Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah
Lance, Thanks for your concern for Blaine and over the legitimacy and sensitivity of my line of questioning. My reason for asking that question is two-fold. One is to relate to the rest of the group what potentially awaits good mormon men who transition from men to gods and the women who may get chosen to be their eternal soirit wives. The second is to determine if Blaine has any insight or opinoin into his grandfather's current state. As for the pitter-patter of spirit feet, I thought that was a cute quip based on the parallel earthly phrase meaning the same thing when earthly human children are born. It is a common mormon belief that mormons can become gods after they die, have spirit wives, produce spirit babies, and populate a planet, just as their current god, originally from the planet Kolob, did with his spirit wives and this planet, Earth. I know several of his offspring...Satan, Jesus, Dave, and Blaine, to name a few. I do not think that a mormon would find this question offensive, no more so would any Christian of whom I askedof their deceased grandfatherr, was he a believer, implying all that we believe happens to a believer who dies. Besides, it is also possible that Blaine had heard from his grandfather from beyond the grave, as he did a great aunt, I believe it was, and knows the answer to these things. If he has received no message from his grandfather, then perhaps he has an opinion relative to that question. For example, if he knows that his grandfather performed all of the earthly works necessary to become a god, then he mey reply with certainty that he is in such a state, although he has not heard directly from him. And, since Blaine is a big boy, he can respond if he wishes, or not. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 12:57:12 -0400 Mr. Moderator: This is over the top and, not necessary. L - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 13, 2005 23:26 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Do you think you Grandfather is a god now, with spirit wives, and possible the pitter-patter of little spirit feet? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 19:15:05 EDT In a message dated 6/13/2005 2:09:44 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would think that we all choose to believe whatever based upon our view of the credibility of the truth source closest to us in terms of time and space.I mean, if Blaine was born a Mormon,' his first source of truth would be his parents. Who's he going to believe -- his parents or some guy standing cross the street waving underwear. And, by the time he gets to a free thinking age, he already has such a systematize faith that little will prevail against it.THAT'S NORMAL.Blaine may or not believe this -- but THANK GOD WE DO NOT HAVE TO BE RIGHT. JD Blaine: Good, JD. I agree parents are critical in what children end up believing. I am very fortunate to have had good advice and guidance from my mom and dad.My grandpa was also very influential, mostly by his example. He served two missions (LDS) to Norway, and another one to Spokane, Washington. He recorded many miraculous healings, casting out of devils, etc. in his writings. He was a Judge in regular life, and often required those he saw in court to go to church, the denomination being left to them. He was always in favor of religious training, regardless of the belief system. Any belief that advocates Christian values, he felt, was better than the value systems that got people into trouble with the law. Nevertheless, he lived and died by the LDS doctrines. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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
Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah
Baline, Sometimes it is right to doubt. But, when shown the evidence, even Thomas believed. We will only know for sure when you present the facts and let me evaluate them. The point is that if there is no real evidence, then the scripture is most likely not related to the anecdote at all. Blaine, are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:55:37 EDT Blaine: Probably nothing that would satisfy your Doubting Thomas attitude, Perry. In a message dated 6/11/2005 10:34:43 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, I have heard that story, but that does not relate the event to the Isaiah passage. We still have two separate stories with no ties other than some common words. One from scripture, one anecdotal. Do you have anything that actually links them? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 22:28:12 EDT Blaine: Have you not read/heard the story of Martin Harris taking characters copied from the plates (by JS) to Professor Charles Anthon, and first being told they were true characters, but then being rebuffed by him when he was told a portion of the plates were sealed, and therefore could not be dellivered to him for translation? In a message dated 6/11/2005 8:18:53 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: The sealed portion has yet to be translated, but contains the vision of all. see Isaiah. 29:11 -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Dave, sorry to hear about your ER trip, but glad to hear you are back home recuperating. Take it easy and don;t rush things. At our age we don't recuperate like we did hen we were 19! I can hear you now...ohh, I feel terrible...quick, get a laptop...I have to check in wth TT! :-) Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 00:12:24 -0700 DAVEH: Hi all.Sorry to be gone for a bit last week. I became rather ill on Monday night, and by Thursday ended up in the ER. Due to some other family complications, they allowed me to come home today. I'm too weak to be climbing the stairs to access my main computer, but my son was able to get one of our old laptops configured for wireless, and hence I'm back onlinesorta. I don't (yet anyway) have access to my old files, so if anybody sent me questions, ask them again or you'll just have to wait until I can wade through my backlog of mail that is awaiting my return upstairs! Anyway, for those who are curious to the details, the short version is that because I was unable to get a flu shot last winter, I assumed I had a bad case of the flu due to wild temperature fluctuations and getting the shakes and chills. Assuming a lot of bed rest would allow it to run its course, that's pretty much all I did until Thursday when I discovered my leg had a lot of red spidery looking veins heading from my ankle to my knee. A half hour later I was in ER getting antibiotics flowing into me, and a battery of tests that ultimately showed our worst fears were not realized, and I've probably get to keep the leg I use to kick cats through the uprights. (I assume that will quell any sympathetic thoughts you might have, Izzy!):-) Cheerio.Dave -- 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. -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Blaine, sorry about the typo...sometimes I transpose letters unintentionally. Transmitters, receivers, whatever. Are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the Isaiah scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry, AE6GQ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 09:49:11 EDT Perry, Since you are converting to LDS beliefs, and giving up your job as moderator, :) you are going to have to get with it regards believing via the influence of the Holy Ghost, rather than the hard, tangible evidence you have in the past gotten used to demanding. I for one rely on the evidence of praying in faith, then receiving the answer through the medium of the spirit--Spirit-of-God direct to my receiver spirit. But you do have to have your receiver in tune with the transmitters, Perry, otherwise this sort of evidence does not work. Just as when your radio is tuned off-station, or not working at all, or out of range of the signal, all you will recieve is static. I am afraid in the past that is all you have been receiving, for whatever reason--so you might consider getting a renewing of the spiritual receiver, is all I am saying. New spirits are extremely costly, they tell me, so that is obviously not an option. Take Care, Perry, and good luck with your newly acquired religion!! And, Congratulations on becoming One With The Saints!!! Blainerb (not baline, please!!) n a message dated 6/13/2005 6:55:55 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Baline, Sometimes it is right to doubt. But, when shown the evidence, even Thomas believed. We will only know for sure when you present the facts and let me evaluate them. The point is that if there is no real evidence, then the scripture is most likely not related to the anecdote at all. Blaine, are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Well, I thought I had addressed it, but apparently not. Let me try again. I have in times past examined other belief systems in an attempt to find the truth. Some topically, some more seriously. I have picked a standard for truth that I believe to be the true Word of God, and by that standard judge all things. If I am wrong, I guess I will go down with the ship, and may indeed pay for the errors of my choice. I have the promise of Christ that if I believe, then I am saved. If there is no Christ, then there is no salvation, and any other system is moot anyway. Once I found the truth, I had no reason to explore any of the belief systems I previously examined. Their falseness stood out quite starkly. I bagan to study mormonism because once I became a Christian I heard that mormonism was a cult. Rather than just take that as fact I began to look into the mormon system rather deeply and, guess what! It is a cult. It falls in the face of scripture, the standard I have chosen by which to judge al things. So, to answer your question directly, I have never seriously considered that Blaine's 'belief' might be quite true and my 'belief' might be quite false. That would be impossible for me to do given the faith I have in Christ, and what I know about mormonism. Raymond felt otherwise. I believe he said he used to be a Christian, but became a mormon. My guess is that he was looking for something more than merely the Christ. He evidently found it, and now lies in the same shallow as Blaine. I do at times find some small facet of Mormonism that causes me to step back and take a second look at that fact...but even the mormons will tell you...every false religion has some truth mixed in with their lies. BTW, I took your advice and got the Midnight Cry tape and viewed it. A perfect example of a difference of 'belief'. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 10:43:53 -0400 To:CPL-Have you ever SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED that Blaine's 'belief' might be quite true and, that your's might be quite false? I'm not attempting to be funny! Why not address my post concerning 'belief systems'.? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 13, 2005 10:22 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Blaine, sorry about the typo...sometimes I transpose letters unintentionally. Transmitters, receivers, whatever. Are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the Isaiah scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry, AE6GQ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 09:49:11 EDT Perry, Since you are converting to LDS beliefs, and giving up your job as moderator, :) you are going to have to get with it regards believing via the influence of the Holy Ghost, rather than the hard, tangible evidence you have in the past gotten used to demanding. I for one rely on the evidence of praying in faith, then receiving the answer through the medium of the spirit--Spirit-of-God direct to my receiver spirit. But you do have to have your receiver in tune with the transmitters, Perry, otherwise this sort of evidence does not work. Just as when your radio is tuned off-station, or not working at all, or out of range of the signal, all you will recieve is static. I am afraid in the past that is all you have been receiving, for whatever reason--so you might consider getting a renewing of the spiritual receiver, is all I am saying. New spirits are extremely costly, they tell me, so that is obviously not an option. Take Care, Perry, and good luck with your newly acquired religion!! And, Congratulations on becoming One With The Saints!!! Blainerb (not baline, please!!) n a message dated 6/13/2005 6:55:55 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Baline, Sometimes it is right to doubt. But, when shown the evidence, even Thomas believed. We will only know for sure when you present the facts and let me evaluate them. The point is that if there is no real evidence, then the scripture is most likely not related to the anecdote at all. Blaine, are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Blaine, I will assume that your answer is no, that you are not willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the Isaiah scripture is not related to the anecdote. From your answer, then I will also assume that when you have no evidence linking a Biblical text to a mormon anecdote or doctrine, that you receive a spiritual message telling you it is connected. Is that right? DaveH, is that the same for you? Do you also determine if a Biblical passage and a mormon anecdote or doctrine are linked by receiving a spiritual message, or do you look for actual tangible textual or historical evidence? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:19:42 EDT Blaine: Well, that's where the problem is, Perry. You see, there is real evidence. You are just not in tune with the spiritual channel that deals with this evidence. I can see that plainly. You are looking for an out, and anything you find, small or large, is good enough--as long as it furnishes you with a reason to remain the skeptic. I try to give you straws of hope and light, but you for some reason never glom onto them the way you do the anti-stuff. You apparently don't even question the anti-stuff, at least not as assiduously as when you are looking at official Mormon material. It tells you what your itching ears want to hear, so . . . end of further investigation. Hmmm, the spirit tells me that it will not always strive with man . . . Blaine In a message dated 6/13/2005 8:30:21 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, sorry about the typo...sometimes I transpose letters unintentionally. Transmitters, receivers, whatever. Are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the Isaiah scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry, AE6GQ -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Blaine, in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 117:12 JS wrote the following prophecy: And again, I say unto you, I remember my servant Oliver Granger; behold, verily I say unto him that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord. Do you know who Oliver Granger is? If not, please ask your spritual source, because I have been wanting to know this for a long time. Let me know what he/she says. Thanks, Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:19:42 EDT Blaine: Well, that's where the problem is, Perry. You see, there is real evidence. You are just not in tune with the spiritual channel that deals with this evidence. I can see that plainly. You are looking for an out, and anything you find, small or large, is good enough--as long as it furnishes you with a reason to remain the skeptic. I try to give you straws of hope and light, but you for some reason never glom onto them the way you do the anti-stuff. You apparently don't even question the anti-stuff, at least not as assiduously as when you are looking at official Mormon material. It tells you what your itching ears want to hear, so . . . end of further investigation. Hmmm, the spirit tells me that it will not always strive with man . . . Blaine In a message dated 6/13/2005 8:30:21 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, sorry about the typo...sometimes I transpose letters unintentionally. Transmitters, receivers, whatever. Are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the Isaiah scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry, AE6GQ -- 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] Hill Cumorah
John, How far NOT RIGHT is too far NOT RIGHT? It seems that here is a continuum of belief in people, ranging from the totally unbelieving atheist to the very devout believing Chrsitian. Or on another scale, from the Satanist to the Christian. Do you think that ALL will be saved regardless of how NOT RIGHT they are? Where will the line be drawn? There is no almost saved, or saved a little, or saved more than me...there is only saved and unsaved. What will detrmine where the line will be drawn? Can you know on which side of the line you fall? Can you be deceived into thinking that you are on the RIGHT side of the line when, indeed, you are on the NOT RIGHT side of the line? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 14:21:39 -0400 I would think that we all choose to believe whatever based upon our view of the credibility of the truth source closest to us in terms of time and space.I mean, if Blaine was born a Mormon,' his first source of truth would be his parents. Who's he going to believe -- his parents or some guy standing cross the street waving underwear. And, by the time he gets to a free thinking age, he already has such a systematize faith that little will prevail against it. THAT'S NORMAL.Blaine may or not believe this -- but THANK GOD WE DO NOT HAVE TO BE RIGHT. JD -Original Message- From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 06:20:26 -0700 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Lance, what I also hear is that we all choose to believe what we want to believe, regardless of the facts, or lack thereof. However, I believe that when a grain of truth is revealed, but not immediately accepted, a cognitive dissonance is created and stored away that must eventually be resolved. This, I believe, is why people that, for example, become a Christian after denying the evidence for years, suddenly believe it ALL. The act of becoming a Christian resolves all of the small dissonant ideas they have stored away. So, I beleive that if Blaine ever decides to become a Christian, thus resolving all of the small dissonant facts he has stored away, he will be one of the greatest Christians ever. That is to say, when he takes all of the energy he expends defending a false religion, and turns it toward defending the truth, watch out! I speak from my own experience. I got to the point where I could no longer deny the truth. All of the lies I told myself about why I could not accept Christianity vanished literally overnight, and all of the truths I had learned through the years, but not accepted, all became a viable part of my belief. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 09:05:42 -0400 Even if, if, if, if you were absolutely correct, CPL, you know that he is NOT prepared to acknowledge this. Please read my post on 'belief'. You are as likely to be posting as a Mormon as he (Blaine) is likely to be posting as what you deem to be a 'christian'. If there is present on TT a six day young earth creationist, can you or anyone on TT imagine them forfeiting this 'belief' in order to believe 'teleological evolutionism'? Impossible? No! Likely? Snowball's chance... - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 13, 2005 08:55 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Baline, Sometimes it is right to doubt. But, when shown the evidence, even Thomas believed. We will only know for sure when you present the facts and let me evaluate them. The point is that if there is no real evidence, then the scripture is most likely not related to the anecdote at all. Blaine, are you willing to admit that since there is no real evidence, then it is possible that the scripture is not related to the anecdote? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:55:37 EDT Blaine: Probably nothing that would satisfy your Doubting Thomas attitude, Perry. In a message dated 6/11/2005 10:34:43 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, I have heard that story, but that does not relate the event to the Isaiah passage. We still have two separate stories with no ties other than some common words. One from scripture, one anecdotal. Do you have anything that actually links them? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 22:28:12 EDT
Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah
Blaine, Thanks for your spiritual insight into this prophecy. So, if I understand this correctly, the REAL meaning of this prophecy is that Oliver Granger's name would be remembered from generation to generation by virtue of the fact that detractors of mormonism would point it out as false prophecy, thus fulfilling the prophecy? In what way is that in sacred rememberance? Well, Blaine, I guess I have to agree with you on a point you made earlier. I definitely am not tuned in to your spiritual frequency. BTW, I am proud to be identified with the street preachers, although I am not one and do not deserve that title. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:34:29 EDT Blaine: Oliver Granger got his name in the DC, and for that reason alone, he will fulfill the prophecy. Do you see my name in the DC? Nope. Do you see Dave's name in the DC? Nope. With twelve going on thirteen million readers of the DC, surely many of them will note this prophecy, especially since you AND your fellow street preachers have made such an effort to point his low profile out. By now, I imagine I have heard or read his name at least a dozen times. At the present rate, Oliver Granger cannot help but become almost as famous as Joseph Smith and easily as famous as Brigham Young. In a message dated 6/13/2005 10:42:57 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 117:12 JS wrote the following prophecy: And again, I say unto you, I remember my servant Oliver Granger; behold, verily I say unto him that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord. Do you know who Oliver Granger is? If not, please ask your spritual source, because I have been wanting to know this for a long time. Let me know what he/she says. Thanks, Perry -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Do you think you Grandfather is a god now, with spirit wives, and possible the pitter-patter of little spirit feet? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 19:15:05 EDT In a message dated 6/13/2005 2:09:44 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would think that we all choose to believe whatever based upon our view of the credibility of the truth source closest to us in terms of time and space.I mean, if Blaine was born a Mormon,' his first source of truth would be his parents. Who's he going to believe -- his parents or some guy standing cross the street waving underwear. And, by the time he gets to a free thinking age, he already has such a systematize faith that little will prevail against it.THAT'S NORMAL.Blaine may or not believe this -- but THANK GOD WE DO NOT HAVE TO BE RIGHT. JD Blaine: Good, JD. I agree parents are critical in what children end up believing. I am very fortunate to have had good advice and guidance from my mom and dad.My grandpa was also very influential, mostly by his example. He served two missions (LDS) to Norway, and another one to Spokane, Washington. He recorded many miraculous healings, casting out of devils, etc. in his writings. He was a Judge in regular life, and often required those he saw in court to go to church, the denomination being left to them. He was always in favor of religious training, regardless of the belief system. Any belief that advocates Christian values, he felt, was better than the value systems that got people into trouble with the law. Nevertheless, he lived and died by the LDS doctrines. -- 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] Hill Cumorah
A question for Dave and/or Blaine... Do the mormons believe that the golden plates used by JS to translate the BoM are still buried in the hill in Palmyra New York they call Hill Cumorah? Perry -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Blaine wrote: The sealed portion has yet to be translated, but contains the vision of all. see Isaiah. 29:11 Blaine, how do you know that Isaiah 29:11 refers to the golden plates? I don't see the connection to the plates other than the word sealed. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:44:53 EDT In a message dated 6/11/2005 5:44:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A question for Dave and/or Blaine... Do the mormons believe that the golden plates used by JS to translate the BoM are still buried in the hill in Palmyra New York they call Hill Cumorah? Perry Blaine: No. Once the translation was completed, and the plates had been viewed and handled by the eight witnesses, the angel took the plates. They turned up again when the angel showed them, along with the sword of Laban, the liahona, and many other records besides, to the three witnesses, Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer.The plates were apparently never returned to the hill-side, for obvious reasons--- The sealed portion has yet to be translated, but contains the vision of all. see Isaiah. 29:11 -- 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] Hill Cumorah
Yes, I have heard that story, but that does not relate the event to the Isaiah passage. We still have two separate stories with no ties other than some common words. One from scripture, one anecdotal. Do you have anything that actually links them? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 22:28:12 EDT Blaine: Have you not read/heard the story of Martin Harris taking characters copied from the plates (by JS) to Professor Charles Anthon, and first being told they were true characters, but then being rebuffed by him when he was told a portion of the plates were sealed, and therefore could not be dellivered to him for translation? In a message dated 6/11/2005 8:18:53 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: The sealed portion has yet to be translated, but contains the vision of all. see Isaiah. 29:11 Blaine, how do you know that Isaiah 29:11 refers to the golden plates? I don't see the connection to the plates other than the word sealed. Perry -- 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.
