Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Charles Perry Locke wrote: If I may add a comment, there is a difference between reformation and restoration. The protestant movement was a reformation...JS' movement was a restoration. I see them as quite different. DAVEH: I understand that, Perry. I'm trying to figure out why they went with a reformation instead of a restoration. Seems like the Bible suggests there would be a restitution (restoration) of all things, rather than a reformation. Wouldn't it have been more Biblical for the Reformers to think in restitution/restoration terms? Is there Biblical evidence to suggest a reformation? Luther thought the church had gone astray, DAVEH: Yes.That seems like a perfect reason to suggest an apostasy had taken place in/by the RCC. I'm surprised the Reformers did not consider such. and reformed it to correct doctrinal error. JS thought the church had totally apostatized, so totally resored it. I dfon;t think the two can be compared. DAVEH: I wasn't trying to compare them. To me the restoration makes perfect sense from the Biblical evidence of an apostasy, and subsequent restitution. Yet the Reformers evidently didn't see it that way, but rather preferred to consider that the RCC folks simply strayed a bit and needed some reforming instead of restoring what was lost. I agree with Luther (in that the church had gone astray, and that reformation was due), DAVEH: Since you agree with the early Reformers, then perhaps you can answer my questions about it..assuming you understand what I'm asking. Forget about JS for a moment.And consider the RCC folks. Do you think they just had some bad doctrine that evolved over the years? Or.do you view them as apostates from the Primitive Church? And, if they were Apostatesthen wouldn't a restoration have made sense from the Reformers' (or your) perspective? If not, there must be some Biblical reason you/Reformers did not think a restitution is/was necessary. but not JS. DAVEH: Listen Perry.I understand that few TTers have any sympathy for JS. I'm not trying to promote him in TT. I'm not asking you to believe him or his teachings. But, my curiosity is certainly biased by what I know and believe about his teachingsforgive me for that. What interests me though is what reasons (Biblical) you (and Protestants in general) believe the way you do when it seems so odd to me. I hope that makes sense. For instance, I see the Bible speak about a falling away (apostasy) and the need for a restitution (restoration) of all things, and it fits into my theological and Biblical inclinations. I hear your thinking about the RCC having some skewed doctrines that needed reformed, and then the Reformers making some minor changes.and I don't see that in the Bible. It is not that I'm trying to hit you over the head with this.I'm just trying to figure out why you see it your way when I see it another way and we both are viewing it from a Biblical perspective. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. -- 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] The Trinity
DAVEH: I hope you don't mind my intrusion, John. First.welcome to TT and this thread. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with "person" (and I have used this many more times than once) gives us the impression that know what God looks like. DAVEH: Does not the Bible suggest what God looks like when we are told Jesus is in his express image? (He 1:3) It seems logical to me that the Son would look similar to his Father. We are persons. He is a person. They (all three) are persons --- and walla -- he is male with arms, legs, hindquarters. The manifestation becomes the reality and the observation by John that "no man hath seen God at any time" gets lost in the shuffle. DAVEH: Do you leave any room for considering that some men of God may have seen him, though not necessarily with their natural eyes. Did not Stephen see God when filled with the Holy Ghost? (Acts 7:55) There are certainly passages that infer that such a belief (men that see God will die) is in error. Judges 13:22 is a good example.. And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God. Isaiah is another who spoke of seeing the King in 6:5. To me though, the most compelling passage is Gen 32:30.. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. ...What more evidence can be more plain than that, John? Perhaps Jn 6:46 might make more sense in light of many Biblical instances (suggesting some men are able to see God and live) if one considers the exception (save he which is of God) may be referring to anybody who is filled with the HG as was Stephen, rather than thinking the passage exclusively refers to Jesus. In His grace John David Smithson (JD in another and most regretable life) -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: [TruthTalk] Questions set the tone
If only Judas could have endured one more moment?Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: DAVEH: Sinners.yes. Lost?.Can one be lost if he endures to the end? YESDAVEH: Now let me ask you, Terry.Do you believe one can be saved if he does not endure to the end?-- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain Five email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Passion of the Christ
Back in the old days, before computers to zip out copies. There were companies that printed forms. Sometimes forms would have a sort of part number. Would the form number printed on the bottom of the form, be legally binding? Would the form number be part of the terms of a contract?Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: The headings chapter verses are not in the mss. They are not part of the text and not part of Gods word You embarass yourself by claiming you thought the headings were scripture.DAVEH: Forgive me for being naive, Kevin. As you are well aware, I'm not high on the TT IQ quotient protocol here. that is just foolishness on your part. Perhaps you greatly desire to see something, anything, that will align with your preconcieved notions about errors in the Bible.DAVEH: I hear seemingly contradictory statements and try to harmonize (as some TTers have used before) what I've heard to make sense. Do you also think the form number on the bottom of your mortgage is part of the "CONTRACT"DAVEH: Silly me.somehow I thought when one signed one of those documents with all kinds of itty bitty disclaimers and numbers, including page numbersit means that each of those points is important to the integrity of the entire document. What gave me that idea I suppose, is that one has to initial each and every page that contains one of those numbers. IF you are correct---that those page numbers aren't important to the integrity of the legal document---then I have learned something about law. IF you are wrong---that those page numbers aren't important to the integrity of the legal document---then I have learned something about you, Kevin. LOLDave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jt: Headers, chapter and verse divisions and all that are not and never were sacred text Daveh, so what's the problem?DAVEH: The problem is some people may think it is part of the inerrant text. I did. I wonder if many of the KJVOnly folks do too? And, from what DavidM said..There are some 1611 King James folks who think that is inerrant. I think Kevin is in this camp. ...Perhaps Kevin believes such as well. I'd sure appreciate Kevin commenting on this. Which way do you believe, Kevin..Do you believe the headings are inerrant???-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
I don't care what you call the rock. The verse says the gates of hell will not prevail against the church Thye other verse teaches the church will exist througout ALL AGES Jesus must be mistaken because you know there was a TOTAL Apostacy shortly after the last apostle died there were no more christians on earth. WDJKa (What does Jesus know anyhow) Seems theDOGMA tradition of men,here is "The Great Apostacy" have you the book? If there are no christians there is no church right? Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: True Christianity wasNEVER lost Mt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;DAVEH: IMHO..that rock was revelation, Kevin. So, to me it makes sense that after a general apostasy (falling away), it would be a restitution of all things via revelation to the Lord's servants, the prophets. and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. EPH 3:21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen. God's word was NEVER lostDAVEH: I don't think we were referring to God's word being lost, but rather to people being lostsearching to and fro for the truth. As Isaiah recorded in 29:13.Wherefore the Lord said, For as much as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men.Rather than hear the real message of the Lord's word, they become lost due to the dogma and traditions (such as the T-Doctrine belief in a literal lake of fire and brimstone) derived by men centuries ago. At least that's how I see it. To suggest that God's word was never lost, I think that might be short sighted thinking. Seems to me there are a lot of gaps in or knowledge of what happened in Biblical times, and what God may have revealed. Is that not why there are so many theological questions and controversies over doctrines? Furthermore, there are books written (viz, THE LOST BOOKS OF THE BIBLE) regarding material that has since been discovered. You may have lost it or may never have found it. God's word is ETERNAL ALIVE 1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. But then again you do not trust His wordDAVEH: I think I trust it far more than I trust those who purport the Bible is all God has revealed, Kevin. Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: And Mormons are proof of that falling away! There was NO TOTAL APOSTACY that needed a RESTORATIONDAVEH: I would have thought the Protestants would be happy to suggest the RCC or the Dark Ages represented a time of apostasy and falling away. Couldn't Protestants then claim the Reformation movement to be a part of the prophecy of a restitution of all things as spoken by the Bible? If the Protestants don't lay claim to such a restoration, then when do they think it will happen, Kevin? thru a a money digging OCCULTIST, who could not stay away from other mens wives.-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
[TruthTalk] Fw: David: Not a question but another quotation..
- Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 06:11 Subject: David: Not a question but another quotation.. "Theological statements operate with what we may call open concepts-concepts which, to be sure, must be closed on our side, for we have to formulate them as carefully and exactly as we can, but which on God's side are open to the infinite objectivity and inexhaustible reality of the divine Being. That is to say, the kind of conceptuality with which we operate in theology is one in which our acts of cognition are formed from beyond them by the reality disclosed so that the content of what is revealed constantly bursts through the forms we bring to it in order to grasp it. This can happen only under the power of the Spirit, as He presses upon us from the side of the divine Being. The Spirit is thus the act of God upon us which keeps our concepts or cognitive forms open, so that our thoughts and speech are stretched out beyong themselves toward the inexhaustible nature of the divine Being. Apart from this impact of the Spirit upon us, the forms of our thought and speech become quite obscure and indeed may even become a form of obstruction to the divine revelation or a means of suppressing the truth through the transmutation of knowledge into our own constructs. It is worship which keeps the epistemological process personal."Lance
[TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Therefore, using the Jewish calendar, the first day of the month was always a new moon and the middle of the month was the full moon. It really is that simple. The problem is that you do not believe me, so study some history about calendars like Blaine has and you too will understand. JT: You must be behind on your reading David because this thread is resolved; I disagree with you on some other issues but this is not one of them. I just needed to see and understand it in God's Word for myself - I've now seen the movie and compared to some of the other controversies the state of the moon pales. Actually I did do my homework and learned that watchers in Israel would light fires when the saw the New Moon to let everyone know that the other was coming along with some other interesting trivia. judyt God allows the devil to raise up heretics to make his people study ~ Corresponding dates of the past with our present calendar is not always so simple. However, determining that the moon was full when Jesus was crucified is VERY simple. You don't seem to understand that the Gregorian calendar was not put into use until 1582. At the time of Christ, there was no Gregorian calendar like we use today. There were people who visually looked for the new moon to determine when the month would start. This day would be a rest from worldly business, a day wherein trumpets were blown and sacrifices were offered (see Num. 10:10, 28:11, Amos 8:5). Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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.
[TruthTalk] The Trinity
John wrote:The problem with "person" (and I have used this many more times than once) gives us the impression that know what God looks like. DAVEH: Does not the Bible suggest what God looks like when we are told Jesus is in his express image? (He 1:3) It seems logical to me that the Son would look similar to his Father. jt: Jesus did not refer to 'body image' when He made that statement He speaks of 'nature and character' [??] We are persons. He is a person. They (all three) are persons --- and walla -- he is male with arms, legs, hindquarters. The manifestation becomes the reality and the observation by John that "no man hath seen God at any time" gets lost in the shuffle. jt: Some misguided souls now think God looks like Jim Caveizel .. DAVEH: Do you leave any room for considering that some men of God may have seen him, though not necessarily with their natural eyes. Did not Stephen see God when filled with the Holy Ghost? (Acts 7:55) There are certainly passages that infer that such a belief (men that see God will die) is in error. Judges 13:22 is a good example.. And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.Isaiah is another who spoke of seeing the King in 6:5. To me though, the most compelling passage is Gen 32:30..And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preservedWhat more evidence can be more plain than that, John? Perhaps Jn 6:46 might make more sense in light of many Biblical instances (suggesting some men are able to see God and live) if one considers the exception (save he which is of God) may be referring to anybody who is filled with the HG as was Stephen, rather than thinking the passage exclusively refers to Jesus. jt: We should take Jesus at his Word DaveH. After all HE is the Truth. Manoah and his wife were visited by an angel which is plain from the text. Manoah called it God after the fire rose from the altar but this needs to be taken in balance and context. Jacob wrestled at Bethel with the 'angel of the Lord's presence' in the form of a man and Stephen saw "the glory of God" with Jesus sitting at his right hand. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study
[TruthTalk] reliability of the HOLY BIBLE
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] What I do find curious though is why you feel the Bible is inerrant, when you apparently aren't even sure who penned parts of it. Who do you think wrote Hebrews, Kevin? DavidM thought you might possibly think Paul did so, but I would like to hear your thoughts about what you believe regarding the author of Hebrews.??? jt: Same author for all 66 books DaveH; he just uses different messengers. The authority of your mail does not depend on whether you have the pedigree of the mailman delivering it does it? Those whoknow the authorin a personal way can receive His Word because they recognize His voice. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study Kevin Deegan wrote: There exists more than 24,000 partial complete manuscript (mss) copies of the bible.They are available for inspection.The existing quotes (of portions of the New Testament) of the Bible number over 86,000These are found in letters and documents of the "church fathers" including several thousand lectionaries (CHURCH SERVICE BOOKS CONTAINING PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE)Without the manuscripts all but about 11 verses could be assembled from just the quotations. All 86,000 of these mss and many Lectionaries are available for inspection and cross checking the VALIDITY of the new testament we hold in our hands. Where can we scrutinize the sources for the BoM?DAVEH: Why do you care, Kevin? Have you not already determined it is false? Is there anybody else in TT who thinks it is true other than a few LDS TTers? I don't want to speak for Blaine, but I have not been pushing the BofM on anybody here. Nor do you have any interest in considering if it is true. So I don't feel compelled to defend it to your satisfaction---what would be the point!
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
What does the verse say dave? Try reading it real slow. what does the word UNTILmean? whom (Jesus) heaven must recieve UNTIL the times of restitution of all things. Jesus is in heaven UNTIL Are you claiming JOe restored ALL things? Then where are the "LOST" books of the Bible? Instead of fixing the supposed problem, JoE made it worse. He translated the books of the bible and could only find 65 of them, in the JST JoE LOST ONE MORE! Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: When Jesus comes back in the future Act 3:20-21 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.DAVEH: I've understood this to be that Jesus won't return (for the second time) prior that restitution. IOW, the restitution must come first. Do you agree? And, may I assume (it seems such from your above comment) you do not believe the restitution has yet taken place? Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: And Mormons are proof of that falling away! There was NO TOTAL APOSTACY that needed a RESTORATIONDAVEH: I would have thought the Protestants would be happy to suggest the RCC or the Dark Ages represented a time of apostasy and falling away. Couldn't Protestants then claim the Reformation movement to be a part of the prophecy of a restitution of all things as spoken by the Bible? If the Protestants don't lay claim to such a restoration, then when do they think it will happen, Kevin? thru a a money digging OCCULTIST, who could not stay away from other mens wives.-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Fw: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
Welcome to TT John Smithson, you write in part:
"I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by
history."
