Dave, will you tell us the mormon interpretation (or, at the very least,
your interpretation) of the following verse? Exactly what is Paul trying to
say here?
1 cor 9:14 In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the
gospel should receive their living from the gospel.
Dave, I take it you do not believe that statement, thinking I made
it up, right?
DAVEH: No, I did not automatically make that assumption. I did not
take the time to research it on the net though, as I've been trying to
clean up my inbox tonight.tomorrow, I've got to head for home and
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BTWPlease don't understand my above comment to mean that I agree
with your statement.
Don't worry, Dave. From past experience, I did not expect you to agree with
my statement.
But, I'm not trying to argue with you about itI just want to understand
what did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need Biblical
references
DAVEH: The easy example is from 1Cor 15:29. I bet there was a
shepherd there by the name of Perriwinkle Lockenstein who when he heard
Paul say
Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the
will you tell us the mormon interpretation (or, at the very least,
your interpretation
DAVEH: I'm not sure why you want to know my opinion on this, Perry.
I thought you might prefer to delete my posts instead of responding to
them, as you might think it would give me platform to preach
John wrote:
When you read this word, you see office
and argue from that perspective. When
I see the word apostle. I see function,
assignment, a specific and personal calling
to the exclusion of office.
I'm not sure what you mean by to the exclusion of office, but you have
basically given
Read what followed this line, Gary.
Izzy wrote:
"I wonder why I have been wasting my time throwing
pearls before swine here. The answer, of course, is that
I dearly enjoy readingand sharing posts with the kindhearted
Believers on TT. But the truth is, in real life I would never
associate
Considering that Izzyis quoting Jesus who is the author and source of
all love, I think Izzy properly defines love here. What is your source for
defining love? Bob Dylan?
David M.
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent:
The Lord is a man of war. What you seem to fail to understand is that
killing the wicked is a loving thing to do. What do you think the judgment
of hell is all about? It is the greatest act of love that God could ever
practice toward mankind. Some are too selfish and wicked to recognize
John wrote:
I say that because the Mormon Church is so very
different from the first and pre-apostate church
found in the First and PreApostate Scriptures.
For the record, this is one area where John and I agree!
The greatest mistake the Mormon church did was re-establish a priesthood
that
David Miller wrote:
The use of CE for a date kind of gives away
their bias, doesn't it. :-)
DAVEH:
The way you said that, it somewhat implies you
think you have no biases, DavidM. :-\
I'm biased toward naming our centuries after Christ our Creator. Any other
bias is the wrong bias
Perry wrote:
The gospel didn't even have POWER until
he was rose from the dead.
I'm a little surprised by this statement. There are many Scriptures that
indicate that the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles did have
power. Jesus indicated that people were pressing into the
DaveH wrote:
If I remember correctly, you are a 4Sq
adherent, which as I understand it is a branch
of Protestantism.
John wrote:
That denomination did not come from the
Portestant response to RCC theology.
If I am remembering correctly, the historical root to the Four Square church
is
Offended at the 'name' of WHICH JESUS CHRIST, DavidM? The Mormon jesus seems
to cause you little offence! A 'word which you cannot in all good conscience
repeat' does seem to. Kinda wacky.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Dave,
Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions. You can't add
conjecture and assumptions to scripture to make it mean what you want. That
is called scripture-twisting and proof-texting.
I ask again, What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible? I will need
Biblical
Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the gospel? The
pre-existing God, incarnating as a Jew, living, dying, descending,
resurrecting, ascending, sitting and interceding. Why truncate the gospel?
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Dave, you response does not appear to have anything at all to do with the
question. Do you mind giving it a second try?
will you tell us the mormon interpretation (or, at the very least, your
interpretation) of the following verse? Exactly what is Paul trying to say
here?
1 cor 9:14 In
Why, DavidM, do you so specialize on minutiae? John is who he has become. He
is the aggregate of all that has comprised his life up to now. But then,
who'd ya be without multitudinous 'bunny trails' to go down?
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth?