**Moderator comment: was Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha
Kevin, you may disagree with the Bible versions others use, but please do
not call them Bible Perverts. One who uses a perverted translation might
better describe your position on other translations without casting
aspersions on the one that prefers, or references, other translations.
Perry the moderator
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 08:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
HEAR YE HEAR YE,
Bible Pervert speaks on perversion!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What What is a curse word to one is a relationship to another
--- if you are speaking of Jesus Christ and that is Mr. G's point
(to me). The perverse part is not using this curse word to describe a
relationship[ but relegating this relationship to a mere mutter of words.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 00:44:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha
.AOLPlainTextBody {margin: 0px;font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial,
Sans-Serif;font-size: 12px; color: #000; background-color:
#fff; }.AOLPlainTextBody pre {font-size: 9pt;}.AOLInlineAttachment {
margin: 10px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader {border-bottom: 2px solid #E9EAEB;
background: #F9F9F9;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .Title {font: 11px Tahoma;
font-weight: bold;color: #66;background: #E9EAEB;
padding: 3px 0px 1px 10px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldLabel {font: 11px
Tahoma; font-weight: bold;color: #66;padding: 1px 10px 1px
9px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldValue {font: 11px Tahoma; color:
#33;}There is most definitely something perverse about equating a curse
word with a relationship. jt
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 19:19:28 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
myth [the biblical Word created and sustains the world--'the earth..and
they that dwell therein' belong to Him, as always, therefore, (our)
'relationship' (with him) is both positive and negative, e.g., as when a
non-Chrisitian mutters 'Jesus Christ' and as when someone who loves him
like JD says in his own words, 'Jesus Christ'--consider this Word as a
subtlety foriegn to the egocentrism and sinlessness of the dualistic mind
set in its absolutism and 'correct'-ness--a Humility]
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 17:02:20 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
..there is no relationship with the Truth outside of His Word..
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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] Clowning Around
Blaine, I have no link. Maybe Dave has it. The photo was attached to Dave's original message. If you have that just open the email and clock download at the bottom of hte mail page (I presume you receive TT mail via your AOL account?). Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Clowning Around Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:02:00 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:35:13 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perry the Clown wrote to Blaine: PRODUCE THE PHOTOS [of perry the clown] OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Looks like the mormon boys are tag-teaming me. But, I must confess. I did not think anyone would find my clown picture on the internet (in fact, I forgot it was even posted), but Dave found it and posted it, so, Blaine, I guess I owe you an apology. I am a clown. You can call me a clown any time you wish. In all humility, Perry the Clown Blaine: I would like to find it too--have an address? -- 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] Clowning Around
Oh, Blaine, if you took my response as serious, thinking the picture really is of me in a clown suit, then you did not catch the gist of my jest. Dave just forwarded some photo he got somehwere, most likely on the web, and posted it as though it was me. I was just playing along. But, still feel free to call me a clown whenever you like! Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Clowning Around Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:02:00 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:35:13 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perry the Clown wrote to Blaine: PRODUCE THE PHOTOS [of perry the clown] OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Looks like the mormon boys are tag-teaming me. But, I must confess. I did not think anyone would find my clown picture on the internet (in fact, I forgot it was even posted), but Dave found it and posted it, so, Blaine, I guess I owe you an apology. I am a clown. You can call me a clown any time you wish. In all humility, Perry the Clown Blaine: I would like to find it too--have an address? -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Lance, the gist of his reply was I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. So, I eliminated the trick questions and posed the two serious ones in hope that he would reconsider. They are not gobbledygook, or rediculous. Perhaps he does not want to share his witness because in this forum it will not sound like a valid witness. Nobody wants to hear that their subjective feelings are not a valid witness, especially when there are no bible verses to support that. That is fine, too. He is a big boy. He can reconsider and choose again not to answer. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:15:28 -0400 He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life
and
from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book in
the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy and
in
Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
No. It could have easily been in the front of the book. Take the copyright
notices on movies and in our books today...always up front...but that does
not alter their effectiveness...in fact, it may even increase it since most
people don't read books cover to cover these days, or watch movies until the
last frame of film has passed through the projector.
Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first
century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being
shown and told to write.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:16:43 -0500
Don't you think it is significant that the warning is written in the last
chapter of The Book? Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:39 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, I have to vote for this book in Rev 22:18,19 applying specifically
to the Revelation. I used to try to apply it to the whole Bible (in a
debate
with a mormon many years ago) , and I DO believe that the general principle
applies to the whole Bible, but in particular believe that these verses are
referring specifically to the Book of Revelation.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:35:51 -0500
Rev 2218I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this
book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are
written in this book;19and if anyone takes away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of
life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.
JD, tell me what does the word Bible mean? And what is the last book
in the Bible? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:03 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the
Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:17:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Myth - It is finished already
And this warning is not only in Revelation, it is also in Deuteronomy
and in Proverbs.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:01:12 -0400 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
In 'Prophecy: The Uprising' they go on to FINISH the book of Revelations.
From: ShieldsFamily
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or
subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy
--
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.
--
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.
--
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] Perry vs DaveH
The unacceptability of my or Blaine's subjective witness is not the issue. Whether or not it is Biblical is the issue. Obvious references are made obvious by quoting scripture. No obvious quote, no obvious reference. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:22:02 -0400 So then, CPL, 'his' subjective witness is unacceptable while yours is? He did not quote Ja 1:5fg but it was his obvious reference. - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 10:27 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Lance, the gist of his reply was I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. So, I eliminated the trick questions and posed the two serious ones in hope that he would reconsider. They are not gobbledygook, or rediculous. Perhaps he does not want to share his witness because in this forum it will not sound like a valid witness. Nobody wants to hear that their subjective feelings are not a valid witness, especially when there are no bible verses to support that. That is fine, too. He is a big boy. He can reconsider and choose again not to answer. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:15:28 -0400 He already answered these. James 1:5 fg/ - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 07, 2005 09:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, there were a couple of detractor questions, but here are the ones I think you will be able to answer: 1. Is the witness of the spirit to which you referred the burning in the bosom that mormons say they get as a witness? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling (a.k.a., the burning in the bosom) is a valid witness of the spirit? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 03:19:43 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 3:28:38 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Blaine: Sorry, but none of the above rings a true sound for me. It sounds like goeldygook, or whatever. At best, it is a rediculous statement, which deserves no answer, or a rediculous answer. I choose no answer, for the simple reason there is no serious answer to a rediculous question. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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
RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
I agree, and I think John recorded that effectively. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:52:05 -0500 God knew. -Original Message- Also, it does not matter what John thought Bible or book meant in the first century, as someone suggested...he was just writing down what he was being shown and told to write. Perry -- 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. -- 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] Clowning Around
Well, I do have to admit a slight resemblance. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Clowning Around Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 17:33:54 EDT In a message dated 6/7/2005 7:14:22 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, Blaine, if you took my response as serious, thinking the picture really is of me in a clown suit, then you did not catch the gist of my jest. Dave just forwarded some photo he got somehwere, most likely on the web, and posted it as though it was me. I was just playing along. But, still feel free to call me a clown whenever you like! Perry Perry I finally saw the photo, and saved it to My Pictures. I will treasure it always, but please be aware that I do not believe it is not you. I think you are just clowning around again with this fake denial. :) Blaine -- 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] JS is a False Priest according to Blaine
Blaine wrote: Associatiing JS with other false priests, is a bad association no matter how you look at it. cpl -- 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] JS is a False Priest according to Blaine
Blaine, First, you said associating JS with OTHER false priests...these are YOUR words, and you imply JS was ALSO a false priest...if you had NOT wanted to include him you should have said associating JS with false priests (sans the other). Second, I can only know what you WRITE, not what you MEANT. When using email, you have to be very careful to say what you MEAN (but then, maybe you did!). Third, it is an ad hominem attack to call me a clown unless you have photos of my huge red nose, frizzy read hair, whiteface, painted on smile, and painted stars over my eyes! not to mention my over-baggy striped pants, red suspenders, and huge floppy shoes! I may be funny looking, but a clown I am not! Besides, I get claustrophobic in small cars EVEN WHEN BY MYSELF, MUCH MORE SO WITH 9-10 OTHER CLOWNS IN THERE WITH ME! PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] JS is a False Priest according to Blaine Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:32:34 EDT Laugh, clown, laugh!! I meant JS was a false priest according to YOUR perceptions, not mine. There, you are caught redhanded, taking a sentence out of context!! Ha! I knew I'd catch you doing that if I just waited long enough. BlaineRB In a message dated 6/6/2005 8:48:46 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine wrote: Associatiing JS with other false priests, is a bad association no matter how you look at it. cpl -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
That's funny. The God of the Bible was not once a man and is not from the planet Kolob, did not have a son named Satan (or Lucifer). Get serious Blaine. I know you have been told they are the same, and that you have to ignore the facts to maintain that belief, but the rest of us know better. Do you also think the David Miller from Hollywood Florida, is the same David Miller as the one from Hollywood CA. Same name, maybe same hair color, and maybe they both drive an SUV...by mormon standards maybe they are the same! (Apologies to DM). Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:05:50 EDT I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrines of traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamental falsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? According to E B Stennhouse, the editor of the Deseret news for some 25 years, in his 1875 book entitled The Rocky Mountain Saints, he comments regarding the purported Shekinah in the Kirtland temple, paraphrasing, that the appearance of the spirit was more due to the imbibing of the spirit than the presence of the spirit. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:17:53 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:08:50 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: a sense of false security Good point Blaine. What security do you have? Blaine: The witness of the spirit. The Shekinah, the fiery presence of the Lord in his appearance to JS and later, at the dedication of the Kirtland (Ohio) Temple. I feel this fire as often as I am humble and seek the Lord's will, not my own. What security do you have, Kevin? Hmmm? -- 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] Exerpts
Actually, Izzy, it was not that long ago that Dave and I were having just
such a squabble.
Perry
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Exerpts
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:30:56 -0500
JD why is it that you are the ONE individual who is in constant quibbles
about I didn't say that, Yes I did, You said thus and such, You are
lying about what I said, Prove that I said that,, etc, etc, etc. Ever
notice that no one else has these squabbles except for you? Does this tell
you anything??? Izzy
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 6:56 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Exerpts
Wrong again. The words, below, are your original post, Judy. The post
preeceding this one has me talking about something else and you dragging
Lance and Gary's names into the subject. I question you on this,
wondering
why you have included them in your response when I had not refereneced them
at all, and this origianl post is your defence of that strange occurance.
THIS IS THE ORIGINAL. Eventually, my response to your false accusations
was to cite Lance's several posts proving that his concerns in script
included much much more than comments about the movies.
JD
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:49:21 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Exerpts
This is not the original - this is me explaining the original. You'll have
to do better than this... jt
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:04:55 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]'); writes:
Here is your original post, Mrs Taylor. I am the one who spoke of rooting
and grounding -- not you. but you can read it for yourself.
Gary Lance are referenced in my wording not yours because they are two of
the three who are most critical of David Miller and his spiritual gift.
I'd
be interested in some examples of the rooting and grounding (in God's Word)
that you perceive in the writings of both Lance and Gary JD. Lance is an
expert in old movies and this is what he writes about. Gary is taken up
with
his own writings, those of Bob Dylan, and the word myth ... So how about
giving me some examples of what I have missed. jt
And here is what you said you said:
Let me repeat; in my original post on this subject Mr. Smithson I said that
neither Lance nor Gary were
sufficiently rooted and grounded in God's Word to correctly discern a
genuine spiritual gift in operation.
Look in the archives. This is what I said. jt
Not having a good week, are we?
JD
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
javascript:parent.ComposeTo('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
Let me repeat; in my original post on this subject Mr. Smithson I said that
neither Lance nor Gary were
sufficiently rooted and grounded in God's Word to correctly discern a
genuine spiritual gift in operation.
Look in the archives. This is what I said. jt
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 16:34:04 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In your first post on this subject, you did not say that at all, Mrs.
Taylor. Not even close.
But your side does not care what it has written -- only what it says it
has
written. Let's move on.
Jd
That is your myth (read lie) JD because I never made a statement anything
like what you have written below. Did I say Gary O never reads the Bible?
What I said is that he is not sufficiently rooted and grounded in God's
Word
to discern what is and what is not a genuine spiritual gift in operation.
Actually I suspect he
would say they are all bogus because of the fact that he is Calvinistic at
heart. jt
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:01:59 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
myth (read:lie) : Gary O has no relationship with the Word of God
JD
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isaiah's point about false worship solidifies in ch2, relates to 'trusting
in man'; in ch5, Isaiah condemns the arrogant attitude/s of God's people;
e.g., '..you live alone in the land' (5:8), a criticism of their economics
which reflects their real poverty (lording themselves over the
poor)..apparently such poverty results primarily from man-centeredness
witnessed in the philosophy partic of the/ir religious establishment (cp.
3:12, 14); also, 5:14 does not mention 'hell'--its about a blessed society
trapped in the throes of (its) spiritual suicide
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 23:44:34 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
. read ..Isaiah 5:13,14
_
Discover Yahoo!