Truly wisdom from above,
judyt
God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people
study
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated
3/9/2004 5:11:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The
answer now, it seems to me, is not to trash the language -- as if that will
make the controversy go away -- but to learn how to speak it in a way that
is both historically and biblically accurate, while meaningful and true.
~~~You
have much to say, Bill Taylor. I prefer to narrow the discussion to
a single point. Allow me that discretion here, now. If you imply
that the principle I presented somehow degrades an opposing view ("trash"
is the word -- a bit harsh for my intentions), I do not agree.
My statement: "I am afraid that if we try to explain what has not
been fully revealed, we give the enemy another target.," is a rule of
biblical interpretation I follow. I see God's revelation in the
biblical message and nowhere else. I believe that He said what He
said with perfect intention and purpose. In the above, you speak of the
challenge of worded conclusions that are both historically and biblically
accurate. I believe to be biblically accurate is to be historically
true. Therefore, I am personally free to exegete my way to
biblical conclusions and assume that all other consideration will fall in line.
I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history.
Grace John Smithson
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
So many questions and controversies over doctrine? That is why we need JoE? Seems to me with over 200 offshoots of the Branches of the RESTORATION, something has gone seriously wrong!Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: True Christianity wasNEVER lost Mt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;DAVEH: IMHO..that rock was revelation, Kevin. So, to me it makes sense that after a general apostasy (falling away), it would be a restitution of all things via revelation to the Lord's servants, the prophets. and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. EPH 3:21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen. God's word was NEVER lostDAVEH: I don't think we were referring to God's word being lost, but rather to people being lostsearching to and fro for the truth. As Isaiah recorded in 29:13.Wherefore the Lord said, For as much as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men.Rather than hear the real message of the Lord's word, they become lost due to the dogma and traditions (such as the T-Doctrine belief in a literal lake of fire and brimstone) derived by men centuries ago. At least that's how I see it. To suggest that God's word was never lost, I think that might be short sighted thinking. Seems to me there are a lot of gaps in or knowledge of what happened in Biblical times, and what God may have revealed. Is that not why there are so many theological questions and controversies over doctrines? Furthermore, there are books written (viz, THE LOST BOOKS OF THE BIBLE) regarding material that has since been discovered. You may have lost it or may never have found it. God's word is ETERNAL ALIVE 1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. But then again you do not trust His wordDAVEH: I think I trust it far more than I trust those who purport the Bible is all God has revealed, Kevin. Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: And Mormons are proof of that falling away! There was NO TOTAL APOSTACY that needed a RESTORATIONDAVEH: I would have thought the Protestants would be happy to suggest the RCC or the Dark Ages represented a time of apostasy and falling away. Couldn't Protestants then claim the Reformation movement to be a part of the prophecy of a restitution of all things as spoken by the Bible? If the Protestants don't lay claim to such a restoration, then when do they think it will happen, Kevin? thru a a money digging OCCULTIST, who could not stay away from other mens wives.-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Who did the RC Church burn during the dark ages? Bible believing christians were never in short supply for torches You are totally leaving out the Waldenses, Anabaptists Albigenses How do they fit in your scheme of things? Why did they keep getting slaughtered? Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 07:13:47 -0800 Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave: That would then open the door to the Reformers claiming they were the answer to Biblical prophecy. Yet I don't recall any Protestants making such a claim. I'm curious as to why they don't adopt this scenario. By not seeing it from this perspective, it seems to me they leave the field exclusively open to folks (like the LDS) who do claim to fulfill Biblical prophecy. Vince: False prophets and false teachers make false claims. The fact that lds-ites makes false claims is no reason to compete with lds for primacy in those false claims. That's like having a contest to see who could most disasterously beat their own thumbs with a hammer. Is asking a non-lds to defend a position which he never advocated the best arrow that you have in your quiver? DAVEH: I'm not trying to shoot arrows into you or Protestants in general, Vince. I'm trying to find out what they believe and why they believe such. To me, the apostasy and subsequent restoration is a given from my LDS bias. It seems so obvious (again.from my LDS perspective) that the gospel went through dark ages just as the world did in other aspects. It just surprises me the Reformers did not jump onto that bandwagon (apostasy as evidenced by RCC theology) while claiming to be the Biblical answer (in the effect of a restoration of what the RCC folks lost). Now again, Vincethis is my LDS biased thinking. I'm curious to know if any Protestants have given any thought to this. And if not, why not? To me it seems relatively a logical path to take. Are there any Biblical reasons why the Reformers did not consider traveling that route?-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up [Greek, harpazo]together with them in the clouds, to meet the LORD in the air: and so shall we ever be with the LORD" 1Thessalonians 4:17"I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up [Greek, harpazo] to the Third Heaven" 2Corinthians 12:2 "And they heard a Great Voice from Heaven saying unto them, Come Up Hither. And they ascended up to Heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them" Rev 11:12 The word rapture is used to express a doctrine AND a GREEK WORD harpazo Rapture "transporting of a person from one place to another, especially to Heaven" American Heritage Dictionary Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in the Bible, but an english word commonly used to refer to the catching up or snatching away of the church as described in 1 Thes 4:17 (but, you knew that already). Like "trinity", or "the antichrist" (when used as an epithet for 'the beast" of Revelation). English words that catch the idea of the text, but do not appear in that text.From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last DaysDate: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 21:42:14 -0700On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 21:33:32 -0600 Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes: Charles Perry Locke wrote: ..the rapture..is this biblical wording now; what verse?G ~ P 235_Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor === You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. 'splaine yourself! Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 21:33:32 -0600 Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke wrote: ..the rapture.. is thisbiblical wording now; what verse? G ~ P 235 Naw,G. Rapture is not in the Bible. It's just a word we use to communicate an idea. The same way we use reverend or pope. Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
He wascommunicating to the other members of the Godhead TheTRI - part being created man in His image, as a TRI part being (1)Body, (2)soul (3)spirit 1Thes 5 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Do any parts of your being ever communicate to the other parts? Is 51:23 But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee; which have said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may go over: and thou hast laid thy body as the ground, and as the street, to them that went over. MT 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: "And God said, let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness . . ." So according to LDS theology God should have made man after the gods images.DAVEH: All Gods at that point of time were in the same (deified) image, as there were not yet any false gods created by men. Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Genesis 1:26) Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- (Genesis 3:22)DAVEH: Question: Who was God speaking to when he spoke these words, Kevin?-- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain Five email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] reliability of the HOLY BIBLE
There is no defense of a book (BoM) that has been changed countless times. The book has been tampered with, it has been cooked. There are no extant copies of the source documents. No BoM sites, NO BoM peoples names recorded in any history, places or documents secular or otherwise. It was the invention of a 19th century farm boy and his Spirit Guide Nephi later changed to Moroni. God wrote the book he used Holy Men not a pervert like JoE. God gave it - God preserved it. Ps 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. According to YOU, God lost his church, God lost his word. Your god is a promiscious pipsqueakDave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: There exists more than 24,000 partial complete manuscript (mss) copies of the bible.They are available for inspection.The existing quotes (of portions of the New Testament) of the Bible number over 86,000These are found in letters and documents of the "church fathers" including several thousand lectionaries (CHURCH SERVICE BOOKS CONTAINING PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE)Without the manuscripts all but about 11 verses could be assembled from just the quotations. All 86,000 of these mss and many Lectionaries are available for inspection and cross checking the VALIDITY of the new testament we hold in our hands. Where can we scrutinize the sources for the BoM?DAVEH: Why do you care, Kevin? Have you not already determined it is false? Is there anybody else in TT who thinks it is true other than a few LDS TTers? I don't want to speak for Blaine, but I have not been pushing the BofM on anybody here. Nor do you have any interest in considering if it is true. So I don't feel compelled to defend it to your satisfaction---what would be the point! What I do find curious though is why you feel the Bible is inerrant, when you apparently aren't even sure who penned parts of it. Who do you think wrote Hebrews, Kevin? DavidM thought you might possibly think Paul did so, but I would like to hear your thoughts about what you believe regarding the author of Hebrews.???-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
1 Tim 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times SOME shall DEPART from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Not all just some. Seems to me JoE was a prime candidate for this. He joined left the methodist church he was seduced by a "angelic" spirit beingDave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Perry Locke wrote: If I may add a comment, there is a difference between reformation and restoration. The protestant movement was a reformation...JS' movement was a restoration. I see them as quite different.DAVEH: I understand that, Perry. I'm trying to figure out why they went with a reformation instead of a restoration. Seems like the Bible suggests there would be a restitution (restoration) of all things, rather than a reformation. Wouldn't it have been more Biblical for the Reformers to think in restitution/restoration terms? Is there Biblical evidence to suggest a reformation? Luther thought the church had gone astray,DAVEH: Yes.That seems like a perfect reason to suggest an apostasy had taken place in/by the RCC. I'm surprised the Reformers did not consider such. and reformed it to correct doctrinal error. JS thought the church had totally apostatized, so totally resored it. I dfon;t think the two can be compared.DAVEH: I wasn't trying to compare them. To me the restoration makes perfect sense from the Biblical evidence of an apostasy, and subsequent restitution. Yet the Reformers evidently didn't see it that way, but rather preferred to consider that the RCC folks simply strayed a bit and needed some reforming instead of restoring what was lost. I agree with Luther (in that the church had gone astray, and that reformation was due),DAVEH: Since you agree with the early Reformers, then perhaps you can answer my questions about it..assuming you understand what I'm asking. Forget about JS for a moment.And consider the RCC folks. Do you think they just had some bad doctrine that evolved over the years? Or.do you view them as apostates from the Primitive Church? And, if they were Apostatesthen wouldn't a restoration have made sense from the Reformers' (or your) perspective? If not, there must be some Biblical reason you/Reformers did not think a restitution is/was necessary. but not JS.DAVEH: Listen Perry.I understand that few TTers have any sympathy for JS. I'm not trying to promote him in TT. I'm not asking you to believe him or his teachings. But, my curiosity is certainly biased by what I know and believe about his teachingsforgive me for that. What interests me though is what reasons (Biblical) you (and Protestants in general) believe the way you do when it seems so odd to me. I hope that makes sense. For instance, I see the Bible speak about a falling away (apostasy) and the need for a restitution (restoration) of all things, and it fits into my theological and Biblical inclinations. I hear your thinking about the RCC having some skewed doctrines that needed reformed, and then the Reformers making some minor changes.and I don't see that in the Bible. It is not that I'm trying to hit you over the head with this.I'm just trying to figure out why you see it your way when I see it another way and we both are viewing it from a Biblical perspective. Perry-- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain Five email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
[TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
DAVEH: Does not the Bible suggest what God looks like when we are told Jesus is in his express image? (He 1:3) It seems logical to me that the Son would look similar to his Father. For eons without end (for eternity past) Jesus did look like he Father. JN 1 IIn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. During ALL this time he had no body but was fully God! He had NO cause for his beginning, He was there with God. God created the universe from nothing and with this he created the beginning of time. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. God became FLESH, flesh did not become God. God MANIFEST in the flesh 1 Tim 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DAVEH: I hope you don't mind my intrusion, John. First.welcome to TT and this thread.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with "person" (and I have used this many more times than once) gives us the impression that know what God looks like.DAVEH: Does not the Bible suggest what God looks like when we are told Jesus is in his express image? (He 1:3) It seems logical to me that the Son would look similar to his Father. We are persons. He is a person. They (all three) are persons --- and walla -- he is male with arms, legs, hindquarters. The manifestation becomes the reality and the observation by John that "no man hath seen God at any time" gets lost in the shuffle. DAVEH: Do you leave any room for considering that some men of God may have seen him, though not necessarily with their natural eyes. Did not Stephen see God when filled with the Holy Ghost? (Acts 7:55) There are certainly passages that infer that such a belief (men that see God will die) is in error. Judges 13:22 is a good example..And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.Isaiah is another who spoke of seeing the King in 6:5. To me though, the most compelling passage is Gen 32:30..And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preservedWhat more evidence can be more plain than that, John? Perhaps Jn 6:46 might make more sense in light of many Biblical instances (suggesting some men are able to see God and live) if one considers the exception (save he which is of God) may be referring to anybody who is filled with the HG as was Stephen, rather than thinking the passage exclusively refers to Jesus. In His grace John David Smithson (JD in another and most regretable life) -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
DAVEH: Do you recognize/accept the Trinity Doctrine? To me, the word doctrine means a set of principles, something concrete to use as a measuring device. I am not sure that I can describe the trinity and do justice. Your idea of one in purpose is clearly included, but I think Bill and Kevin made it more clear. I believe in a triune God. Whether for clarification we use "persons", or "personalities", or Gods, there are three. They have not only the same purpose (A baseball team has the same purpose), they are absolutly alike in how they think. No disagreement whatsoever on any point, at any time. They have exactly the same attributes and emotions. What one loves, they all love. What one hates, they all hate. You cannot play one against the other because they are always in total agreement. They are unified like no three humans have ever been. I wish I could explain it better I do not know when the apostasy began. I do not know any reformers. I don't even know what a tangential path looks like or where it leads. I am fairly ignorant of these things you find important. I am not even certain what it is you offered to explain. Do you not believe that we are in the last days? DAVEH: Yes I do. But as you mentioned previously, you believe the last days started 2 millennia ago.. First, the book of Hebrews explains that we have been in the last days for almost two thousand years, Heb 1:1-2. So, my point was that the falling away could have taken place shortly after Jesus' death and still be considered in the last days as opposed to thinking the falling away has not yet happened. Have you looked at Paul's comments to Timothy in 2nd. Tim.3:1-5? Have you seen these things come about in your life time? I have. DAVEH: ButI assume you do not think the falling away (apostasy) has exclusively happened in these latter-days? No, I think it has been a long gradual slide, but starting about the time of ww2, the slide got steeper and we picked up speed Now we are like a runaway freight train headed down hill with the throttle to the wall. The slide is about over and the wreck will be terrible, and none of us can stop it. God has a plan, and His plans always work the way He wants them to. Terry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
. I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history. Grace John Smithson === What a great line Is that original? Can I steal it? Terry
[TruthTalk] Re:The value of tradition and, dictionaries
Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 08:22 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Charles Perry Locke wrote: Again, this is not an issue I hang my salvation on. I am actually "pan-trib"...however it pans out! Hey Perry. That's my view on the tribulation too. I just never knew what to call it before. Many thanks I would like to hear (read) your post-tribulational resurrection beliefs if and when you have time. BTW, I am currently reading a book called "When will Jesus Come", by Dave Hunt. He takes a pre-tribulational resurrection view, and provides a lot of evidence for that position. Do you know of Dave Hunt? if so, what is your impression of him? We have a couple of books by Dave Hunt, and get his "Berean call" regularly. His book,"What Love is This" is a super study on Calvinism. Terry From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Last Days Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 23:58:35 -0500 Perry wrote: However, if the order of events is preserved in the 2 Thes 2:3 (and we know it is since it's entire purpose is to state the order of events), then the above cannot be possible since at the time the "falling away" occurs, the man of sin has not yet been revealed. I think you are making a huge mistake with this statement. You assume your assumption of the order is true and then interpret the text from that. Based upon my study of Scripture, the resurrection (what you call the rapture) happens AFTER the man of sin is revealed. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- "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. _ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx -- "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.
