Suggested reading:
1. 'Dare we Hope That all men be Saved? with a short discourse on Hell -
Hans Urs Von Balthasar
2. 'Four Views on Hell' Counterpoints series
3. 'The One Purpose of God' An answer to the Doctrine of Eternal Punishment'
Jan Bonda
4. 'Hell': A Hard Look at a Hard Question - The
- Original Message -
From: Debbie Sawczak
To: 'Lance Muir'
Sent: March 14, 2006 22:04
Subject: excerpt redux
Lance, I was just printing out the next raw chapter (on
"Two Kinds of Righteousness" and "A Meditation on Christ's Passion") in
preparation for editing, and my eye lit on
Dean:It was a meaningless congratulatory message.
As I read yesterday's salvo, I see that you have indeed discovered how to access
the archives.Also, my slams at both you and Kevin went over the line,
often. You both exhibit a thoroughgoing apprehension of a particular brand of
Each generation must apprehend then apply the truth
in a manner appropriate to its time. This is but one reason IFO favour newer
translations of all sacred texts, including the text of scripture. Some recent
christian teaching/writing is an asset to the believing community. FWIW, I'd
dance
For someone whose expertise is withwords Lance,
your friend sure plays fast and loose with them.
Nowhere doesscripturesay "Christ
became sin or a sinner" - Remember? He was "begotten not
made,
of one substance with the Father" - so
even Orthodoxy disputes her thesis.
It was on the cross
Not so Lance; Truth is fixed and eternal in every
generation. God does not change and neither does His Word
which is forever sealed in heaven. As Dean
warns - better be sure you are not dancing around a calf.
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 05:42:17 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Each
Would you be so kind Judy, as to restate 'apprehend
and apply' so as to demonstrate to me that therein lies the meaning 'truth is
NOT fixed and eternal..'?
Further Judy, should we actually be attempting to
exhibit a 'new and improved' TT, was the last 'shot' necessary? ('dancing around
a
Is it figurative in the BoM too?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: NOTE to all TTers: I had attempted to post several responses that were rejected. Most of them were about the previous situation, which is now less than pertinent, so there is no point in posting them. However, a couple of them
And Theologians revamp HELL before moving in Can't remember the authorLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Suggested reading:1. 'Dare we Hope "That all men be Saved"? with a short discourse on Hell - Hans Urs Von Balthasar2. 'Four Views on Hell' Counterpoints series3. 'The One Purpose of God'
So 1) were you just angry or 2) did you see the correct response to this "inflammatory brand" as slams?If it was 2 is that itself inflammatory?Is it the Dogmatism that bothers you?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean:It was a meaningless congratulatory message. As I read
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:02:02 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would you be so kind Judy, as to restate 'apprehend and apply' so as to demonstrate to
me that therein lies the meaning 'truth is NOT
fixed and eternal..'?
I say that truth IS
fixed and eternal so would
Kevin:As to the probability of any conversation, am
I to understand your to be meaning something like this: 'The Scriptural teaching
on Hell is clear beyond question. What I, along with most everyone I know
believes concerning this matter is not open to discussion.' Thereafter you would
Lance's
friend writes:
It's
QA, and the point I was noticing was that sinhas no existence apart
from sinners
What about the
angels who sinned and are held in chains of darkness - are they persons
also? And
BTW what is
personhood anyway? Last time I looked angels were ministering
It was 2) and, yes to both.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 15, 2006 07:23
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dean as a
candidate for Moderator?
So
1) were you just angry
or
2) did you see the correct
Very interesting dialogue, Lance. I appreciate you sharing it with us.
There is much more that can be developed here. The concept of love the
sinner but hate the sin is problematic in certain contexts, but it is not
entirely a logical contradiction. The reason is that the concept of
sinner
When you answer my question then, I'll 'give it a
shot' as it were.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 15, 2006 07:22
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The dearly
departed
Looks as though we have a major sin problem
here.
We need to be able to define persons and we need to
know the difference between good and evil
Slamming ppl is presumptuous sin along with taking
offense. There is just ONE faith, once delivered to the
saints.
Why not be offended with what
I am saying that I don't understand your question
Lance - so it looks likeyou have excused yourself again.
Why are you so full of conditions - is it really
that difficult to say what you mean?
