Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

There's NO BLASPHEMING goin' on, David! That which, IMO, is IN QUESTION HERE, has nothing to do with your facility as a rationalist, (i.e. your back and forth with John over logic via syntax) rather, it's your own discerning 'heart'(?). You still don't know yourself, David. - Original

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

'Twas Perry who brought up this film. He did not end up an 'embittered soldier'. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: December 19, 2005 23:47 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda

[TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

Shall we accuse them ALL of blasphemy? C'mon let's do it! Surely it's not a serious charge is it, Judy? From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: December 19, 2005 09:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] JUDY ASSERTS THAT I,

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

You just love the groupfest thing don't you Lance?. You talk yourself into a corner and then want everyone who has ever disagreed with anything I have ever said on this list to join you. How very sad!!! I say the Spirit of God gives me understanding as per John 16:3,14 and you say He does

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

I've been just as clear as you've been on this. Including others is not a 'groupfest thingy', Judy. Have you truly failed to take note of anyone's recent disagreement with you over your scriptural interpretation? I've most certainly NOT failed to note them! Here is a very serious

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:38:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been just as clear as you've been on this. Including others is not a 'groupfest thingy', Judy. Have you truly failed to take note of anyone's recent disagreement with you over your scriptural

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

You and David have accused ME of blasphemy. By extension you've similarly accused the 'trio' as you call them.Kicked off or not, I should like for this to go ahead. 'Blaspheming' is serious business, Judy. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To:

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

I know - and for this reason you should stop doing it Lance. I don't know about this "by extension" thing; let the others fight their own battles ... Gary's writings are incomprehensible so I wouldn't know what he is saying most of the time JD's are also so much mixture it has become

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

I await the prouncement(s). - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: December 19, 2005 10:08 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

[TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

Lance wrote: Here is a very serious suggestion! Let's have David and Perry prounce on this issue. Let's say that if anything warrants being thrown off the list, it'd be blasphemy. Agreed? No, Lance, I don't agree. This list is not a Christian list. Atheists and pagans are allowed. Surely

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

Here we go once again, David. Since we are totally public why don't you outline, utilizing texts and interpretation just how you support this 'non-accusation' that not you but, God is judging me for? - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

"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 the same time and in the same breath, accusing him OF blasphemy. jd -- Original message

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

Lance wrote: ... why don't you outline, utilizing texts and interpretation just how you support this 'non-accusation' that not you but, God is judging me for? Your last comment indicates you have misunderstood me. What I meant is that you are under God himself. You are not somebody who is

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

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 the same time and in the same breath, accusing him OF blasphemy. There is a distinction between

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

HUZZAH!! David has loosed me from condemnation! Actually David, it may well be Judy who misunderstood. IMO both of you misapprehend Jn 16 1 Cor 2 but, another conversation for another prophet. . - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

-- 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

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

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

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

-- 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

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is legalism that filters the nat and chokes on the camel. Or verse visa

Re: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

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

RE: [TruthTalk] And Gary, and John, and Bill and, on occasion(s), Linda and David

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