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
John wrote:
When you read this word, you see office
and argue from
YOU WERE NOT INSULTED, DAVIDM! You were simply
described. An _expression_ was employed that is no worse than 'brain fart'. Cool
it, oh defensive one!
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:46
Subject: Re:
And why, DavidM, would Bob Dylan NOT be as good an
example as Izzy?
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:47
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] limbaugh
love
Considering that Izzyis quoting Jesus who is
This 'killing thingy' really seems to 'turn your
crank', DavidM. Maybe anger management is called for.
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:49
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] limbaugh
love
The Lord is
THE GREATEST MISTAKE?? Yikes! Maybe you need a short course on Mormonism,
DavidM.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 09:52
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
John wrote:
I say that because the
Lance, God the Eternal Father can not die - Methinks
you need to clean out your pipes
since it is aNew Year
now and revise some things
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:29:12 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: Maybe, DavidM, the question ought to have been: Who is the
gospel? The
Why not?
All spiritual giftings reside in the Holy Spirit rather
than men - why couldn't DavidM
be used the same as Smith Wigglesworth?
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:34:27 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: Are you, DavidM, another Smith Wigglesworth?
- Original Message -
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My 'pipes'
are clean.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:38
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets
Perry wrote:
If Paul says he fully preached the gospel of
Christ...then I believe he fully preached the
gospel of Christ. What is your point?
DAVEH:
You have apparently made the assumption that
everything Paul taught is included in the Bible.
IMO, that is not logical.
Good point, DaveH.
I don't think so Lance, if they were you would
understand that God CAN NOT die or are
you of the same persuasion a certain Germanwho
proclaimedGod was dead?
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:43:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jesus is God, JT! Jesus pre-existed JT. My
'pipes' are
DaveH wrote:
I don't see that Paul's mission was any different than
the current day apostle of the LDS Church. He/they
are a special witness of our Lord, Jesus Christ.
Dave, do the present day apostles in the LDS organization travel and
experience the kinds of apostolic signs and wonders
A believing man with the kind of childlike faith in
God's Word that gets results.
Amazing what can happen when we give God our all
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:44:26 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did not say he might not be another SW, JT. I
just asked him if he is. I
What is the point in asking questions, DavidM, to which you already know the
answer?
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:51
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave, what does thi versemean to you?
DaveH wrote:
Him (SW), yes! Others? Sporadically maybe. Not much
in the Western world by Western 'christians', IMO.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:50
Subject: Re:
David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25; 2:1-2; 15:12-18.
After saying many times that he would be raised on the third day, had He not
been, He would have been proven a false prophet. All that He taught would
have been nullified. There would be no gospel (1 Cor 15:12-18). After all,
isn't
It's what good lawyers do - and you watch
Lance,
He will win the case :-)
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:00:17 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: What is the point in asking questions, DavidM, to which you
already know the answer? -
Original Message - From: "David Miller"
Or...not!
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 10:54
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] limbaugh
love
He is only repeating what is written Lance; we should
all
Judy:When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what
is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish baby prior to His birth? Was/Is
Jesus truly God, JT?
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent:
He is only repeating what is written Lance; we should
all adjust to the fact that when the
Lord returns it will not be "gentle Jesus meek and
mild" - all anger is not sin... only when it is
self centered anger the zeal of the Lord is righteous
tho it may not appear so to the natural man.
On
Lance wrote to Judy:
When you say 'I don't think so, Lance', what
is it that you are saying? Who was 'the Jewish
baby prior to His birth? Was/Is Jesus truly God,
JT?
I think what Judy might be getting at could be said this way. As a man,
Jesus was tempted to sin, and as a man, Jesus died.
Thus, as said, a 'truncated gospel' as apparently preached by DavidM.
- Original Message -
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:02
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor
He was the Lord of Hosts, the Word of God, the Angel of
His Presence; whoever He needed to be
as the second member of the Godhead and he layed aside
the glory he had with the Father to take upon
himself a body in the likeness of men. He was
called the Son of God as well as theson of man and
Lance wrote:
Offended at the 'name' of WHICH JESUS CHRIST,
DavidM? The Mormon jesus seems to cause you little
offence!