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:31:49 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When you answer my
DaveH asks Gary:
You've repeatedly posted copyright material
on TT. Doesn't that violate copyright restrictions?
I'm not a lawyer, Dave, but my understanding is that there is no problem
with copying portions of an author's material for noncommercial use. The
copyright laws are meant to
I've no problem acknowledging the 'fixity and
eternality' of truth. I do, however, have a problem with some persons
interpretations. I'd say to you that which I said to Kevin: Once you (Judy) are
convinced that your statements concerning the truth (Scriptural quotations on
any subject) are
No the conversation goes like this Men HATE the concept of a place of punishment for actual PEOPLE therefore they will do anything to overthrow that PLACE for the disobedient, refered to in scripture. Some alegorize, some remodel some avoid the thought altogether.Why would Jesus use
It is my understanding that you may post - print PORTIONS not complete works.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DaveH asks Gary: You've repeatedly posted copyright material on TT. Doesn't that violate copyright restrictions?I'm not a lawyer, Dave, but my understanding is that there is no
Do you think that you could change the mind of one who might fit the description of Acts 15:26? Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.Would you say that men that put their own lives in hazard are not somewaht DOGMATIC? Would you admit that some (not all) you
Rhetorical questions are intended to provoke
thought rather than bring forth an answer. It may well be the case that some,
having arrived at the definitive understanding on some matters,believe
that any other understanding is itself a lie/deception. That having been said
then, no further
So what you are saying Lance is that there is no
"objective truth?" That in fact if I say dog, you could be
hearing cat? which means there is no such
thing as a dog because this is just my interpretation?
And if I write exactly what is written in
scripture - because IYO truth changes
There is objective truth, Judy. Some of that which
you say is.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 15, 2006 07:59
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The dearly
departed
So what you
You haven't answered my question Lance
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:03:01 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is objective truth, Judy. Some of that
which you say is.
From: Judy Taylor
So what you are saying Lance is that there is
no "objective truth?" That
I believe that I have answered your question, Judy.
As you believe that I have not then, we are at an impasse. I've gone beyond the
suggested quota for they day (number of posts) so, for the time being, I'll
leave it there.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To:
- Original Message -
From: Debbie Sawczak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Lance Muir' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 15, 2006 08:20
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: excerpt redux
My, that was fast!
I guess we have to take his word for it. I wonder what sort of sign would
express an accusatory and
Along these same lines, I view the biblical message as "truth" with the belief that such is absolute. My interpretation of same can never be considered [by me] as absolute. Paul's word of caution, "when you think to know something, you do not yet know it as you should," is always in order.But,,
If I'm understanding Kevin correctly he is speaking
of something different from
Jer 31:33 and Heb 8. The Day of the Lord is
what was feared so much in the book
of Acts after hearing the apostles preaching that
Simon the magician trembled and
begged Peter to pray for him that none of the
And I think that you can duplicate what is written if you do not profit from it and/or it is not duplicated as a course of business (as a church does with their singing or a buisness does with the birthday song -- have you noticed that no business actually sings "Happy birthday to you .." It is
OH I see you are saying that what is true for one may be false for another. There is no objective truth A thing may be both A and NON A at the same time. Is the definition of this philosophy - irrationality - PostModernism?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rhetorical questions are
Yes.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 15, 2006 09:09
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hell
OH I see you are saying that what is true for one may be false for
another.
There is no objective truth
A thing may be
cd: You can save this if you want and when we decide who is moderator-I will see that he proves you are from the Ozarks or apologize-remind me.
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 3/14/2006 5:26:25 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] To The
cd: No need bro-as I already have them- I save all the messages I reply too-and have found it helps to do so-I am starting to realize why Webber films/tapes all his debates.
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 3/14/2006 5:22:38 PM
DAVEH: Responding to Kevin.It seemed to me that he posted the
entire text of each song.
Responding to KevinI think you are wrong about that. If you
wrote a book, the law would allow me to quote very small portions of it
in a review I might post. However, if I were to post the whole
Because I believe that homosexuality is preventable and
curable.
DAVEH: Did you/anybody happen to watch 60 MINUTES a few days ago?
It had a very interesting segment on homosexuality. And as I
understood the story, they seemed to be neutral in their
examination.which was
DAVEH: Hadn't thought about it, Kevin. Post a passage and let's
examine it.
Kevin Deegan wrote:
Is it figurative in the BoM too?
