry about that Iz, good for you. BTW has
anyone seen Christine - missing her. jt
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:22:05 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Actually I am not a
former RCC. My parents were RCC and my brother. It never took with
me. Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Judy
Taylor
1. Purgatory is one that is taken from
1 or 2 Macc- Izzy being a redeemed rc probably knows
more
2. The rapture is one interpretation
among others, it is not declared canon by the rcc or anyone
else.
Let's face it Lance - your Bishop has
erred.
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:20:05 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Two issues
arise:
1. Which 'heretical doctrines'
arise from 'them'?
2. IFF some actually do then,
are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted
canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1
Thess.
From: ShieldsFamily
And the RCC
adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Deegan
JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of
misinformation.
The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss
The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was
printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as
part of the text as in the Oldest best
manuscripts
The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT
either only in the RC bibles.
The minister of questions chooses to
mislead.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/
You may find this
interesting. As far as "adding" to the bible -- did
you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the
mid to late 1800's. The so-called "Prostestant
bible"is a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New
Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves.
Jd
-Original
Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6
Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs
DaveH
What were
the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching
against? Also your favorite epistle
James is
said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the
ascension. Could we be
missing
something here JD?
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005
14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
When did the Bible come
into existence -- before or after the
Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first
century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to
what God has said. Jd
From: Judy
Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Myth -
It is finished already
And this
warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in
Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005
13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
In 'Prophecy: The
Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
You are wrong again,
Blaine. Revelations says
that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you
miss that part? Izzy
__Do
You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Judy, I believe that Lance is the one who coined the term in 1914, so youll just have to forgive him. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Before you get carried away here Lance, I seem to recall that not so long ago you referred to me on this public internet list as 'one funny broad' - and as a child of God I find this term offensive; are you aware of it'sorigin? - if not I will enlighten you (this is from Plateau Press.com): jennifer: How/where/when/why did the word 'broad' get used to describe a woman? Doug: This term started out as US criminal slang. The original meaning was 'a prostitute' and when it entered mainstream usage it broadened (sorry for the pun, I just couldn't resist) its meaning to include so-called women of loose morals and later women of the uneducated or lower classes. So as you can see the term has never been what you might call respectful. It is first cited in 1914. In these days of 'enlightened behaviour' the term is considered apropos and is fast falling into disuse. I understand that you were 'well meaning' and am using this to show how easy it is to offend when ppl are prone to take up an offense. I don't do that because I live by Psalm 119:165 and so God's peace guards my heart and mind. jt On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:09:42 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy DAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear? ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
So what does Blaine have to say for himself? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 11:17 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrinesof traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamentalfalsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book in the Bible? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd -Original Message- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Sure makes me think its all about JSmith and the BoM. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 11:27 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH I see you have not read Charlotte's Web. It is about a spider that spun webs with English words incorporated, which in turn were assumed by Humans to refer to the pig who lived in the sty beneath the webs. These descriptive adjectives were then assumed to be the pig's character traits. No proof, no nothing, just the words, appearing in print form, were enough to convince the masses that the pig was super-normal. He became celebrated, because Charlotte the spider said he was such--IN PRINT. Just aspoof on the gullibility of human-kind. Blaine In a message dated 6/6/2005 11:02:16 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are you so gullible that YOU believe everything that is in print? Like the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and the DC. E. B. White, the author of Charlotte's Web, was born in 1899. How could the story be a basis for what E. B. Stennhouse wrote in 1875??? Perry
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
In addition, "proof-texting" is the misuse of scripture. All ae suspectible to this failure. We look for verses with similar wording and assume those passages have the same meaning and context.-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:24:11 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:39 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH How would they know if they?ve never tried? Anyway, ?proof-texting? is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JD-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:09:42 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet?
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
You persist in missing Lance's point. There are similar listings on the internet to this found below. No one is arguing that apocrapha is scripture. Continue with that line of debate and you are wasting time. JD Matthew 4:4 Wisdom 16:26 Matthew 4:15 1 Maccabees 5:15 Matthew 5:18 Baruch 4:1 Matthew 5:28 Sirach 9:8 Matthew 5:2ss Sirach 25:7-12 Matthew 5:4 Sirach 48:24 Matthew 6:7 Sirach 7:14 Matthew 6:9 Sirach 23:1, 4 Matthew 6:10 1 Maccabees 3:60 Matthew 6:12 Sirach 28:2 Matthew 6:13 Sirach 33:1 Matthew 6:20 Sirach 29:10s Matthew 6:23 Sirach 14:10 Matthew 6:33 Wisdom 7:11 Matthew 7:12 Tobit 4:15 Matthew 7:12 Sirach 31:15 Matthew 7:16 Sirach 27:6 Matthew 8:11 Baruch 4:37 Matthew 8:21 Tobit 4:3 Matthew 9:36 Judith 11:19 Matthew 9:38 1 Maccabees 12:17 Matthew 10:16 Sirach 13:17 Matthew 11:14 Sirach 48:10 Matthew 11:22 Judith 16:17 Matthew 11:25 Tobit 7:17 Matthew 11:25 Sirach 51:1 Matthew 11:28 Sirach 24:19 Matthew 11:28 Sirach 51:23 Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:24s Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:28s Matthew 11:29 Sirach 51:26s Matthew 12:4 2 Maccabees 10:3 Matthew 12:5 Sirach 40:15 Matthew 13:44 Sirach 20:30s Matthew 16:18 Wisdom 16:13 Matthew 16:22 1 Maccabees 2:21 Matthew 16:27 Sirach 35:22 Matthew 17:11 Sirach 48:10 Matthew 18:10 Tobit 12:15 Matthew 20:2 Tobit 5:15 Matthew 22:13 Wisdom 17:2 Matthew 23:38 Tobit 14:4 Matthew 24:15 1 Maccabees 1:54 Matthew 24:15 2 Maccabees 8:17 Matthew 24:16 1 Maccabees 2:28 Matthew 25:35 Tobit 4:17 Matthew 25:36 Sirach 7:32-35 Matthew 26:38 Sirach 37:2 Matthew 27:24 Daniel 13:46 Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:13 Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:18-20 -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:26:34 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 1. Purgatory is one that is taken from 1 or 2 Macc- Izzy being a redeemed rc probably knows more 2. The rapture is one interpretation among others, it is not declared canon by the rcc or anyone else. Let's face it Lance - your Bishop has erred. On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:20:05 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
