-- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John wrote: "techniccally" is the word of a legalist justifying what he has actually done while pretending to be fully consistent. One simply cannot tell another to "stop the blasphemy" without, at
You believe that the phrase "Christ is the end of the law .." means one thing and I believe it means something entirely different. Two opposing "undertandings." Which one is that which is a "misunderstanding?" And what effect does this circumstance have on your understanding of "illumination" as
John, if you have a problem with inductive logic, substitute blasphemy
everywhere you see my word error and I stand behind those comments just
the same. That should be obvious to you because the word I used was a more
general word that included blasphemy as an error.
John, you changed words
John wrote:
You believe that the phrase Christ is the
end of the law .. means one thing and I
believe it means something entirely different.
Two opposing undertandings. Which one
is that which is a misunderstanding?
I don't think you understand my perspective of Romans 10:4 if you think
Terry,
You wrote a very explicit comment about me personally
earlier today which caused me to
respond with the following question. If you are
walking in the kind of love you accuse me of
being void of ... Then couldyou please answer the
following for me.
Terry, please tell me. If you
-- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] John, if you have a problem with inductive logic, substitute "blasphemy" everywhere you see my word "error" and I stand behind those comments just the same. That should be obvious to you because the word I
David, are we discussing theology or hermeneutics? Words, words, words, David. You just get hung up on words. My question is this -- when we do disagree on a passage of scripture -- who is right? You with your doctrine of divine illumination ? And when you and Judy, believing the very same thing
You have not answered my question Lance ... are you going to ignore this
one also?
You wrote:
You are a tripartate who has a disdain for things of the earth
which by extension indicates
that you do not apprehend the significance of the Incarnation and the
humanity of Jesus.
Do you
Do you not ignore questions I ask of you, nearly everyday? The post written last night asking about a "truce" ?? That was written under the direction of the Holy Spirit, Judy.It was a very emotional experience and clearly, from God. Your response? Ignore, ignore , ignore.
jd
--
I'm not David but since you are including my
name in this also - You wrote;
"Blasphemy" has nothing to do with the attitude
or state of the heart,
in and of itself.
It is an
action.
Speaking out of the mouth is action also -
would you agree?
and this action comes out ofthe
abudance
I didn't understand it JD,
It was incomprehensible to me and I don't consider
myself at war with you.
I was not intentionally being rude about it and didn't
know you wanted an answer.
Guess I am so used to being set up and then knocked
down here.
Sorry about that. ATST you are misjuding
What do you think my posted question is about, Judy. Mental gynamastics is not my forte. Tell it to David. And deal with the question. Do you know what the question is? Just answer the question. It is simple enough/ But you can't answer the question, can you?? !! The jig is up if you do , and you
Arrogance will get you nowhere.
-- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't understand it JD,
It was incomprehensible to me and I don't consider myself at war with you.
I was not intentionally being rude about it and didn't know you wanted an
Arrogance? Where does that perception come
from?
Don't answer that - I know.
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 23:28:45 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Arrogance will get you nowhere.
From:
Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't understand it JD,
It was incomprehensible to me and
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 23:26:59 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you think my posted question is about, Judy. Mental
gynamastics is not my forte.
Tell it to David. And deal with the question. Do
you know what the question is?
This is not "mental gymnastics" JD; it is
Spiritual discernment is a scriptural teaching JD. If you want to call it bogus that is between
you and the Lord; however, God does say that one who is unable to separate the precious
from the vile can not be his spokesperson.
Your inability to answer the questions posted is evidence of that
Judy Taylor wrote:
Terry,
You wrote a very explicit comment about me
personally earlier today which caused me to
respond with the following question. If
you are walking in the kind of love you accuse me of
being void of ... Then couldyou please
answer the following for me.
My question is this -- when we do disagree on a passage of scripture -- who is right? You with your doctrine of divine illumination ? And when you and Judy, believing the very same thing about "spiritual discernment" disagree -- who is right in that case? If you cannot answer these question, the
Gosh the "humble" JD wasn't around for very long
... just a very brief appearance and back to
normal
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:49:44 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Spiritual discernment is a scriptural teaching
JD. If you want to call it bogus that is between
you and the Lord;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is legalism that filters the
nat and chokes on the camel.
Or verse visa
Actually, this is the point. I'm a pin-head.
Tks
j
-- Original message -- From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is legalism that filters the nat and chokes on the camel.
Or verse visa
Where is the arrogance, John? This is one of her better efforts. Give
credit where it is due. Please? We are sposed to be family. Let's
try harder.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arrogance will get you nowhere.