Find restaurants, movies, travel more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=32658/*http://discover.yahoo.com/weekend.html
--
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
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, in your usual style, you have not answered my questions, yet expect me to answer yours. Let me list them out for you...after you answer them, then list yours out and I will take a stab at answering them: 1. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? 3. Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? 4. Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perry, how can you speak with any authority about what I feel or what other LDS feel, subjectivity being what it is? You take a heavy position, presuming to speak for others. All else aside, however, how do you account for JS's fire of the first vision that did not consume being so similar to the burning bush of Moses that burned yet was not consumed? And how do you account for that same fire being present at the Kirtland Temple's dedication? Hundreds witnessed it. BTW, you asked once, How do you know I have never been in a Mormon temple? Would you please explain that question? Are you a former Mormon? In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:36:57 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? According to E B Stennhouse, the editor of the Deseret news for some 25 years, in his 1875 book entitled The Rocky Mountain Saints, he comments regarding the purported Shekinah in the Kirtland temple, paraphrasing, that the appearance of the spirit was more due to the imbibing of the spirit than the presence of the spirit. Perry -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Are you so gullible that YOU believe everything that is in print? Like the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and the DC. E. B. White, the author of Charlotte's Web, was born in 1899. How could the story be a basis for what E. B. Stennhouse wrote in 1875??? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:50:46 EDT Blaine: Are you so gullible you believe anything just because it is in print? Go see the movie, Charlotte's Web. Ha! that is the basis for the whole story. In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:36:57 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? According to E B Stennhouse, the editor of the Deseret news for some 25 years, in his 1875 book entitled The Rocky Mountain Saints, he comments regarding the purported Shekinah in the Kirtland temple, paraphrasing, that the appearance of the spirit was more due to the imbibing of the spirit than the presence of the spirit. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, Where in the Bible does anyone feel the Shekinah? ...and the mormon moses said, I felt it! I felt it! Did you feel it? Just for a moment there I felt it!, Blaine 3:12-15, BBV. The shekinah was a HUGE column of smoke by day, and a column of fire by night. I guess if you were in the middle of it you WOULD feel it! But only for a second! I do not read fairy tales to gain knowledge of the truth. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:58:48 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:36:57 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? Blaine: The Shekinah is a greatly amplified version of what is otherwise known as the Spirit of the Holy Ghost.I have definitely felt it numerous times, sometimes stronger than at other times; never the amplified version, however where it becomes visible to the spiritual eye. Are you a teacher of righteousness, and did not know this? :) Those who have both seen and felt it all agree it bestows profound peace and joy. Reread Joseph Smith's story, as well as the accounts of the Three Witnesses, as well as the account of JS and Oliver C when John the Baptist appeared amid a cloud of light, or Shekinah, accompanied by the voice of the Lord speaking from eternity. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Lance, If bazoom has some other meaning to you than just an intentional mispronunciation of bosom, which I have heard used before but did not associate anything more than that, then I apologize for not considering that to some it might imply something more, and did not intend for it to be anything more than an intentional mispronunciation. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:58:44 -0400 CPL: 'bazoom'? IMO not necessary. .. - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 12:36 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? According to E B Stennhouse, the editor of the Deseret news for some 25 years, in his 1875 book entitled The Rocky Mountain Saints, he comments regarding the purported Shekinah in the Kirtland temple, paraphrasing, that the appearance of the spirit was more due to the imbibing of the spirit than the presence of the spirit. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:17:53 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:08:50 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: a sense of false security Good point Blaine. What security do you have? Blaine: The witness of the spirit. The Shekinah, the fiery presence of the Lord in his appearance to JS and later, at the dedication of the Kirtland (Ohio) Temple. I feel this fire as often as I am humble and seek the Lord's will, not my own. What security do you have, Kevin? Hmmm? -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] JS is a False Priest according to Blaine
Glad my comedic bent is entertaining to you, my friend. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] JS is a False Priest according to Blaine Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:16:08 EDT Blaine: Are we having fun yet, Perry? I am. In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:18:35 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blaine, First, you said associating JS with OTHER false priests...these are YOUR words, and you imply JS was ALSO a false priest...if you had NOT wanted to include him you should have said associating JS with false priests (sans the other). Second, I can only know what you WRITE, not what you MEANT. When using email, you have to be very careful to say what you MEAN (but then, maybe you did!). Third, it is an ad hominem attack to call me a clown unless you have photos of my huge red nose, frizzy read hair, whiteface, painted on smile, and painted stars over my eyes! not to mention my over-baggy striped pants, red suspenders, and huge floppy shoes! I may be funny looking, but a clown I am not! Besides, I get claustrophobic in small cars EVEN WHEN BY MYSELF, MUCH MORE SO WITH 9-10 OTHER CLOWNS IN THERE WITH ME! PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Perry -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, I did not make that comment. It is from Lance. While most of use place our OWN name before a statement we make, Lance places the name of the person he is addresseing before his comment. I guess that is the way it is done in Canada :-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:32:59 EDT Interesting comment, CPL. :) Blaine In a message dated 6/6/2005 11:06:26 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CPL:You actually expect Blaine to take this 'foolishness' seriously? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 12:56 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, in your usual style, you have not answered my questions, yet expect me to answer yours. Let me list them out for you...after you answer them, then list yours out and I will take a stab at answering them: 1. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? 3. Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? 4. Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? Perry -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Sorry, Lance, I took your question to be rhetorical since 'foolishness' was in quotes. So, here is your answer. I consider questions 1, 2, and 4 to be serious questions that Blaine can answer, and questions for which I expected (or at least hoped for) an answer. Question 3 I consider to be an extremely serious question, which I expected Blaine to ignore. As far as asking him to answer my questions before I answer his, he is generally good at answering questions when they come one or two at a time, but if there are more than a couple he tends to ignore the questions, then fires back his own. I am not going to play that way. I want some semblance of a discussion, so I am going to force that issue. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 14:02:18 -0400 Now, CPL, how 'bout answering me? . - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 13:59 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, I did not make that comment. It is from Lance. While most of use place our OWN name before a statement we make, Lance places the name of the person he is addresseing before his comment. I guess that is the way it is done in Canada :-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:32:59 EDT Interesting comment, CPL. :) Blaine In a message dated 6/6/2005 11:06:26 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CPL:You actually expect Blaine to take this 'foolishness' seriously? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 06, 2005 12:56 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, in your usual style, you have not answered my questions, yet expect me to answer yours. Let me list them out for you...after you answer them, then list yours out and I will take a stab at answering them: 1. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? 2. Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? 3. Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? 4. Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? Perry -- 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. -- 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. -- 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 World Takes Care of It's Own
People don't starve because there is not enough food in the world. People starve because despotic rulers cut off supply chains to starve the people so they will not rise up and overthrow the despots. No amount of money will fix those types of problems...but getting rid of the depots will. Perry From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] The World Takes Care of It's Own Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:42:05 -0400 Bob Geldof Launches Live 8 Concerts On July 13th 1985 two unique simultaneous concerts called Live Aid were held in London and Philadelphia with a goal of easing the suffering of millions of victims of famine in Africa. Live Aid raised over $100 million but 20 years later poverty, disease, and famine are still major problems for the people of Africa. 20 years ago the public contributed resources to end suffering and now Bob Geldof is putting together new concerts to pressure wealthy governments to come to the aid of impoverished people. - Top 40 / Pop Guide Bill Lamb -- 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 World Takes Care of It's Own
Judy, I agree. I do not think it is going to get a lot better, regardless of how much money the world throws at the problem. However, as I am sure you will agree, we should help where we can, and where it will make a difference. Although we certainly cannot end all of the suffering in the world, perhaps we can eliminate it in some cases, ease it in others. Perry From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] The World Takes Care of It's Own Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:42:30 -0400 I hear what you are saying Perry .. but realistically can you perceive a time when all the despots and all evil is gone from the world before the Second Coming when Jesus rules and reigns? The scriptures tell us that evil will increase as the end draws closer - In Daniel wrote that God's people would fall by the sword and by flame, by captivity and by spoil many days etc.. (Daniel 11:33-39) judyt From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] People don't starve because there is not enough food in the world. People starve because despotic rulers cut off supply chains to starve the people so they will not rise up and overthrow the despots. No amount of money will fix those types of problems...but getting rid of the depots will. Perry From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Geldof Launches Live 8 Concerts On July 13th 1985 two unique simultaneous concerts called Live Aid were held in London and Philadelphia with a goal of easing the suffering of millions of victims of famine in Africa. Live Aid raised over $100 million but 20 years later poverty, disease, and famine are still major problems for the people of Africa. 20 years ago the public contributed resources to end suffering and now Bob Geldof is putting together new concerts to pressure wealthy governments to come to the aid of impoverished people. - Top 40 / Pop Guide Bill Lamb -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] But the Mormon teaching Manuals say the Prophet is the ONLY man allowed to add or subtract. To/from his harem? ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:You are wrong again, Blaine. Revelations says that no one is to add or subtract from the Bible. Did you miss that part? Izzy - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:06 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH I Blaine: Aren't you converted to Mormonism by now Izzy? :) I'm shocked you don't know the answer. It is BOTH. Since they are the same individuals! I do, however understand why you might think otherwise. Anyone subjected to the watered-down doctrines of traditional Christianity would tend, I would think, to uphold these false niceties, even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. Satan has a way of lulling the unwary into a sense of false security, engendered by his presentation of a few superficial truths with his fundamental falsehoods. This pairing is as old as the Garden of Eden, when Satan told Eve she would not surely die, AND that she would gain wisdom, the latter being the truth, and the former a lie. n a message dated 6/6/2005 9:23:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Bible speaks for itself. According to JSmith the Bible is not enough. Who will you serve, the God of the Bible or the God of the Book of Mormon? Izzy - Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news more. Check it out! -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
What I typed was intentional. I have heard the word used as an intentional mispronunciation of bosom since I was a kid. Lance indicated to me that to some it may mean something a little different. I have heard it used in that sense before, but by no means thought that it meant that exclusively. To those to whom it means something more than just a hilarious way to say bosom, I apologize. To those who took it in the spirit in which I used it, LAUGH IT UP. My folks mispronounced several words regulary as I was growingup. Some were intentional to get a laugh, some were part of their southern dialect. My schoolmates were often quite entertained by my occasional mispronunciations, whether intentional or not! What do you expect from a clown? Perry From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 14:28:19 -0700 (PDT) ROTFL! Burning in the BAZOOM? Did you make that up or a typo Bosom Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa, Blaine. Is your witness of the spirit that subjective heartburn feelings mormons say they get? AKA, the burning in the bazoom? Do you have any biblical references that this burning feeling is a valid witness? Could it instead possibly be the fires of hell being stoked by your resident demon? Have you ever seen the Sheikinah yourself? According to E B Stennhouse, the editor of the Deseret news for some 25 years, in his 1875 book entitled The Rocky Mountain Saints, he comments regarding the purported Shekinah in the Kirtland temple, paraphrasing, that the appearance of the spirit was more due to the imbibing of the spirit than the presence of the spirit. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:17:53 EDT In a message dated 6/6/2005 10:08:50 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: a sense of false security Good point Blaine. What security do you have? Blaine: The witness of the spirit. The Shekinah, the fiery presence of the Lord in his appearance to JS and later, at the dedication of the Kirtland (Ohio) Temple. I feel this fire as often as I am humble and seek the Lord's will, not my own. What security do you have, Kevin? Hmmm? -- 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. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
What? I thought Maps was the last book in the Bible, after the book of
Concordance!
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 21:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
Twisting the facts to mislead.
Do you accept your maps as part of the bible until 2005? LOL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I said is plainly stated. Make of it what you will.
Jd
-Original Message-
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:16:35 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
.AOLPlainTextBody {margin: 0px;font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial,
Sans-Serif;font-size: 12px; color: #000; background-color:
#fff; }.AOLPlainTextBody pre {font-size: 9pt;}.AOLInlineAttachment {
margin: 10px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader {border-bottom: 2px solid #E9EAEB;
background: #F9F9F9;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .Title {font: 11px Tahoma;
font-weight: bold;color: #66;background: #E9EAEB;
padding: 3px 0px 1px 10px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldLabel {font: 11px
Tahoma; font-weight: bold;color: #66;padding: 1px 10px 1px
9px;}.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldValue {font: 11px Tahoma; color:
#33;}The apocrypha were not part of the Jewish scriptures JD - are
you saying that the Bereans may have been
checking out Paul's teaching by them? - have you read them?
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:09:01 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ You may find
this interesting. As far as adding to the bible -- did you know that
the Apocrapha was a part of nearly all Bibles until the mid to late 1800's.
The so-called Prostestant bible is a little over 120 yers old. Christ
and or the New Testament writers quoted from most of them, themselves.
Jd
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475 .AOLPlainTextBody {
FONT-SIZE: 12px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana,
Arial, Sans-Serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR:
#fff}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475 .AOLPlainTextBody
PRE {FONT-SIZE: 9pt}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
.AOLInlineAttachment {MARGIN:
10px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
.AOLAttachmentHeader {BACKGROUND: #f9f9f9; BORDER-BOTTOM: #e9eaeb 2px
solid}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
.AOLAttachmentHeader .Title {PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px;
BACKGROUND: #e9eaeb; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; FONT: bold 11px Tahoma; COLOR:
#66; PADDING-TOP:
3px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475 .AOLAttachmentHeader
.FieldLabel {PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 9px; PADDING-BOTTOM:
1px; FONT: bold 11px Tahoma; COLOR: #66; PADDING-TOP:
1px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldValue {FONT: 11px Tahoma; COLOR:
#33}What were the more noble Bereans of Acts 17:11 checking Paul's
teaching against? Also your favorite epistle
James is said to have been written by the Lord's brother only 15yrs
following the ascension. Could we be
missing something here JD?
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:19 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When did the Bible come into existence -- before or after the Revelation?
There was no book called the Bible in first century times. But,
certainly, we should not be adding to what God has said. Jd
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLPlainTextBody {
FONT-SIZE: 12px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana,
Arial, Sans-Serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR:
#fff}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLPlainTextBody PRE {
FONT-SIZE: 9pt}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLInlineAttachment {
MARGIN: 10px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLAttachmentHeader {
BACKGROUND: #f9f9f9; BORDER-BOTTOM: #e9eaeb 2px
solid}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLAttachmentHeader
.Title {PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; BACKGROUND: #e9eaeb;
PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; FONT: bold 11px Tahoma; COLOR: #66; PADDING-TOP:
3px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0 .AOLAttachmentHeader
.FieldLabel {PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 9px; PADDING-BOTTOM:
1px; FONT: bold 11px Tahoma; COLOR: #66; PADDING-TOP:
1px}#AOLMsgPart_2_92a4aab2-2c23-4329-b5af-882073221475
#AOLMsgPart_2_9275316b-9e1e-42ac-b395-a647a7c02be0
RE: [TruthTalk] Clowning Around
Perry the Clown wrote to Blaine: PRODUCE THE PHOTOS [of perry the clown] OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Looks like the mormon boys are tag-teaming me. But, I must confess. I did not think anyone would find my clown picture on the internet (in fact, I forgot it was even posted), but Dave found it and posted it, so, Blaine, I guess I owe you an apology. I am a clown. You can call me a clown any time you wish. In all humility, Perry the Clown From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] Clowning Around Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 20:58:33 -0700 *PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! * DAVEH: Can it be an AH attack if there are pictures to prove it, Perry. :-D Charles Perry Locke wrote: Third, it is an ad hominem attack to call me a clown unless you have photos of my huge red nose, frizzy read hair, whiteface, painted on smile, and painted stars over my eyes! not to mention my over-baggy striped pants, red suspenders, and huge floppy shoes! I may be funny looking, but a clown I am not! Besides, I get claustrophobic in small cars EVEN WHEN BY MYSELF, MUCH MORE SO WITH 9-10 OTHER CLOWNS IN THERE WITH ME! PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Perry Blaine wrote: Laugh, clown, laugh!! -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. PerrytheClown.jpg -- 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] [Bulk] Rmoderator Commant: was: Re: NIV Bible Quiz
Gary, To call someone's comments a myth (even without any evidence) expresses your unsupported opinion. But, your parenthetical comment equates David to a false prophet. Rather than level such an ad hominem attack, please provide exidence to support your claim or retract it. Perry the moderator From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 21:51:16 -0600 myth (false prophets speak of JC in the past tense for manipulative personal reasons or as does the author, below) On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 20:09:38 -0400 David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Jesus also respected Scripture the way that we do. -- 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.
Moderator commant: Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
Lance, if you are going to state that David's citations demonstrate a misreadng, please provide some evidence of such and allow David to respond. Perry the Moderator From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 06:08:12 -0400 As I said David, it is you. Your citations demonstrate a misreading of both. (Jesus Scripture) - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 03, 2005 20:09 Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Lance wrote: I was simply alluding to those on TT who believe that God 'incarnated' in book form as opposed to a human being. (You, David, Judy and Izzie) I wouldn't use the word 'incarnated' but because you threw my name into the mix, I suppose you are addressing my great respect for Scripture. Don't you think Jesus also respected Scripture the way that we do? Consider the straining at the letter of Scripture that Jesus does in the following passage: John 10:34-36 (34) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? (35) If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; (36) Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? Besides Jesus demonstrating here that he is a legalist, he illustrates respect for every jot and tittle of Scripture. And why not, he also taught that no jot or tittle would fail until heaven and earth pass away. Matthew 5:17-18 (17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Remember too that Jesus encouraged his disciples to listen and obey those expounders of Scripture whom many on TruthTalk would label as legalists. Matthew 23:2-3 (2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: (3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. So who here is walking in the tradition of Jesus Christ? Is it those who greatly respect the Scriptures and follow it closely, or is it those who think it would be evil legalism to do so? Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
I never use the term, and have no definition. But if I wanted one I would see if there was a comon usage for the term. I wouldn't make up my own definition to fit my own desires. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 01:37:52 EDT So, what is your definition of priestcraft, Perry? Blaine In a message dated 6/3/2005 7:17:13 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blaine wrote: Priestcraft is, by my definition, ... Here we go again...the mormons like to make up their own meanings for words, to suit thier own personal perception of the world. I call this the Queen of Hearts syndrome: Words mean exactly what I want them to mean! When a person is steeped in a culture in which the cultural leaders redefine words to have untraditional meanings, for the purpose of making the culture appear to be other than it really is, this begins to affect it's adherents, as we see with Blaine above, and have recently seen with DaveH in his limited definition of the word teach, which exclusdes his own actions on TT. Another case in point is the Clinton case where his attempt tp liimit the definition of certain words and phrases to exclude his own actions has been passed down to our youth, who at times use these tactics to try to exclude thier own actions. Another, but inverse, example is the word homophobe. In this case the definition of the word has been EXPANDED to include not only those who fear homosexuality (traditional definition), but to include those who beleive that it is sinful behavior. The root of this is in the politically correct movement, where it does not matter what you feel or believe, but how you are perceived. Wow. What a world! Perry -- 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: Moderator commant: Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