[TruthTalk] Re:The value of tradition and, dictionaries
From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:The value of tradition and, dictionaries
Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance It is just a matter of whether your tradition is the same tradition taught by the Apostles 2 Thes 2;15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Paul was a BIBLICIST he said by "Word" the HOLY BIBLE I prefer to refer to Paul and the perfect Word of God than to what some men thought down thru history Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 08:22 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: David: Not a question but another quotation..
I read your post: Gal 4;30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Search the scriptures Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 2 Tim 3;16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 06:11 Subject: David: Not a question but another quotation.. "Theological statements operate with what we may call open concepts-concepts which, to be sure, must be closed on our side, for we have to formulate them as carefully and exactly as we can, but which on God's side are open to the infinite objectivity and inexhaustible reality of the divine Being. That is to say, the kind of conceptuality with which we operate in theology is one in which our acts of cognition are formed from beyond them by the reality disclosed so that the content of what is revealed constantly bursts through the forms we bring to it in order to grasp it. This can happen only under the power of the Spirit, as He presses upon us from the side of the divine Being. The Spirit is thus the act of God upon us which keeps our concepts or cognitive forms open, so that our thoughts and speech are stretched out beyong themselves toward the inexhaustible nature of the divine Being. Apart from this impact of the Spirit upon us, the forms of our thought and speech become quite obscure and indeed may even become a form of obstruction to the divine revelation or a means of suppressing the truth through the transmutation of knowledge into our own constructs. It is worship which keeps the epistemological process personal."Lance Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:The value of tradition and, dictionaries
Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance God's word is not a symbol. God created science symbols. God's Word is TRUTH as Judy pointed out God's word has TRUTH Power God's word points to God Himself, the meaning we all seek. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Passion of the Christ
If it is a contract with the government, yes. Certain forms are required, and without the proper form number, are not acceptable. BUt probably not in civil matters between two contracting parties. From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Passion of the Christ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:58:20 -0800 (PST) Back in the old days, before computers to zip out copies. There were companies that printed forms. Sometimes forms would have a sort of part number. Would the form number printed on the bottom of the form, be legally binding? Would the form number be part of the terms of a contract? Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: The headings chapter verses are not in the mss. They are not part of the text and not part of Gods word You embarass yourself by claiming you thought the headings were scripture. DAVEH: Forgive me for being naive, Kevin. As you are well aware, I'm not high on the TT IQ quotient protocol here. that is just foolishness on your part. Perhaps you greatly desire to see something, anything, that will align with your preconcieved notions about errors in the Bible. DAVEH: I hear seemingly contradictory statements and try to harmonize (as some TTers have used before) what I've heard to make sense. Do you also think the form number on the bottom of your mortgage is part of the CONTRACT DAVEH: Silly me.somehow I thought when one signed one of those documents with all kinds of itty bitty disclaimers and numbers, including page numbersit means that each of those points is important to the integrity of the entire document. What gave me that idea I suppose, is that one has to initial each and every page that contains one of those numbers. IF you are correct---that those page numbers aren't important to the integrity of the legal document---then I have learned something about law. IF you are wrong---that those page numbers aren't important to the integrity of the legal document---then I have learned something about you, Kevin. LOL Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jt: Headers, chapter and verse divisions and all that are not and never were sacred text Daveh, so what's the problem? DAVEH: The problem is some people may think it is part of the inerrant text. I did. I wonder if many of the KJVOnly folks do too? And, from what DavidM said.. There are some 1611 King James folks who think that is inerrant. Ithink Kevin is in this camp. ...Perhaps Kevin believes such as well. I'd sure appreciate Kevin commenting on this. Which way do you believe, Kevin..Do you believe the headings are inerrant??? -- ~~~Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain Five email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. _ Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 -- 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] Judy + everyone
"Truth is a Person" AMEN11However, how then does one account for this cacaphony (look it up if you don't know it) of voices. The Word of God + One indwelt by the Spirit of God =??Well, what it equals is this conversation! Does someone out there see that? A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. When you equate your statement(s) of the truth with the Truth Himself you're already moving away from the Truith. Lance - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 08:46 Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:The value of "tradition" and, dictionaries [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
Hi Terry, I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
[TruthTalk] The value of history
John Smithson wrote: I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history. Judy wrote: Truly wisdom from above Terry wrote: What a great line Is that original? Can I steal it? Why is it that those who say such things always seem to be those who are least educated in history? I would take such comments more seriously if such statements came from historians. I am not saying this as a jab, but to express my incredulity after reading these recent posts. The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of us interpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible. History is the record of the experience of others. The Bible's foundation is history, so to say that history is for entertainment is to say that the Bible is for entertainment. If someone is going to start arguing that Jesus did not exist, that David did not exist, that Moses did not exist, that Abraham did not exist, that the genealogical records of the Bible are fictitious, that Jerusalem did not exist... come-on. Such reasoning is ludicrous and is going down the wrong path. To argue that the acceptance of these historical facts is merely entertainment and not education is walking down the path that would consider anything material and experiential as having no basis in reality. Kevin has made several arguments about how the Book of Mormon has no historical basis and therefore should not be trusted. If we accept the idea that history has entertainment value but not educational value, we completely demolish Kevin's argument against Mormonism. Can't you all see that? Everybody reads the Bible and interprets words from their experience. If we read the word prayer in the Bible, we understand that from our own experience of prayer. If we are educated in history, then we might have a more enhanced understanding of what prayer was actually like when it is mentioned in the Bible. Now I certainly will agree that historians slant their presentation of history, but that is not a reason to ignore history. It is a reason to broaden our study of history to include other historians. It is a reason to temper our historical knowledge with a trusted source of knowledge... the Bible. Knowledge is NOT the enemy of the Word of God. Knowledge is a friend and companion of Truth. Knowledge is not for entertainment. Knowledge gives us understanding of our own personal history and gives us light. To reject knowledge is to choose darkness. To appreciate knowledge, especially historical knowledge, will lead us to wisdom and truth. Jesus and truth are inseparable in my mind, and this leads to an understanding that knowledge and Jesus is inseparable. To posit that history is entertainment is to posit that knowledge is entertainment which equates with the idea that truth is entertainment and that Jesus is entertainment. Certainly Jesus and religion and history is entertainment for some people, but not for me. More importantly, I do not think there is any Biblical justification for treating historical knowledge as entertainment. That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; IN WHOM ARE HID ALL THE TREASURES OF WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE. (Colossians 2:2-3 KJV) And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, FILLED WITH ALL KNOWLEDGE, able also to admonish one another. (Romans 15:14 KJV) But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; By pureness, BY KNOWLEDGE, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned ... (2 Corinthians 6:4-6 KJV) And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; AND TO VIRTUE KNOWLEDGE; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-8 KJV) Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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.
[TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. jt: The Greeks don't have all the answers ... Is it aPERSON who said: "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life?" wt: So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? jt: No... wt: That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor jt: If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
Yes, Lance, yes, yes, yes. This is what I'm getting at. Bill Taylor - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:12 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 07:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
[TruthTalk] Judy + everyone
From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Truth is a Person" AMEN11 However, how then does one account for this cacaphony (look it up if you don't know it) of voices. jt: I know what the word 'cacaphony' means Lance, this is what goes on in hell. lm: The Word of God + One indwelt by the Spirit of God =?? jt: A learner - which is what I and others who hear the voice of the Shepherd profess to be. lm: Well, what it equals is this conversation! Does someone out there see that? jt: What are you saying Lance - that we are a cacaphony here? lm: A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. jt: When a statement is founded upon the Rock of truth it is made in faith and what is faith but certainty in the object thereof? lm: When you equate your statement(s) of the truth with the Truth Himself you're already moving away from the Truith. Lance jt: Your opinion or His? judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
RE: [TruthTalk] Please hear me out before ousting me.
Perry wrote: I must say that I am in the same camp as Kevin with respect to not seeing Mel Gibson's movie. My position is that it is not the Passion... it is an RCC commentary about the Passion. That's like arguing that Kevin's posts on TruthTalk are a Baptist commentary about Jesus Christ and therefore not worthy of consideration. I reject that idea. I pray that one day we all will learn to shed the religious bigotry that permeates our thoughts and actions. Mel Gibson is expressing his personal understanding of Jesus and the crucifixion. We should think of it no differently than reading someone's post on TruthTalk or listening to someone preach on a street corner. There may be many objections and many valid criticisms because none of us are perfect in knowledge, and there may be many invalid criticisms too because no critic is perfect in knowledge, but at some level we consider what he has to say and judge its overall usefulness. Just because Mel Gibson is Roman Catholic and has that particular bias in his presentation does not invalidate the usefulness of this film. I have watched the Passion of the Christ twice now. I deeply appreciate the message just as much as I have appreciated hearing Kevin's preaching or reading some of Terry's insightful posts here on TruthTalk. I mentioned on a list that I felt certain some people were going to start reading the Bible more because of this film. People will want to know whether what Gibson is saying is actually in the Bible. Well, that indeed has happened. I heard Bill O'Reilly say on Fox News that he read all four gospels again after seeing this movie. I have heard from many of conversations that were spawned by this movie that led to Bible studies about whether or not certain events happened in the Bible. This has led to people being shocked to see that many of the things Gibson put in the movie were indeed in the Bible. I don't work outside in a large office, but friends I have that do say that everybody at work is talking about Jesus because of this movie, which has led to many conversations and sharing about Jesus Christ in the workplace. If people are made more aware of Jesus and his place in history because of this movie, then we should be glad about that. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Re: Language-Including The Bible
Lance wrote: Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system ... Do the symbols themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the meaning we all seek? Excellent point, Lance. Language is not truth, but it helps point us to the meaning that we all seek. Words are not precise, but they are vague symbols which point the mind towards grasping a truth that cannot fully be expressed with words. Once we understand this, we will understand the difference between being dogmatic and standing up for an important principal. We also will understand the difference between the Written Word and the Living Word. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] The Last Days
From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days Charles Perry Locke wrote: Again, this is not an issue I hang my salvation on. I am actually pan-trib...however it pans out! *Hey Perry. That's my view on the tribulation too. I just never knew what to call it before. Many thanks* I must attribute this line to Hank Hanegraaf, of the Christian Research Institute. I borrowed it from him. I would like to hear (read) your post-tribulational resurrection beliefs if and when you have time. BTW, I am currently reading a book called When will Jesus Come, by Dave Hunt. He takes a pre-tribulational resurrection view, and provides a lot of evidence for that position. Do you know of Dave Hunt? if so, what is your impression of him? *We have a couple of books by Dave Hunt, and get his Berean call regularly. His book,What Love is This is a super study on Calvinism.* I bought What Love is This?, but have yet to get into it. Because of your comment maybe I will start it this week!. Terry From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Last Days Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 23:58:35 -0500 Perry wrote: However, if the order of events is preserved in the 2 Thes 2:3 (and we know it is since it's entire purpose is to state the order of events), then the above cannot be possible since at the time the falling away occurs, the man of sin has not yet been revealed. I think you are making a huge mistake with this statement. You assume your assumption of the order is true and then interpret the text from that. Based upon my study of Scripture, the resurrection (what you call the rapture) happens AFTER the man of sin is revealed. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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. _ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx -- 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. _ Find things fast with the new MSN Toolbar includes FREE pop-up blocking! http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/ -- 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.