How did you respond when they did it? Better question. How did you respond when Jesus did it? "IT IS WRITTEN" JesusLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:39 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH How would they know if theyve never tried? Anyway, proof-texting is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Can you blame them? Seems like it may be a defensive technique. If they quote a passage, they may fear being criticized as proof-texting.ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, regarding your previous question, please take note of this technique of the Bible quote haters: Instead of specifically quoting a particular statement to explain their views they throw an entire chapter at you and say, "It's in there if you just can see it--find it for yourself!" Thus they think they are justified for using the Bible, but have blurred the issues by not being specific (because it really isn't "in there"!). Izzy The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter).. Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The more important question IMO is "what did this word "bible" mean to the Apostle John in 98 AD. JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. JD, tell me what does the word ?Bible? mean? And what is the last book in the Bible? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Does thisapplyto yourself JD, or is it just for "others"? Do you think DM is humored every time he is referred to as legalistic and a false prophet among other things and what about repaying Kevin evil for what you perceive to be evil? On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:50:48 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JDFrom: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet?
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
It is done for show tell not humor. Some LDS are not initiated into the "meatier" doctrines of Mormonism and are shocked to learn of the protective undergarments. This creates a problem for the LDS, since they have to explain to their own members why they have kept it secret from them for possibly years. wearing magic underwear will not protect the wearer from harm anymore than a saint on the dashboard or scapular around the neck. They are a work of the flesh. Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenStreet preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Lance, the gist of his reply was I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. So, I eliminated the trick questions and posed the two serious ones in hope that he would reconsider. They are not gobbledygook, or rediculous. Perhaps he does not want to share his witness because in this forum it will not sound like a valid witness. Nobody wants to hear that their subjective feelings are not a valid witness, especially when there are no bible verses to support that. That is fine, too. He is a big boy. He can reconsider and choose again not to answer. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:15:28 -0400 He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Did someone burn Mormon underwear? When did holding something in your hand become a desecration. You guys are either loosing hold of reality, or as usual blowing it out of proportion to gain better traction. Another case of False witness misrepresentation. Go d will hold you accountable no matter how lightly you percieve the consequences of twisting misrepresenting and tale bearing falsehoods. No one "desecrated" "burned" "broke up weddings" called women "whores", or any such thing. LDS: "WAH WAH they are desecrating our undies!" LDS: "How would you like it if they burnt your prayer shawl?" WAH WAH WAH There shall be WAILING GNASHING of TEETH Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:17:02 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! From: ShieldsFamily Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenStreet preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out!
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life
and
from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book in
the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and
in
Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I guess the prophets in the Bible didn't care about the people they "insulted" either. No wonder John the Baptist was beheaded. (By people like you?) Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:51 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JD-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:09:42 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet?
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
JD, join the "Why We Can't Believe What We Read in the Bible Club". Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:48 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH In addition, "proof-texting" is the misuse of scripture. All ae suspectible to this failure. We look for verses with similar wording and assume those passages have the same meaning and context.-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:24:11 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:39 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH How would they know if they?ve never tried? Anyway, ?proof-texting? is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Don't you think it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The Book? Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
So then, CPL, 'his' subjective witness is unacceptable while yours is? He did not quote Ja 1:5fg but it was his obvious reference. - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 10:27 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Lance, the gist of his reply was I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. So, I eliminated the trick questions and posed the two serious ones in hope that he would reconsider. They are not gobbledygook, or rediculous. Perhaps he does not want to share his witness because in this forum it will not sound like a valid witness. Nobody wants to hear that their subjective feelings are not a valid witness, especially when there are no bible verses to support that. That is fine, too. He is a big boy. He can reconsider and choose again not to answer. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:15:28 -0400 He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
No. It could have easily been in the front of the book. Take the copyright
notices on movies and in our books today...always up front...but that does
not alter their effectiveness...in fact, it may even increase it since most
people don't read books cover to cover these days, or watch movies until the
last frame of film has passed through the projector.
Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first
century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being
shown and told to write.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:16:43 -0500
Don't you think it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The Book? Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a
debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the
Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know
how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
God knew. -Original Message- Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being shown and told to write. 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] Perry vs DaveH
The unacceptability of my or Blaine's subjective witness is not the issue. Whether or not it is Biblical is the issue. Obvious references are made obvious by quoting scripture. No obvious quote, no obvious reference. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:22:02 -0400 So then, CPL, 'his' subjective witness is unacceptable while yours is? He did not quote Ja 1:5fg but it was his obvious reference. - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 10:27 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Lance, the gist of his reply was I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. So, I eliminated the trick questions and posed the two serious ones in hope that he would reconsider. They are not gobbledygook, or rediculous. Perhaps he does not want to share his witness because in this forum it will not sound like a valid witness. Nobody wants to hear that their subjective feelings are not a valid witness, especially when there are no bible verses to support that. That is fine, too. He is a big boy. He can reconsider and choose again not to answer. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:15:28 -0400 He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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. -- 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
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I agree, and I think John recorded that effectively. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:52:05 -0500 God knew. -Original Message- Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being shown and told to write. 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd -Original Message-From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 07:35:55 -0700 (PDT)Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Did someone burn Mormon underwear? When did holding something in your hand become a desecration.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Do you believe that what I wrote is a crrect teaching or not? -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:17:23 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Does thisapplyto yourself JD, or is it just for "others"? Do you think DM is humored every time he is referred to as legalistic and a false prophet among other things and what about repaying Kevin evil for what you perceive to be evil? On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:50:48 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JDFrom: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet?
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Was it the last chapter in the Bible when it waswritten?
Jd-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:16:43 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Don't you think it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The Book? Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for "this book" in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word "Bible" mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
--
"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] Perry vs DaveH
Lance are you equating the Bible the Koran to a pair of skivvies? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:17 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH It's about as funny as it would be for you and your Jet-flying son to be present at a flag burning. It's about as funny as David or Kevin, while preaching at a 'sodomite' convention, to witness the desecration of the Holy Scriptures! Iz, these would be just 'downright funny'! - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:46 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Probably because its downright funny! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:31 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Street preachers just quote what it says. IzzyDAVEH: Then why do some feel the need to wave underwear?ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH, There are TT'ers who get criticized for quoting what the Bible says by those who don't quote what it says, but replacewhat it says with their own ideas of what they think it should say--that's why they don't quote and don't like those who quote. Street preachers just quote what it says. Izzy The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out!
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. You are as crooked as the JW arguing against a Triune god,saying the word trinity is not in the bible From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd Are you saying that somewhere in Salt Lake City there is a Mormon with no skivvies? That is common down here where it is still ninety degrees at bed time, but SLC is a little cool for that. Might freeze your equipment.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
We look for verses with similar wording and assume those passages have the same meaning and context. Speak for yourself. I KNOW what the Bible says. So does Lance that is why he will not answer me with one of those "numerous" alternate understandings of John 3:36 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In addition, "proof-texting" is the misuse of scripture. All ae suspectible to this failure. We look for verses with similar wording and assume those passages have the same meaning and context.-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:24:11 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH 'Proof-texting' can apply to more than the Scriptures. Michael Moore and John Kerry both employed it vis a vis GWB. How did you respond when they did it? One may accurately quote someone, often absent appropriate context, with the intent of critiquing the person they quote. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:39 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH How would they know if they?ve never tried? Anyway, ?proof-texting? is a term THEY use to shoot down scripture quoters. Izzy__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Personal EXPERIENCE?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JD-Original Message-From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:09:42 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 08:30 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
If you believe the Bible, you might consider the passages In the photo--part of the Brigham Young Monument in Salt Lake City Blaine The Hosanna Shout, given at the dedication of each new temple--also, 2 passages from Isaiah, believed to have been fulfilled when the Salt Lake temple was completed
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Dear Minister of Questions, What did the word Trinity mean to the Apostle? How did Paul view Bible search engines?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The more important question IMO is "what did this word "bible" mean to the Apostle John in 98 AD. JD-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. JD, tell me what does the word ?Bible? mean? And what is the last book in the Bible? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I guess you just condemned a few Apostles, prophets and Jesus Christ! Or did the religious crowd enjoy be called full of dead mens bones? On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:50:48 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JDFrom: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
What did Paul think of Gay clothing in 98AD?ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: God knew. -Original Message-Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being shown and told to write.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.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I did not set it on fire. Although we did dry some on a clothesline. http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200404gc.html (third pic down)[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd -Original Message-From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 07:35:55 -0700 (PDT)Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Did someone burn Mormon underwear? When did holding something in your hand become a desecration. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
If a EFFEMINATE PC faith, fits you see to it! Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you believe that what I wrote is a crrect teaching or not? -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:17:23 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Does thisapplyto yourself JD, or is it just for "others"? Do you think DM is humored every time he is referred to as legalistic and a false prophet among other things and what about repaying Kevin evil for what you perceive to be evil? On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:50:48 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The decision to commit to actions and wording that is objectionable to others is living proof that those who do suchthings no longer care about those whom they insult. JDFrom: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jt says 'to each his own, everyone has their own type of humour - it's a cultural thing, Lance.' Therefore we may assume that profaning the 'sacred' matters not to her. So make fun of or desecrate the flag, the Scriptures or Mormon undergarments, ...all in that which one finds humorouseh? Can I get an 'Amen' from all, Mormon and non-Mormon on this point by Judy? Try burning a Koran at a Mosque when the worshippers on walking in. Tell them it's just a 'cultural thingy'. From: Judy Taylor To each his own; everyone has their own type of humor - it's a cultural thing Lance. Do you think it was ungodly for Elijah to mock the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel by telling them their god just might be sitting on the toilet? Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The Minister of Questions wants to know.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Was it the last chapter in the Bible when it waswritten?
Jd-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:16:43 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Don't you think it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The Book? Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for "this book" in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word "Bible" mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
--
"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.