Because if you can not support your claims, they are likely false, and bearing false witness...well...you know. From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: Moderator commant: Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 11:38:36 -0400 Why? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 04, 2005 11:37 Subject: Moderator commant: Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Lance, if you are going to state that David's citations demonstrate a misreadng, please provide some evidence of such and allow David to respond. Perry the Moderator From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 06:08:12 -0400 As I said David, it is you. Your citations demonstrate a misreading of both. (Jesus Scripture) - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 03, 2005 20:09 Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Lance wrote: I was simply alluding to those on TT who believe that God 'incarnated' in book form as opposed to a human being. (You, David, Judy and Izzie) I wouldn't use the word 'incarnated' but because you threw my name into the mix, I suppose you are addressing my great respect for Scripture. Don't you think Jesus also respected Scripture the way that we do? Consider the straining at the letter of Scripture that Jesus does in the following passage: John 10:34-36 (34) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? (35) If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; (36) Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? Besides Jesus demonstrating here that he is a legalist, he illustrates respect for every jot and tittle of Scripture. And why not, he also taught that no jot or tittle would fail until heaven and earth pass away. Matthew 5:17-18 (17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Remember too that Jesus encouraged his disciples to listen and obey those expounders of Scripture whom many on TruthTalk would label as legalists. Matthew 23:2-3 (2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: (3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. So who here is walking in the tradition of Jesus Christ? Is it those who greatly respect the Scriptures and follow it closely, or is it those who think it would be evil legalism to do so? Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Dave, Blaine wrote, Priestcraft is, by my definition, which admits that he guessed at or made the definition up that suits him. Had he said according to Webster's, or the definition of Priestcraft is I could not have made the assertion I made. Perry From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:33:09 -0700 DAVEH: According to the dictionary definition, it's obvious Blaine was not making it up as your below assertion, Perry http://65.66.134.201/cgi-bin/webster/webster.exe?search_for_texts_web1828=priestcraft ...Will Blaine receive a forthcoming apology? Charles Perry Locke wrote: I never use the term, and have no definition. But if I wanted one I would see if there was a comon usage for the term. I wouldn't make up my own definition to fit my own desires. So, what is your definition of priestcraft, Perry? Blaine In a message dated 6/3/2005 7:17:13 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blaine wrote: Priestcraft is, by my definition, ... Here we go again...the mormons like to make up their own meanings for words, to suit thier own personal perception of the world. I call this the Queen of Hearts syndrome: Words mean exactly what I want them to mean! When a person is steeped in a culture in which the cultural leaders redefine words to have untraditional meanings, for the purpose of making the culture appear to be other than it really is, this begins to affect it's adherents, as we see with Blaine above, and have recently seen with DaveH in his limited definition of the word teach, which exclusdes his own actions on TT. Another case in point is the Clinton case where his attempt tp liimit the definition of certain words and phrases to exclude his own actions has been passed down to our youth, who at times use these tactics to try to exclude thier own actions. Another, but inverse, example is the word homophobe. In this case the definition of the word has been EXPANDED to include not only those who fear homosexuality (traditional definition), but to include those who beleive that it is sinful behavior. The root of this is in the politically correct movement, where it does not matter what you feel or believe, but how you are perceived. Wow. What a world! Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Dave, pick a definition, any definition. Just don't pick one that labels what you do as teaching. From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:06:07 -0700 DAVEH: FWIW Perry, you may be the one trying to change the culture (see below), so to speak. As I pointed out, there are many definitions of teach, but the one I feel is appropriate for TT agrees with what DavidM posted today about the meaning of teaching (/sermonizing)/.. DavidM wrote: Actually, he does tell the saints that they come together to GIVE a sermon, and such implies that there will be some there to HEAR a sermon. :-) 1 Corinthians 14:26 (26) How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. Notice the word doctrine in this list of what the Corinthian believers were doing when the whole church comes together. *This is teaching -- a sermon. * ...Do you think what I post qualifies as sermons?Furthermore, do you really think other TTers have joined TT to listen to me /sermonizing? / Therefore Perry, is it not you who wants to use another definition in an attempt to change the culture here? Charles Perry Locke wrote: When a person is steeped in a culture in which the cultural leaders redefine words to have untraditional meanings, for the purpose of making the culture appear to be other than it really is , this begins to affect it's adherents, as we see with Blaine above, and have recently seen with DaveH in his limited definition of the word teach, which exclusdes his own actions on TT. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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] [Bulk] Rmoderator Commant: was: Re: NIV Bible Quiz
Lance, I cannot disagree that Gary MAY have the gift of discernment. However, people with discernment also know WHY they discern the things they do. From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] [Bulk] Rmoderator Commant: was: Re: NIV Bible Quiz Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 11:41:46 -0400 Gary might have the gift of discernment, Charles. If this is the case then, simply 'discerning' (though he didn't, as you seem to suggest infer David was a false prophet, IMO) is sufficient. Why not let David take care of this privately? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 04, 2005 11:32 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] [Bulk] Rmoderator Commant: was: Re: NIV Bible Quiz Gary, To call someone's comments a myth (even without any evidence) expresses your unsupported opinion. But, your parenthetical comment equates David to a false prophet. Rather than level such an ad hominem attack, please provide exidence to support your claim or retract it. Perry the moderator From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 21:51:16 -0600 myth (false prophets speak of JC in the past tense for manipulative personal reasons or as does the author, below) On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 20:09:38 -0400 David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..Jesus also respected Scripture the way that we do. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blaine wrote: Priestcraft is, by my definition, ... Here we go again...the mormons like to make up their own meanings for words, to suit thier own personal perception of the world. I call this the Queen of Hearts syndrome: Words mean exactly what I want them to mean! When a person is steeped in a culture in which the cultural leaders redefine words to have untraditional meanings, for the purpose of making the culture appear to be other than it really is, this begins to affect it's adherents, as we see with Blaine above, and have recently seen with DaveH in his limited definition of the word teach, which exclusdes his own actions on TT. Another case in point is the Clinton case where his attempt tp liimit the definition of certain words and phrases to exclude his own actions has been passed down to our youth, who at times use these tactics to try to exclude thier own actions. Another, but inverse, example is the word homophobe. In this case the definition of the word has been EXPANDED to include not only those who fear homosexuality (traditional definition), but to include those who beleive that it is sinful behavior. The root of this is in the politically correct movement, where it does not matter what you feel or believe, but how you are perceived. Wow. What a world! Perry -- 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] Obesity
Christine, do you equate singing songs in church with worship? Are there any other types of worship than singing songs? Perry From: Christine Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Obesity Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:47:35 -0700 (PDT) It plays a very important part in the discipline of spiritual growth. Amen. I realized recently that the worship songs I sing have taught me a sort of spiritual jealousy, where I wanted to mean those songs from my heart when I sang them. This one song had a line You can offer her anything her affections are all for Him only, that showed me how I should desire my God. Though I wouldn't rate it over preaching and teaching, as quoted in Lance's post, I do love worship! Blessings! --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Worship shapes our spirituality ...our spirituality is usually shaped more by the experience of communal worship than it is by preaching and teachingthe way we think about God and relate to God is influenced enormously by our experience of God in communal worship..Songs are especially formative. We are far more likely to find ourselves humming something we sang in church when we go home than we are to find ourselves meditating on a phrase in the sermon..(not one of yours, of course)..Christian philosopher and scientist Michael Polanyi spoke of knowledge that we simply absorb by a kind of 'osmosis' without even realizing that we have done so. This is what he refers to as 'tacit knowledge' Most Christians simply imbibe a theology through the way that they worship. .theology springs from right worship but theology also, in turn, guides and ensures right worship.There is a circular relationship between the two as healthy worship and theology support each otherhow theology can guide the kind of worship that in turn shapes people spirituality. How very true, for my wife and I, at least. Our church of choice is Valley Christian Center in Fresno. It is a 2000 member congregation with, perhaps, the best comtemporary worship service in the area. What Polanyi speaks of in the above quote is, perhaps, the same as that referenced by Paul in Eph. 5:18-20. There, spirit filling is an experience received on any occasion the community of saints gather togather in the sharing of song and spiritual hymns. It plays a very important part in the discipline of spiritual growth. Too much attention to the negatives expressed by some saints (including ourselves) often counters the joy and peace derived from these times of worhsip. Thanks for the words JD __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- 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. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
John, I have to agree. I otherwise might not agree, but I met a man who came with his wfe to a Bible study I was in some years ago. He was raised in a home in which his mother and father were involved in drugs from before he was born. He would go with them to make buys, and witness them use the drugs for as long as he could rememeber. He was never taught that this was wrong. so he grew up pretty much seeing this as normal, and at a very early age beginning to do the same. He was in his early 30's when I met him, and had already spent considerable time in prison for various drug related offenses. From his testamony, and his apparent love for the Lord,, I believe that he was in the fold, but occasionally had times of relapse when he would get drawn back in to the drug culture. Last I heard he was doing hard time at Corcoran Pen. I have never stop believing that he was and still is saved continues in a state of salvation through God's grace, although he is unable to totally kick the habits he grew up with as being normal. Who knows, but what God may be using him in some way I do not understand, perhaps to reach men inside the prison walls that would not otherwise hear the gospel. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 02:02:00 -0400 Do you understand that I believe that event sin can be stop immediately but other types of sin cannot? There are addictions, character failures such as pride and selfishness that are the foundation for other sin AND are listed as sin (selfishness is a sin but it is not an event). There are sins of omission when we should be doing something and we choose not to. Some sins stop -- but others only decrease in influence. Some may never be completely gone. It is my opinion that there is absolutely no alternative to this -- that those who disagree share a much narrower definition of sin than I - and I believe I have a sound biblical argument for my point of view, not to mention the practical argument. Much of nearly every letter saved for us in the NT scriptures contains encouragement to the saints regarding the continuing battle against sin - letters written to those who are in the family of God. JD -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:36:33 -0500 Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz The point that I was trying to get you to see for yourself is that though growth as a Christian is a continuous thing, sin stops when we die to self. My old self cursed and hated with the best of them. I drank from two to four six packs a day. I lusted in my heart. I dipped snuff and defiled my body. But when I died to self, that stuff went, and it did not go gradually. When Jesus says, You are forgiven. Go and sin no more, only the most selfish persons could consider what Christ did for them and not respond in obedience. I know that. It is a fact. I have never been more certain of anything in my life. Terry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, Terry. And that is all that I am saying, here. sin is sin -- but what IS sin? As long as we have this idea that it is a violation of the law, we will never be able to really help the people we are called to help. We HAVE been given the ministry of reconciliation. For the past 4 weeks, my left knee has been out of action. An operation is soon in the offing. But during this period, I have had to continue to work. About six hours or so is all I can stand. What has happened is this: the surrounding muscle structure has increased and the knee is becoming serviceable on its own -- painful as that might be. ditto with those who are dealing with their besetting sin (and we all have them). Their lives are not defined by a single area of concern. No one is. I know management of sin might sound repulsive, a doctrine of license.But it really is not. Management is a RECOVERY tool -- not a teaching that encourages sin. Sin Management teaches the addict to postpone her addictive behavior for a specified time -- and this time is increased. Fat people (and I suspect there are more fat people on this forum than one would suppose) victimize themselves with the addiction of gluttony. Sin Management teaches them that this is destructive behavior (ala sin) and encour ages them to modify or postpone their eating . Meanwhile, we emphasize the good and healthy aspects of their lives with God. -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 18:19:18 -0500 Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Back to an issue of substance. Law and faith It is amazing to me that those who are clearly
RE: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
Izzy, I felt your post below was a bit tacky. I speak as your brother, not as moderator. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are those the only body parts you are missing, or are you holding out on us, JD? (Sounds like a likely story to me!) Iz -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
Izzy, first of all, it is none of your business if anyone on this group has a malady, or is missing appendages. What do you mean, he is just now telling us? What makes you think you even entitled to know this, or that he is obligated to tell you? Second, John gave us a valid reason for his typos, so why do you think he is being dishonest? Third, if you had any sensitivity at all you would drop your prideful attitude, quit trying to cover up your comment with cuteness, and admit it was tacky. Unless, of course, you have no sensitivity at all. Perry From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 21:51:47 -0500 Why is that Perry? When folks start make good-natured fun of JD's typo's suddenly he tells us he has two missing fingers. Now how long have we known JD and he is just now telling us that? Do you believe it? If we complain that he is not making sense is he going to suddenly confess that he had a lobotomy back in the 50's, or what??? Izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 8:37 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Izzy, I felt your post below was a bit tacky. I speak as your brother, not as moderator. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are those the only body parts you are missing, or are you holding out on us, JD? (Sounds like a likely story to me!) Iz -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Lance, we have a standard for determining the right Jesus and the right God. It is the Bible. The mormon jesus does not match the jesus of the Bible, nor does the mormon god match the God of the Bible. If you listen only to what the missionaries, DaveH, and Blaine tell you you will think they are they same, but when you look at what their non-prophets have written, and what they actually believe, (the part people typically do not learn about until they are deep into the mormon religion) they are not the same. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:45:32 -0400 CPL:Jus how nuanced would you make this out to be vis a vis 'the right Jesus'? Would you acknowledge that David Miller's Jesus' was not the Jesus of Bill Taylor? IMO this is so. Should you doubt this I could call BT 'up from the dead' to so demonstrate my point. Does this 'count'? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 01, 2005 01:03 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Blaine, You have to have the right jesus, or it does not count. The bible is replete with warnings not to follow false christs...written well before JS ever invented (or was inspired by Satan to invent) the mormon jesus. It is that simple. You have to have the right jesus. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:19:13 EDT I agree, Izzy, and by now you should know that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches enduring to the end IN CHRIST--only. You have unfortunately fallen under the very bad influence of those blind guides who teach the traditions and commandments of men, mixed with a few select scriptures to support their craftiness. I have a hard time believing you guys really believe these silly assertions that we worship JS, or anyone else than Jesus Christ. If you insist on fleeing from the true shepherd, be my guest. But read below . . . O how marvelous are the works of the Lord, and how long doth he suffer with his people; yea, and how blind and impenetrable are the understandings of the children of men; for they will not seek wisdom, neither do they desire that she should rule over them. Yea, they are as a wild flock which fleeth from the shepherd, and scattereth, and are driven, and are devoured by the beasts of the forest. (BoM, Mosiah 8:20-21) In a message dated 5/31/2005 1:16:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No. You must endure to the end â?oin Christâ?. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesnâ?Tt cut it. Sorry. Iz -- 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. -- 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. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz
Actually, I have a problem when I type similar to John's, in tht I frequently transpose two letters. It is because I am not a touch-typist, I guess. But, I do it a lot. I noticed that each of the typos that you and Kevin pointed out are nothing more than letter transpositions. Surely you can see past the typos and you know what he intended to type. Peryr From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 19:01:18 -0500 Freudian slip, JD? Iz _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:55 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] NIV Bible Quiz Not really. My degree is from a Catholic school - lost of good people there. JD -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Blaine, You have to have the right jesus, or it does not count. The bible is replete with warnings not to follow false christs...written well before JS ever invented (or was inspired by Satan to invent) the mormon jesus. It is that simple. You have to have the right jesus. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:19:13 EDT I agree, Izzy, and by now you should know that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches enduring to the end IN CHRIST--only. You have unfortunately fallen under the very bad influence of those blind guides who teach the traditions and commandments of men, mixed with a few select scriptures to support their craftiness. I have a hard time believing you guys really believe these silly assertions that we worship JS, or anyone else than Jesus Christ. If you insist on fleeing from the true shepherd, be my guest. But read below . . . O how marvelous are the works of the Lord, and how long doth he suffer with his people; yea, and how blind and impenetrable are the understandings of the children of men; for they will not seek wisdom, neither do they desire that she should rule over them. Yea, they are as a wild flock which fleeth from the shepherd, and scattereth, and are driven, and are devoured by the beasts of the forest. (BoM, Mosiah 8:20-21) In a message dated 5/31/2005 1:16:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No. You must endure to the end “in Christ”. Enduring to the end in JSmith doesn’t cut it. Sorry. Iz -- 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 and John on the Law and the Spirit
John, I consider the following a veiled ad hominem reference: ...someone who either does not comprehend at a high level (say , similar to a dolphin) Giving a second option (not reading posts), which may or may not be true, does not negate or cover the ad hominem part. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy and John on the Law and the Spirit Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 09:43:25 -0400 Here is the perfect example of someone who either does not comprehend at a high level (say , similar to a dolphin) --- and Linda IS smarter than that OR we have someone who simply does not read the posts she responds to. We have Izzy arguing that God will help us become gods unto our selves. Maybe the Mormon brothers will agree -- but most of the rest of us are left scratching our heads Also, here is a great example for the need of interpretative rules. Does God inable us to sin? He makes ALL THINGS possible. Does He enable us to steal and murder? He makes ALL THINGS possible. But , hhh, wait a minute !! The text says ALL THINGS. cARS AND BOATS AND, A $500 LUNKER STICK, a library full of really good porn - all things. If God says it, I beleive (?) Think Hermeneutic. JD Gots to go to work. -Original Message- From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 30 May 2005 07:43:40 -0500 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Judy and John on the Law and the Spirit Then you are arguing with Jesus. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 9:36 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy and John on the Law and the Spirit No, no they are not. JD -Original Message- From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sun, 29 May 2005 19:15:06 -0500 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Judy and John on the Law and the Spirit Luke 10:27 “all things are possible with God. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] When we become gods unto ourselves, wwe attempt the impossible -- -- 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: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
John, you certainly are easily entertained! Perhaps you should get out a little more! What else can I say? Izzy opened the door, Lance only walked through it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 17:16:15 -0400 When we speak of the Great Dance -- we can call this sort of activity the Legalist Shuffle !! Dripping with ad hom and no one can prove a thing awesome. Did I say ad hom? What ad hom (on second thought). You are a genius, oh Wise Guru of the North Country. Ca B ---out!! -Original Message- From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Mon, 30 May 2005 13:07:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH I suspected as much but, feared reprisal from our new moderator for saying so. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 30, 2005 12:52 Subject: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH No. I’m really that stupid. Duh. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS...