I'm talking about the NAME Christ. Mormons use the same name, Lance, or
haven't you noticed?
Peace be with you.
David Miller
--
Let your speech be always with
If he is seeking to 'win the case' Judy, then
indeed he may. This would be a truncated objective. (I like that word today)
THEOLOGICAL ARM WRESTLING is best left to those who seem to have the time for
it. (DavidM CharlesPL) They actually seem to believe that they are engaged
in something
Syntax/Semantics, DavidM. When the NAME is employed, it is filled out with a
meaning. If your meaning and theirs (the Mormons) is one and the same then,
that's your problem. Watch that anger, DavidM.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
I will not judge their motives but they are at least
attempting to communicate in a lucid fashion which is more than
can be said for certain other unnamed ones I can think
of.
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:11:53 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If he is seeking to 'win the case' Judy,
No! C'mon Judy, let's name 'em. It's Lance isn't
it?
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:22
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave, what does
thi versemean to you?
I
JESUS IS GOD. JESUS WAS TEMPTED WITH REAL, NOT PRETEND, TEMPTATIONS. JESUS
DIED. I leave it to others to sort out the LOGIC of the matter.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:07
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted (Bill, John and, even
DavidM) with no success.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Perry wrote:
David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25;
2:1-2; 15:12-18.
Your first two passages speak of him CRUCIFIED and not a word about his
resurrection.
Perry wrote:
After saying many times that he would be raised
on the third day, had He not been, He would have
been proven a false
Bin there, done that and, ain't gonna go down that
road one more time.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets
Lance wrote:
Syntax/Semantics, DavidM. When the NAME is
employed, it is filled out with a meaning. If your
meaning and theirs (the Mormons) is one and the
same then, that's your problem.
In regards to our date system, when I say BC or AD, I think we are talking
about the same historical
JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God Lance made
in the LIKENESS of
man. He did say during
his time here "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) so
what does that mean. How can the Father be
greater than God Himself?
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:27:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL
IFF BC/AD/BCE as employed by Mormon/Christian are absent CONTENT then,
indeed you are correct. IMO, no word is employed without content, DavidM,
therefore, you are INCORRECT.
Y'all sound a little testy, David. That's why I mentioned anger.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller
Lance wrote:
You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
(Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.
The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness. Therefore, if you
accept that Judy is a godly woman, then it is
Talk to the hand, Judy.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:49
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets
JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God
Thanks for the opportunity to avoid a 'Davidic rebuke' but, no, I meant what
I said just the way I said it.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:52
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Lance
I say "let God be true and every man a
liar"
His Word is where it is at Lance regardless of what
Bill, John, you, or even DavidM says
though I don't think I am in disagreement with him
about the important things.
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:32:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No - I'm talking to the face here ... about the real
rather than the pretend...
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:52:59 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Talk to the hand, Judy.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
As to the latter concerning DavidM, I suspect that
you are quite correct. It just may be the raison detre for TT.He (DavidM) was
perhaps hoping to discover that his understanding was not quite so far afield
from orthodoxy as it has turned out to be. I also believe this to be one of the
Lance wrote:
IFF BC/AD/BCE as employed by Mormon/Christian
are absent CONTENT then, indeed you are correct.
IMO, no word is employed without content, DavidM,
therefore, you are INCORRECT.
When the Mormons speak about the historical Christ, are they talking about a
different person? I don't
Lance - wait just a minute. Did Orthodoxy go to
the cross for you? Didn't Paul warn about those who say
I am of this one or I am of that one? Is the
servant greater than his Lord? Jesus didn't chase after the
kill
hereticks - like the roots of orthodoxy did. In
Geneva it was a crime to
myth(jt's doctrinal
demands*contortmythological god-men:men of
godlinessbirthed fromhergod of
manliness)
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:52:33 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:The only
value of [jt] doctrine is to produce godliness
--
*
"JESUS came to this planet as the Son of God
When the Mormons speak of 'a historical christ', David, they speak of THEIR
HISTORICAL CHRIST. There's never a Kevin around when you need one. Perhaps
CPL can advise you offline so as not to embarrass you.