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NOTE
to all TTers: I had attempted to post several responses that were
rejected. Most of them were about the previous
yes
[E.g., you know Bob Dylan to some degree
(didn't you say he's got one of your leather jackets?);
perhaps write, through his internet
site,and askhim to check out the TT archives for a©
violation
( let us know what he
says:)]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:24:38 -0800 Dave
Hansen [EMAIL
cd: David you were given you choice and I think people should have to live
with their decisions- Remove me from this list.You chose Mormons and Liars
over you brother in Christ-The choice wasn't whether or not Gary and Kevin
came back to your list. The choice was for me to Moderate their offences
Great post. I would include David's response but I am still working on his comments.
Perhaps only the definition of sin exists in the abstract. We I speak of "hating the sin" I only mean that I am displeased with the effects sin is having on his person. I think it a perversion to hate the
Are you saying I am thoughtLESS?Regular questions are intended to provoke answers You did not answer any of the questions below. Why? If I have it wrong, tell me why my understanding is a lie/deception. Seems to me it is not that WE are at an impass, it is that YOU are at an impass because
How can you relate the two was Job and now Zacchaeus a FORNICATOR also?Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: "Debbie Sawczak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "'Lance Muir'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: March 15, 2006 08:20Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: excerpt reduxMy, that was
Bingo! Day of The Lord The day of the Lord God will deal with the NATIONS And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD's sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until
That is belief in NON SENSE You believe in the LITERAL Truth else you would have no concern with walking across the QEW!Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes.- Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 15, 2006 09:09 Subject: Re:
Some of the conflict recently has involvedthe ideology of whether or
not a list like TruthTalk should be a secular list or a Christian list.
There is a more general topic involved here that concernsour Bill of
Rights and the concept of separation of church and State. I would
likefor us to
NO Jd
Some of us believe the scriptural account which teaches
us that as a person He was "begotten" not made
The word JD is "monogenes" and it means one of a kind
and different from the rest of us who were conceived in
in sin and iniquity.
YES Jd
He did die unjustly and if you believe
the
Go to your favorite copy store tell them you want to copy one page of this copyrighted booklet. See what happensCopyright protects the right to copy and or distrubute among other things What we have been discussing is called "FAIR USE" The more you copy the less likely it will be considered
Numorous aboringinal socities discovered thruout history have ALL been Male/Female I think that generally rules out the genetics of the situation.Not all Homosexuals are cannibals but most if not all cannibals are Homosexual is that Genetic? Do a search on google:
BE WARNED!!!
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:21:33 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps only the definition of sin exists in the
abstract. We I speak of "hating the sin" I only mean that I
am displeased with the effects sin is having on his person. I think it a perversion to hate the
BTW It was the Baptists that were killed beaten banished. It was unlawful to be Baptist in America until the revolutionary War except in Rhode Island founded by Baptists. It was these same Baptists that accepted into RI, the Jews and every other form of religion to freely worship as they saw fit.
Kevin, I think I understand John's question, so I am going to try and
rephrase it and hope you will answer it.
It seems to me that Johnthinks you do not allow for baby Christians
who might be considered carnal. In other words, if a Christian is found to
be weak and a little dense
Wrong, Lance. I can be sure I am right and
still discuss it with someone else who (a) also thinks I am right, (b) thinks I
am wrong and wants to debate the issue. I cannot, however, have a conversation
with someone who is sure HE, also, is right, and does not want to discuss it with me if
Dean, I think that means it was untrue. How
do we discern which of Lances words are true vs meaningless?
iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006
4:37 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Kevin, you can Google the
lyrics to any song. I just found the lyrics to Carrie Underwoods Jesus
Take the Wheel. (Love it!) iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006
6:52 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Doesnt that prove that 60 Minutes doesnt
know a __ thing? iz
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006
9:11 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
excerpt redux
Because I
Conservative Republicans (in any income
bracket) are much happier than Liberal Democrats (in any income bracket).
http://pewresearch.org/social/pack.php?PackID=1
Since I came back to TT at the request of Dean, I think I'll depart also.