Is corrected edition of the Inspired Version an oxymormon? From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS... Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Joseph Smith also declared, I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors (Translation of Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 327). Apostle Mark E. Peterson said, Many insertions were made, some of them 'slanted' for selfish purposes, while at times deliberate falsifications and fabrications were perpetrated (As Translated Correctly, p. 4). Apostle Orson Pratt stated: If it be admitted that the apostles and evangelists did write the books of the New Testament, that does not prove of itself that they were divinely inspired at the time they wrote Add all this imperfection to the uncertainty of the translation, and who, IN HIS RIGHT MIND could for one moment suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original? (Divine Authority of the Book of Mormon, pp. 45, 47) LDS Apostle Orson Pratt further proclaimed, The Bible has been robbed of its plainness; many sacred books having been lost, others rejected by the Romish Church, and what few we have left, were copied and re-copied so many times, that it is admitted that almost every verse has been corrupted and mutilated to that degree that scarcely any two of them read alike (The Seer, p. 213) BOM, II Nephi 29:6-10 (Pg.110), Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible and we need no more Bible Wherefore because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written. Joseph Smith stated: it was apparent that many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.10) When: the book [Bible] proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew...it contained the fullness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record (1 Nephi 13:24), but afterwards thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church...after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles (Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 13:26,28). See also Doctrines of Salvation, vol.3, p.190-191. many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible...Wherefore because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 29:3,10). When his revelation about Adam being God was disputed, Brigham Young stated: You believe Adam was made of the dust of this earth. This I do not believe...I have publicly declared that I do not believe that portion of the Bible as the Christian world do. I never did, and I never want to. What is the reason I do not? Because I have come to understanding, and banished from my mind all the baby stories my mother taught me when I was a child (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, p.6). Orson Pratt's lack of confidence in the Bible is obvious: ...and who, in his right mind, could for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? No one can tell whether even one verse of either the Old or New Testament conveys the ideas of the original author (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 28). Apostle Bruce McConkie: Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors, many plain and precious things were deleted, in consequence of which error and falsehood poured into the churches. One of the great heresies of modern Christendom is the unfounded assumption that the Bible contains all of the inspired teachings now extant among men (Mormon Doctrine, pp. 82,83). McConkie continues: The Bible of the Old World has come to us from the manuscripts of antiquity - manuscripts which passed through the hands of uninspired men who changed many parts to suit their own doctrinal ideas. Deletions were common, and, as it now stands, many plain and precious portions and many covenants of the Lord have been lost. As a consequence, those who rely upon it [the Bible] alone stumble and are confused... (The Ensign, December 1985, p 55). Comparisons made by Mormon Leaders between the Bible and Book of Mormon
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
Actually, John, I did not read this as a preference of one over the other. I am sorry that you did. I read it as an effort on the part of David to honestly relate what he has gained from Dave's being on TT. I, too, have gained from Dave's being on TT. He (as well as Blaine and Raymond) has provided a platform for me (and Kevin) to expose the unbiblical, satanic, and deceitful ways of the mormon faith to fellow Christians who, due to their unfamiliarity with the redefined words mormons use and secret occultic ceremonies, may not have otherwise given it a second thought. To that end we ALL have gained from their being here. God has those mormon boys sticking around here for a reason, whether they (or any of us, for that matter) know that reason or not. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 08:08:32 -0400 Well, what do we learn here? That David prefers Dave. Sorry Perry - I did have to laugh a little at this one. JD -Original Message- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sun, 29 May 2005 02:22:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH In regards to the Perry / Dave exchange, I would like to say that I greatly appreciate Dave's participation on TruthTalk. I have learned a lot about Mormonism because of his presence here. I have read dozens of books and studied numerous aspects of Mormonism because of his posts. I have appreciated times he has taken to quote LDS writings, and he has even sent me books to read, including the standard works of Mormonism. Blaine tipped me off to the history of Mormonism written by Joseph Smith and I purchased that set and have read much of it. When I consider my knowledge of Mormonism before interacting with guys like Dave and Blaine and compare it to what I know now about it, I must say that it has been better than several years of classes on it at a university somewhere. I enjoy learning for the sake of learning, so all I can say is thank you Dave and Blaine for your participation here on TruthTalk. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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] Perry vs DaveH
Izzy, Since I know others on TT have contributed, I intentionally used the indefinite who... may not have otherwise given it a second thought to exclude them. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 18:58:17 -0500 Perry, please keep in mind that it was I who exposed the Mormon underwear thingy. Izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 2:25 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Actually, John, I did not read this as a preference of one over the other. I am sorry that you did. I read it as an effort on the part of David to honestly relate what he has gained from Dave's being on TT. I, too, have gained from Dave's being on TT. He (as well as Blaine and Raymond) has provided a platform for me (and Kevin) to expose the unbiblical, satanic, and deceitful ways of the mormon faith to fellow Christians who, due to their unfamiliarity with the redefined words mormons use and secret occultic ceremonies, may not have otherwise given it a second thought. To that end we ALL have gained from their being here. God has those mormon boys sticking around here for a reason, whether they (or any of us, for that matter) know that reason or not. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 08:08:32 -0400 Well, what do we learn here? That David prefers Dave. Sorry Perry - I did have to laugh a little at this one. JD -Original Message- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sun, 29 May 2005 02:22:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH In regards to the Perry / Dave exchange, I would like to say that I greatly appreciate Dave's participation on TruthTalk. I have learned a lot about Mormonism because of his presence here. I have read dozens of books and studied numerous aspects of Mormonism because of his posts. I have appreciated times he has taken to quote LDS writings, and he has even sent me books to read, including the standard works of Mormonism. Blaine tipped me off to the history of Mormonism written by Joseph Smith and I purchased that set and have read much of it. When I consider my knowledge of Mormonism before interacting with guys like Dave and Blaine and compare it to what I know now about it, I must say that it has been better than several years of classes on it at a university somewhere. I enjoy learning for the sake of learning, so all I can say is thank you Dave and Blaine for your participation here on TruthTalk. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] New Moderator for TruthTalk
TT members, Well, here I am again moderating TT. I am changing my style a little from when I last was moderator. Last time I approached ad-hominem offenders in private and discussed with them the nature of their offense. I fear that, while I think this was effective most of the time, it may have given the appearance that no moderation was going on. This time around I plan to address ad-hominem comments on the forum. However, if anyone feels the need to discuss anything privately, feel free to email me directly at [EMAIL PROTECTED] If anyone is new to the group, or you are not new but have not read the guidelines for posting, visit http://innglory.org and click on Discussions, the scroll down to Guidelines for making posts. Thanks, Perry From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] New Moderator for TruthTalk Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 10:32:25 -0400 Ok, guys, this makes it clear that a new moderator is in order. For some reason, Gary won't correspond with me, so I am taking action unilaterally for the sake of the list. Perry has agreed to take over as moderator again. I appreciate the time Gary has put into the job. The job is now Perry's. The idea of a moderator is that he is the only person who will be speaking toward the person on the list. He will try to help the rest of us stay on topic and stay away from personal attacks. Let's please comply with his judgments. Thanks. David Miller List Administrator - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 10:42 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fond Farewells- Salvation Apparently. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Fri, 27 May 2005 22:18:56 EDT Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fond Farewells- Salvation In a message dated 5/27/2005 7:55:41 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What was your message to Deegan when he called me a liar? Liar is ok -- nuts is off limits? Blaine: I think Kevin has arrived at the can-do-no-wrong stage of membership in TT. :) -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Lance, Believe me, I am trying to bring this thing to a close as quickly as I can. I have already dispensed with our first point of contention, and am working on the second. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 13:44:56 -0400 CPL:Paallessseee leave off this harangue! Can't you get past this? Do we need to be looking for another moderator? I ain't got a 'snowball's chance' but maybe it'd be me. Yikes! - Original Message - From: Dave To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 28, 2005 13:40 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, The LIE I accused you of was making me out to be against mormons posting on TT, DAVEH: ??? Huh? What are you talking about, Perry? when I have NEVER been against that. I felt that you intentionally twisted it around, and made it appear as though I objected to your posting mormon doctrine DAVEH: Where did you get that notion, Perry? Either my memory is much worse than I expected, or you are making this stuff up. AndI think the latter is more likely in this case. when I DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE. DAVEH: Nor have I ever said that I think you objected to me teaching Mormonism, or anything remotely similar. What have you been smokin', Perry??? :-) If you are seriously accusing me of suchdig out the quote that supports your supposition. Until then, please quit whining and misconstruing what I've posted. For a guy who has accused me of being deceitful, and twisting what you've saidyou seem to be creating a mistruth in the way you've twisted this matter, Perry. Go back and read my posts that you consider at fault and see if you didn't misinterpret what I posted. If I am wrong...then post it for everybody to seeand I'll apologize. If you don't find any incriminating evidence, then do you think you might owe me an apology? Or..should we just accept your silence as an admission of wrongly accusing me of posting something I didn't say? I only objected to your teaching (from my perspective) and then denying it. The only thing left to do is for you to acknowledge that you understand that I never objected to your posting motmon doctrine DAVEH: ??? Why should I have to acknowledge such, when I've never posted anything that inferred that you objected to me posting Mormon doctrine! or else to provide evidence to the contrary, and that the only thing I ever objected to (from my perspective) was your denial of your teaching mormon doctrine. DAVEH: And for that, you called me deceitful, did you not? Perry From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:31:30 -0700 Dave, I respect your position, and I beleive that we may have settled our first point of contention. While you may not consider some of your responses to be teaching mormonism, I most whole-heartedly believe that some of it is. When you answer questions that are asked, and even when you give mormon references to support it, I do not think of that as teaching per se. However, when you ask a Christian what he/she believes, and he/she tells you, and THEN you counter and rebut it with mormon doctrine and references, which you have done in the past, then you ARE teaching mormon doctrine, no marter how subtlekly you do it. So, I can live with that fact that you DO NOT consider that teaching, which allows you to say that you are NOT teaching mormon doctrine, but I will adhere to my belief that you ARE teaching mormon doctrine when you do that. I will set out to resolve our second point of contention in my next post. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:07:02 -0700 DAVEH: If you want to define teaching as responding to questions about my beliefs, then you might have a point, Perry. I view it a bit differently though. To be a teacher, one needs students. For the most part, I don't view TTers as being students wanting to learn. Witness Debbie's comments today From my LDS perspective, Teachers are to teach the gospel by using the Word of God. As you know, for the most partI have refrained from posting latter-day passages on TT, excepting in specific
Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
Lance, I will not argue with you on Gary's credentials as you have stated them. But, I have rarely seen a post of his that I have understood. People, in general, don't think and communicate like Gary, so much of the time it sounds to me like he is speaking a foreign language. His style of writing was popular in the 60's, which probably accounts for his attraction to B. Dylan (or does his attraction t BD account for his style?). I often avoid his posts because I haven't the time to dig out my old Dylan LPs and read the backs for clues to what Gary is trying to say. Maybe TT is not the right forum for him to exercise his highly creative talents. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary is, at present and IMO, one of the more perceptive, creative, literary, imaginative writers on TT. Others trail far behind. You've never understood him or, what he's doing. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met
Lance, Perhaps, then, it is time that Dave and I take this discussion off line. I agree it has become tiresome, and must be a pain for the bulk of TT to wade through. I will respond to his latest post offline and suggest we keep it there. Thanks for speaking up. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 14:43:28 -0400 Let's just assume that you are correct in your assumption is quite correct concerning the 'dreaded' DaveH (I actually don't believe you are), can't you just overlook it and, move on? My goodness Perry, it's turning into the mountain/molehill thingy. - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 28, 2005 14:35 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Lance, Believe me, I am trying to bring this thing to a close as quickly as I can. I have already dispensed with our first point of contention, and am working on the second. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 13:44:56 -0400 CPL:Paallessseee leave off this harangue! Can't you get past this? Do we need to be looking for another moderator? I ain't got a 'snowball's chance' but maybe it'd be me. Yikes! - Original Message - From: Dave To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 28, 2005 13:40 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, The LIE I accused you of was making me out to be against mormons posting on TT, DAVEH: ??? Huh? What are you talking about, Perry? when I have NEVER been against that. I felt that you intentionally twisted it around, and made it appear as though I objected to your posting mormon doctrine DAVEH: Where did you get that notion, Perry? Either my memory is much worse than I expected, or you are making this stuff up. AndI think the latter is more likely in this case. when I DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE. DAVEH: Nor have I ever said that I think you objected to me teaching Mormonism, or anything remotely similar. What have you been smokin', Perry??? :-) If you are seriously accusing me of suchdig out the quote that supports your supposition. Until then, please quit whining and misconstruing what I've posted. For a guy who has accused me of being deceitful, and twisting what you've saidyou seem to be creating a mistruth in the way you've twisted this matter, Perry. Go back and read my posts that you consider at fault and see if you didn't misinterpret what I posted. If I am wrong...then post it for everybody to seeand I'll apologize. If you don't find any incriminating evidence, then do you think you might owe me an apology? Or..should we just accept your silence as an admission of wrongly accusing me of posting something I didn't say? I only objected to your teaching (from my perspective) and then denying it. The only thing left to do is for you to acknowledge that you understand that I never objected to your posting motmon doctrine DAVEH: ??? Why should I have to acknowledge such, when I've never posted anything that inferred that you objected to me posting Mormon doctrine! or else to provide evidence to the contrary, and that the only thing I ever objected to (from my perspective) was your denial of your teaching mormon doctrine. DAVEH: And for that, you called me deceitful, did you not? Perry From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:31:30 -0700 Dave, I respect your position, and I beleive that we may have settled our first point of contention. While you may not consider some of your responses to be teaching mormonism, I most whole-heartedly believe that some of it is. When you answer questions that are asked, and even when you give mormon references to support it, I do not think of that as teaching per se. However, when you ask a Christian what he/she believes, and he/she tells you, and THEN you counter and rebut it with mormon doctrine and references, which you have done in the past, then you ARE teaching mormon doctrine, no marter how subtlekly you do it. So, I can live
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: farewell to TT -- long but most real answer
Lance, thanks for posting this very candid and informative post. It is almost always a good exercise to see oneself as others see you. From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] Fw: farewell to TT -- long but most real answer Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 05:27:13 -0400 - Original Message - From: Debbie Sawczak To: Lance Muir Sent: May 26, 2005 14:42 Subject: farewell to TT -- long but most real answer Lance, this may be too long to post on TT. I'll let you be the judge. I'm writing as if to you--you asked the question, and besides, that keeps me more open and thinking less about how others will respond. Do what you like with it. Why did I leave? David is partly right about the time factor, but that springs from the more important issue, which is the quality of communication that happens on TT; I am serious about communication (maybe too serious!), so I put a lot of time and thought and energy into reading the messages and composing readable replies. As it became harder and harder to understand and be understood, that investment only increased, and with it my anxiety about the result, since it usually turned out badly. It just wasn't worth it. Reducing the number of messages would only get at the symptom, not the cause. When I started on TT the first time, back in December or January or whenever it was, I took everybody at face value and expected and practised normal communication. I actually learned stuff from some people, got new ideas from them. It wasn't long, though, till it became clear to me that some key participants were not up for learning anything at all. They were, at best, only into correcting people. At their worst, they did not read posts lovingly (putting things in the best light, trusting the intent, looking for points of commonality). They also did not read them properly (as wholes, following the thread of argument, looking for the main thrust, interpreting parts in the light of the whole). Instead they tended to pick messages to bits and pounce on individual words or predicates that raised flags for them. This was generally done in a tone of superior spirituality, superior allegiance to God and Scripture. There was never any good way to respond to this. What can you say in return when someone does this, since every subsequent attempt to address their response only leads to more of the same? Here was something I can only describe as deafness, hardness. With other people outside TT--for example, you and I when we misunderstand each other--we try again. There is good will. It gets cleared up. Or we find the places where we agree and go on from there. But on TT, people just dug in deeper and deeper. Ironically, people ended up going to ridiculous extremes of untenability to defend something they had said. The same old arguments kept coming up again and again, with zero change in anybody's position. That was a bore. We were in an argumentative rut, so that if somebody posted something that wasn't related to one of the polarizing issues, it was ignored, or quickly and superficially dispatched, or twisted into something that did relate to one of the polarizing issues. Meanwhile on the polarizing issues there was just mindless mouthing going on, for the most part. If Camp A Member said something, it had to be right. If Camp B Member said something, it had to be wrong. There were only rare exceptions to this. There was a lot of sarcasm. From childhood I have been unable to tolerate sarcasm. Sarcasm when it is obvious you are joking is one thing (even though it's a weak form of humour), but then there's sarcasm intended to make the other person appear absurd or evil so you can beat them unfairly. It is not real communication and I do not allow it in my family. For me it is the end of the conversation, which is why I stopped responding to certain TT people altogether. Accusation, recrimination, smearing, insulting, and condemning were common too, and produced anger in me, not all of it righteous. This anger generally turned to sorrow. I would seek refreshment elsewhere (in prayer--sometimes confessing and receiving forgiveness for my anger--in Scripture, in other parts of the Christian community, etc.), and try again, but this cycle got to be wearing, and the people doing these things seemed not to notice or care that they were. It was discouraging. When I left the first time it was with the idea of probably returning refreshed at some point, and I did. That might still happen this time, too, but if it does it will take longer. I think I have to grow more, be wiser and stronger and braver, before I can be of use on TT as it is. Even those who didn't deal in this kind of thing were mostly not prepared to entertain any idea they didn't already believe. The whole point of the exercise seemed to be to prove you were right, rather than simply
[TruthTalk] Izzy's J smiley.