Why is it, David, that you are inclined to 'trumpet' your good works?
However, in spite
I used to be bothered by the use of CE instead of AD until I realized
that it can also mean Christian Era. However, I still prefer and use AD.
Wikipedia: Common Era, Current Era, or Christian Era (this year is 2006
CE).
Merriam-Webster: chemical engineer, civil engineer, Christian Era --
David wrote:
Perry wrote:
David, Paul says it best: 1 Cor 1:22-25;
2:1-2; 15:12-18.
Your first two passages speak of him CRUCIFIED and not a word about his
resurrection.
In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection was implicit. Many
were crucified, why would Jesus' be any
-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, you are re-establishing the correct interpretation of the Bible?DAVEH: No, that is not what I said, or impliedbut now that you have mentioned it, I do believe the restoration does have that effect. I can see
Again, DH, your question of Perry gives me further evidence that the Mormon Church has no clue as to the atonement as taught in preApostate scripture. Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no consequence. We clearly do not share the same gospel if that is not a part of your
Again I say unto you, A DIFFERENT JESUS = A
DIFFERENT GOSPEL.
Again I say unto you, IT IS THE GEOCENTRIC UNIVERSE
THINGY
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 13:30
suggests the term Protestant can infer more than simply protesting the RCC,
I do not make that separation. Protestantism is a response , an objection, to the RCC. Why would you insist on using the term in a differing way? I , for one, do not think the RCC is any further from the truth of God in
Amen JD! Kinda difficult convincin' the 'antis' on
TT, though.
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 13:37
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and
prophets
suggests the
Lance wrote:
You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of Jesus, Judy. that's why. Better than I have attempted
(Bill, John and, even DavidM) with no success.
David Miller wrote:
The only value of doctrine is to produce godliness.
Therefore, if you accept that Judy is a godly woman,
All suggestions by you, DavidM, are welcomed.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 13:51
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Lance wrote:
You are a 'godly woman' with a heretical theology
of
Perry wrote:
In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection
was implicit. Many were crucified, why would Jesus'
be any different unless the resurrection was in view?
The difference is that Jesus is the only leader in history who ever went TO
the cross of his own will and doctrine.
DAVEH: I really don't want to argue with your comment in a way that you
might think I'm denigrating it, Perry. But, I will give you my short
view in contrast.
The guards were put there by those who feared Jesus' friends would
steal his body (in the middle of the night, I would think)
Lance wrote:
When the Mormons speak of 'a historical christ',
David, they speak of THEIR HISTORICAL CHRIST.
I think you are letting your bias and sectarianism get in the way. How many
historical Christ's have their been? Do you really think the Mormons are
speaking historically of someone
myth ("For I have come down
from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent
me.")
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:Jesus.. went TO the cross of his own will and
doctrine.
Not a myth, Gary, but rather your statement adds clarification, that the
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own, but was of the one who had
sent him. You really should try not to be so sectarian and divisive.
John 7:16
(16) Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his
Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no
consequence.
DAVEH: Did I not say the very same thing in previous posts, Pastor?
If you failed to note that I had said virtually the same thing, then
FTR let it be known that the above is similar to the way I believe as
well.
David, I see your point...I, too, beleive that the cross is central, but
still, without the resurrection the gospel would have been meaningless.
Preaching would have been in vain...faith would have been in vain.
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
myth
(ultimately God's doctrine is God's)
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:28:23 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:the
doctrine of Christ was not ultimately his own
cult-apostolic
myth ("For I have come down from
heaven..do the will of him who sent me.")
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500 "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:Jesus.. went TO the cross of his own will
..
David,
I will consider this as agreement. I believe it is the resurrection that
gave the gospel its power...you believe it was people seeing the risen
Jesuswhom they never would have seen had he NOT been resurrected. I
consider these ALL part of a larger picture called the resurrection.