[TruthTalk] The value of history
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]John Smithson wrote: I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history.Judy wrote: Truly wisdom from above Terry wrote: What a great line Is that original?Can I steal it? Why is it that those who say such things always seem to be those who are least educated in history? jt: How many 'great historians' has God chosen to use that you know of? [in scripture that is] dm: I would take such comments more seriously if such statements came from historians. I am not saying this as a jab, but to express my incredulity after reading these recent posts. jt: So if Will Durant made these claims he would get your attention? The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of usinterpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible.History is the record of the experience of others. The Bible'sfoundation is history, so to say that history is for entertainment is tosay that the Bible is for entertainment. jt: The Bible is not history DavidM. It may contain history but it is primarily God [who is Spirit] revealing Himself to man. If someone is going to start arguing that Jesus did not exist, that David did not exist, that Moses did not exist, that Abraham did not exist, that the genealogical records of the Bible are fictitious, that Jerusalem did not exist... come-on. jt: And men have done all of the above - history and historians have not convinced them to change their opinion. The Holy Spirit does not anoint history or men's opinions. Such reasoning is ludicrous and is going down the wrong path. To arguethat the acceptance of these historical facts is merely entertainmentand not education is walking down the path that would consider anythingmaterial and experiential as having no basis in reality. jt: The material and experiential is in the process of passing away while God's Truth is eternal. His Words are spirit and they are life. Everybody reads the Bible and interprets words from their experience.If we read the word "prayer" in the Bible, we understand that from ourown experience of prayer. If we are educated in history, then we mighthave a more enhanced understanding of what prayer was actually like whenit is mentioned in the Bible. jt: Depends on whose history, the pagans on Mt. Carmel prayed. Now I certainly will agree that historians slant their presentation ofhistory, but that is not a reason to ignore history. It is a reason tobroaden our study of history to include other historians. It is areason to temper our historical knowledge with a trusted source ofknowledge... the Bible. jt: Noone is saying to ignore it, just keep it in perspective. I like history in it's proper place. Knowledge is NOT the enemy of the Word of God. Knowledge is a friend and companion of Truth. Knowledge is not for entertainment. Knowledge gives us understanding of our own personal history and gives us light. jt: If the light within be darkness, how great is that darkness? To reject knowledge is to choose darkness. To appreciate knowledge,especially historical knowledge, will lead us to wisdom and truth.Jesus and truth are inseparable in my mind, and this leads to anunderstanding that knowledge and Jesus is inseparable. jt: Spiritual ignorance is a form of knowledge and without spiritual discernment darkness is called light. This is very evident on this list. To posit that history is entertainment is to posit that knowledge is entertainment which equates with the idea that truth is entertainment and that Jesus is entertainment. jt: Only if you are Mel Gibson. He combines the two. He did it with Braveheart and now he has done it with the crucifixion. Swallow it to your own peril. Certainly Jesus and religion and history is entertainment for some people, but not for me. More importantly, I do not think there is any Biblical justification for treating historical knowledge as entertainment. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study
Re: [TruthTalk] reliability of the HOLY BIBLE
Kevin Deegan wrote: There is no defense of a book (BoM) that has been changed countless times. The book has been tampered with, it has been cooked. There are no extant copies of the source documents. No BoM sites, NO BoM peoples names recorded in any history, places or documents secular or otherwise. It was the invention of a 19th century farm boy and his Spirit Guide Nephi later changed to Moroni. God wrote the book he used Holy Men not a pervert like JoE. God gave it - God preserved it. Ps 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. According to YOU, God lost his church, God lost his word. Your god is a promiscious pipsqueak DAVEH: I respectfully disagree with your conclusion, Kevin. God predicted a general apostasy. He also gave warning to men who would add and subtract from his Word. And.he provided a means by which those situations were corrected, by continued revelation and the restoration of his gospel principles and doctrines. BTW Kevin.why did you not answer my question? You often times go to great lengths to answer questions that have not been asked. You must have overlooked the one I did ask below. So.I'd appreciate knowing who you think authored Hebrews.please? What I do find curious though is why you feel the Bible is inerrant, when you apparently aren't even sure who penned parts of it. Who do you think wrote Hebrews, Kevin? DavidM thought you might possibly think Paul did so, but I would like to hear your thoughts about what you believe regarding the author of Hebrews.??? ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
[TruthTalk] Re: Language-Including The Bible
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Lance wrote: Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system ... Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Excellent point, Lance. Language is not truth, but it helps point us tothe meaning that we all seek. Words are not precise, but they are vaguesymbols which point the mind towards grasping a truth that cannot fullybe expressed with words. Once we understand this, we will understandthe difference between being dogmatic and standing up for an importantprincipal. We also will understand the difference between the WrittenWord and the Living Word. jt: For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, NOT IN THE WORDS WHICH MAN'S WISDOM TEACHETH, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.. (1 Corinthians 2:11-13) judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study
RE: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
David Miller wrote: The problem is that you do not believe me, so study some history about calendars like Blaine has and you too will understand. Judy wrote: You must be behind on your reading David because this thread is resolved; I disagree with you on some other issues but this is not one of them. The post to which I responded was only three days old. You and Kevin mocked me and raked me over pretty good for this very mundane point of fact that I kept saying was very simple. It seems to me that both you and Kevin should apologize and clearly state that you were wrong on this point. I'm not saying this because I need you to be contrite, but because I think you need it. It will work some humility in you and in Kevin, if you both can admit when you were wrong, especially after the mocking and demeaning posts you all directed at me for trying to explain how simple the concept was. At the very least, it would be interesting to see if Kevin can admit to a Mormon like Blaine that he was wrong and the Mormon was right! :-) Bill Taylor has been posting some very interesting material, and instead of appreciating it, you guys have expressed disdain for what he has shared. I have found his posts to be made with great humility, especially considering his great level of knowledge, yet many here seem threatened by his knowledge and seek to marginalize him. We really should appreciate that he has taken time to explain himself to people who are clearly way below his level of understanding. He is like a college professor speaking to high school students, and instead of the students appreciating the opportunity, they deride the professor as being useful for entertainment value only! I am truly disheartened by this behavior. I only can hope that Bill has enough patience and time to bear with us through this. One of Bill's posts was extremely insightful. Using the Pelagian / Augustine controversy over grace, he explained how someone might be right about something but cause some bad fruit by how he stresses his particular understanding. What great insight! Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning to synthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps a synergy might develop through such mutual cooperation. I truly believe that this is exactly what happened with the early church as we read about its birth in Acts 2. Unfortunately, you do not seem able to appreciate this incredible insight that he has shared. Instead of even trying to bring together your knowledge with his, you prefer to beat your drum and claim that you know the TRUTH, you know the PERSON, and what someone like Bill has to bring to the table in the form of historical or theological understanding is unimportant. This is truly a sad state of affairs and I do pray that your eyes might be opened so that you can adjust your attitude to be receptive not just to the uneducated, but to the educated as well. There really should be no respect of persons among us, whether it is in the usual sense or in reverse. Judy wrote: I just needed to see and understand it in God's Word for myself The irony of this is that if you truly did finally understand, it was not the Bible that led you to understand this, but rather extra-biblical history. Once you accepted the history, the Bible's comments about the new moon made more sense and fit in very well. The point is that until you accepted truth from outside the Bible, your knowledge about it being a full moon when Jesus was in the garden was limited. It might seem like a minor point, and it is, but the principles involved about how we arrive at this knowledge is not minor at all. It explains much of the cacophony that sometimes happens on this list. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Please hear me out before ousting me.
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Please hear me out before ousting me. Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:39:41 -0500 Perry wrote: I must say that I am in the same camp as Kevin with respect to not seeing Mel Gibson's movie. My position is that it is not the Passion... it is an RCC commentary about the Passion. That's like arguing that Kevin's posts on TruthTalk are a Baptist commentary about Jesus Christ and therefore not worthy of consideration. I reject that idea. I pray that one day we all will learn to shed the religious bigotry that permeates our thoughts and actions. Kevin's posts may indeed be Baptist commentary, but If the Baptists agree with scripture then, by all means, lets read Kevin's commentary. In fact, I worry that someone may join TT and, not being as aware as most of us about the Bible, will be extremely confused and led astray by the many things that are posted here. DavidM, would you go to the BoM to learn about Jesus? No, you would go there to learn about the heresies of the Mormons. I would watch the Passion if I wanted to learn about the heresies of the Catholics, and mystical visions of a nun from the 17th century. But, to do so requires an excellent grounding in biblical truth. if one is a new Christian, or perhaps not yet a Christian, it could be disastrous. Case in point: My Bible study group met last night. We are studying a 3 week presentation of the Passion put out by Rick Warren of Saddleback. They praise Mel Gibson and his commentary, and want to put out material that rides the current tidal wave created by the movie. I think their motive is pure, but their vehicle is flawed.) One of the group members was explaining something about one of the thieves. She made a statement, as fact, that I knew to be non-biblical. I asked her, did you get that from the movie, or from the scripture AND SHE COULD NOT SAY! She had seen the movie twice and already was confusing the artisitc license and catholic heresy with biblical truth! This member was raised a Catholic, and at about 14 years old, by reading the Bible, was able to discern error in the Catholic church. Hoever, the former Catholic who is now a Christian is even more at risk, because of their Catholic upbringing the are more likely to overlook the error and accept it as truth! That is what I object to about the movie. People see this and confuse the no-biblical parts with scripture. Does that not bother you at all? Now, for someone as well studied as yourself, you may be able to ignore the untruths and catholic mystical elements and glean the truth, but for most it is not that way, and most stand a great chance of being led astray of the truth. She (the group member) also stated that she didn't realize that Jesus was beaten so much, and I asked her, do you think in the movie he was beaten more or less than the scriptures report?. She said more, which indicates an untruth in the movie, but she was about to believe that the scriptures inaccurately reported how badly he was beaten. Give me a break, DavidM, there are problems with this movie. It includes gratuitous violence, beyond what the scripture states, with no reason for doing so other than serving to prolong the beating that Jesus took for theatrical effect (I am not one ounce diminishing the excrutiating and painful ordeal he suffered at the hands of His enemies) at the expense of misleading many and causing confusion with the truth. WHY DID MEL GIBSON FIND IT NECESSARY TO BEAT OUR LORD AND SAVIOR SO BADLY? Was he taking his OWN agression out on Him ABOVE AND BEYOND what He already suffered? Mel Gibson is expressing his personal understanding of Jesus and the crucifixion. We should think of it no differently than reading someone's post on TruthTalk or listening to someone preach on a street corner. There may be many objections and many valid criticisms because none of us are perfect in knowledge, and there may be many invalid criticisms too because no critic is perfect in knowledge, but at some level we consider what he has to say and judge its overall usefulness. Just because Mel Gibson is Roman Catholic and has that particular bias in his presentation does not invalidate the usefulness of this film. I have watched the Passion of the Christ twice now. I deeply appreciate the message just as much as I have appreciated hearing Kevin's preaching or reading some of Terry's insightful posts here on TruthTalk. I mentioned on a list that I felt certain some people were going to start reading the Bible more because of this film. People will want to know whether what Gibson is saying is actually in the Bible. Most of the Christians I have met are not avid seekers and bible readers. I believe most viewers will not read the Bible more because of the movie. Why read the book if you have already seen the movie? (That is pretty ingrained in our society. If you read
Re: Fw: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
In a message dated 3/10/2004 4:18:50 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Welcome to TT John Smithson, you write in part: "I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history." Truly wisdom from above, judyt Hi judyt: i am thinking we agree. Right? God bless and I am looking forward to receiving and sharing. I just have to figure out what is going on in the list. Looks like several things. John
RE: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Perry wrote: Actually, we know the order is true despite what falling away may mean, right? Paul is laying out the order. The falling away happens, then the man of sin is revealed, then the Lord comes. Now, if one takes falling away to mean a falling away of the faithful from the faith, then the time of the resurrection is unspecified in this verse. Why do you say this? The time of the resurrection happens AFTER the falling away. Read the passage. Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him [the Resurrection / Rapture], That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 KJV) The apostasy mentioned (falling away) cannot be translated to refer to the resurrection because he just framed his entire speech to say that the coming of our Lord Jesus and our gathering together unto him would not happen until the apostasy and revealing of the man of sin. This seems so obvious to me that I truly do not understand how you could frame an argument otherwise. As Terry said, the passage says what it says. Perry wrote: But, I was writing in the context of the falling away meaning the resurrection itself (see the reference I gave in a previous post). In this context, it would indicate that the resurrection would happen, then the man of sin would be revealed, then the Lord would come. This viewpoint contradicts the immediate verse preceding this one, and it also contradicts other verses in the context. For example, consider the previous chapter that associates the coming of the Lord and the glorification of the saints (the Resurrection / Rapture) with a fiery judgment of vengeance upon the wicked. And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day. (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 KJV) The verses following the passage you have commented upon also indicate the apostasy, calling it the mystery of iniquity, which will continue to work and hold fast until this spirit behind it is taken out of the way and the son of perdition, the man of sin, is revealed. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thessalonians 2:7-8 KJV) So very clearly, the passage indicates apostasy followed by the man of sin followed by Christ appearing in the clouds, the resurrection of the saints, and the judgment of the nations, all in that order. Perry wrote: But, I suspect you do not consider the falling away in 2 Thes 2:3 to be the resurrection. Am I right? Right. The falling away is an apostasy, the working of iniquity. Perry wrote: BTW, I am currently reading a book called When will Jesus Come, by Dave Hunt. He takes a pre-tribulational resurrection view, and provides a lot of evidence for that position. Do you know of Dave Hunt? if so, what is your impression of him? I have never met Dave Hunt but I have heard good reports about him. I do not know his eschatological views too well, but I read his books, The Seduction of Christianity and Beyond Seduction. I'm not really in his target audience because I already accept the Bible as an authority for truth, so much of it was kind of boring and uninteresting to me. That is not to say he is not doing a good work, just that I am not in his target audience concerning the subjects he has written about. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] The Trinity
In a message dated 3/10/2004 5:21:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: I hope you don't mind my intrusion, John. First.welcome to TT and this thread. it is great to speak with you [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with "person" (and I have used this many more times than once) gives us the impression that know what God looks like. DAVEH: Does not the Bible suggest what God looks like when we are told Jesus is in his express image? (He 1:3) It seems logical to me that the Son would look similar to his Father. Not at all. What do we do with John's observation that no one has seen God at any time? AND His existence apart from the incarnation (remember he EMPTIED HIMSELF OF HIS ACTUAL EXISTENCE Phil 2) is totally different from ours. He is everywhere at all times -- obvious we are not. Therefore, reason demands that he be different from us in appearance -- not to mention the fact that we actually have revelation on this matter. (I Jo 4:12 and I Jo 3:2 -- these passages clearly state that God's actual appearance is a mystery AS IS OUR FORM TO BE -- do they not? We are persons. He is a person. They (all three) are persons --- and walla -- he is male with arms, legs, hindquarters. The manifestation becomes the reality and the observation by John that "no man hath seen God at any time" gets lost in the shuffle. DAVEH: Do you leave any room for considering that some men of God may have seen him, though not necessarily with their natural eyes. Did not Stephen see God when filled with the Holy Ghost? (Acts 7:55) I have seen him, judyt has seen it (I am imagining that she will agree0. Many have seen a minifestation of his reality. Does he look like a burning bush or a pillar of fire or a dead man on a cross or ? There are certainly passages that infer that such a belief (men that see God will die) is in error. Judges 13:22 is a good example.. And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God. In the biblical message, there are three souces of information. God, Satan and man. Only the words of God in the bibilical message (whether spoken directly by him or via a prophet) are true in all cases. Satan's words are always wrong even when he is right (ulterior motives condemn even the Enemy's truth) and man sometimes gets it and sometimes not. I have I Joh 4:12 and the passage to deal with. You see how I settle the matter. Isaiah is another who spoke of seeing the King in 6:5. To me though, the most compelling passage is Gen 32:30..Has he seen God or a manifestation of God? And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. Here, the problem becomes complicated. Or is it. Does Jacob speak from his own sense of reality or is he, here, inspired as a prophet? ...What more evidence can be more plain than that, John? Perhaps we will not agree. And this is why we can continue to share fellowship in spite of the disagreement. There is a revelatory issue here. And quite frankly, honest word bound people can disagree here. For me, "manifestation" gets I John 4:12 and IJOs 3:2 to agree with the scripture you point to. Perhaps Jn 6:46 might make more sense in light of many Biblical instances (suggesting some men are able to see God and live) if one considers the exception (save he which is of God) may be referring to anybody who is filled with the HG as was Stephen, rather than thinking the passage exclusively refers to Jesus. Certainly a reasonable conclusion. Grace back at ya---John In His grace John David Smithson (JD in another and most regretable life)