Discover Yahoo!
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
much more information than I care to consider !! JD-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 15:53:59 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd Are you saying that somewhere in Salt Lake City there is a Mormon with no skivvies?That is common down here where it is still ninety degrees at bed time, but SLC is a little cool for that. Might freeze your equipment.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Why frame it as an undewrwear debate? We hold the fig leaf aprons also. in the Temple Satan tells the LDS it is "a token of his priesthoods" and they put them on. A fig leaf will never cover your SIN! http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200302.html I doubt that Bob was an eyewitness, but hey there is always poetic license to lie right? BOB lies or repeats a lie "One man, dressed in his church clothes, walked past in the crowd, saw the insults and desecrations, and grabbed the piece of clothing. To protect it. He was charged with robbery and taken to jail." I was an eyewitness Mr Basilio assualted from behind with a choke hold a guy half his size, while he was praying not "waving",to protect the sacred undies? If it is sacred surely LDS must assualt to protect it. MY Pastor does not assault people! What's with this HIGH PRIEST? http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?sid=51767nid=39template=print Jose Basilio Charged with Robbery "This person was talking against the Church, saying bad things against the Prophet. He was showing a garment. It was a woman's garment. The ones we wear as members of the LDS Church. I'm a High Priest. I was angry. I tried to take it from himHe said I tried to hit him. But I did not hit him. I know martial arts and if I would have wanted to hurt him, I could have broken his arm or leg. He was just a youth and I am an adult. I had no intention to hurt him." "DWAYNE BAIRD/SALT LAKE CITY POLICE: IN DOING SO IT TOOK THE MAN TO THE GROUND, THE VICTIM AND IT DRAGGED HIM A COUPLE OF FEET AS THIS MAN RAN AWAY WITH HIS PROPERTY." Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd Are you saying that somewhere in Salt Lake City there is a Mormon with no skivvies?That is common down here where it is still ninety degrees at bed time, but SLC is a little cool for that. Might freeze your equipment. Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I dont know for sure, but suspect
so. However that is irrelevant, as God saw to it that it was the last
book in the Bible. Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:14
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs
DaveH
Was it the last chapter in the Bible when it
waswritten?
Jd
-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:16:43 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Don't you think
it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The
Book? Iz
-Original
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday,
June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE:
[TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to
vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the
Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon
many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the
whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring
specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From:
ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE:
[TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7
Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I
testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if
anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in
this book; 19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this
prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from
the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me
what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible?
Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the
Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no
book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we
should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original
Message-
From: Judy
Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6
Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is
finished already
And this
warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in
Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun
2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
writes:
In 'Prophecy:
The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From:
ShieldsFamily
_javascript_:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong
again, Blaine.
Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from
the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
Let your
speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to
answer every man. (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not
want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants
to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
he will be subscribed.
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
The rapture is Heresy? Does that mean that you will separate from those that teach such heresy? Since it is Heresy does it damn ones soul? Just what effect does your label of heresy have? Any real effect, other than to raise a controversy? According to Titus 3:9-10 a heretic follows his self willed questions, he is to be avoided But avoid foolish questions...A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself. Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two issues arise: 1. Which 'heretical doctrines' arise from 'them'? 2. IFF some actually do then, are they offset by those 'heretical doctrines' arising from the 'accepted canon'. Example:The 'rapture' doctrine from 1 Thess. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 07:43 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH And the RCC adopted them as canon to support their heretical doctrines. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:16 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH JD reaches back into his dusty old shelf of misinformation. The Apocrypha was part of the corrupt mss The apocrypha was not part of the 1611 it was printed as a tool like the maps we have in our bibles, not interspesed as part of the text as in the Oldest best manuscripts The apocryphal books were not in the Jewish OT either only in the RC bibles. The minister of questions chooses to mislead.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find this interesting. As far as "adding" to the bible -- did you know that the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's. The so-called "Prostestant bible"is a little over 120 yers old. Christ and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves. Jd -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:10:53 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's teaching against? Also your favorite epistle James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs following the ascension. Could we be missing something here JD? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation? There was no book called the "Bible" in first century times. But, certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Myth - It is finished already And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and in Proverbs. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations. From: ShieldsFamily You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Too funny Bible blockheads
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