I meant to address the response below to Dave.
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:39:27 -0800
David,
I will consider this as agreement. I
DaveH, you have to understand that John's background is Church of Christ,
DAVEH: I did remember that, DavidM. Even so, as I remember, WIKI
painted the CofC as Protestant as well.
However, in a recent discussion with you, I thought I understood
John to say that he currently is worshiping
Your diatribe below is full of conjecture and assumptions.
DAVEH: LOL.Is that a problem for you, Perry? Isn't that what you
asked for..? :-)
I ask again, "What did Paul preach that is not in the Bible?
DAVEH: I see you did not really read what I posted below, Perry. I
quoted one
Do you mind giving it a second try?
DAVEH: OK Perry, let me succinctly explain what I tried to explain
before.
Paul was a busy guytoo busy to baptize many. His time was
better spent traveling to meet more people, than to spend time trying
to baptize those who heard his testimony. He
You were simply described.
DAVEH: Lance, may I ask you where you draw the line on an ad-hom? Is
it possible describing somebody as a pompous ass to ever be an
ad-hom in your opinion?
Lance Muir wrote:
YOU WERE NOT INSULTED, DAVIDM! You
were simply described. An _expression_ was
What do you think the judgment of hell is all about?
DAVEH: I've heard you make that comment before, DavidM. But I'm not
sure why you think that way if you believe in the traditional
concept of hell being a place of punitive torture. Doesn't the
harshness of the pain and suffering caused by
Some years ago, I quoted how the Encyclopedia Britannica classified the LDS
as a protestant group, but you did notagree with them. From my
perspective, there are historical ways of looking at this classification, and
there are philosophical ways. Historically, the Church of Christ, the
Dave, this discussion has become a joke. Eitgher you don't get it or you are
just playing. Either way, I'm out.
Perry
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006
The love being expressed is not toward the one being damned, but toward the
rest of society. It is impossible to have a utopian community of love if
there is even one single wicked person living freely in it. Just look at
the world and what a mess it is in.
Peace be with you.David Miller.
I understood your original post...it just has nothing to sdo with the
question. Again, eiither you don't get it or you are playing around. I'm out
on this one, too. I haven't got time to play the stupidity game.
Perry
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
Poor DM. I have not been a part of the Churches of Christ for some 32 years. My denominational background has nothing to do with my theology at this late date. Secindly, Aimee Semple McPherson is the founder of Four Square. She was not responding to a negative RCC consideration.Certainly, I am no
How many times have we heard from right wingers that it is not ad hom if it i true!!??
jd
-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] You were simply described.DAVEH: Lance, may I ask you where you draw the line on an ad-hom? Is it possible describing somebody
You tell us, John. How many times have you heard that from the right
wingers?
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org, TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unsubscribe please
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:13:32 +
I have lost count but it occurred on nearly every occasion that I was called a heretic or "just plain stupid." or a child of the devil..
jd
-- Original message -- From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] You tell us, John. How many times have you heard that from
Dave, do the present day apostles in the LDS organization travel and
experience the kinds of apostolic signs and wonders that Paul did?
DAVEH: I believe it happens, but as Blaine also mentioned.I do
not have personal experience or direct witness of such.
I seem to remember you
John,do you understand the difference between a historical
perspective and a philosophical one?
Let's consider the philosophical concern a little more
closely.A Protestant is defined broadly as a member of a church
thatrejects papal authority.
-
Prot·es·tant
[noun]
I think there was only one person who said it. Kevin, if I remember
correctly, and I corrected him and told him that it was an ad hominem argument
even if it was true.
David M.
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ;
Double talk.
Secondly, it not His will but the will of his father that sent Him to the cross -- "nevertheless not my will but thine be done."
jd
-- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not a myth, Gary, but rather your statement adds
If you agree with Perry, then why the question?
-- Original message -- From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Without the resurrection, all that Christ said and did is of no consequence.DAVEH: Did I not say the very same thing in previous posts, Pastor? If you failed to note that I
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