No need to quit that because a few of our mail readers can't display it. Express yourself. We will just think the message is from Jesus. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:03:36 -0500 Frequently. Guess I'll have to quit that. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 9:15 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met Izzy, I also receive a post from you occasionaly that has only a large J in along left hand edge. Do you sometimes post a message with only a smiley face in it? Perry From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:53:26 -0500 PS JD, What do you mean by the incoming mail line? Do you mean the From: line at the beginning of the message below? What Terry's problem was is that whenever I typed a smiley face in hypertext, his computer did not recognize that character set and instead translated it into the letter J on his end. No one else, apparently, had that problem except for Terry. (How old is your computer program Terry?) Perhaps the update my husband did tonight will help Terry with that problem. Here is a smiley face just for you Terry: :-) Does it look like a J? If nothing else helps I can just use plain text, but how very BORING! I hope that is not necessary. I like to change fonts and colors, and make smiley faces! Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 7:41 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Sorry that you are having problems with emails from me. It sound like there is a tilde (~) sign appearing in the email somewhere that should not be there. I have asked my husband about this. We run several threat filters including Norton Internet Security 2005 and the new Microsoft AntiSpyware. These programs are continuously updated with new threat definitions. In addition to scanning all incoming and outgoing emails, full system scans are automatically performed on a weekly basis. So far, we cannot detect any threats (such as Trojan horses) that might be transferred to you via email. My husband also just ran a detect and repair reconfiguration of our Microsoft Office 2003 installation in case this is causing some type of non-standard characters to be included in my emails (such as smiley faces) that your computer does not have a character set to resolve into a recognizable character. This problem can occur when hypertext is used by the sender (e.g., to reply in colored font types) but the recipient computer does not have a similar font installed causing the incoming message to appear garbled. This is why some email lists stipulate that users communicate in plain text only. Please let me know f the problem continues. It would also be helpful to see an example of the way the message appears on your end (e.g., printed in PDF format). Incidentally, For a Trojan horse to spread, you must, invite these programs onto your computers--for example, by opening an email attachment or downloading and running a file from the Internet. (see http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nav.nsf/docid/1999041209131106). Unless you opened an attachment that I sent with an email to Truth Talk, you could not have acquired a Trojan Horse from one of my emails. Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 3:20 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx RE: [TruthTalk] Fond http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx Farewells- Salvation Often, when you , Izzy, address me, there is a little curly something to the left side on the incoming mail line. Your's is the only one that has this marking. When it appears, and when I try to open your mail, it takes soemthimes 3 or 4 minutes to download and when I try to respond, it freezes up my machine. The Tojan Horse that ruined my machine several months ago -- recently fixed - came in on the back of one of your email. I am wondering if you have some sort of virus or something
Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Lance, I am not angry at them. I am pained by their inability to reason outside of Joseph Smith. They do not think for themselves at all. When it comes to spiritual things, they cling to Smithism like they are clinging to a sinking life raft in a storm. By the way, I DO beleive that the clinging thing is great...but you have to be clinging to something real, something that holds water, floats. Anything I post to the mormons that may appear angry stems from my frustration of trying to penetrate the veil erected by Satan around these people. I have no ax to grind with them personally. If I did not care for them I would not go to the effort to try to reach them. It pains me that such wonderful and dedicated people are being led to the slaughter by Satan and are totally oblivious to that fact. The opposite of love is not hate. The opposite of love is indifference. If I did not love them, I would be totally indifferent toward them. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 09:02:54 -0400 Charles:Are you angrier at the Mormons than God is? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 27, 2005 08:57 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Dave, do you sometimes teach mormon doctrine on TT? From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pery wrote: Are you on TT to teach mormon doctrine? DAVEH: No, Perryas I've explained before, that was not what motivated me to join TT, nor is it the reason I remain. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Lance, I agree with you. We all want to be in truth, and cling dearly to and defend that which we believe to be true. I typically have not spent my time trying to penetrate 'that'. My reason is that, first of all, I consider most of those issues to be in house debates. Christians reasoning with Christians about non-critical (in most cases) issues. However, if I saw a brother that I felt was making a mistake that was critical to his/her salvation, I would have to appeal to him and to try to bring him to the light of scrpture. Second, and perhaps more important in my instance, is that I feel drawn and compelled to appeal to mormons to examine their own faith in light of Biblical facts; something very few are willing to do in an honest and intellectual manner. Is this the Holy Spirit drawing me to this purpose? While I cannot positively say that it is (I have heard no voices, nor have I seen any hands writing walls), I have to believe that it is because I pray to God to be shown the truth. I pray that if this compulsion to reach out to momons is of Him that it persist, and that if it is not that he remove it. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perry: There are some, you and I among them, on TT who similarly 'cling' to that which is simply not so concerning the nature of God and His Gospel. Would you not agree? Does one find penetrating 'that' any easier? Lance - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 27, 2005 09:25 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Lance, I am not angry at them. I am pained by their inability to reason outside of Joseph Smith. They do not think for themselves at all. When it comes to spiritual things, they cling to Smithism like they are clinging to a sinking life raft in a storm. By the way, I DO beleive that the clinging thing is great...but you have to be clinging to something real, something that holds water, floats. Anything I post to the mormons that may appear angry stems from my frustration of trying to penetrate the veil erected by Satan around these people. I have no ax to grind with them personally. If I did not care for them I would not go to the effort to try to reach them. It pains me that such wonderful and dedicated people are being led to the slaughter by Satan and are totally oblivious to that fact. The opposite of love is not hate. The opposite of love is indifference. If I did not love them, I would be totally indifferent toward them. Perry From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 09:02:54 -0400 Charles:Are you angrier at the Mormons than God is? - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 27, 2005 08:57 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Dave, do you sometimes teach mormon doctrine on TT? From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pery wrote: Are you on TT to teach mormon doctrine? DAVEH: No, Perryas I've explained before, that was not what motivated me to join TT, nor is it the reason I remain. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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
Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Dave, I respect your position, and I beleive that we may have settled our first point of contention. While you may not consider some of your responses to be teaching mormonism, I most whole-heartedly believe that some of it is. When you answer questions that are asked, and even when you give mormon references to support it, I do not think of that as teaching per se. However, when you ask a Christian what he/she believes, and he/she tells you, and THEN you counter and rebut it with mormon doctrine and references, which you have done in the past, then you ARE teaching mormon doctrine, no marter how subtlekly you do it. So, I can live with that fact that you DO NOT consider that teaching, which allows you to say that you are NOT teaching mormon doctrine, but I will adhere to my belief that you ARE teaching mormon doctrine when you do that. I will set out to resolve our second point of contention in my next post. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:07:02 -0700 DAVEH: If you want to define teaching as responding to questions about my beliefs, then you might have a point, Perry. I view it a bit differently though. To be a teacher, one needs students. For the most part, I don't view TTers as being students wanting to learn. Witness Debbie's comments today From my LDS perspective, Teachers are to teach the gospel by using the Word of God. As you know, for the most partI have refrained from posting latter-day passages on TT, excepting in specific cases when asked to do so or it was appropriate for the discussion. As a courtesy to TTers, I've tried to focus my discussions within the confines of the Bible.which in effect composes less than half of what I believe to be Canon of Scripture. Can I teach Mormonism while ignoring much of what God has said? Not in my opinion. If I wanted to teach Mormonism, you'd be seeing a lot of references to our Standard Works instead of just Biblical quotes. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, do you sometimes teach mormon doctrine on TT? From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pery wrote: Are you on TT to teach mormon doctrine? DAVEH: No, Perryas I've explained before, that was not what motivated me to join TT, nor is it the reason I remain. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Dave, Our second point of contention is that I feel you have repeatedly maligned me by misrepresenting my position with respect to my belief that you indeed are teaching mormon doctrine on TT. I have repeatedly said that I believe TT to be an open forum, and that you, as well as any other member, is free to post their opinons, even if it is teaching their religion. I have NEVER objected to you teaching mormonism on TT, even though you choose not to interpret any of your responses as teaching. The ONLY thing that I have objected to is the fact that you say you are not on TT to teach mormon doctrine, but you frequently engage in that vary practice (from my perspective). But, now that we have resolved that issue, and AGREED TO DISAGREE, that is no longer an issue with me. The LIE I accused you of was making me out to be against mormons posting on TT, when I have NEVER been against that. I felt that you intentionally twisted it around, and made it appear as though I objected to your posting mormon doctrine when I DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE. I only objected to your teaching (from my perspective) and then denying it. The only thing left to do is for you to acknowledge that you understand that I never objected to your posting motmon doctrine or else to provide evidence to the contrary, and that the only thing I ever objected to (from my perspective) was your denial of your teaching mormon doctrine. Perry From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:31:30 -0700 Dave, I respect your position, and I beleive that we may have settled our first point of contention. While you may not consider some of your responses to be teaching mormonism, I most whole-heartedly believe that some of it is. When you answer questions that are asked, and even when you give mormon references to support it, I do not think of that as teaching per se. However, when you ask a Christian what he/she believes, and he/she tells you, and THEN you counter and rebut it with mormon doctrine and references, which you have done in the past, then you ARE teaching mormon doctrine, no marter how subtlekly you do it. So, I can live with that fact that you DO NOT consider that teaching, which allows you to say that you are NOT teaching mormon doctrine, but I will adhere to my belief that you ARE teaching mormon doctrine when you do that. I will set out to resolve our second point of contention in my next post. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:07:02 -0700 DAVEH: If you want to define teaching as responding to questions about my beliefs, then you might have a point, Perry. I view it a bit differently though. To be a teacher, one needs students. For the most part, I don't view TTers as being students wanting to learn. Witness Debbie's comments today From my LDS perspective, Teachers are to teach the gospel by using the Word of God. As you know, for the most partI have refrained from posting latter-day passages on TT, excepting in specific cases when asked to do so or it was appropriate for the discussion. As a courtesy to TTers, I've tried to focus my discussions within the confines of the Bible.which in effect composes less than half of what I believe to be Canon of Scripture. Can I teach Mormonism while ignoring much of what God has said? Not in my opinion. If I wanted to teach Mormonism, you'd be seeing a lot of references to our Standard Works instead of just Biblical quotes. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, do you sometimes teach mormon doctrine on TT? From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pery wrote: Are you on TT to teach mormon doctrine? DAVEH: No, Perryas I've explained before, that was not what motivated me to join TT, nor is it the reason I remain. -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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
Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic ...
Blaine, it seems that 99 44/100 % of the DC was revealed to JS. Did he have a general constituency that voted on whether or not what he said was was revealed to him was truly revelation from god? How about his visions. Was there a vote on those, too? Do you think Isaiah or Daniel or Exekiel had people that voted on their prophecies to see if they were really from God? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic ... Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 20:38:18 EDT In a message dated 5/26/2005 2:27:22 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What can you tell me of the 1978 (?) 'revelation' concerning the increased status of blacks in your church? BLAINE: The revelation to extend Priesthood to worthy Black males appears in the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration --2. It was received as a revelation by then President Spencer W. Kimball, and later sustained unanimously by the Quorum of the Twelve and eventually by all Church General Authorities. It was presented in General Conference by President Nathan Tanner on September 30, 1978. At the bottom of the revelation as it is written in the DC, it reads: Recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, Seer and Revelator, and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it is proposed that we as a constituent assembly accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord. All in favor please signify by raising your right hand. Any opposed by the same sign. The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous in the affirmative. I repeat--NO revelation is accepted as official doctrine without this vote by the general constituency of the Church. That has never happened with the Adam-God Theory/Doctrine, contrary to the efforts of many anti-Mormons to r ationalize it as a doctrine of the Mormon Church. Noone believes it that I know of, and I doubt many ever did. If Brigham proposed it as a doctrine to the General Authorities of his time, apparently they did not accept it. One thing is for certain, it was never even proposed as an official doctrine to the general membership for a sustaining vote. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: May 25, 2005 22:49 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of T... In a message dated 5/25/2005 6:03:14 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: The President of the Church is the only man on earth authorized by God to go beyond or add to the scriptures Teachings of the Living Prophets P18 published CJCLDS 1982 Blaine: Even the President/prophet must have a sustaining vote for new doctrines he espouses to be accepted--As I said, the sustaining of the Adam-God doctrine as official never happened. In several other cases, a sustaining vote did happen, as for instance, the doctrine that little children who die before reaching the age of accountability inherit the Kingdom of God. This doctrine now appears in the DC, for the simple reason it was voted upon and sustained. MANY so-called doctrines of the LDS Church do not have this status. Another of these is the doctrine that men may become Gods and populate other worlds. Although it is widely believed, it is not in any standard work, nor has it been sustained as an official doctrine by the general membership. As I said, Kevin, Elvis died--trying to prove he is still alive is a lost cause, and only makes sense if you have some psycho/emotional investment in believing he lives on. :) -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: So, Perrydo you still believe I am lying about this, or do you view it as a difference of definition? I have never said that you were lying about this. In my statement about our second point of contention I said you were lying. That is covered in another post. What I did say is that you are being disingenuous in that you (from my perspective) say you do not teach, but you do. I believe that you have crafted a definition for teaching that excludes your particular style of teaching. So, to answer your question, yes, we disagree on the definition of teaching relative to what you are actually doing when you present mormon doctrine unsolicited. I call it teaching, you do not. BTW.Roughly how many times do you think I've quoted LDS Scripture, excluding the Bible? I have no idea. Maybe none, maybe some. That is not the point. The point is teaching mormon doctrine when you say you aren't. You can do that without ever referencing a single mormon text. Deepak Chopra teaches hinduism without ever referencing any hindu texts. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, I respect your position, and I beleive that we may have settled our first point of contention. While you may not consider some of your responses to be teaching mormonism, I most whole-heartedly believe that some of it is. When you answer questions that are asked, and even when you give mormon references to support it, I do not think of that as teaching per se. However, when you ask a Christian what he/she believes, and he/she tells you, and THEN you counter and rebut it with mormon doctrine and references, which you have done in the past, then you ARE teaching mormon doctrine, no marter how subtlekly you do it. So, I can live with that fact that you DO NOT consider that teaching, which allows you to say that you are NOT teaching mormon doctrine, but I will adhere to my belief that you ARE teaching mormon doctrine when you do that. I will set out to resolve our second point of contention in my next post. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teac
Are you on TT to teach mormon doctrine? From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 23:41:09 -0700 Charles Perry Locke wrote: David, and Dave, Dave states that he is not here [on TT] to learn the truth...he is here to learn what protestants think, and why. While not part of his pat statement about why he is on TT, he also said that he is not here tio convert anyone to mormonism or to teach mormonism. I believe that Dave is genuine about his stated reasons for being here. Most of the time, Dave answers questions about his faith when asked, and that presents no problem at all. Sometimes Dave will ask someone what protestants believe. They will answer him honestly and forthrightly. Dave will then begin to DEBATE what they believe by interject unsolicited mormon doctrine, sometimes socratically. Again, I have no problems with his doing this. However, when I say, Dave, you have said that you are not here to teach mormon doctrine, which is what he is doing when he introduces mormon doctrine in rebuttal to a question he has asked to learn what protestants think, he denies it. Now, he may say that he is not here to teach mormon doctrine, and that may indeed not by why he is here. But, when confronted with the fact that he said he is not here to TEACH mormon doctrine but is, in fact TEACHING mormon doctrine, I have a problem with that. To me it is not being genuine. All Dave has to do is admit that at times he teaches mormon doctrine on TT. It is the fact that he sometimes teaches mormon doctrine, but denies that he does so, that I am complaining about. Furthermore, he has taken my comlpaint and TWISTED it to mean that I object to his teaching mormon doctrine. That has never been my argument. It is a lie for him to twist it that way. He can teach ALL the mormon doctrine he wishes...I would just like for him to stop denying it and admit that is what he is doing. Case in point. Blaine makes no qualms about proudly presenting his mormon beliefs, and that has NEVER bothered me...because BLAINE NEVER MADE THE STATEMENT THAT HE IS NOT TEACHING MORMON DOCTRINE on TT. DAVEH: Nor have I made such a statement, Perry. Now look who's twisting the truth Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met
Izzy, I also receive a post from you occasionaly that has only a large J in along left hand edge. Do you sometimes post a message with only a smiley face in it? Perry From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:53:26 -0500 PS JD, What do you mean by the incoming mail line? Do you mean the From: line at the beginning of the message below? What Terry's problem was is that whenever I typed a smiley face in hypertext, his computer did not recognize that character set and instead translated it into the letter J on his end. No one else, apparently, had that problem except for Terry. (How old is your computer program Terry?) Perhaps the update my husband did tonight will help Terry with that problem. Here is a smiley face just for you Terry: :-) Does it look like a J? If nothing else helps I can just use plain text, but how very BORING! I hope that is not necessary. I like to change fonts and colors, and make smiley faces! Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 7:41 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Sorry that you are having problems with emails from me. It sound like there is a tilde (~) sign appearing in the email somewhere that should not be there. I have asked my husband about this. We run several threat filters including Norton Internet Security 2005 and the new Microsoft AntiSpyware. These programs are continuously updated with new threat definitions. In addition to scanning all incoming and outgoing emails, full system scans are automatically performed on a weekly basis. So far, we cannot detect any threats (such as Trojan horses) that might be transferred to you via email. My husband also just ran a detect and repair reconfiguration of our Microsoft Office 2003 installation in case this is causing some type of non-standard characters to be included in my emails (such as smiley faces) that your computer does not have a character set to resolve into a recognizable character. This problem can occur when hypertext is used by the sender (e.g., to reply in colored font types) but the recipient computer does not have a similar font installed causing the incoming message to appear garbled. This is why some email lists stipulate that users communicate in plain text only. Please let me know f the problem continues. It would also be helpful to see an example of the way the message appears on your end (e.g., printed in PDF format). Incidentally, For a Trojan horse to spread, you must, invite these programs onto your computers--for example, by opening an email attachment or downloading and running a file from the Internet. (see http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nav.nsf/docid/1999041209131106). Unless you opened an attachment that I sent with an email to Truth Talk, you could not have acquired a Trojan Horse from one of my emails. Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 3:20 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx RE: [TruthTalk] Fond http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx Farewells- Salvation Often, when you , Izzy, address me, there is a little curly something to the left side on the incoming mail line. Your's is the only one that has this marking. When it appears, and when I try to open your mail, it takes soemthimes 3 or 4 minutes to download and when I try to respond, it freezes up my machine. The Tojan Horse that ruined my machine several months ago -- recently fixed - came in on the back of one of your email. I am wondering if you have some sort of virus or something. This is serious. And I am not trying to insult. When I see that little curly -- from now on I will delete. I am not trying to avoid you, but I can't afford to open those emails. Does anyone know what is going on in this case? I copied the line above but it did not capture the curly. It is some kind of demon, I am sure. JD -- 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
RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met