What's the big deal about waving that underwear around? Now if it was something skimpy from Victoria's Secret, well that would be a bit more shocking than that dowdy stuff. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 3:56 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH I did not set it on fire. Although we did dry some on a clothesline. http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200404gc.html (third pic down)[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you weren't waving it around? You were just walking around the streets holding someone's underwear in your hands? Jd -Original Message-From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 07:35:55 -0700 (PDT)Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Did someone burn Mormon underwear? When did holding something in your hand become a desecration. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: ??? Please restate it so a simple minded guy (like me) can understand your question, Lance. Lance Muir wrote: Let me assume DM's inquisitor model (not employed in some time I might say) and, abbreviate for the sake of your time: Do you perceive the James 1 experience such that it enables you to set aside every other consideration concerning LDS? - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 23:57 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Time is my biggest enemy, Lance. I started a big reply to one of DavidM's posts about 3 or 4 weeks ago, and it is only half finished. Right now I'm running a sleep deficit, and having fallen asleep early last night at my computer while reading TT stuffI am going to try to lurk more in the future. Besides...I think most TTers find my thoughts rather boring, being as LDS biased as they are. Lance Muir wrote: No 'knows'rings here, Dave. Why don't you more actively enter the conversation by offering your own summary of what's been said thus far. Then, please let me know your opinion/thoughts. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 09:58 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Lance Muir wrote: DH asks: 1. Did Jesus' ...By some, yes. Your counterpart would be:The reindentification of 'who jesus is' by JS. One need not extend this thinking far to conclude that either the LDS are the 'true christians' or those that reflect the teaching of Nicea. You do see this do you not? DAVEH: Yeshowever, it is also possible that neither are correct. ONCE IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT WE DO NOT WORSHIP, PREACH, TEACHTHE SAME JESUS THEN, ONE OF US FOLLOWS A FALSE GOSPEL. You do see this do you not? DAVEH: OK..I'm following you so far, Lance. I would like to follow this conversation, tired or not, through to it's conclusion, should you permit me to do so. DAVEH: Thank you for leading me by the nose, Lance..please continue. thanks, Lance From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 01:56 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: I'm a little too slow (and too tired) to ascertain your intended message, Lance. If you want me to understand what you are trying to convey, put it in more simple terms for this dunderhead. Did Jesus' theology nullify who God is as perceived by the Jews? As he saidhe didn't come to destroy the law, but rather fulfill it. FWIW...It seems to me the Jews could say something similar to you as to what you are saying to me... YOU CANNOT PREACH THE GOD YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF GOD'S CHOSEN IN ANY HISTORIC SENSE .You do realize this, do you not? Lance Muir wrote: DaveH:I just re-read my question(s) and, find them rather clear. Please try telling me what YOU THINK I'm asking. Your analogy breaks down as it has to do with Older/Newer Testaments and the Incarnation of Christ. What you've (LDS) done is to have taken orthodox theology and nullified it with a superceding revelation as to WHO THIS JESUS IS. You then, answer the question posed by Jesus Himself in Lk 16 differently than every genuinely Christian group on the face of the earth.YOU DO KNOW THAT, DON't YOU? YOU CANNOT PREACH THE JESUS YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF CHRISTIAN IN ANY HISTORIC SENSE. YOU KNOW THIS ALSO DO YOU NOT? I fear poor old CPL might've thought I was confused as to who you actually are. I'M NOT!! Why not take another run at it just for my sake. From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 01, 2005 10:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: I'm not exactly sure of your question, Lance.But as I view it, the position of many TTers is analogous to the Jews of Bible times. In the OT, Scripture gave them a perception of God to which the staunchly held. So firm in their convictions (as are many TTers), they had trouble acknowledging the Lord when he finally appearedwhybecause he was more like them than they expected I suppose. Nor did they buy into additional Scripture being added to Canon, which is another similarity shared by TTers. Many also failed to accept new commandments
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave Hansen Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth? ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested? ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 05, 2005 22:09 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH David, Hmm, I see your point, but yours is a special case, wouldn't you say? I have to say your point is actually weak. Associatiing JS with other false priests, is a badassociation no matter how you look at it. JS gave dates, descriptions of what took place, etc, which none of these people did. Besides, how do we know they were not inspired, anyway? Surely God gives direction to all liberally, who ask in faith. I'd hate to judge these people as being falsely motivated. Considering that in the last days, there is to be 1. An angel appearing on the horizon with the everlasting gospel to preach to all nations, kindreds, etc., 2. There are to be 140,000 missionary l;eaderscalled to assist in this great work, 3. Israel is to be gathered out of the caves and other such remote places, 4. According to Daniel, a great kingdom, the Kingdom of God, is to be set up without hands, meaning by God, and not by men, I would say that for these great fetes to be accomplished, a well organized effort would beat the lazziz faire arrangement you seem to favor. The LDS Church has(as of December, 2004)51,067 full time missionaries out;241,239 converts for the year 2004, a total membership of 12,275, 822; with 26,670 wards and branches. Not to knock what you do, I am convinced you do a lot of good with your approach, so hang in there, but for the final mop-up, I am afraid it is going to take more than individuals working under their own auspices. Blaine In a message dated 6/4/2005 6:39:46 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: You are using the "guilt by association" approach to reasoning, which is false reasoning, and shameful for anyone to have to resort to it.Are you sure that "guilt by association" is false reasoning? Don't you use the same reasoning in the very next sentence?Blaine wrote: By the way, the Mormon Church is now the 4th largest denomination in America. Just two years ago, it was the 5th largest.By saying that you are the 4th largest denomination, you are using association to make your case. Isn't that the same thing as "guilt by association" only in reverse?Now I realize to you, being a large denomination is a good thing, but to me, being a large denomination is a bad thing. So what I hear from you is guilt by association. Is this faulty reasoning that you are using? Does being the 4th largest denomination mean anything?Peace be with you.David Miller.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Read my post to Blaine. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 02:44 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: ??? Please restate it so a simple minded guy (like me) can understand your question, Lance.Lance Muir wrote: Let me assume DM's inquisitor model (not employed in some time I might say) and, abbreviate for the sake of your time: Do you perceive the James 1 experience such that it enables you to set aside every other consideration concerning LDS? - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 23:57 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Time is my biggest enemy, Lance. I started a big reply to one of DavidM's posts about 3 or 4 weeks ago, and it is only half finished. Right now I'm running a sleep deficit, and having fallen asleep early last night at my computer while reading TT stuffI am going to try to lurk more in the future. Besides...I think most TTers find my thoughts rather boring, being as LDS biased as they are.Lance Muir wrote: No 'knows'rings here, Dave. Why don't you more actively enter the conversation by offering your own summary of what's been said thus far. Then, please let me know your opinion/thoughts. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 09:58 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Lance Muir wrote: DH asks: 1. Did Jesus' ...By some, yes. Your counterpart would be:The reindentification of 'who jesus is' by JS. One need not extend this thinking far to conclude that either the LDS are the 'true christians' or those that reflect the teaching of Nicea. You do see this do you not?DAVEH: Yeshowever, it is also possible that neither are correct. ONCE IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT WE DO NOT WORSHIP, PREACH, TEACHTHE SAME JESUS THEN, ONE OF US FOLLOWS A FALSE GOSPEL. You do see this do you not?DAVEH: OK..I'm following you so far, Lance. I would like to follow this conversation, tired or not, through to it's conclusion, should you permit me to do so.DAVEH: Thank you for leading me by the nose, Lance..please continue. thanks, Lance From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 02, 2005 01:56 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: I'm a little too slow (and too tired) to ascertain your intended message, Lance. If you want me to understand what you are trying to convey, put it in more simple terms for this dunderhead. Did Jesus' theology nullify who God is as perceived by the Jews? As he saidhe didn't come to destroy the law, but rather fulfill it. FWIW...It seems to me the Jews could say something similar to you as to what you are saying to me...YOU CANNOT PREACH THE GOD YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF GOD'S CHOSEN IN ANY HISTORIC SENSE.You do realize this, do you not?Lance Muir wrote: DaveH:I just re-read my question(s) and, find them rather clear. Please try telling me what YOU THINK I'm asking. Your analogy breaks down as it has to do with Older/Newer Testaments and the Incarnation of Christ. What you've (LDS) done is to have taken orthodox theology and nullified it with a superceding revelation as to WHO THIS JESUS IS. You then, answer the question posed by Jesus Himself in Lk 16 differently than every genuinely Christian group on the face of the earth.YOU DO KNOW THAT, DON't YOU? YOU CANNOT PREACH THE JESUS YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF CHRISTIAN IN ANY HISTORIC SENSE. YOU KNOW THIS ALSO DO YOU NOT? I fear poor old CPL might've thought I was confused as to who you actually are. I'M NOT!! Why not take
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 05:07 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 05:42 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 06:11 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Thanks for the 'yes' even though you supplemented it with 'but'. The point therefore, has been made to both my and, your satisfaction. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 06:46 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-)
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I guess you feel you made some kind of a point but it is not the point we began with which is whether or not the Bible speaks for itself. IT DOES - No matter who does or who does not choose to hear. Those with a heart for God who continually come to the light and deal with their stuff are the stones Jesus is using to build His church - the one that the gates of hell will not prevail against. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 07:12:33 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the 'yes' even though you supplemented it with 'but'. The point therefore, has been made to both my and, your satisfaction. From: Judy Taylor Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I suspect that what I'm about to say matters not a whit to you and, in actuality, it shouldn't. The more I read you, the more I'm inclined to think of you in the non-fundamentalist camp. You are definitely your own person, under God. I think similarly concerning Terry. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 08:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH I guess you feel you made some kind of a point but it is not the point we began with which is whether or not the Bible speaks for itself. IT DOES - No matter who does or who does not choose to hear. Those with a heart for God who continually come to the light and deal with their stuff are the stones Jesus is using to build His church - the one that the gates of hell will not prevail against. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 07:12:33 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the 'yes' even though you supplemented it with 'but'. The point therefore, has been made to both my and, your satisfaction. From: Judy Taylor Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: If I'm following you correctly on this Lance, the answer would be yes to both questions. (But I have not given it any deep thought, as I'm a bit short on time this morning.) Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 05, 2005 22:09 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH David, Hmm, I see your point, but yours is a special case, wouldn't you say? I have to say your point is actually weak. Associatiing JS with other false priests, is a badassociation no matter how you look at it. JS gave dates, descriptions of what took place, etc, which none of these people did. Besides, how do we know they were not inspired, anyway? Surely God gives direction to all liberally, who ask in faith. I'd hate to judge these people as being falsely motivated. Considering that in the last days, there is to be 1. An angel appearing on the horizon with the everlasting gospel to preach to all nations, kindreds, etc., 2. There are to be 140,000 missionary l;eaderscalled to assist in this great work, 3. Israel is to be gathered out of the caves and other such remote places, 4. According to Daniel, a great kingdom, the Kingdom of God, is to be set up without hands, meaning by God, and not by men, I would say that for these great fetes to be accomplished, a well organized effort would beat the lazziz faire arrangement you seem to favor. The LDS Church has(as of December, 2004)51,067 full time missionaries out;241,239 converts for the year 2004, a total membership of 12,275, 822; with 26,670 wards and branches. Not to knock what you do, I am convinced you do a lot of good with your approach, so hang in there, but for the final mop-up, I am afraid it is going to take more than individuals working under their own auspices. Blaine In a message dated 6/4/2005 6:39:46 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: You are using the "guilt by association" approach to reasoning, which is false reasoning, and shameful for anyone to have to resort to it. Are you sure that "guilt by association" is false reasoning? Don't you use the same reasoning in the very next sentence? Blaine wrote: By the way, the Mormon Church is now the 4th largest denomination in America. Just two years ago, it was the 5th largest. By saying that you are the 4th largest denomination, you are using association to make your case. Isn't that the same thing as "guilt by association" only in reverse? Now I realize to you, being a large denomination is a good thing, but to me, being a large denomination is a bad thing. So what I hear from you is guilt by association. Is this faulty reasoning that you are using? Does being the 4th largest denomination mean anything? Peace be with you. David Miller. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: Do you really believe that any discrepancy about doctrinal interpretations between two believers is a result of at least one of them loving darkness? Or..do you think two true believers can have a legitimate disagreement about what the Lord says in the Bible? Judy Taylor wrote: Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street? -- ~~~ 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] Perry vs DaveH