Re: [TruthTalk] Judy + everyone
The Word of God stands sure! IS 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. 1 Co 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. 1 Co 16;13 Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. 2 Thes 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Titus 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. You can take your stand anywhere you want but as for me, I trust in the Word of the Lord!Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Truth is a Person" AMEN11However, how then does one account for this cacaphony (look it up if you don't know it) of voices. The Word of God + One indwelt by the Spirit of God =??Well, what it equals is this conversation! Does someone out there see that? A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. When you equate your statement(s) of the truth with the Truth Himself you're already moving away from the Truith. Lance - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 10, 2004 08:46 Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:The value of "tradition" and, dictionaries [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
[TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]You and Kevin mocked me and raked me over pretty good for this very mundane point of fact that I kept saying was very simple. It seems to me that both you and Kevin should apologize and clearly state that you were wrong on this point. jt: FTR I did not consciously and intentionally mock you and rake you over the coals David. It would have saved a lot of misunderstanding if you could have explained as simply as you did in that last post rather than take up an offence for Mel Gibson. I'm not saying this because I need you to be contrite, but because I think you need it. It will work some humility in you and in Kevin, if you both can admit when you were wrong, especially after the mocking and demeaning posts you all directed at me for trying to explain how simple the concept was. jt: But you didn't explain it David, that's the point. You just kept stating how simple it is. It was Blaine who finally spelled it out after I had found their system in some Bible helps. At the very least, it would be interesting to see if Kevin can admit to a Mormon like Blaine that he was wrong and the Mormon was right! :-) jt: Blaine is right about the lunar cycle which is minor, I pray he embraces some other aspects of the Jewish writings. Bill Taylor has been posting some very interesting material, and instead of appreciating it, you guys have expressed disdain for what he has shared. I have found his posts to be made with great humility, especially considering his great level of knowledge, yet many here seem threatened by his knowledge and seek to marginalize him. We really should appreciate that he has taken time to explain himself to people who are clearly way below his level of understanding. jt: So he has condescended to men of low estate? I'm sure glad you arn't God David. It's not good to talk down to people from some lofty height or to be a respecter of men's persons God calls it evil. He is like a college professor speaking to high school students, and instead of the students appreciating the opportunity, they deride the professor as being useful for entertainment value only! I am truly disheartened by this behavior. I only can hope that Bill has enough patience and time to bear with us through this. jt: I've never seen you speak of anyone else this way David. Why are secular systems of learning so important to you?Paul was very well educated - but said himself that he counted it all dung and thatknowing Christ is what is important. One of Bill's posts was extremely insightful. Using the Pelagian / Augustine controversy over grace, he explained how someone might be right about something but cause some bad fruit by how he stresses his particular understanding. What great insight! jt: I don't read Augustine or Pelagius and Bill appeared to be offended by the way some of us communicate our faith. I've been on the other end of that myself in the pastand found the answer in Psalm 119:165 Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning to synthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps a synergy might develop through such mutual cooperation. jt: Synergy? Are you referring tothe Hegelian dialectic ofthesis vs antithesis = synthesis? I truly believe that this is exactly what happened with the early church as we read about its birth in Acts 2. Unfortunately, you do not seem able to appreciate this incredible insight that he has shared. jt: I don't see this in the early church at all. In the book of Acts it was"And the word of God spread and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith" [Acts 6:7]. Remember how surprised the Jewish leaders were over the fact that Jesusdisciples were simple and unlearned men? Instead of even trying to bring together your knowledge with his, you prefer to beat your drum and claim that youknow the TRUTH, you know the PERSON, and what someone like Bill has to bring to the table in the form of historical or theological understanding is unimportant. jt: Whosaid that Bill and history are unimportant? I've not seen anyone get the red carpet treatment here yet. This is truly a sad state of affairs and I do pray that your eyes might be opened so that you can adjust your attitude to be receptive not just to the uneducated, but to the educated as well. There really should be no respect of persons among us, whether it is in the usual sense or in reverse. Judy wrote:I just needed to see and understand it in God'sWord for myself The irony of this is that if you truly did finally understand, it was not the Bible that led you to understand this, but rather extra-biblical history. jt: No actually it was my Bible Dictionary and another book of helps. Do you think that not understanding the Jewish lunar cycle; not being a math major, a computer geek, or a Greek
Re: [TruthTalk] Judy + everyone
Lance says A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. You may be uncertain, I KNOW in WHOM I have Believed and KNOW that He is Able to perform that which He has promised! Take the BIBLE test: 2 Co 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Truth is a Person" AMEN11 However, how then does one account for this cacaphony (look it up if you don't know it) of voices. jt: I know what the word 'cacaphony' means Lance, this is what goes on in hell. lm: The Word of God + One indwelt by the Spirit of God =?? jt: A learner - which is what I and others who hear the voice of the Shepherd profess to be. lm: Well, what it equals is this conversation! Does someone out there see that? jt: What are you saying Lance - that we are a cacaphony here? lm: A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. jt: When a statement is founded upon the Rock of truth it is made in faith and what is faith but certainty in the object thereof? lm: When you equate your statement(s) of the truth with the Truth Himself you're already moving away from the Truith. Lance jt: Your opinion or His? judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone of us speaks from a "tradition" and words mean things. Why not revisit this whole discussion as it took place in the 4th century by such as Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory and yes,another Gregory (Nazianzus Nyssa)-the Capadocians. Lance jt: But Lance this is a Truth Talk list and truth is a person. He is the Word of God and we receive from Him by the Spirit of Truth Not through 4th Century so called Church Fathers...who were off into error themselves. "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy Word is Truth" ... [John 17:17] judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study From: Kevin Deegan William shies away from "biblicists" whatever that is.Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. No syntactics contains its own semantics b. Language, like mathematics is a symbolic system c. Do the "symbols" themselves contain the truth(meaning) or, do they point away from themselves to the "meaning" we all seek? Lance From: Terry Clifton Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
DavidM says: The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of usinterpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible. I do not interpret the truth of the bible through the lense of history. I interpret history through the lens of TRUTH the HOLY BIBLE. Why should I go to a secondary source which is not INSPIRED or PRESERVED? Which may or may not be interspersed with ERROR. Why shouldI filter the Truth through the lens of history? PS 130:5 I wait for the LORD, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope. I do not need to search high low for Truth it is in The Book! Du 30:14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Smithson wrote: I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history.Judy wrote: Truly wisdom from aboveTerry wrote: What a great line Is that original? Can I steal it?Why is it that those who say such things always seem to be those who areleast educated in history? I would take such comments more seriously ifsuch statements came from historians. I am not saying this as a jab,but to express my incredulity after reading these recent posts.The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of usinterpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible.History is the record of the experience of others. The Bible'sfoundation is history, so to say that history is for entertainment is tosay that the Bible is for entertainment. If someone is going to startarguing that Jesus did not exist, that David did not exist, that Mosesdid not exist, that Abraham did not exist, that the genealogical recordsof the Bible are fictitious, that Jerusalem did not exist... come-on.Such reasoning is ludicrous and is going down the wrong path. To arguethat the acceptance of these historical facts is merely entertainmentand not education is walking down the path that would consider anythingmaterial and experiential as having no basis in reality.Kevin has made several arguments about how the Book of Mormon has nohistorical basis and therefore should not be trusted. If we accept theidea that history has entertainment value but not educational value, wecompletely demolish Kevin's argument against Mormonism. Can't you allsee that?Everybody reads the Bible and interprets words from their experience.If we read the word "prayer" in the Bible, we understand that from ourown experience of prayer. If we are educated in history, then we mighthave a more enhanced understanding of what prayer was actually like whenit is mentioned in the Bible.Now I certainly will agree that historians slant their presentation ofhistory, but that is not a reason to ignore history. It is a reason tobroaden our study of history to include other historians. It is areason to temper our historical knowledge with a trusted source ofknowledge... the Bible. Knowledge is NOT the enemy of the Word of God. Knowledge is a friendand companion of Truth. Knowledge is not for entertainment. Knowledgegives us understanding of our own personal history and gives us light.To reject knowledge is to choose darkness. To appreciate knowledge,especially historical knowledge, will lead us to wisdom and truth.Jesus and truth are inseparable in my mind, and this leads to anunderstanding that knowledge and Jesus is inseparable. To posit thathistory is entertainment is to posit that knowledge is entertainmentwhich equates with the idea that truth is entertainment and that Jesusis entertainment. Certainly Jesus and religion and history isentertainment for some people, but not for me. More importantly, I donot think there is any Biblical justification for treating historicalknowledge as entertainment.That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, andunto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to theacknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;IN WHOM ARE HID ALL THE TREASURES OF WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE. (Colossians2:2-3 KJV)And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also arefull of goodness, FILLED WITH ALL KNOWLEDGE, able also to admonish oneanother. (Romans 15:14 KJV)But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in muchpatience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, inimprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; Bypureness, BY KNOWLEDGE, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the HolyGhost, by love unfeigned ... (2 Corinthians 6:4-6 KJV)And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; AND TOVIRTUE KNOWLEDGE; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperancepatience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherlykindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be inyou, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren norunfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-8KJV)Peace be with you.David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
Re: [TruthTalk] reliability of the HOLY BIBLE
Joseph Smith, Jr., The Holy Scriptures, Translated and Corrected by the Spirit of Revelation, by Joseph Smith, Jr. the Seer ... Plano, Illinois: Published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Joseph Smith, I.L. Rogers, E. Robinson, Publishing Committee, 1867. This version was several times reprinted by Herald Publishing House in Independence, Missouri as the Inspired Version. The Holy Scriptures, Corrected by the Spirit of Revelation by Joseph Smith, Jr. A slightly revised edition was published by Herald Publishing House in 1944 under the title, Holy Scriptures. Containing the Old and New Testaments. An Inspired Revision of the Authorized Version, by Joseph Smith, Junior. A New Corrected Edition. Herald Publishing House is the official publisher of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which holds the copyright on this version. TRUTH? INSPIRED? - Corrected --- slightly Revised LOL! JoE Smith Inspired Version or JST Which do you use? The NEW CORRECTED REVISION or the OLD CORRECTED REVISION? PREFACE TO 1944 EDITION This corrected edition of the Inspired Version of the Holy Scriptures was prepared under the direction of the First Presidency and the Board of Publication of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The committee found some words and phrases transposed or improperly placed in the work done by Joseph Smith, Jr. These errors, together with others involving spelling, punctuation, and typographical or other omissions, were corrected, particularly in those instances where the meaning of the text had been affected. Few other corrections were required. LDS Bible "correctors": http://biblecorrected.homestead.com/ Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is no defense of a book (BoM) that has been changed countless times. The book has been tampered with, it has been cooked. There are no extant copies of the source documents. No BoM sites, NO BoM peoples names recorded in any history, places or documents secular or otherwise. It was the invention of a 19th century farm boy and his Spirit Guide Nephi later changed to Moroni. God wrote the book he used Holy Men not a pervert like JoE. God gave it - God preserved it. Ps 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. According to YOU, God lost his church, God lost his word. Your god is a promiscious pipsqueakDave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: There exists more than 24,000 partial complete manuscript (mss) copies of the bible.They are available for inspection.The existing quotes (of portions of the New Testament) of the Bible number over 86,000These are found in letters and documents of the "church fathers" including several thousand lectionaries (CHURCH SERVICE BOOKS CONTAINING PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE)Without the manuscripts all but about 11 verses could be assembled from just the quotations. All 86,000 of these mss and many Lectionaries are available for inspection and cross checking the VALIDITY of the new testament we hold in our hands. Where can we scrutinize the sources for the BoM?DAVEH: Why do you care, Kevin? Have you not already determined it is false? Is there anybody else in TT who thinks it is true other than a few LDS TTers? I don't want to speak for Blaine, but I have not been pushing the BofM on anybody here. Nor do you have any interest in considering if it is true. So I don't feel compelled to defend it to your satisfaction---what would be the point! What I do find curious though is why you feel the Bible is inerrant, when you apparently aren't even sure who penned parts of it. Who do you think wrote Hebrews, Kevin? DavidM thought you might possibly think Paul did so, but I would like to hear your thoughts about what you believe regarding the author of Hebrews.???-- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE. Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
RE: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
Something has gone horibly wrong the man that preaches UNITY is now going to distance himself or "SEPARATE" from the one who preaches separation. Isn't that a hoot!David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy wrote: It would have saved a lot of misunderstanding if you could have explained as simply as you did in that last post rather than take up an offence for Mel Gibson.Following is how the conversation developed:On Feb. 28, Terry wrote: ... making me wonder how the full moon figured in the story.On Feb. 29, David Miller wrote: It is historically accurate that there was a full moon on that night. On Mar. 1, Judy wrote: It has nothing to do with history; this comes from astronomy and RC Liturgy. There are two different calenders and some disagreement so apparently they use astronomy/astrology to determine what day to celebrate Pascha (see below quote from a French RC theologian) quote:Kevin responded to this with occult rhetoric: This movie is LOADED with "HIDDEN" meaning! ... ...You expressed agreement with Kevin. Then I wrote: After this event, some Christians worked to separate Easter from Passover, so they do some calendar manipulation, but at the time Christ died, none of this was going on. The Jews used a lunar calendar and they used visual observation of the new moon to mark the beginning of each month. We know for a fact that the moon was just about full when Jesus was in the garden praying to his Father.That seems pretty clear to me. I said that they used visual observationof the new moon to mark the beginning of each month.Then Blaine wrote: Full Moon? Hey you guys, there is ALWAYS a full moon on the night of the Passover!!! LOL You guys need to bone up on your calendar lore--the Jewish calendar is what is known as a solar-lunar calendar--Lunar, because each Jewish month begins with a new moon. Solar, because it is kept in sync with the Vernal (Spring) Equinox by adding a lunar month every six years. The first month of the calendar, called Nisan, begins with the new moon closest to the Vernal Equinox, and then the Passover is always held on 15 Nisan. Since a lunar month averages 30 days, this places the Passover smack dab in the middle of the month--when the moon is at full phase!! Always. Take my word for it, as an old Mormon boy who holds a temple recommend! LOLThen Judy wrote on Mar. 2: OK Blaine, I read your first message and you claim the Jewish Calender goes by the moon right? Only there are problems with this and the calender they use presently is more Babylonian than it is Jewish and involves the sun as well as the moon. I doubt Mel Gibson was consulting Jewish/Babylonian calenders.David Miller wrote on Mar 3: I'm sure he was consulting the calendar issues involved here. Every serious scholar has consulted these matters when dealing with Passover and the crucifixion. Gibson brought in experts who would advise him about all these things, men who had surely studied them. You are making this way too complicated with your comments. It all breaks down to this.. The Jews would look for the new moon every month. As soon as the new moon was observed, they declared the new month to have arrived. Now you just count 14 days to the passover (Lev. 23:5). The lunar cycle is 29.5 days, so half of that brings us to the full moon. There really is no dispute over this at all. I don't know why you are arguing about it and not recognizing that Blaine has spoken truthfully about this matter. Judy responded on Mar. 4 with: You must not have read the post I sent explaining how following the moon alone would put the calender off over a period of time and passover would eventually wind up in the fall - hence Babylonian adjustments. It's not me who is complicating things. The "expert" Mel Gibson used is a Jesuit who would have beenof the RC liturgical persuasion.Kevin responded on Mar. 4 with: DAVIDM says You are making this way too complicated with your comments So I checked some sites on the internet. Maybe this will make it clear easily understood. Judy, it really is not that complicated can't you see that? LOL These sites explanations, sound like a bunch of PAGAN Mumbo Jumbo to me. ... ...Then Blaine wrote: The Passover for the year 2004 begins on the eve of April 5, and the actual Passover is the next day, April 6. Go to the site address I have shown below, input 6 April, 2004, and it will show the moon phase for that date. You may see for yourself a full moon shown.Judy responded: Passover for this year wasn't the question, Can you tell me what day and what month Passover was held in the year 33 AD?David Miller responded: The 14th of Nisan.Blaine wrote: Reread my post. It mentions that the Jewish calendar is a solar-lunar calendar, and I explained what is meant by that. The current names of the months on the Jewish calendar came from the Babylonian captivity --prior to that, only the first month had a name, which was Abib (see
RE: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
Kevin wrote: Something has gone horibly wrong the man that preaches UNITY is now going to distance himself or SEPARATE from the one who preaches separation. Isn't that a hoot! You apparently have never understood my teaching about unity and separation, but hey, maybe from your perspective you are rubbing off on me? You think? :-) Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Please hear me out before ousting me.