J --- this is how it looks to me...the letter j. From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 20:53:26 -0500 PS JD, What do you mean by the incoming mail line? Do you mean the From: line at the beginning of the message below? What Terry's problem was is that whenever I typed a smiley face in hypertext, his computer did not recognize that character set and instead translated it into the letter J on his end. No one else, apparently, had that problem except for Terry. (How old is your computer program Terry?) Perhaps the update my husband did tonight will help Terry with that problem. Here is a smiley face just for you Terry: :-) Does it look like a J? If nothing else helps I can just use plain text, but how very BORING! I hope that is not necessary. I like to change fonts and colors, and make smiley faces! Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 7:41 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Sorry that you are having problems with emails from me. It sound like there is a tilde (~) sign appearing in the email somewhere that should not be there. I have asked my husband about this. We run several threat filters including Norton Internet Security 2005 and the new Microsoft AntiSpyware. These programs are continuously updated with new threat definitions. In addition to scanning all incoming and outgoing emails, full system scans are automatically performed on a weekly basis. So far, we cannot detect any threats (such as Trojan horses) that might be transferred to you via email. My husband also just ran a detect and repair reconfiguration of our Microsoft Office 2003 installation in case this is causing some type of non-standard characters to be included in my emails (such as smiley faces) that your computer does not have a character set to resolve into a recognizable character. This problem can occur when hypertext is used by the sender (e.g., to reply in colored font types) but the recipient computer does not have a similar font installed causing the incoming message to appear garbled. This is why some email lists stipulate that users communicate in plain text only. Please let me know f the problem continues. It would also be helpful to see an example of the way the message appears on your end (e.g., printed in PDF format). Incidentally, For a Trojan horse to spread, you must, invite these programs onto your computers--for example, by opening an email attachment or downloading and running a file from the Internet. (see http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nav.nsf/docid/1999041209131106). Unless you opened an attachment that I sent with an email to Truth Talk, you could not have acquired a Trojan Horse from one of my emails. Izzy _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 3:20 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif http://m02.webmail.aol.com/images/space.gif [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx RE: [TruthTalk] Fond http://m02.webmail.aol.com/MessageList.aspx Farewells- Salvation Often, when you , Izzy, address me, there is a little curly something to the left side on the incoming mail line. Your's is the only one that has this marking. When it appears, and when I try to open your mail, it takes soemthimes 3 or 4 minutes to download and when I try to respond, it freezes up my machine. The Tojan Horse that ruined my machine several months ago -- recently fixed - came in on the back of one of your email. I am wondering if you have some sort of virus or something. This is serious. And I am not trying to insult. When I see that little curly -- from now on I will delete. I am not trying to avoid you, but I can't afford to open those emails. Does anyone know what is going on in this case? I copied the line above but it did not capture the curly. It is some kind of demon, I am sure. JD -- 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 Kingdom
John, I would really like to read some more of your thoughts and the results of your research on the Kingdom, if you don't mind sharing it with us. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Met Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 23:38:12 -0400 A few interesting facts kingdom is nearly always used of the physical kingdom(s) in the O.T. scriptures. In the new testamnt, it occurs 137 times; 100 of those times used by Christ. Kingdom of heaven, of God, kingdom, It is almost always physical in the Old -- nearly always spiritual in the New/ Faather is used twice in the Old in reference to God; 256 times in the New !!! children of Israel in the Old children of God in the new. Sonship is a NT concept as well. God as a personal God is a NT concept -- different from the Old. I am doing a study on the kingdom, for myself after Lance gave encouragement for the study. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, I don't mind if you choose not to answer, but no need to whine about it. If you and I are through discussing things on TT, then so be it. You said if I want to know what mormons believe, then I sould ask a mormon. I did that, but he has no answer for me. Who should I turn to for the truth about mormonism? The bible? Kevin? The internet? All three of those say it is a false religion. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 23:29:27 -0700 DAVEH: For what reason should I explain why/where you are wrong about my beliefs, Perry. I don't mind explaining to those who really want to know what I believe, but in your case it seems your intention is to denigrate my beliefs. You've stated that your mission (so to speak) is to discredit Mormonism.in effect meeting the definition of an anti-Mormon. So for what reason would you want to query me about Mormonism, if it is not to denigrate that in which I believe? Along with that, you continue to disbelieve my stated reason for joining TT years ago. You can believe as you wish, Perrybut if you effectively want to post that I am lying about my reasons for being here, then I see no particular reason to hand you the knife with which you intend to use to carve up my faith. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Actually, the problem I have is not with Dave stating mormon beliefs, especially when asked. It is his teaching mormon doctrines, but denying that he is doing so. I am for openest...but honesty, too. Dave, If I am somewhat close, can you tell me the part I am wrong about? You always say if I want to know what mormons believe, ask a mormon... Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 06:38:17 -0700 Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, Christians consider angels and humans to be two distinct types of created beings. DAVEH: Yes, I understand that. Yet, it seems Paul is telling us that it is difficult (if not impossible) to tell us (mortals) apart from angels. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't mormons consider angels to be either pre-mortal or post-mortal humans? For example, don't mormons consider Michael (the archangel) also to have been a human at one point...was it Adam? Hasn't he also been considered to be the mormon god the father? So, basically, one being can be spirit, angel, human, or god at various times. Am I right on this? DAVEH: You are somewhat close. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
David, Dave is smarter than you are giving him credit for being. He knows what he is doing. He is playing a word game. I have no problem with him pushing his mormon views into the discussions here...I just want him to acknowledge that is what he is doing. He is intentionally misinterpreting this as my not wanting him to espouse mormonism on the forum. That is NOT my goal. My goal is to get him to own his actions. To say he is NOT pushing mormonism, then push it anyway is disengenuous. Then, to turn it around as though I do not welcome his mormon views is a lie. Perry From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 09:09:31 -0400 DaveH wrote: Apparently many TTers want me to teach LDS theology on TT, yet some wish to criticize me for complying with their wishes. Seems like a no win situation, eh Lance. Let me clarify yet again what TruthTalk is all about and Dave Hansen's situation in regards to this forum. TruthTalk is meant to be a forum where people from different religions and different backgrounds can share their beliefs and teachings with the rest of us. We, in turn, can judge what they teach and examine it. We can raise objections or questions concerning what is being said. The goal is learning and getting a better undertanding of both what we believe and what others believe. Dave Hansen is LDS Mormon and he has as much right here as anybody else to teach or post his views. In like manner, his teachings will be examined and questioned by others. This is the nature of the forum. I would not say that it is a no win situation just because a person's viewpoint is criticized in this forum. If you share your views, expect some examination and perhaps criticism if someone thinks that the viewpoint deserves such. Now in regards to the question of why DaveH is here. I have read both Dave and Perry's exchange on this, and personally I find Dave's reasons for being here consistent. He has an interest in knowing what Protestants believe and why. He interacts with us, and in doing so, is questioned about his beliefs. He responds to such questions in a way that he is comfortable. Often the exchange hits a dead end, and some TruthTalk members get frustrated with that (me included), but I don't think that means that his reasons for being here are not being stated properly. Some have interpreted him to be implying that he wants to become a Protestant if he hears good answers for what Protestants believe, but I have never understood him that way. He is simply curious and has an academic interest in what motivates us and what makes us who we are. I'm sure Christians not affiliated with a major institution seems very strange to him. His life is centered around an institution of authority. That is the kind of structure he is use to and is comfortable with. Many of us reject such institutions. I think Dave is still trying to understand why and how this is. I suspect it would be easier for him to understand us if we were all Roman Catholic. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, I wanted to add that, although you are whining about answerig my question, and doing everything except answering it, it has served it's secondary purpose, and that is to expose and stimulate discussion on the non-biblical and heretical aspects of mormon beliefs. In the meantime, my question has also been answered to my satisfaction by Kevin. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 23:29:27 -0700 DAVEH: For what reason should I explain why/where you are wrong about my beliefs, Perry. I don't mind explaining to those who really want to know what I believe, but in your case it seems your intention is to denigrate my beliefs. You've stated that your mission (so to speak) is to discredit Mormonism.in effect meeting the definition of an anti-Mormon. So for what reason would you want to query me about Mormonism, if it is not to denigrate that in which I believe? Along with that, you continue to disbelieve my stated reason for joining TT years ago. You can believe as you wish, Perrybut if you effectively want to post that I am lying about my reasons for being here, then I see no particular reason to hand you the knife with which you intend to use to carve up my faith. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Actually, the problem I have is not with Dave stating mormon beliefs, especially when asked. It is his teaching mormon doctrines, but denying that he is doing so. I am for openest...but honesty, too. Dave, If I am somewhat close, can you tell me the part I am wrong about? You always say if I want to know what mormons believe, ask a mormon... Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 06:38:17 -0700 Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, Christians consider angels and humans to be two distinct types of created beings. DAVEH: Yes, I understand that. Yet, it seems Paul is telling us that it is difficult (if not impossible) to tell us (mortals) apart from angels. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't mormons consider angels to be either pre-mortal or post-mortal humans? For example, don't mormons consider Michael (the archangel) also to have been a human at one point...was it Adam? Hasn't he also been considered to be the mormon god the father? So, basically, one being can be spirit, angel, human, or god at various times. Am I right on this? DAVEH: You are somewhat close. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
David, and Dave, Dave states that he is not here [on TT] to learn the truth...he is here to learn what protestants think, and why. While not part of his pat statement about why he is on TT, he also said that he is not here tio convert anyone to mormonism or to teach mormonism. I believe that Dave is genuine about his stated reasons for being here. Most of the time, Dave answers questions about his faith when asked, and that presents no problem at all. Sometimes Dave will ask someone what protestants believe. They will answer him honestly and forthrightly. Dave will then begin to DEBATE what they believe by interject unsolicited mormon doctrine, sometimes socratically. Again, I have no problems with his doing this. However, when I say, Dave, you have said that you are not here to teach mormon doctrine, which is what he is doing when he introduces mormon doctrine in rebuttal to a question he has asked to learn what protestants think, he denies it. Now, he may say that he is not here to teach mormon doctrine, and that may indeed not by why he is here. But, when confronted with the fact that he said he is not here to TEACH mormon doctrine but is, in fact TEACHING mormon doctrine, I have a problem with that. To me it is not being genuine. All Dave has to do is admit that at times he teaches mormon doctrine on TT. It is the fact that he sometimes teaches mormon doctrine, but denies that he does so, that I am complaining about. Furthermore, he has taken my comlpaint and TWISTED it to mean that I object to his teaching mormon doctrine. That has never been my argument. It is a lie for him to twist it that way. He can teach ALL the mormon doctrine he wishes...I would just like for him to stop denying it and admit that is what he is doing. Case in point. Blaine makes no qualms about proudly presenting his mormon beliefs, and that has NEVER bothered me...because BLAINE NEVER MADE THE STATEMENT THAT HE IS NOT TEACHING MORMON DOCTRINE on TT. Perry From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 10:51:42 -0400 Dave Hansen wrote: To me it remains a no win situation when it is implied that I am a liar for responding to questions about my beliefs. From my perspective, if a member implies you are a liar for responding to questions about your belief, that member is mistaken. You have made your case, and even if the person you have made your case with does not accept your arguments, don't presume that the rest of us don't. It seems to me that you don't want to answer Perry until he acknowledges that you are being honest about your motivations for being here. I would encourge Perry to acknowledge this, but even if he disagrees with both you and me, wouldn't it be ok to go ahead and answer him and still stick by your position of honesty? One question you might answer that could help resolve this with Perry is, do you ever have any thoughts of possibly converting any of us to Mormonism? You ought to understand that evangelism is important to many evangelicals. Most non-Mormons on this list probably hope to influence you away from Mormonism, so it is natural for them to assume that you hope to move some of us toward accepting Mormonism. Can you be honest about your feelings concerning this with us, or do you never think about your influence upon us in regards to Mormonism? I personally suspect this might be a secondary reason you have for being here, and acknowledging such might help Perry relate to you better. On the other hand, if moving us toward Mormonism really never enters your mind, that would be interesting for us to know. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, Christians consider angels and humans to be two distinct types of created beings. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't mormons consider angels to be either pre-mortal or post-mortal humans? For example, don't mormons consider Michael (the archangel) also to have been a human at one point...was it Adam? Hasn't he also been considered to be the mormon god the father? So, basically, one being can be spirit, angel, human, or god at various times. Am I right on this? Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 22:14:44 -0700 DAVEH:Perhaps.Heb 13:1 ShieldsFamily wrote: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, If I am somewhat close, can you tell me the part I am wrong about? You always say if I want to know what mormons believe, ask a mormon... Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 06:38:17 -0700 Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, Christians consider angels and humans to be two distinct types of created beings. DAVEH: Yes, I understand that. Yet, it seems Paul is telling us that it is difficult (if not impossible) to tell us (mortals) apart from angels. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't mormons consider angels to be either pre-mortal or post-mortal humans? For example, don't mormons consider Michael (the archangel) also to have been a human at one point...was it Adam? Hasn't he also been considered to be the mormon god the father? So, basically, one being can be spirit, angel, human, or god at various times. Am I right on this? DAVEH: You are somewhat close. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Actually, the problem I have is not with Dave stating mormon beliefs, especially when asked. It is his teaching mormon doctrines, but denying that he is doing so. I am for openest...but honesty, too. From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 10:08:28 -0400 Write me privately then. I'd actually like to know beyond 'close'. If I convert I'll keep it a secret. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: May 24, 2005 09:55 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] mormon angels. was: Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT DAVEH: That would be an affront to Perry. Elaborating would be the equivalent of teaching LDS theology on TT, an activity Perry abhors. Lance Muir wrote: Could you not expand on 'somewhat close'? Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, Christians consider angels and humans to be two distinct types of created beings. DAVEH: Yes, I understand that. Yet, it seems Paul is telling us that it is difficult (if not impossible) to tell us (mortals) apart from angels. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't mormons consider angels to be either pre-mortal or post-mortal humans? For example, don't mormons consider Michael (the archangel) also to have been a human at one point...was it Adam? Hasn't he also been considered to be the mormon god the father? So, basically, one being can be spirit, angel, human, or god at various times. Am I right on this? DAVEH: You are somewhat close. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Blaine, I drank some punch like that one itme ;-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 22:18:43 EDT In a message dated 5/23/2005 11:15:18 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH:Perhaps.Heb 13:1 ShieldsFamily wrote: Has anyone on TT actually seen an angel? Izzy BLAINE: I have been very very busy lately, so have not even been reading most of the posts. Sorry if I have not answered some of your queries. In answer to your question, Izzy, I have to say NO! I have never seen an angel. BUT--about a year or so after my wife and I were married civally, we began taking a church-sponsored class to help us prepare for being sealed together in the Salt Lake Temple. On the evening that we finished the class, the teacher provided punch and cookies, and as we were sitting around drinking the punch and eating the cookies, in the teacher's basement, I suddenly became aware that a woman was standing directly in front of me. I could only sense her presence, so don't ask me how I knew it was a woman--I just knew that it was a her, not a him. She stood there for a moment, and it came through to me that she was one of my immediate ancestors, a woman born in Norway, who had been active in converting her husband and family to Mormonism, and that she was there to show her approval of what we were in process of doing. I said nothing, just sat there taking it all in. Later that same night, my wife asked me, Could you feel that there was an angel present in the room at the teacher's house tonight?I said YES! She was one of my relatives! I was amazed she had experienced the same thing, yet neither of us had spoken of it at the time. That is the closest I have ever come to seeing an angel, Izzy. -- 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] Are Jesus and Satan brothers?
I emailed Raymond to ask him when we would see him again on TT and I don't think he would mind me sharing wth all that he replied, I don't have time to keep up with all of the email. I also tired of re-answering questions, again and again, that I've already answered. I can understand his frustration! That is the nature of TT. Perry From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Are Jesus and Satan brothers? Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 05:27:15 -0700 (PDT) WHAT HAPPENED to RAYMOND?? He did not even say BYE. Bothoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Terry-- I took the time to explain to you what my Church teaches on this subject. Please take the time to explain what you believe on this subject. --Raymond Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bothoms wrote: Hi Terry Im glad to see that you are open-minded and willing to let me respond to these questions. If you dont mind, Id like to answer these questions one at a time. DO LATTER-DAY SAINTS BELIEVE THAT JESUS AND SATAN ARE OR WERE BROTHERS? To give a proper answer, this will take a bit of explanation. First, most non-LDS Christians believe in the pre-mortality of Jesus. We do also. We also believe that all who live on this earth, past and present, lived before with God in Heaven. We believe that God is literally the Father of our spirits. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? (Heb 12:9) Have we not all one father?... (Mal 2:10a) One God and Father of all... (Eph 4:6a) Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. (Eccl 12:7) Being children of God we were all brothers and sisters. Jesus, known as Jehovah in the OT, was our Fathers firstborn. And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. (Heb 1:6) In mortality, Jesus would be Gods Only Begotten. Jeremiah was informed that he lived before he was born. Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. (Jer 1:4-5) Our Father presented a plan to us. And the Lord God spake unto Moses, saying: The heavens, they are many, and they cannot be numbered unto man; but they are numbered unto me, for they are mine. And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works, neither to my words. For behold, this is my work and my gloryto bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. (Moses 1:38-40) While we were in the presence of God we walked by sight; now, our memories are taken away and we walk by faith. There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after. (Eccl 1:11) And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; and we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; and they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever. (Abr 4:24-26) Lucifer seeks power. For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne about the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most high. (Isa 14:13-14) A Savior is Chosen. And I, the Lord God, sake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name on mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, sayingBehold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor. But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto meFather, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever. Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;... (Moses 4:1-3) And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man:
[TruthTalk] Protestantism for Dummies
Can you beleive it? I saw Protestantism for Dummies in Barnes and Noble the other day. I sat down and read few sections...I wanted to know what they believe, too! Especially info about the 2nd Great Awakening. There was some major spiritual activity going on around that time. Many heretical sects sprung up during the early 1800s, and I am interested in what was going on at that time to cause that. Anyone have any knowledge about the spiritual atmosphere around the 2nd Great Awakening? Perry -- 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] TT Trivia
TT members, Did you know that TT has a photo page? Most of you probably do know that, but for those that do not, check it out at http://innglory.org. Then click on the Photos link, then List members. As I glanced through the pictures, and noticed a new picture or two since the last time I looked, being able to attach faces to the names gave me real appreciation for all of you. We often hide behind the anonymity of the itnernet, recognizable in name only, most likely posting and speaking differently than we would if we were face-to-face. But, when we attach a face to the name, it makes a world of difference. The name at the other end of the wire now becomes a human being. I have noticed a similar effect on the crowded freeways of Los Angeles. When I use only my turn signal to indicate that I wish to merge into another lane, fery few will open up to let me in. But when I open my window, and turn and look the other driver in the eye, and motion to get in, I have NEVER been refused. Demonstrable proof that the eyes are the window to the soul. I encourage everyone to do two things. First, go to the TT photo page and take a look at the members who have posted their pictures. Take a long look at each of them. Look a their eyes. Tell me if it does not make a difference in at least some small way. Second, if your picture is not on the page, consider forwarding one to David to be added. Let us get a good look at you. Let us begin to think of you in a more humane way, rather than as just a name at the end of the wire. One final note. When you look at the picture of David and his family, try to pick Christine out (it is not difficult). Then, click on her name and watch the video of her graduation. Perry -- 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, I notice that you often answer a question with another question. If you don't want to answer it, just say so. It is a direct question with a yes or no answer. But, if you have no answer that is okay, just say so. Here is my planned responses should you choose to answer the question: 1) if you say yes then I will ask you why you did not retain any of your godly powers, as jesus did, when you cam to earth and why you have to work to become a god all over again. 2) if you say no, then I will ask you why your brother jesus got to be a god before he became a man, but you didn't. Again, if you do not want to answer, just say so. I am just trying to figure out the statement you made that jesus was a god before coming to earth, and whether you were or were not, and why that is. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 22:15:03 -0700 DAVEH: Another leading question, Perry? Do you intend to criticize me again for answering your question??? Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, If you believe jesus was a god before he became a man, as you stated, and you are his brother, then were you a god before you became a a man? Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