--
Original message --
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL
Terry,
Thank you for your detailed response ... I would like
to have an image that is pleasing to everyone and am
truly sorry that I have missed the mark with this.
I don't havemoney to show ppl love; and what I do have
is
constantly mocked and maligned. I never wanted to
get into this
These words I didn't understand it JD, It was incomprehensible to me
struck me as casting my writing in the same light as DM often does. I regard such as blatant arrognace. I do not believe for a second that Judy could not understand what I wrote !! She pretends to not be at war with me -
I love the Bible! In church,
we are currently studying the DC, but will begin the Old Testament in
January, for a year. Last year we studied the BoM, the year before, the
New Testament. It is all scripture to us. We do not see the
problems you see with the BoM. It is 100% compatible with
Are we talking about my personal history, or the history of the LDS
Church? I have volumes on the latter. Only one autobiog on
myself.
Blainerb
In a message dated 12/19/2005 5:04:54 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Blainer: Just how well (seriously) do you know
JD was just stating a biblical truth, Dean. Jesus said
several times he was sent to the house of Israel ONLY!!! He never went to
the Gentiles. His apostles did that. But he did visit the Israelite
branches in the Americas and the isles of the sea--these werehis "other
sheep." And because
In a message dated 12/18/2005 7:28:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and
his name is called The Word of God.
I have trodden the winepress alone, . . .
Sure seems to be a strong emphasis on lots of
I understand. Do whatever you think will please the Lord.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These words I didn't understand it JD, It was incomprehensible to me
struck me as casting my writing in the same light as DM often
does. I regard such as blatant arrognace. I do not believe for a
always the best of advice.
Thanks
jd
-- Original message -- From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] I understand. Do whatever you think will please the Lord.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These words I didn't understand it JD, It was incomprehensible to me
struck me as
Thank you Iz, this is talking about none other than the Lord Jesus Christ,
right? John also calls him "the Word."
Blainerb
In a message dated 12/18/2005 1:33:45 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rev.11And I saw heaven opened, and
behold a white horse; and he
Oh, well, at least we have agreed he bled in Gethsemane, is that a
conclusion I can count on? :) Maybe not so much as I thought tho,
huh?
Blainerb
In a message dated 12/19/2005 8:14:29 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Although this is a very rare phenomenon,
Maybe Lance is onto something, Judyequating
truth and faithfulness with Republicans? iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
7:43 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
This, coming from
Lance??? Amazing, isnt it? iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
7:27 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Condition
of heart of unregenerate gentiles
How are
As should you always, Lance.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
9:22 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: what
is new for me
I believe you.
- Original Message
If the earth was so great it wouldnt
need redeeming, now would it? Until the Millenium, its nothing to write
home about. Kind of like alphabet soup; some good stuff, mostly losers. As my
husband often says, We arent in heaven yet. iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
If she meant the Democrats are the dead,
she could have a point.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
9:31 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Empty-headed regard for it (Scripture?)
The Scent of a Woman Lance? Is that what you've been watching lately? (I
do love the tango scene!) But do you really want to end up like that lost,
embittered soldier? iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Monday, December
Judy, if speaking the Truth is love, then
you deserve a crown of glory. Blessings to you and yours, Izzy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
7:57 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc:
I still love the tango scene.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 11:01 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s),
Linda
Yup.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
9:52 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Oh, well, at least we have agreed he bled
in Gethsemane, is that a conclusion I
For what is is worth, huzzah is an old english word that has become
hurrah today. I first heard it at a renaissance festival. I think you mean
Hoo-ha, which is the term Pacino used in Scent of a Woman.
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
FYI, jd, when someone speaks of the
Accuser, they may be speaking about the spirit motivating you; not you
personally. Get it? iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
8:38 PM
To:
Yup again.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
9:47 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
Thank you Iz, this is talking about none
other than the Lord Jesus
The Cross?
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005
9:24 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] sweat
In a message dated 12/18/2005 7:28:12
P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL
Bingo !!! And do you think that we are all stupid enough not to know who the Accuser is?
-- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI, jd, when someone speaks of the Accuser, they may be speaking about the spirit motivating you; not you
Thoughts that work for me from the thinking of others:
An ecclesiology that does not share a high regard for a hermeneutic that includes church tradition,
preferring, instead, an infintile appeal to Sola Scriptura that denies all circumstances for
understanding other than the influence of the
101 - 147 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