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Please hear me out before ousting me. Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:21:56 -0500 Perry wrote: Kevin's posts may indeed be Baptist commentary, but If the Baptists agree with scripture then, by all means, lets read Kevin's commentary. I think the Baptists disagree with Scripture MORE than Roman Catholics in many areas, but that is another thread altogether. :-) Well dip my baby! I had no idea you felt that way. Perry wrote: In fact, I worry that someone may join TT and, not being as aware as most of us about the Bible, will be extremely confused and led astray by the many things that are posted here. TruthTalk is not for unknowledgeable and immature individuals. Such individuals surely will unsubscribe and be edified elsewhere. There are more sites that will cater to them than sites like TruthTalk that allow a little rough and tough tumbling over issues. Perry wrote: DavidM, would you go to the BoM to learn about Jesus? No, you would go there to learn about the heresies of the Mormons. I would watch the Passion if I wanted to learn about the heresies of the Catholics, and mystical visions of a nun from the 17th century. What in the world are you talking about? What heresy of the Catholic church is being taught by this movie? This movie is nothing like the Book of Mormon. It is a pictorial sermon by Mel Gibson about the passion of Christ. Why do you want to demonize it? This smacks to me of witch hunting for Roman Catholicism and religious bigotry. Yep, it is. Mel didn't come up with all of that inaccurate imagery on his own, ya know. Perry wrote: But, to do so requires an excellent grounding in biblical truth. Name for me one thing in the movie that would hurt people if they did not have an excellent grounding in Biblical truth? I did below. Perry wrote: if one is a new Christian, or perhaps not yet a Christian, it could be disastrous. How? Would it be more disasterous than the Lethal Weapon movies? Why have you been silent about the Lethal Weapon movies but critical of this movie about Jesus? Exactly what about it offends you? All I hear from the critics is gossip and innuendo, from people who have not seen the film themselves. That bothers me. Let them rail against the Lethal Weapon movies if they want, but not this movie. I haven't seen the lethal weapon movies, do not allow R rated movies into our house, and have asked my older kids (both over 18) not to watch R rated movies, and have told our youngest (15) not to watch R rated movies. We discussed the MG movie over dinner before any of us saw it. I again told the 15-year old not to see it, and told the two over 18 that they would have to make their own decisions about it. Our oldest (23) saw it. No one else in the family has. If my wife chooses to see it that is her choice. Perry wrote: Case in point: My Bible study group met last night. We are studying a 3 week presentation of the Passion put out by Rick Warren of Saddleback. They praise Mel Gibson and his commentary, and want to put out material that rides the current tidal wave created by the movie. I think their motive is pure, but their vehicle is flawed.) I'm skeptical of anything like this. I smell the love of money around all books and studies like this. I don't know Rick Warren so I'm not saying this applies to him, but there will be many who will want to cash in on the success of this movie. Yeah, I occasionaly have problems with their approach, too. Perry wrote: One of the group members was explaining something about one of the thieves. She made a statement, as fact, that I knew to be non-biblical. I asked her, did you get that from the movie, or from the scripture AND SHE COULD NOT SAY! She had seen the movie twice and already was confusing the artistic license and catholic heresy with biblical truth! This is not a case in point if you do not tell us what she said. Was it about the crow picking at the eye of one of the thieves? She commented that the theives were carrying the crossbars of their crosses on their shoulders, and she commented that she did not realized that they carried theirs like that. I do not recall it saying that in the accounts in the scripture. If I have missed something let me know. People confusing Bible with artistic license is certainly going to happen, but that happens with sermons all the time. How many times have you heard things like, God helps those who help themselves or some other such unbiblical proverb? Does that mean we should never listen to someone giving a sermon because we might confuse what is said in a sermon with something said by the Bible? I find that a most ridiculous conclusion. We should simply help each other understand what is Biblically based and what is not, and that which is not Biblically based is not necessarily wrong. The railings against the appearance of Veronica in the movie is one such case in point. Kevin might
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
The word used here for one is ECHAD, Hebrew/Chaldee Lexicon To The Old Testament, (echad) means, "to unite, to join together, to be in unity." in other words "Compound United oneness" echad is a uniplural adjective describing several items in one unit or group or compound UNITY. The word is used for one nation of 12 tribes, mariage two become one flesh god took one (Echad) rib and the two become one (echad) flesh gen 2:24; Numbers 13:23 one(echad) cluster of grapes God could have used yachid the hebrew word for Absolute one or "the only one," "alone." Genesis 22:2 "Take now your son, your only [yachid] son" Jesus said "I and my Father are ONE" (John 10:25) ECHAD is used in Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One." Some call it TRI - UNITY TRINITY is a contraction of TRIuNITY Hope this helps you understand the TRI UNITY of God. Thank you Kevin . Because of you and Bill, I now understand what I could never quite grasp before. I am in your debt. Terry
[TruthTalk] Pearls before swine?
\o/ !HALALUYah! \o/
Greetings in the Matchless NameofYahShua!!
So much banter on the calendar.
There are those who believe that the moon is new when it is full.
Their numbers are growing significantly. Yes, they are wrong ... but that
is nothing new.
One writes that the first month is Nisan. Well, that's
Babylonian. That one later corrects and notes Abib is the first month BUT
then notes it is the only month with a name in Scripture. That's wrong,
too. Others are also named (Ziv, Ethanim, Bul).
Then one notes that the year begins with the New Moon closest to the vernal
equinox. Actually it is the first New Moon that follows the vernal
equinox. I have a multi-authored study on this that is hundreds of pages
of documented scholarship long.
Also, the first light of the moon is Babylonian in origin. The moon
is actually new when it is completely dark ... you know, like counting begins
from "zero" (dark of the moon) and then "one" as in "first" as in "first light"
of the moon. The light of the moon shows that the first day is
passed.
Also, the "April" 6 date for Pesach (Passover) is from the Babylonian
Jewish calendar full of man's manipulations. It you are following the
crescent understanding it is the 5th. It you are following TRUTH it is the
4th.
Then there is the "Hebrews in America" banter.
One notes something about how "Indians" look versus how Jews look.
Truth of the matter is that there is an incredibly wide variation in looks of
either group. So how can you prove or disprove one is or isn't the other
based on that? You can't ... at least not accurately ... and Accuracy =
Truth.
If you don't have AccurateTalk you can't have TruthTalk.
By the way, "Indian" is an inaccurate word to describe the indigenous
peoples of the western hemisphere commonly called "the Americas".
That being said, there are indigenous peoples ("indians") of the western
hemisphere ("the Americas") who observe the new moon in similar fashion to
Scripture (how many of you know that is even in Scripture?) and by traditions of
Hebrews? Know why? 'Cause some of those peoples have Hebrew origins
(like the Cherokees)!
In New Mexico there is a stone in the side of a mountain with the 10
Commandments carved in the ancient Hebrew script that hasn't been used since
around the time of Messiah. How did it get there? Who put it
there? Hebrew "indians" did millenia ago. How did they get
here? There are easy, logical answers for those who will dig out
TRUTH.
I could go on and on.
Ahava b' YahShua
(Love in The
SAVIOUR)
Baruch YHVH,
ChrisBarr
a servant
of YHVH
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: David: Not a question but another quotation..
epistemological Hey Vince. He's doing it again. Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
Wm. Taylor wrote: Hi Terry, I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor Thanks for clearing that up Bill. This time I understood. I'm glad I asked instead of guessing at the answer. Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
Does that mean you would have been in the Coliseum cheering as Christians were being fed to the Lions? That is history. Is that the kind of entertainment you are looking for? . I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history. Grace John Smithson
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
Powerful, David, Preach it! - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:24 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] The value of history John Smithson wrote: I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history. Judy wrote: Truly wisdom from above Terry wrote: What a great line Is that original? Can I steal it? Why is it that those who say such things always seem to be those who are least educated in history? I would take such comments more seriously if such statements came from historians. I am not saying this as a jab, but to express my incredulity after reading these recent posts. The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of us interpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible. History is the record of the experience of others. The Bible's foundation is history, so to say that history is for entertainment is to say that the Bible is for entertainment. If someone is going to start arguing that Jesus did not exist, that David did not exist, that Moses did not exist, that Abraham did not exist, that the genealogical records of the Bible are fictitious, that Jerusalem did not exist... come-on. Such reasoning is ludicrous and is going down the wrong path. To argue that the acceptance of these historical facts is merely entertainment and not education is walking down the path that would consider anything material and experiential as having no basis in reality. Kevin has made several arguments about how the Book of Mormon has no historical basis and therefore should not be trusted. If we accept the idea that history has entertainment value but not educational value, we completely demolish Kevin's argument against Mormonism. Can't you all see that? Everybody reads the Bible and interprets words from their experience. If we read the word prayer in the Bible, we understand that from our own experience of prayer. If we are educated in history, then we might have a more enhanced understanding of what prayer was actually like when it is mentioned in the Bible. Now I certainly will agree that historians slant their presentation of history, but that is not a reason to ignore history. It is a reason to broaden our study of history to include other historians. It is a reason to temper our historical knowledge with a trusted source of knowledge... the Bible. Knowledge is NOT the enemy of the Word of God. Knowledge is a friend and companion of Truth. Knowledge is not for entertainment. Knowledge gives us understanding of our own personal history and gives us light. To reject knowledge is to choose darkness. To appreciate knowledge, especially historical knowledge, will lead us to wisdom and truth. Jesus and truth are inseparable in my mind, and this leads to an understanding that knowledge and Jesus is inseparable. To posit that history is entertainment is to posit that knowledge is entertainment which equates with the idea that truth is entertainment and that Jesus is entertainment. Certainly Jesus and religion and history is entertainment for some people, but not for me. More importantly, I do not think there is any Biblical justification for treating historical knowledge as entertainment. That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; IN WHOM ARE HID ALL THE TREASURES OF WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE. (Colossians 2:2-3 KJV) And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, FILLED WITH ALL KNOWLEDGE, able also to admonish one another. (Romans 15:14 KJV) But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; By pureness, BY KNOWLEDGE, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned ... (2 Corinthians 6:4-6 KJV) And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; AND TO VIRTUE KNOWLEDGE; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-8 KJV) Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
jt wrote If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. I reply Judy, Don't you get it? When we say, "Truth is a Person," we are already accepting, without reservations, the grid established by the very ones you see as being "problematic," the Nicene fathers. Get it? They are the ones who invented the word "person" to express what their language could not otherwise say about the Godhead and Jesus Christ. That word spills down to us. We use it today to speak wonderful truths about the Word of God. Bill Taylor - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:35 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. jt: The Greeks don't have all the answers ... Is it aPERSON who said: "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life?" wt: So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? jt: No... wt: That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor jt: If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
[TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] jt wrote If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. I reply Judy, Don't you get it? When we say, "Truth is a Person," we are already accepting, without reservations, the grid established by the very ones you see as being "problematic," the Nicene fathers. Get it? jt: No Bill, you are the one who does not "get it" I am not quoting the Nicene fathers when I say that "Truth" is a person. I am quoting John 14:16. The words of Jesus Himself where he says "I Am the Truth" They are the ones who invented the word "person" to express what their language could not otherwise say about the Godhead and Jesus Christ. That word spills down to us. We use it today to speak wonderful truths about the Word of God. jt: I don't need the Nicene Fathers to spill wonderful truths ABOUT the Word of God down to me. I have the Word of God and the promise to lead me into ALL truth. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:35 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. jt: The Greeks don't have all the answers ... Is it aPERSON who said: "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life?" wt: So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? jt: No... wt: That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor jt: If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
\o/ !HALALUYah! \o/ Greetings in the Matchless NameofYahShua!! If we were to "level the playing field" and agree to discuss this subject sola Scriptura (from Scripture only), using only Scriptural words, this discussion would be much easier. Is that such an unreasonable request to insist on only that which is found in Scripture to determine the Truth of Scripture? One noted that "Godhead" is Biblical. Well, think again. That is a made-up-by-King-James-translators word. Look up the word "head" in Scripture and find the Greek for it. You will find absolutely no aspect of that word in any of the words translated nefariously as "Godhead". This word was an English invention to prop up the decidedly UN-Scriptural trinity doctrine. In each of the three instances this 'word' "Godhead" appears in the King James Version, it is 'translated'/made-up from a different (though related to the others) Greek word every time. The words are each a derivation of the word 'deity' or 'divinity'. There is no plurality, implied or otherwise. King James translators merely spawned it by inference to support their commonly held polytheism-wrapped-in-monotheistic-wrapping Trinity MIS-understanding. With the 'word' "Godhead" disposed of we can then eliminate what it has spawned - "God-family" and "God-kind". These words are not derived from Scriptural words, but rather from the made-up-King James-translator 'word' "Godhead". Throw out also duality, dualism and "dual anything else". These are not to be found in Scripture. We are left with 'ONE' from which you can derive the noun 'ONENESS' if you like. That is a term commonly used to label the Scriptural Truth of the Nature of the Almighty. Briefly stated, the Almighty is One (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29). He is Spirit (John 4:24). As He is Holy and Spirit He is the Holy Spirit. This Holy Spirit that is Eternal fathered the physical form of YahShua (Matt. 1:20) and was therefore the Eternal Father. This physical form is the embodiment or en-flesh-ment of deity, the literal and physical form of the Father (Isa. 9:6; John 14:7-9).Ahava b' YahShua (Love in The SAVIOUR) Baruch YHVH, ChrisBarr a servant of YHVH
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
In a message dated 3/10/2004 12:01:14 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JS' What is JS John -- the new guy
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including The Bible
You are too much for me, Judy. I can't help you. - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 2:37 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] jt wrote If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. I reply Judy, Don't you get it? When we say, "Truth is a Person," we are already accepting, without reservations, the grid established by the very ones you see as being "problematic," the Nicene fathers. Get it? jt: No Bill, you are the one who does not "get it" I am not quoting the Nicene fathers when I say that "Truth" is a person. I am quoting John 14:16. The words of Jesus Himself where he says "I Am the Truth" They are the ones who invented the word "person" to express what their language could not otherwise say about the Godhead and Jesus Christ. That word spills down to us. We use it today to speak wonderful truths about the Word of God. jt: I don't need the Nicene Fathers to spill wonderful truths ABOUT the Word of God down to me. I have the Word of God and the promise to lead me into ALL truth. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:35 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. jt: The Greeks don't have all the answers ... Is it aPERSON who said: "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life?" wt: So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? jt: No... wt: That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor jt: If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: David: Not a question but another quotation..