If I read you correctly then, absolutely nothing could be said ever to move you from your 'subjective truth'. I thought as much. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 09:43 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: If I'm following you correctly on this Lance, the answer would be yes to both questions. (But I have not given it any deep thought, as I'm a bit short on time this morning.)Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 05, 2005 22:09 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH David, Hmm, I see your point, but yours is a special case, wouldn't you say? I have to say your point is actually weak. Associatiing JS with other false priests, is a badassociation no matter how you look at it. JS gave dates, descriptions of what took place, etc, which none of these people did. Besides, how do we know they were not inspired, anyway? Surely God gives direction to all liberally, who ask in faith. I'd hate to judge these people as being falsely motivated. Considering that in the last days, there is to be 1. An angel appearing on the horizon with the everlasting gospel to preach to all nations, kindreds, etc., 2. There are to be 140,000 missionary l;eaderscalled to assist in this great work, 3. Israel is to be gathered out of the caves and other such remote places, 4. According to Daniel, a great kingdom, the Kingdom of God, is to be set up without hands, meaning by God, and not by men, I would say that for these great fetes to be accomplished, a well organized effort would beat the lazziz faire arrangement you seem to favor. The LDS Church has(as of December, 2004)51,067 full time missionaries out;241,239 converts for the year 2004, a total membership of 12,275, 822; with 26,670 wards and branches. Not to knock what you do, I am convinced you do a lot of good with your approach, so hang in there, but for the final mop-up, I am afraid it is going to take more than individuals working under their own auspices. Blaine In a message dated 6/4/2005 6:39:46 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: You are using the "guilt by association" approach to reasoning, which is false reasoning, and shameful for anyone to have to resort to it.Are you sure that "guilt by association" is false reasoning? Don't you use the same reasoning in the very next sentence?Blaine wrote: By the way, the Mormon Church is now the 4th largest denomination in America. Just two years ago, it was the 5th largest.By saying that you are the 4th largest denomination, you are using association to make your case. Isn't that the same thing as "guilt by association" only in reverse?Now I realize to you, being a large denomination is a good thing, but to me, being a large denomination is a bad thing. So what I hear from you is guilt by association. Is this faulty reasoning that you are using? Does being the 4th largest denomination mean anything?Peace be with you.David Miller. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I think soDaveH, being born again is just entering the door, I've had to wade through so much darkness during the past 30yrs and put off so much stuff, have more to go but it's less than before; "the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn it shines brighter and brighter till the noonday..." jt On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 06:49:28 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: Do you really believe that any discrepancy about doctrinal interpretations between two believers is a result of at least one of them loving darkness? Or..do you think two true believers can have a legitimate disagreement about what the Lord says in the Bible?Judy Taylor wrote: Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?-- ~~~ 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] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: Lance, from a subjective standpoint...Do you believe Jesus is the Christ? If so, could anything be said to move you from that truth as you perceive it? (I also wonder the same about other TTer's feelings about thishoping to hear some responses.) Lance Muir wrote: If I read you correctly then, absolutely nothing could be said ever to move you from your 'subjective truth'. I thought as much. DAVEH: If I'm following you correctly on this Lance, the answer would be yes to both questions. (But I have not given it any deep thought, as I'm a bit short on time this morning.) Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position? -- ~~~ 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] Perry vs DaveH
Speaking for myself...maybe.A not very good movie was made (look! he's at it again..does this guy do nothing but watch movies?) entitled 'The Body'; the premise of which was...wait for it...the discovery of the bones of Jesus..Well, there you go This would be comparable to discovering a document in the handwriting of JS saying...hey..I was just funnin' y'all!! - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 10:37 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH DAVEH: Lance, from a subjective standpoint...Do you believe Jesus is the Christ? If so, could anything be said to move you from that truth as you perceive it? (I also wonder the same about other TTer's feelings about thishoping to hear some responses.)Lance Muir wrote: If I read you correctly then, absolutely nothing could be said ever to move you from your 'subjective truth'. I thought as much. DAVEH: If I'm following you correctly on this Lance, the answer would be yes to both questions. (But I have not given it any deep thought, as I'm a bit short on time this morning.)Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position?-- ~~~ 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] Perry vs DaveH
The fact that LDS have to attack the Bible speaks loudly. No other book has had the impact on men and human history as the Bible has. There are some that cower at the sight of that Blessed Old Book. It has the Power to save the Power to condemn! Not so the BoM bDave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
The only ping pong is LANCE vs LANCE the "OLD" JD vs the "NEW" JD old Lance - DM JT Izzy teach book incarnation New Lance - Kevin teaches such Right Lance - Kevin does not, has never will not teach such JDAssertion "ALL" changes to "some" when he defends his position Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 05:07 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
In a message dated 6/6/2005 8:45:21 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lance Muir wrote: Blaine says that 'God gives direction to all liberally who ask in faith'. I asked you/DH whether or not the 'subjective' bottom line was James 1. Are you herein simply offering a resounding 'yes' to that query? Would this invariably be your fallback position? - Original Message - Blaine: Pardon the interuption, but the emphasis is on FAITH. Faith is a gift from God, and reflects his will in any matter. We can pray, and ask, but no guaranteethat an answer will be forthcoming, unless our prayers are offered up in FAITH. As withALL the gifts of the spirit, FAITH is the reward of faithfulness to God's commandments. He sheds his light on those who love him and seek to do his will. He redeems only his friends, not his enemies. Although all will be resurrected, some will be resurrected toa resurrection of damnation (John 5:28-29: Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which ALL that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."). This means the inheritance of those who have not repented of their sinswill be of lesser quality than that of the righteous, who kept the faith by keeping his commandments. See DC 76