Nothing has changed. I'll miss my friends, but not the backbiters. Izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Moore
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:49 AM
To:
An example of a carnal reply. Does anyone doubt the sincerity of Linda's faith -- yet we have something that could not sound more worldly. I think this has to do with I Cor 3:1ff.
jd
Doesnt that prove that 60 Minutes doesnt know a __ thing? iz
The blank space is so that YOU can fill in
the blank. I suppose your fill-in was carnal. (Mine was not.) J iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006
2:26 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
Did I miss your response Lance? You have picqued my interest. Do you think that you could change the mind of one who might fit the description of Acts 15:26? Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.Would you say that men that put their own lives in hazard are
I'm going to try and weigh in a bit
here.
I hear from Lance that sometimes truth and
one's interpretation of truth does not coincide.
I hear from Judy that sometimes one's
interpretation of truth does coincide.
I agree with these two statements. Do
both of you? I think you both do, but
Why do you have to post for JD?The question is not the problem. I have posted at least 10 times asking JD to post his summary of my belief that he has a problem with. JD does not clearly understand what I am saying I believe JD just has to have this theology of carnal believers for
As in all things do as the scripture tells us. Not our theology, not our creed, not our feelings, not our beliefs, not our reason.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin, I think I understand John's question, so I am going to try and rephrase it and hope you will answer it.It
-- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The blank space is so that YOU can fill in the blank. I suppose your fill-in was carnal. (Mine was not.) J iz
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL
DM says Kevin, I think I understand John's questionAre you sure? Is it that clear to you?JD says we all know of your theologyon the matters cited Youre all set then: Therefore it should be a piece of cake for him or that matter any other to summarize my beliefs on the matter, as he
You will be missed!ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I came back to TT at the request of Dean, I think I'll depart also.Nothing has changed. I'll miss my friends, but not the backbiters. Izzy-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean
Thanks for your example of as you say "a carnal reply"Now that I see your response I am a BELIEVER!!! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An example of a carnal reply. Does anyone doubt the sincerity of Linda's faith -- yet we have something that could not sound more worldly. I think this has
You left out COMMUNITY!David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to try and weigh in a bit here.I hear from Lance that sometimes truth and one's interpretation of truth does not coincide.I hear from Judy that sometimes one's interpretation of truth does coincide.I
Your theology is herein included, Kevin. Now -- Back to I Cor 3:1ff. It appears (based on what is written) that we have a church full of carnal and immature people. It is my beleif that if this were a circumstance in which Joanna Williams could help -- she just might be doing her best to mentor
I hear something else from Judy (and Izzy too), and that is that Lance seems to have no basis by which we can know whether or not our interpretation of the truth is accurate. This creates a problem in discussing truth, because then we all just have opinions and nobody knows the truth. Lance, do
Interesting.
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BTW
It was the Baptists that were killed beaten banished. It was unlawful to be Baptist in America until the revolutionary War except in Rhode Island founded by Baptists. It was these same Baptists
I see you as standing outside the door of the church rebuking Wake UP! It's just a NIGHMARE! Or a personal problem...[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your theology is herein included, Kevin. Now -- Back to I Cor 3:1ff. It appears (based on what is written) that we have a church full of carnal and
..was written by whom--anybody
know/anything about this v interesting person virtually banished from Am.
history?
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 13:03:44 -0500 "David
Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
..[the Am. constitutional]Bill of
Rights ..
..ftr, this v interestingperson also wrote the (historic)French
BoR
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:05:31 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
..was written by whom--anybody
know/anything about this v interesting person virtually banished from Am.
history?
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 13:03:44
Ben Franklin?
-- Original message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..ftr, this v interesting person also wrote the (historic) French BoR
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:05:31 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
..was written by whom--anybody know/anything about this v
http://www.present-truth.org/Roger-Williams/R-WilliamsTOC.htm Roger Williams was the apostle of a doctrine which in time became the fundamental tenet of American philosophy of civil governmentthe proposition that the civil authorities have no jurisdiction over the conscience in religious
Sounds like a bear with his foot in a trap !!
It is so easy to set the record straight. You are all over people or activiity such as the one shared by Lance and his friend, Joanna Williams, and yet, you now seem to want others to believe that I have misrepresented you. Not my intention at all.
nope
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 03:19:17 +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ben Franklin?
-- Original message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ..ftr, this v interesting person also wrote the
(historic) French BoROn Wed, 15 Mar 2006
20:05:31 -0700 [EMAIL
An interesting keeper for my files -- but did he, too, believe that King James was a evangelical Chrsitian? THAT's what I want to knowholy snikies !! Is the correct answer to G's question ... R W?