DAVEH:I certainly don't have all the answers to each and every question you or Kevin might pose... Finally, reasonable answer. -- 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] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is exactly what you are doing. You may not be aware of the Socratic Method of teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now, as far as I am concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever you think is the truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use (within the gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you ar teaching LDS doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then doing it anyway. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700 Judy Taylor wrote: On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DAVEH: SureGod does look like a man, Kevin. If Jesus was the Son of man (Jn 3:13), then do you not think his Father in Heaven was a Holy Man? No; God is a Spirit (John 4:24) - Jesus took our likeness upon Himself for a purpose. Psalm 91:4 speaks of God's feathers and wings, do you suppose he looks like a bird/ a chicken DAVEH: Do you believe you have a spirit as well, Judy? Does having a spirit change the way one looks? If you do not believe God looks like a man, then what do you think he looks like??? Do you believe Jesus is in the express image of his Father in Heaven? (Heb 1:3) And, if Jesus' physical body was in the form of a man, do you not think his pre-mortal spiritual body may have been in a similar form?No; before he took a body upon Himself he was God the Word who appeared in His preincarnate state as an angel, a cloud, fire, water from the rock. You can't figure out God with a carnal mind Dave. DAVEH: Do you believe it is important to understand the nature of God, Judy? To answer your last questionyes, many things are created in a form before they become the actual entity. If we were created in the image of God (Gen 1:26), and we will be like him when he appears (1Jn 3:2), then does it not follow that God looks like a man? No; the image of God speaks of nature and character. DAVEH: Really?!?!?! So you would believe (don't let me put words in your mouth) that we could have been born with 4 legs and a tail and still been in the image of God? You are trying to mix the spiritual with the temporal. The temporal is passing away - only the spiritual is eternal. Transformed bodies are part of it but this does not mean that Good looks like a man. He did not leave us any representation of Jesus, noone knows what he looks like other than he wasn't all that good looking. DAVEH: You are losing me on that one, Judy. Do you not believe Jesus currently has a resurrected physical body that resembles that of a man? God knows our frame, we are such idolaters that we would do the same with him as Israel did with the bronze serpent. As for him being seen.is there any question about it? The passages that suggest one cannot see God are obviously referring to those who are carnal, since there are Biblical characters (such as Moses Stephen) who did see God. Furthermore, Gen 32:30 pretty much illustrates that holy men can see God, and live. Was it not Jesus who said... Moses didn't see God, he only saw his hind parts as he passed by and even that caused his face to shine so that he had to wear a veil before the ppl. Stephen had a vision of Jesus standing at the RH of the Father but there is no indication that he saw the face of God. DAVEH:What difference does it make that Moses did not see God's face. That wasn't the question.Did Moses see God, and you stipulated that he did..saw his hind parts . So what's to debate.Moses saw God and lived. God has a body (you've stipulated Moses saw part of that body) which can be seen. Case closed, is it not? He said that because the man he wrestled with represented God. Do you really think that God Himself left his throne in heaven and came down to earth to wrestle with Jacob? It was an angel. DAVEH: Do you believe the hindparts Moses saw were God's hindparts, or do you believe they were hindparts of an angel? Probably another manifestation of Jesus in His preincarnate state. *Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.* (Mt 5:8) ...Do you believe you can see God, Kevin? If not, perhaps you are not pure enough in heart. Takes more than presumptuous belief DaveH - It takes a pure heart (that is what God calls pure) DAVEH: You are losing me on this, Judy. So you *do *believe those with a pure heart the shall see God? If so, then why would you take issue with my assertion that God has a body that can be seen? Kevin Deegan wrote: So what would he look like? a man? *Can he
Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT
DaveH wrote: Just how do you want me to respond to questions posed to me on TT? I want you to respond as you feel is appropriate. I am just saying that if you are going to teach mormon doctrine, that you admit that is what you are doing instead of hiding it behind some pat phrase about NOT teaching it. DaveH also said, My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this, You have stated this before, yet when a protestant tells you what he/show thinks, you do not learn from ti. Instead, you debate the issue, arguing the mormon point of view. That is NOT learning what protestants beleive, it is baiting them so you can push the mormon perspective. Call it what it is, Dave. DaveH also wrote: I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism., and I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. My point exactly. Then why do you teach it? I repeat, I think it is okay if you try to teach it, but when you say you did not join to teach it, but end up teaching it anyway, I just wonder about that. Please examine what your motives are and what you are doing and OWN it. (Gee, that road sure is familiar!) Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave uses Socratic Method of Teaching LDS doctrine on TT Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:32:37 -0700 DAVEH: Golly, PerryWhen asked a question, I try (time allowing) to answer it. Are you surprised that I would give an answer that is congruent with my LDS rooted beliefs?I've not heard of the SM method of teachingBut, is the way I answer the questions a problem for you, Perry. It seems that when I give a brief answer by merely quoting a single passage as evidence in support of my belief, you criticize me for prooftexting. When I quote several passages of support of my beliefs, now you criticize me for teaching LDS doctrine. I'm perplexed, Perry. BTWDid you notice that I asked Kevin a number of questions as I answered his questions, yet instead of directly answering them, he just egged me on (if that is the proper way to frame it) with more questions to draw out my own beliefsfor which you are finding fault. I repeatI did not come to TT to preach LDS theology, nor to convert other TTers to Mormonism. My interest in being here is based on my curiosity why Protestants (and in the case, most TTers) would think about things like this. To me it is pretty obvious that God has the form of a man, and that he can be seen by man. I derived my thinking on this from my LDS background, and I feel the Bible sufficiently supports my belief. Yet apparently some TTers like Kevin, Judy and presumably you disagree...is that correct? Why? Is not the Bible plain in revealing that men have seen God in the form of a man in Bible times? Do you not see why I am so curious to learn why any Bible believing Christian would not see it as I do? To me it is simply illogical to think God is not in the form of a man. If you don't agree with me, please tell me what you think God looks like Perry??? Do you really think he does not exist in the form of a man? Now PerryIf you think my thinking on this is strictly a Mormon quirk, I suspect there are other TTers who would agree with what I said above. At one time I remember DavidM suggesting the Bible teaches that God has body parts. (Am I loosely quoting you right on that, DavidM?) And logicallyif God has body parts, what conclusions would that lead to, Perry? So Perrywhat's the problem? If you feel that I am teaching Mormonism, how bad can that be if the Bible teaches the same? And...I stand by my original statement...I did not join TT to preach Mormonism or convert TTers to Mormonism. I'm hear to find out what others believe, and why they believe it. If you do not want to know what I believe, don't ask me what I believeand be sure to delete (without reading) any of my responses to questions that are asked of me by others. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, you say you are not here to teach LDS doctrine, but that is exactly what you are doing. You may not be aware of the Socratic Method of teaching, but you are using it to teach LDS doctrine. Now, as far as I am concerned, it is your right to try to teach whatever you think is the truth using whatever method you feel compelled to use (within the gudelines) on TT. But at least be honest about it when you ar teaching LDS doctrine, rather than saying you do not do it, then doing it anyway. Perry From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 07:17:32 -0700 Judy Taylor wrote: On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:09:26 -0700 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Re: [TruthTalk] Carolyn asks: Did we miss it? Was: Street Preaching
I was referring to no passages at all. This was Carolyn's statement. From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Carolyn asks: Did we miss it? Was: Street Preaching Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 23:42:12 -0700 DAVEH: To what passages are you referring, Perry? Charles Perry Locke wrote: Jesus also said he'd return before they've gone through all the towns of Israel. So, did we miss it? Carolyn, I would love to hear your answer to the question you posed above. Can you provide a little rationale along with your answer, too, instead of a simple yes or no? This is an area in which I have an interest and on which I like to hear different viewpoints. If anyone else would like to answer this question, please do. Each of us probably has a unique viewpoint on this issue. Yes, you mormon boys are invited, too. Perry -- ~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS. -- 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. -- 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] Carolyn asks: Did we miss it? Was: Street Preaching
From: Caroline Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Street Preaching Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 09:07:49 -0500 Jesus also said he'd return before they've gone through all the towns of Israel. So, did we miss it? Carolyn, I would love to hear your answer to the question you posed above. Can you provide a little rationale along with your answer, too, instead of a simple yes or no? This is an area in which I have an interest and on which I like to hear different viewpoints. If anyone else would like to answer this question, please do. Each of us probably has a unique viewpoint on this issue. Yes, you mormon boys are invited, too. Perry -- 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] Copying the Bible
I am no authority on copying or scripture origins, but I have understood that when biblical texts were copied, the copyists understood they were on a mission from God, (what could be more blessed than being entrusted with accurately copying the Holy Word of God?) and that intentionally doing anything other than a perfect job would be considered bearing false witness and blasphemy. Also, they were checked and double checked, letter by letter, and if even one letter was in error, the entire page was scrapped and the source recopied. Maybe this explains the texts found in the trash. Maybe they had a letter wrong. Or a smudge. Perry From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] Copying the Bible Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 11:16:32 -0400 *Note Subject Change Subject was Rikk Watts on Genesis 1 and is now Copying the Bible Caroline Wong wrote: Both errors are likely. People could deliberately add words to bolster the text and make it sound better. Wait just one minute, please. If you were copying the Scriptures, you would try real hard to copy it accurately, would you not? Would *YOU* truly add words to bolster the text and make it sound better? I'm talking about *YOU*. Think about this carefully. I would venture to say that if you were copying the Holy Scriptures, you would not add any words at all to make it sound better. I know that I would not. Caroline Wong wrote: In fact, Christians have been known to write whole books and letters and attribute them to Paul or John or some other Apostle. There was a lot of controversy and uncertainty so adding words make things more plain. You are confusing outright forgery with monks copying the sacred text. When scribes were copying texts, they were very careful NOT to add words and NOT to subtract words. With this underlying paradigm at work here, which mistake is most likely to take place? Would the addition of words or the omission of words be the most likely to occur if your modus operandi was trying to copy the text exactly and not add or subtract words? I think the omission of words would be the most likely mistake. Caroline Wong wrote: Biblical scholars were quite surprised when they found early manuscripts which did not contain lots of stuff like the ending to Mark or the story in John about the woman caught in adultery. Mark can be explained by saying the manuscript lost its ending but how do we explain John :-) We don't. We just put a note and say it's not in the early manuscripts. You give up on explanations way too quickly! It could be that the guy doing the copying was called to lunch by his buddy and when he came back, he picked up his copying efforts in the wrong place. It also could be that the part of the text he was copying from was damaged. Maybe he spilled his coffee on it, and so he planned to come back later when he could get an undamaged copy. I haven't examined these manuscripts myself directly, but I have read reports of those who have that passages like Mark 16 actually have a large blank space where the omitted passage would fit. It looks like indeed the copyist planned to come back later and fill it in. This suggests to me that the copy he was working from was probably damaged in that place. Caroline Wong wrote: If copyists lost words as they copied, the later manuscripts would have less words than the early ones. Now you are thinking, but your assumption here is that all later manuscripts were copied from all earlier ones. This is not true. Many times copies were made that became a dead end. In other words, no further copies were made from them. I think this is the case with these two older manuscripts. We need to keep this fact of TWO manuscripts in mind because you talk about older manuscripts and some people might get the idea that there are a bunch of them. The truth is that we are talking about TWO manuscripts which differ significantly from about 5,000 manuscripts that have a more recent date. The big question is how this could be, which is why Westcott and Hort came up with their Syrian recension theory. They postulated that these older Egyptian manuscripts were right but the majority of other manuscripts were wrong because there was a big mistake made early on from which all these other copies were made. It makes much more sense that these two older manuscripts in Egypt are the ones which were mistaken, especially when you consider that the Sinaiticus text was found in a trash can at Saint Katherine's monastery. (Incidentally, for trivia's sake, I would like to mention that I have visited this monastery and spent the night there.) Furthermore, the text was in all capital letters with no spaces between the words. Was this perhaps some fun experiment some monk was doing because of his boredom with copying texts all day long? For all we know, it was a teenager given the task as homework, and he
Re: [TruthTalk] LDS cursing, threatening and spitting
From: Bothoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] As for the extra books --- I'm an LDS Christian; and I've read them and I know what's in them. Why don't you read them and ask God if they are true? Would you rather, as a non-LDS Christian, depend upon man for your answers or God? I prefer to follow God and I know that God answers prayer. --Raymond Ray, If one reads satanically inspired books, then prays over them asking for truth, what is the chance that Satan will answer the call? By even entertaining literature that bears the signature of Satan, that contradicts the bible, and that came about through a man that was and is known to have participated in nefarious and occultic activities is risky. Look at what happened to you. You exchanged the truth for a lie. When people that do that, I feel it is because they have allowed Satan a inroad to their lives, and have fallen for the lie. I cannot entertain that. I cannot sit idly by while the same lies are spread to Christians who may not understand the seriousness of the sitiation. The mormons are working hard to make themselves appear as a Christian sect, in fact as the ONLY Christian sect, but they are neither. Satan has worked for more than a century and has woven a very complex fabric of deceit. It looks so tempting, so wholesome, so appealing from the outside that it took me years of study and prayer to understand what is on the inside, and to finally get to the point where the various hints and clues to its origin began to fit together to expose the hand of Satan in it. As far as I can tell, there are only two on this group who have fit the pieces together...me and Kevin. (If there are others that have done so, they have not made themselves known on the forum.) Our studies were done independently through the years...we met (online) only when I joined this group. We independently have arrived at the same conclusios about the mormons. Anyone who spends time reading scripture and talking to mormons will begin to understand the different meanigs of words, see the differences in the mromon deities and the Christian Deity. Have you noticed that when Kevin and I expose the mormon deceit on this forum, that no one besides the mormons try to contradict us? I believe that they sense the hand of satan, the differences in the mormon deities and the God of the Bible, the deceptive nature of the system, and do not interfere. I know this group. If they disagreed even a little, they would certainly say so. Perry -- 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: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Are Jesus and Satan brothers?
From: Bothoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Are Jesus and Satan brothers? Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT) Implied by the text, see-- sniP --notice that he is 'the accuser' who is 'cast down,' and at no time is he referred to as a brother because he's not. First, your reasoning is flawed. Isn't your statement above like someone saying that you are not a human because no one ever referred to you as one? (I am not implying anything by that example, it just cane to mind). We cannot assume things are not so because they are not stated. It is that and similar fallacies that work throughout the mormon deception. Second, I would say that if he (Satan) is at no time referred to as a brother, it just may be that he is not and has never been a brother of Jesus, or you, for that matter. You must have gotten that from some heretical extra-biblical reference. Besides, why would Jesus refer to the devil as the Pharisee's father (Jn 8:44) if indeed he was their brother? Can he be their father and brother at the same time? If he is no longer their brother, can he then become their father? Ray, these mormons have really twisted things up. Repent, because it is appointed to man to die once, and then the judgement. Perry -- 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] Founder of Mormonism, was Mormon Underwear, was bapti sm
From: Bothoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Scriptures testisfy that there are only two churches---And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whose belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. (1Ne 14:10) Sorry, Ray, but quoting heretical extra-biblical texts and calling them The Scriptures is an affront to the Holy Word of God. Most likely nobody here except you three mormonites believe they carry any authority. Perry -- 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: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism
Blaine, Yes. I was the mormon man that attcked the street preacher. That little guy put up a heck of a fight, but he finally converted me. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 23:18:47 EDT BLAINE: Questions for Kevin and Perry: I distinctly recall underwear being waved at General Conference in Salt Lake City, I recall a Mormon man reacting and attacking the wavers; were either of you involved in this? OR Did you condone it? In a message dated 5/14/2005 6:17:13 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with Lance and am glad you conduct yourselves as a Christian. How do you deal with the violent and angry sinners? Love, Caroline - Original Message - From: _Lance Muir_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 3:12 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Thanks Kevin. - Original Message - From: _Kevin Deegan_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: May 14, 2005 15:42 Subject: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism I do not chase people down the street, I just preach do one on one discuss teach, answer questions, and or pray with people. If they care not, that is between them God I have discharged my responsibility. I try to conduct myself as a Christian. Try being lied about slandered, put on TV for calling people whores, having Christians repeat third hand stories they heard, Christians backpeddaling as fast as they can away from you, Dealing with the Authorities, Dealing with the angry sometimes violent sinners I preach all kinds of events and surely do not preach Hellfire damnation at the family events I have never been arrested in over 20 years of preaching on a regular basis. I have led a good number of lost to the Lord. I just love telling people about my savior, can't shut my mouth, look what He did for me! ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What Kevin says is not offensive to me in the least. I think when he preaches against sin it is only “offensive” to sinners. The same word of God either hardens or softens hearts. When I hear someone preach against sin like Kevin does it causes me to want to examine my own life to be sure I’m not also in need of repentance for some sin. I doubt that Kevin curses at anyone, or molests anyone. Maybe he can verify that for us. If you hate the ACLU I can agree with that! If Skin Heads, Nazi’s, etc. are cursing at me that’s a whole different matter—they are of satan, and so is cursing and molesting. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Caroline Wong Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 9:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Someone I don't know, trust, believe or even like shouting at me stuff that is offensive to my ears is disturbing my right to peace and quiet and my right to be unmolested and intimidated when I enter my place of worship. What if it wasn't a Street Preacher on the video but Skin Heads, NeoNazis or Satanists cursing you while you're trying to get into a meeting? Is there any law in America that you could use to stop them or are they totally protected by the ACLU too? Love, Caroline - Original Message - From: _ShieldsFamily_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 4:25 PM Subject: RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Caroline, do you believe that public preaching encroaches on your freedom? Izzy Caroline Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: We took a leaf from your founding fathers: Your freedom ends when it encroaches mine. -- 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: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism
Blaine, I was joking, of course, in that last post. You seem to have somehow identified me as a street preacher, although I have never preached on a street in my life. I happen to believe in what they are doing, that is, street evangelism, and admire them for their courage in spreading the word of God. Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 23:18:47 EDT BLAINE: Questions for Kevin and Perry: I distinctly recall underwear being waved at General Conference in Salt Lake City, I recall a Mormon man reacting and attacking the wavers; were either of you involved in this? OR Did you condone it? In a message dated 5/14/2005 6:17:13 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with Lance and am glad you conduct yourselves as a Christian. How do you deal with the violent and angry sinners? Love, Caroline - Original Message - From: _Lance Muir_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 3:12 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Thanks Kevin. - Original Message - From: _Kevin Deegan_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: May 14, 2005 15:42 Subject: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism I do not chase people down the street, I just preach do one on one discuss teach, answer questions, and or pray with people. If they care not, that is between them God I have discharged my responsibility. I try to conduct myself as a Christian. Try being lied about slandered, put on TV for calling people whores, having Christians repeat third hand stories they heard, Christians backpeddaling as fast as they can away from you, Dealing with the Authorities, Dealing with the angry sometimes violent sinners I preach all kinds of events and surely do not preach Hellfire damnation at the family events I have never been arrested in over 20 years of preaching on a regular basis. I have led a good number of lost to the Lord. I just love telling people about my savior, can't shut my mouth, look what He did for me! ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What Kevin says is not offensive to me in the least. I think when he preaches against sin it is only “offensive” to sinners. The same word of God either hardens or softens hearts. When I hear someone preach against sin like Kevin does it causes me to want to examine my own life to be sure I’m not also in need of repentance for some sin. I doubt that Kevin curses at anyone, or molests anyone. Maybe he can verify that for us. If you hate the ACLU I can agree with that! If Skin Heads, Nazi’s, etc. are cursing at me that’s a whole different matter—they are of satan, and so is cursing and molesting. Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Caroline Wong Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 9:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Someone I don't know, trust, believe or even like shouting at me stuff that is offensive to my ears is disturbing my right to peace and quiet and my right to be unmolested and intimidated when I enter my place of worship. What if it wasn't a Street Preacher on the video but Skin Heads, NeoNazis or Satanists cursing you while you're trying to get into a meeting? Is there any law in America that you could use to stop them or are they totally protected by the ACLU too? Love, Caroline - Original Message - From: _ShieldsFamily_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org) Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 4:25 PM Subject: RE: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] baptism Caroline, do you believe that public preaching encroaches on your freedom? Izzy Caroline Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: We took a leaf from your founding fathers: Your freedom ends when it encroaches mine. -- 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.