Gesundheit !! :) On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:58:46 -0600 Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: epistemological Hey Vince. He's doing it again. Terry -- 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] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning to synthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps a synergy might develop through such mutual cooperation. vince: Most people call that ecumenism. I see no benefit in unity simply for the sake of unity, especially not at the expense of truth. Synergy born of anthropogenic synthesis is not mentioned much less recommended to us in God's word. God is not impressed with human IQs, advanced degrees, etc. He tells us in His word that He gives understanding to those who are humble, and He gives ears to hear to those who tremble at His word (Prov 11:2; Is 66:5). Seek wisdom, understanding, and knowledge of the truth. Screw synthesis. vincent j. fulton -- 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] Pearls before swine?
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:48:57 -0600 Chris Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: By the way, Indian is an inaccurate word to describe the indigenous peoples of the western hemisphere commonly called the Americas. My handy, dandy Webster's dictionary tells me that, in this context, the word indigenous is the same as native, which, in this context, means someone who is born in the Americas. I was born in Cleveland, Ohio, and Cleveland is in America, therefore I am a native American, despite the fact that my ancestors came from Europe. The proper word would indicate that these Indians come from the original people in the Americas. Fortunately, we already have an English word which derives from the Latin words meaning from the original. It is ab (from) plus origine (the beginning), which we know as the word aborigine. Oink, oink.:) vincent j fulton -- 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] The Trinity
In a message dated 3/10/2004 5:21:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1 Tim 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Maybe this verse did not do it for some of you, but just reading in the posted email made me wish I could sing and make melody. All I can do is hum --- You can actually feel God's presence as you His word -- awesome passage and thank you for its inclusion in your email.
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 04:08:49 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jesus must be mistaken because you know there was a TOTAL Apostacy shortly after the last apostle died there were no more christians on earth. vince: God always preserves a remnant who are His people: 1 Kings 19:18; Romans 11:5; Psalm 4:3. vincent j fulton -- 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] The Trinity
In a message dated 3/10/2004 5:26:18 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What a great line Is that original? Can I steal it? Terry Yes but can have it --- send the anticipated revenues to my worship therapist - I am musically challenged. It is so bad that on one occasion, I was asked to sing during communion and the entire congregation became atheist !!! Really sad. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Judy + everyone
In a message dated 3/10/2004 6:17:57 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A little less hyperbole, a little less certainty, might go a long way. When you equate your statement(s) of the truth with the Truth Himself you're already moving away from the Truth. Lance By this phrase "a little less certainty," are you speaking of rigidity? Clearly, if I am not fully convinced, I do not fully know anything except by coincidence. Lance also said: The Word of God + One indwelt by the Spirit of God =??Well, what it equals is this conversation! I answered his question before he did and I came up with knowledge --- but he may have a point. After thinking about it, Prov 12: 15 says much the same thing: "The way of a fool is right in his own sight but a wise man is one who listens to counsel."
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
In a message dated 3/10/2004 6:27:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kevin has made several arguments about how the Book of Mormon has no historical basis and therefore should not be trusted. If we accept the idea that history has entertainment value but not educational value, we completely demolish Kevin's argument against Mormonism. Can't you all see that? Wow -- David my friend Where have you gone? I was referencing spiritual truth more than anything when I made my statement "I am educated by the Word, I am entertained by history." Entertainment includes, in this case, the joy and validation I feel when I read the story of Polycarp and his willingness to die -- and I could go on and on and on --- but you see the point. I did not mean "entertainment" as something not to be taken seriously but I learn truth from the Word -- as do most of us on this list. Re Mormonism; a couple of thoughts. One -- if someone would write off to the Smithsonian institute about the Mormon claims, they would receive back something to this effect, "Smithsonian (yes James Smithson is a family member -- rise, I am but a man) archeologist see no similarity between the archeology of the New World and the Book of Mormon." Actually I think that can be verified via the web. Man, I hope that statement remains their view. It was there a year or so ago. Secondly: I have no idea what grace means to those on this list, but grace as opposed to law is now our standard of judgment. It is at the center of the New Covenant, a covenant that is not at all like the legal one given by God to Moses (Jere 31:31-34). That being the case, THERE IS NO REASON FOR GOD TO BEGIN ANEW WITH THE MORMON CHURCH, ITSELF FRACTURED INTO THREE OR FOUR GROUPS. We are save by grace, not by works of the law. What do you suppose that means "works of the law"? It means "obedience to the law (and in the context, the law of God)." If we are in deed saved by grace apart from obedience to the law of God, why in the world would God begin anew? Sure the church is screwed up, but who would say that things were different in first century times. IT WAS SCREWED UP FROM THE GET GO, FOLKS. Look to Corinth. They had approved of gross immorality. They had lost their way in regard to the gifts of the Spirit. They had fractured into four warring groups. Their Christianity was described as carnal. Who among us would be proud to have our faith defined for all the ages to ponder as "carnal"? Anyway, you get the point. I don't believe in the Mormon church because God took care of all the problems the church might experience ON THE CROSS. To argue that point is to believe that the error that has followed the church around got God by surprise. Does ANY really believe that? I Jo 1: 8 clearly states that we are all continually in sin. We always need Him --- that is why (among other reasons) that He was raised from the dead - that resurrection created a CONTINUAL ETERNAL flow of the blood of the Lamb. It is in that sense and only in that sense that He died once and for all time for us (Heb 10:14). Anyway -- sorry. Got my preacher blood flowing. This is a great group. I am enjoying not only your individual faith and knowledge, but the patience and acceptance that seems to prevail. God Bless Us All John Smithson
Re: [TruthTalk] Please hear me out before ousting me.
In a message dated 3/10/2004 6:42:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perry wrote: I must say that I am in the same camp as Kevin with respect to not seeing Mel Gibson's movie. My position is that it is not "the Passion"... it is an RCC commentary about "the Passion". Actually, I saw this movieand the above thought never crossed my mind. John
RE: [TruthTalk] The value of history
David Miller wrote: The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of us interpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible. Kevin wrote: I do not interpret the truth of the bible through the lense of history. I interpret history through the lens of TRUTH the HOLY BIBLE. Well, this is where you miss it. Your implicit assumption here is that the Bible is Truth and contains all truth that might be known by man. You should be interpreting the Bible through the lens of Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is found everywhere. He is the light that lighteth every man who comes into the world, even those who have never read the Bible. Jesus Christ is found in history as well as in the Bible. Kevin wrote: Why should I go to a secondary source which is not INSPIRED or PRESERVED? The Bible is not a primary source. Where did you get that idea? From the Reformation idea of Sola Scriptura? Read the Bible and see what it says. Who is the primary source of truth, ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE? (Hint: John 16:13) Truth is not the Bible. Read the Bible to learn this. The Bible speaks of truth dwelling inside of us. The Bible cannot dwell inside of us. Jesus dwells inside of us and His words dwell inside of us (the living word not the written word) through a work of the Holy Spirit. Hear the Bible speak about how truth dwells inside us and will be with us forever: The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; For the truth's sake, WHICH DWELLETH IN US, and shall be with us for ever. (2 John 1:1-2 KJV) Look, the Bible is the highest authority of revelation among us. It is so because of the testimony of HISTORY there's that dreaded word again! :-). But the Bible is not the primary source that Jesus spoke about that would guide us into all truth. Do not replace the Holy Spirit with the Bible. That is the error of many denominations, and the Baptists especially! Believe the Bible and obey it and you will see that what I say about the Bible is true. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
I also think you do not understand the bible teaching on separationDavid Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin wrote: Something has gone horibly wrong the man that preaches UNITY is now going to distance himself or "SEPARATE" from the one who preaches separation. Isn't that a hoot!You apparently have never understood my teaching about unity andseparation, but hey, maybe from your perspective you are rubbing off onme? You think? :-)Peace be with you.David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity
In a message dated 3/10/2004 12:45:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does that mean you would have been in the Coliseum cheering as Christians were being fed to the Lions? That is history. Is that the kind of entertainment you are looking for? If I left the list without ever giving you an answer to the above question, would you actually think that such is what I had in mind? I have addressed the problem in an email to David Miller. It will post soon. So hold your horses. John
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
Amen Amen Amen Thanks for the scriptures.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 04:08:49 -0800 (PST) Kevin Deegan<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes: Jesus must be mistaken because you know there was a TOTAL Apostacyshortly after the last apostle died there were no more christians onearth.vince:God always preserves a remnant who are His people: 1 Kings 19:18;Romans 11:5; Psalm 4:3.vincent j fulton--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
RE: [TruthTalk] The value of history
John Smithson wrote: Wow -- David my friend Where have you gone? I was referencing spiritual truth more than anything when I made my statement I am educated by the Word, I am entertained by history.Entertainment includes, in this case, the joy and validation I feel when I read the story of Polycarp and his willingness to die -- and I could go on and on and on --- but you see the point.I did not mean entertainment as something not to be taken seriously but I learn truth from the Word -- as do most of us on this list. Hmmm. Thanks for clearing that up. I'm not sure the others understood you that way. Don't you get that kind of joy and validation from reading the Word of God too? You juxtaposed the Word of God with History, equating education with the Word of God and entertainment with history, in the context of people who were marginalizing those among us who have a knowledge of history. Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
ROTFL Exactly! The bible never tells us to find areas of commonality. Find Truth let the chips fall where they may.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning tosynthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps asynergy might develop through such mutual cooperation. vince:Most people call that ecumenism. I see no benefit in unity simplyfor the sake of unity, especially not at the expense of truth.Synergy born of anthropogenic synthesis is not mentioned much lessrecommended to us in God's word. God is not impressed with human IQs,advanced degrees, etc. He tells us in His word that He givesunderstanding to those who are humble, and He gives ears to hear to thosewho tremble at His word (Prov 11:2; Is 66:5).Seek wisdom, understanding, and knowledge of the truth. Screwsynthesis.vincent j. fulton--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
RE: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
David Miller wrote: Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning to synthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps a synergy might develop through such mutual cooperation. Vince wrote: Most people call that ecumenism. No, you aren't hearing what I am saying. I am against ecumenism. I don't believe in denominations at all. Vince wrote: Synergy born of anthropogenic synthesis is not mentioned much less recommended to us in God's word. I agree. I'm not talking about anthropogenic synthesis. I'm talking about hearing and receiving from one another and submitting unto one another. I'm talking about the body of Christ. Read 1 Cor. 12 and Acts 2. My wife is calling... time for church... gotta run. Later. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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] Re:Language-Including The Bible
Jesus said I AM the Way, the Truth and the Life He did not sayI know the way, He said HeIS the Way, IS the Truth. The TRUTH PERSONIFIED! TRUTH manifest in the Flesh.Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] jt wrote If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. I reply Judy, Don't you get it? When we say, "Truth is a Person," we are already accepting, without reservations, the grid established by the very ones you see as being "problematic," the Nicene fathers. Get it? jt: No Bill, you are the one who does not "get it" I am not quoting the Nicene fathers when I say that "Truth" is a person. I am quoting John 14:16. The words of Jesus Himself where he says "I Am the Truth" They are the ones who invented the word "person" to express what their language could not otherwise say about the Godhead and Jesus Christ. That word spills down to us. We use it today to speak wonderful truths about the Word of God. jt: I don't need the Nicene Fathers to spill wonderful truths ABOUT the Word of God down to me. I have the Word of God and the promise to lead me into ALL truth. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:35 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Re:Language-Including "The Bible" From: "Wm. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not suggesting that anything other than Scripture is revelatory, neither are there other sources of truth comparable to the Bible. I am saying thattrue statements can come from sources other than the Bible. "Truth is aPerson" is a great little quote. The first time your hearit, it is pretty cool, because we are conditioned to think of truth in other categories. BUT the word "person" is not found in the Text, nor is there a Greek equivalent. jt: The Greeks don't have all the answers ... Is it aPERSON who said: "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life?" wt: So what do we do? Do we say it is an unbiblical idea? jt: No... wt: That's all that I'm asking. More than that, I am trying to get us to lighten up a bit on our criticisms about early Christianity and the language which came from their era. Bill Taylor jt: If they were kept in their place it would not be so bad, but when they are used as a grid through which to determine God's truth they become a problematic. judyt God allows the devil to raise up hereticsto make his people study To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wm. Taylor wrote: , I don't have a problem with it myself, but I'm not all pruned up about this it-has-to-come-from-the-bible stuff. What about you who are? Is that a true and accurate statement concerning Jesus Christ? Bill Taylor===You lost me Bill. Where else? Science, BoM, politics, Rev. Moon? Surely you do not mean there are other sources of truth comparable to the Bible.'splaine yourself!Terry Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Hi everyone. This is funny to me but , I sat down, opened all the mail from this list, post three or four replies and emptied my mail box. I immedicately exited the email and re-entered just to see if anything had post while I working on your (you all) articles. THERE WERE 20 new emails. Man oh man. Good thing we are not having babies !!! John
RE: [TruthTalk] The value of history