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL
nope
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 03:31:06 +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
..Is the correct answer to G's
question ... R W?
||
I have to go eat, now. Funny, but I seriously thought I was taught this in school. Ah ! Old age. I do want to know. History is a most interesting topic.
Here's a news flash -- I am giving up on Sean Hannity. The past three weeks have been very disappointing. For some reason -- the bulldog
ciao
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 03:38:18 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have to go eat, now. Funny, but I seriously thought I was
taught this in school. Ah ! Old age. I do
want to know. History is a most interesting topic.
Here's a news flash -- I am giving up on Sean
Hannity.
Patrick henry and Baptists without Permits http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0527.htm Three Baptist preachers were brought to trial for preaching. http://www.bjcpa.org/resources/pubs/pub_truett_address.htm Baptists and Religious Liberty NOT TOLERATION, BUT RIGHT Baptists have one consistent
..yo DaveH, send this to Bob ask
him where he got the idea:)
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 11:22:43 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"..There's always some new stranger
sneakin' glancesSome trigger-happy fool willin' to take chancesAnd
some old whore from San Pedro to make advancesAdvances
Patrick henry and Baptists without Permits http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0527.htm Three Baptist preachers were brought to trial for preaching. http://www.bjcpa.org/resources/pubs/pub_truett_address.htm Baptists and Religious Liberty NOT TOLERATION, BUT RIGHT Baptists have one consistent
ELEVENTH REQUEST Please post a short summary of the position you want me to hold.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Sounds like a bear with his foot in a trap !! It is so easy to set the record straight. You are all over people or activiity such as the one shared by Lance and his friend, Joanna
Patrick henry and Baptists without Permits http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0527.htm Three Baptist preachers were brought to trial for preaching. http://www.bjcpa.org/resources/pubs/pub_truett_address.htm Baptists and Religious Liberty NOT TOLERATION, BUT RIGHT Baptists have one consistent
LOL That is FUNNY! What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900?? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:An interesting keeper for my files -- but did he, too, believe that King James was a evangelical Chrsitian? THAT's what I want to knowholy snikies !! Is the correct answer to G's
DAVEH: Thanx for posting that link, Kevin. There are several points
they make that would seem pertinent to posting copyrighted song
lyrics
Is the new work merely a copy of the original? If it is simply a
copy, it is not as likely to be considered fair use.
Is the work factual or
JD says we all know of your theologyon the matters cited You're all set then: It should be a piece of cake for you or that matter any other to summarize my beliefs on the matter, as you sayYOU ALL KNOW SINCE YOU ALL KNOW, I NEED NOT WASTE ANY MORE TIME ON THIS!If thare are any other issues
Are you saying I am thoughtLESS?
DAVEH: Lance is probably thinking less than you think, Kevin! ;-)
Kevin Deegan wrote:
Are you saying I am thoughtLESS?
Regular questions are intended to provoke answers
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
DAVEH: I didn't deal with BD personallymy nephew did. It seems
to me that if anybody would request permission or asking whether or not
posting it on TT is in violation, it should be the guy posting the
copyrighted material.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes
[E.g., you know Bob
What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900??
DAVEH: HmmIs this a test? If so, I should think the
answer is simple...PreVangelical.
Kevin Deegan wrote:
LOL That is FUNNY!
What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900??
--
~~~
Dave
Good one!Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900??DAVEH: HmmIs this a test? If so, I should think the answer is simple...PreVangelical.Kevin Deegan wrote: LOL That is FUNNY! What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900??
A king ??
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
LOL That is FUNNY!
What pray tell is an EVangelical prior to 1900??
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An interesting keeper for my files -- but did he, too, believe that King James was a evangelical
Perhaps my twentieth request. It is not what I think you beleive but what you actually believe that is the question. If I tell you what I think you believe, you will just make fun of me and hurt my feelings and stuff .
Does Kevin beleive in the kind of mission activity demonstrated by Joanna and
Music, lyrics, and music video: up to 10 percent of the work but no more than 30 seconds of the music or lyrics from an individual musical work.
No music video's here -- no?
-- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: Thanx for posting that link,
Obviously, this is offered as a criticism. No solutions -- just criticism. Just remember this -- you do not believe in passages such as I cor 3:1 and the reality they present. That is what we know from this thread.
jd
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