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Do you have any LIVING Books at your store?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 05:42 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online & more. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I mean really different conclusions! Here is a good occasion for you to FLAP them gums some more. Iam still waiting for JUST one different conclusion or alternate interpretation of: JN 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. It does not have to be "really different" if you can't back up what you say, just admit it for once. I will accept "slightly different" if you can.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 06:11 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Lances refusal to even "converse" about his assertions has really discredited him.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrinesof traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamentalfalsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
If therocks can cry out surely the Book can.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I guess you feel you made some kind of a point but it is not the point we began with which is whether or not the Bible speaks for itself. IT DOES - No matter who does or who does not choose to hear. Those with a heart for God who continually come to the light and deal with their stuff are the stones Jesus is using to build His church - the one that the gates of hell will not prevail against. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 07:12:33 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the 'yes' even though you supplemented it with 'but'. The point therefore, has been made to both my and, your satisfaction. From: Judy Taylor Yes but you have to understand that we have an adversary who has been teaching doctrines of men and sowing confusion for the past 2,000+ years and I would include your philosophy that we can't know anything because of the enlightenment to be part of this confusion. When all is said and done - or at the end of the day - God's Word is all that will be left standing because the temporal is passing away and His Word is eternal. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 06:34:20 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, it does not, Judy. It does however, demonstrate that people (TT) can read the same passages and, thereafter come to differing conclusions as to their meaning. And, I mean really different conclusions! Now, I know for a certainty that I've witnessed that on numerous occasions. The participants in question have not been 'novices in the Word'. Surely you have 'seen' the same thing, have you not? From: Judy Taylor All TT demonstrates is that different ppl are at different places in their pilgrimage through this world. Some are entering the Kingdom and others have chosen a different path. You need to read the parable fo the wheat and the tares Lance. There are a lotof tares around, so what does their existence prove - that the Word of God has no effect in the lives of ppl? On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:49:46 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say again, the Bible does not speak for itself. We have TT before us as a living demonstration. Now, should you say that the Lord God Himself speaks to humankind and, often through the Scriptures, I'd Amen that. From: Judy Taylor The Bible does speak for itself to those who are willing to come to the light and agree with Him, covenanting to follow Him and to do things His way rather than take on a form of godliness in His name. On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 05:26:58 -0400 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible does NOT speak for itself. On this (see my formula once again) we wholeheartedly agree. Why is it that even among the 'biblicists' who are mature there exists such minimal agreement? This ain't tennis or ping pong folks, this is the God of the Cosmos! Throwing out bible verses which simply elucidate YOUR view (not HIS) leaves people confused. That's why I referenced 2 Tim 3 (KJV whole chapter). From: Judy Taylor Because men love darkness so much that they will not come to the light so that their deeds may be made manifest. On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:49:00 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself.DAVEH: Are you sure about that, Izzy??? If so, why are there so many TTers wanting to speak in its behalf? Hmm...If the The Bible speaks for itself, then why do Street Preachers feel the need to proclaim it from the street?ShieldsFamily wrote: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave HansenSent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:12 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveHDAVEH: The problem as I see it, who is the arbiter of truth on TT, Izzy. Is there anybody here you would say expounds nothing but truth?ShieldsFamily wrote: Only to condemn those who heard the truth but did not heed it. Iz DAVEH: Do you suppose enduring to the end of TT would qualify! ;-) ShieldsFamily wrote: No. You must endure to the end in Christ. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnt cut it. Sorry. Iz DAVEH: I appreciate your concern for my eternal welfare, Izzy. Would it be OK with you if I first endure to the end before getting saved, as the Savior suggested?ShieldsFamily wrote: I vote for (4) Get saved and talk about the REAL Jesus! J Izzy-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
a sense of false security Good point Blaine. What security do you have? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrinesof traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamentalfalsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
ISAIAH 8:20 - BofM does not pass the smell test On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:05:50 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrinesof traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamentalfalsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:08:50 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: a sense of false security Good point Blaine. What security do you have? Blaine: The witness of the spirit. The Shekinah, the fiery presence of the Lord in his appearance to JS and later, at the dedication of the Kirtland (Ohio) Temple. I feel this fire as often as I am humble and seek the Lord's will, not my own. What security do you have, Kevin? Hmmm?
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
That's funny. The God of the Bible was not once a man and is not from the planet Kolob, did not have a son named Satan (or Lucifer). Get serious Blaine. I know you have been told they are the same, and that you have to ignore the facts to maintain that belief, but the rest of us know better. Do you also think the David Miller from Hollywood Florida, is the same David Miller as the one from Hollywood CA. Same name, maybe same hair color, and maybe they both drive an SUV...by mormon standards maybe they are the same! (Apologies to DM). Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:05:50 EDT I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrines of traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamental falsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