This is the core of the problem, you are essentially a Mormon in sheeps clothing. JN 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. JN 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He will guide us into: "THY WORD is TRUTH"2 Peter 1 "We have also a more sure word of prophecy" It is more sure than a Visual appearance of God Vs 16 (Eyewitnesses) It is more sure than than hearing His voice Vs 18 You have it the other way around, and your experience is the guide.David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Miller wrote: The truth is that history is a body of knowledge from which all of us interpret and understand truth, including truth found in the Bible.Kevin wrote: I do not interpret the truth of the bible through the lense of history. I interpret history through the lens of TRUTH the HOLY BIBLE.Well, this is where you miss it. Your implicit assumption here is thatthe Bible is Truth and contains all truth that might be known by man.You should be interpreting the Bible through the lens of Jesus Christ,and Jesus Christ is found everywhere. He is the light that lightethevery man who comes into the world, even those who have never read theBible. Jesus Christ is found in history as well as in the Bible.Kevin wrote: Why should I go to a secondary source which is not INSPIRED or PRESERVED? The Bible is not a primary source. Where did you get that idea? Fromthe Reformation idea of Sola Scriptura?Read the Bible and see what it says. Who is the primary source oftruth, ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE? (Hint: John 16:13)Truth is not the Bible. Read the Bible to learn this. The Bible speaksof truth dwelling inside of us. The Bible cannot dwell inside of us.Jesus dwells inside of us and His words dwell inside of us (the livingword not the written word) through a work of the Holy Spirit.Hear the Bible speak about how truth dwells inside us and will be withus forever:The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in thetruth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; Forthe truth's sake, WHICH DWELLETH IN US, and shall be with us for ever.(2 John 1:1-2 KJV)Look, the Bible is the highest authority of revelation among us. It isso because of the testimony of HISTORY
RE: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
What will take the place of denominations? Has there ever been a time on earth without "denominations"?David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Miller wrote: Bill seems to grasp the idea that we would be better off learning to synthesize our viewpoints together into a complete whole, where perhaps a synergy might develop through such mutual cooperation.Vince wrote: Most people call that ecumenism. No, you aren't hearing what I am saying. I am against ecumenism. Idon't believe in denominations at all. Vince wrote: Synergy born of anthropogenic synthesis is not mentioned much less recommended to us in God's word. I agree. I'm not talking about anthropogenic synthesis. I'm talkingabout hearing and receiving from one another and submitting unto oneanother. I'm talking about the body of Christ. Read 1 Cor. 12 and Acts2. My wife is calling... time for church... gotta run. Later.Peace be with you.David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
RE: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
DavidM says I already accept the Bible as an authority for truth What are the other "authorities"? David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perry wrote: Actually, we know the order is true despite what "falling away" may mean, right? Paul is laying out the order. The falling away happens, then the man of sin is revealed, then the Lord comes. Now, if one takes "falling away" to mean a falling away of the faithful from the faith, then the time of the resurrection is unspecified in this verse.Why do you say this? The time of the resurrection happens AFTER thefalling away. Read the passage.Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,and by our gathering together unto him [the Resurrection / Rapture],That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit,nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is athand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come,except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed,the son of perdition. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 KJV)The apostasy mentioned (falling away) cannot be translated to refer tothe resurrection because he just framed his entire speech to say thatthe coming of our Lord Jesus and our gathering together unto him wouldnot happen until the apostasy and revealing of the man of sin. Thisseems so obvious to me that I truly do not understand how you couldframe an argument otherwise. As Terry said, the passage says what itsays.Perry wrote: But, I was writing in the context of the "falling away" meaning the resurrection itself (see the reference I gave in a previous post). In this context, it would indicate that the resurrection would happen, then the man of sin would be revealed, then the Lord would come.This viewpoint contradicts the immediate verse preceding this one, andit also contradicts other verses in the context. For example, consider the previous chapter that associates the coming ofthe Lord and the glorification of the saints (the Resurrection /Rapture) with a fiery judgment of vengeance upon the wicked.And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall berevealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire takingvengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of ourLord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destructionfrom the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When heshall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all themthat believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.(2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 KJV)The verses following the passage you have commented upon also indicatethe apostasy, calling it the mystery of iniquity, which will continue towork and hold fast until this spirit behind it is taken out of the wayand the son of perdition, the man of sin, is revealed.For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now lettethwill let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wickedbe revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth,and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thessalonians2:7-8 KJV)So very clearly, the passage indicates apostasy followed by the man ofsin followed by Christ appearing in the clouds, the resurrection of thesaints, and the judgment of the nations, all in that order.Perry wrote: But, I suspect you do not consider the "falling away" in 2 Thes 2:3 to be the resurrection. Am I right?Right. The falling away is an apostasy, the working of iniquity.Perry wrote: BTW, I am currently reading a book called "When will Jesus Come", by Dave Hunt. He takes a pre-tribulational resurrection view, and provides a lot of evidence for that position. Do you know of Dave Hunt? if so, what is your impression of him?I have never met Dave Hunt but I have heard good reports about him. Ido not know his eschatological views too well, but I read his books,"The Seduction of Christianity" and "Beyond Seduction." I'm not reallyin his target audience because I already accept the Bible as anauthority for truth, so much of it was kind of boring and uninterestingto me. That is not to say he is not doing a good work, just that I amnot in his target audience concerning the subjects he has written about.Peace be with you.David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
In a message dated 3/10/2004 3:21:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. Look, I think we are having a semantics problem here more than anything. In its context, I stand by what I said. Now, if the context had been a question to this effect: which is more important - the Word or history, I would have chosen different words. When one discusses a religious matter with a Catholic, if that Catholic is knowledgeable, he might refer to a historical occasion as if that settled the question of faith (whatever it might be ) under discussion. In that context, I do not care about history. I have never read Aquinas or Luther and walked away saying to myself, I now understand what God was trying to say in the Good Book. Personally, and bear with me, when I have a problem, I exegete. Anyone can do it. It takes some doing, but anyone can learn to truly exegete (with the greek and all that) any passage of scripture and draw a reasonable conclusion There are several keys to an accurate exegete -- one is a contextual review of the passage in question and , two, a historical understanding of the times, geography, authors, primary audience and so on. In that since, truth cannot be arrived at apart from history. Does any of this help? John
Re: [TruthTalk] Astronomers pinpoint time and date of crucifixion
In a message dated 3/10/2004 3:47:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What will take the place of denominations? In the Bible there is the church local and the church universal but exactly where is the church denominational? Has there ever been a time on earth without "denominations"? Of course, being true does not mean it is God's intention for us. Since Adam, we have all been under sin but God's intentions were something else. John
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. There is an old saying that says it well. "You can get knowledge in college, but you get wisdom from the Word" Terry
RE: [TruthTalk] Please hear me out before ousting me.
http://www.inter-islam.org/faith/dajjal.htm But I will tell you something which no Prophet has told his people.Verily he (Dajjal) is one-eyed and Allah is not one-eyed. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0953327515/103-4075416-0637422?v=glance For some reason god thought it important to tell us Anti christ has a problem with his RIGHT eye: Zechariah 11:17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened. Just a co-inky-dink the movie character is hit in his right eye. sorta like why Mel thought it important to tell us he held the nail with his "sinister" Left hand. David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris wrote: Only when you realize that the Illuminati has long depicted their planned coming Antichrist as a naked one-eyed man does this scene make sense. This combination of scenes -- one-eyed Messiah and naked buttocks -- perfectly fulfills the Illuminist Antichrist symbol!ROTFLOL! Now that was funny. Thanks for sharing, Chris. The degree of reasoning that some people use to find evil in the worldis simply amazing. Maranatha.Peace be with you.David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.--"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!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster.
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
Blaine: Kevin is right about the apostacies, wrong about the credibility of the witnessing. The 12 men never denied their testimonies, even after they had apostasized. Most, including two of the three witnesses who saw the angel, repented, and rejoined the LDS Church after it had moved to Utah. The third one, the only one not to rejoin, continued to accept interviews up to his very deathbed, and maintained steadfastly he had seen and heard all that he signed his name to. He often retold the story, never deviating from the original. As usual, Kevin doesn't give the full story or even relevant facts. - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 6:19 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky? These witnesses had no conviction. The things they "saw" made NO DIFFERENCE in their lives ALL of the 3 Witnesses APOSTACIZED (therefore they were witnesses against the power of the BoM) 4 of the eight Apostacied a fifth dying before he had a chanceto, with the last 3 being SMITHS! More of a witness against the BoM! The church was founded in 1830 for 5 years they had NO APOSTLES! How could this be? In 1835 The Elders laid hands on the 12 to appoint them as Apostles. How does one that is a Melch Priest commision an Apostle? Waiting for your answer. (Put this question with all the others you are unable to answer) Your first 12 were not duly appointed which breaks your line of Priests, Prophets too! 6 of the first 12 Apostacized! What is with the bad track record? In addition the DC call some of these men "wicked", "to mean to mention" and says some of them "could not tell a true from a false revelation" What a great witness you have there Blaine Blaine Borrowman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blaine: The problem is, you didn't give it a fair trial. In any court in America (most courts, except maybe in Southern states whereall thoseBaptists hang out--lol), the testimony of two witnesses is enough to prove innocence--or guilt. The BoM has three witnesses who saw the angel, the gold plates, the sword of Laban, the interpreters (Urim and thummim), and the compass used by Lehi and his group to guide them to the Promised Land, called the Liahona--plus eight more witnesses who saw the gold plates. counting Joseph Smith himself, that makes a total of 12 witnesses. No court--not even in Alabama--could deny this record. - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky? How about if we just put the Book of Mormon on trial, Kevin? OK? Blaine It is on trialand is FOUND WANTING!Blaine Borrowman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about if we just put the Book of Mormon on trial, Kevin? OK? Blaine - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 1:18 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky? Have you TRIED that Spirit Baline? The scripture says TRY THEM! PUT THEM ON TRIAL That is the simple fact. I do not have to prove anything. You choose to ignore the scriptures to your own Demise! The reason being is you do not want to give up your faith. You know that JOe the Prophets the Church will not stand simple scrutiny no less a Trial! Blaine Borrowman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky? Blaine Borrowman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blaine: The story about JS seeing the words cross the stone inside the hat was never substantiated. At best, I think he may have used the hat for effect, probably as a joke, and the rock inside was not a crystal ball--I have a photo of it, and it is opaque, with several holes in it. When Oliver Cowdery tried to translate, nothing happened. That was because he had not learned to read the writing by himself. After JS learned the language of the
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
In a message dated 3/10/2004 4:23:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine: Kevin is right about the apostacies, wrong about the credibility of the witnessing. The 12 men never denied their testimonies, even after they had apostasized. Most, including two of the three witnesses who saw the angel, repented, and rejoined the LDS Church after it had moved to Utah. The third one, the only one not to rejoin, continued to accept interviews up to his very deathbed, and maintained steadfastly he had seen and heard all that he signed his name to. He often retold the story, never deviating from the original. As usual, Kevin doesn't give the full story or even relevant facts. Here's a history lesson. Oliver Cowdry was a teacher and, for a time, a participant in the Campbell/Stone movement (early 1800's).. Since I do not believe that Mormon "truth" is the product of revelation, perhaps some of it came from J Smith's association with others such as Cowdry. Cowdry would have believed in water baptism, elders, evangelism, communion, to name a few of the similarities. It is a hypothesis but is worth studying if you are a history buff. John
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
What do you get if you've done both? - Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. There is an old saying that says it well. "You can get knowledge in college, but you get wisdom from the Word"Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] Old hebrew Coins found in Kentucky?
You seem to know a quite a bit about the Restoration denomination, John. Where did you pick this up? Bill Here's a history lesson. Oliver Cowdry was a teacher and, for a time, a participant in the Campbell/Stone movement (early 1800's).. Since I do not believe that Mormon "truth" is the product of revelation, perhaps some of it came from J Smith's association with others such as Cowdry. Cowdry would have believed in water baptism, elders, evangelism, communion, to name a few of the similarities. It is a hypothesis but is worth studying if you are a history buff. John
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
I think I figured it out. Some wise ass who thinks he knows it all. - Original Message - From: Wm. Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history What do you get if you've done both? - Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. There is an old saying that says it well. "You can get knowledge in college, but you get wisdom from the Word"Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
Just kidding, just kidding. - Original Message - From: Wm. Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:37 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history I think I figured it out. Some wise ass who thinks he knows it all. - Original Message - From: Wm. Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history What do you get if you've done both? - Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. There is an old saying that says it well. "You can get knowledge in college, but you get wisdom from the Word"Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The value of history
Wm. Taylor wrote: What do you get if you've done both? Judging from what they are teaching in college these days, I would suspect that you would get a lot of conflicting information. Terry Let me ask you this, John. Do you think we can better understand truth and life through a knowledge of history? Answer this and maybe I can better understand where you are coming from. One thing for sure, what you said struck a chord of resonance with others here, so maybe there is something I need to learn here. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. There is an old saying that says it well. "You can get knowledge in college, but you get wisdom from the Word" Terry
Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
ROTFLOLWelcome to TT, a hotbed of religious discussion! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone. This is funny to me but , I sat down, opened all the mail from this list, post three or four replies and emptied my mail box. I immedicately exited the email and re-entered just to see if anything had post while I working on your (you all) articles. THERE WERE 20 new emails. Man oh man. Good thing we are not having babies !!! John -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
