Blaine, I'll bet you are dead wrong. Are you saying the temple designers
just put it up randomly? No way. In symbolism, especially masonic symbolism,
from which the mormon stuff was taken, every detail has meaning!
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
Do you hold yourself to the same standards as you
would hold others?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
As for my attacks on promoters of mormonism, I have explained that is is
not the MESSENGER that I am attacking, but the ORIGINATOR of the messages.
*There have been times when I have failed to make
, who came in the latter days and did more, save
Jesus
only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever
lived in it (DC 135:3).
Blainerb: GOOD!!
Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Blaine, the resident TT astrologer says, and the sunstone
in
the meridian of time, and the afternoon lamb might well have symbolized
the
Prophet Joseph Smith, who came in the latter days and did more, save
Jesus
only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever
lived in it (DC 135:3).
Blainerb: GOOD!!
Charles Perry Locke
Lance, post a link to your bookstore so we can check out your wares.
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] New Subject-AE
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 14:17:04 -0500
I SELL this book. It's excellent!
-
My 2c worth:
I have always though of Adam and Eve as created mortal, and that that
perhaps the eventual plan (before the fall) was for them to partake of the
Tree of Life and become immortal.
What would have happened if they had partaken of the Tree of Life after
sinning and while in
Dave, are you nwext going to tell us that monkeys and hoses are your spirit
brothers, too? For that matter, what biblical evidence supports ANY of your
LDS theories?
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
Blaine, the resident TT astrologer says, and the sunstone with the
round-faced image of god. Is god's face round like the sun? Does the sun
have a face like god's? Does god have a literal face? Are god and the sun
the same that anyone should combine them in an image? Can you say Sun
wouldn't
speculate, in the same sentence in which he speculated. I found that
rather curious.don't you?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave, are you nwext going to tell us that monkeys and hoses are your
spirit brothers, too? For that matter, what biblical evidence supports ANY
of your LDS
Did they have navels like we have?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] New Subject-AE
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:33:40 -0500
Also, there is evidence that Adam and Eve were created just like us --
which
Terry, just be careful when you use a translation (the JST) touched by the
hand of Satan.
From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Exodus
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 22:58:36 -0600
Thanks Dave. Makes more
Blaine, who is speaking in you Nephi quote? Jesus or the Father?
It says that the law was fulfilled in Him (Jesus?), but also says He
delivered the law (the Father). Sounds like Nephi thought they are one and
the same. This is yet more evidence of the Trinity in the Bom!
Thanks for that
)
To NOT name call a False teacher is to SIN!
You already practice such are you inaccurate?
Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess if we were Christ, or his Apostles, then we would be able to
exercise Accurate name-calling. But, since we are not, IMO we can not,
and
therefore
] Re:On Assuming 500 more years..
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 06:13:57 -0500
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: December 02, 2005 22:41
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Assuming 500 more years..
Lance,
Tell us
Okay, then the question remains why you posted the SDA stuff, and my
questions to you remain unanswered.
Perry
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] NO! Lance (doncha just love it when people speak of
get the impression Perry that Lance thinks himself as way above us on
an intellectual
level and that most of the time he just plays with us here on TT. jt
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 06:44:52 -0800 Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, then the question remains why you posted the SDA
love it when people speak
of themselves i
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:57:52 -0500
Like I said to you the other day Perry, ya gots ta learn to read for
meaning. It IS all in my post. Sadly, the word 'drivel' is the sum of it.
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED
John, there are many dimensions to the ad-hominem argument on which
Webster's does not elaborate. In fact, the way the ad hominem attack is most
often used on TT is to demean the opponent for 1) hoping to discredit them
to the point that their arguments seem untrustworthy, 2) to throw a red
player is expanding the
tradition (with appropriate 'scripture' support, of course) LaHaye/Jenkins
(combo #1) have gotten rich from this.
Did I tell you that I have a bridge for sale?
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent
Lance,
I do not consider learning about you and your views as a go nowhere
conversation. Other than quoting the opinions of others you, for the most
part, seem to be very private with your personal views. Would you consider
answering them for me privately?
I do not promote LB either.
Perry
-Original Message-
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 10:36:14 -0800
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again employing the ad hom (Barf
for Karl Barth)
John, there are many dimensions to the ad-hominem argument on which
Maybe you can trade that to Lance for his bridge.
From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We have a dodo farm near us.
--
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
John, can you explain heretical ignorance to me? I always thought heretics
claimed to more than others...not less! :-)
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Eternal Sonship and the Adoption heresey
in the
cause of Christ, why not tit for tat?So stop with the trach talk -
THAT is what I am saying.
john
-Original Message-
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 15:12:15 -0800
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again
who prey upon the innocent and unlearned.
Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do I think? Well, I still think both the barf reference and the
Jezebel reference are ad hominem references.
One aspect of the meaning on jezebel may include a characteristic that
you
feel applies to Judy
Your allusion escapes me, but your illusion does not. Calling Judy, or
anyone on this forum a muslim is an ad-hom reference, Lance. Terry's was
too, but Calvin is not on this forum.
Perry the Moderator
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
Lance, what is your belief about the end times prophecies of the Bible?
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Assuming 500 more years..
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:36:14 -0500
1. No
.
Her judgmentalism, concerning many both on and off the list, is equalled
only by that of Kevin Dean, Linda and, Lance's. It depends upon the ox
being gored.
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: December 02, 2005 09:57
Subject: [TruthTalk
.
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: December 02, 2005 09:59
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Assuming 500 more years..
Lance, what is your belief about the end times prophecies of the Bible?
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL
specificity, relating to precipitating
events pertaining to the eschaton.
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: December 02, 2005 14:58
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Assuming 500 more years..
Lance,
Are you
The moderator has adressed this privately...move along folks, nothing to see
here.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] FW: Izzy's sex life
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 20:19:34 -0500
Linda, have you no common
Terry,
The idea that this all started with one person is an absolute myth. See
if you can find Robert Strecker's report on HIV and AIDS somewhere on the
net. His research into the origin of Aids tells a different story.
Perry
From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To:
Kevin, these discussions between Dean and John regarding violence are an
offshoot of the Izzy/Dave thread, so if you wish to continue it please do so
privately.
Thanks,
Perry the Moderator
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
in SLC that he has offended? If not, doesn't that
strike you as a double standard, expecting me to apologize for offending
somebody, and not expecting Kevin to do the same???
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
*Dave, you have tried to shift the focus of your bad behavior onto nearly
everyone
, 26 Nov 2005 09:47:17 -0500
[Original Message]
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Date: 11/26/2005 1:27:30 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Lance Mur says: I have a sense of DaveH that he
ain't got it in
Yet more arrogant drivel.
cd: I say we kick his
So, Terry, if I understand you correctly, your sense of humor is such that
it is titillated by someone asking Izzy about her sexual experiences, and
suggesting that I know something about them, even humorously, especially
before your Christian peers? Hmmm.
From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL
with a filthy mind. I do not. If that causes you to
question my allegiance to my Lord, I can live with it.
Terry
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
So, Terry, if I understand you correctly, your sense of humor is such that
it is titillated by someone asking Izzy about her sexual experiences
their ignorance with more
ignorance.
[Original Message]
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:cpl2602%40hotmail.com
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org mailto:TruthTalk%40mail.innglory.org
Date: 11/25/2005 11:06:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Izzy's Sexual Experiences-Charles?
John, Izzy opened
of God that
cannot
even receive the milk of the word-and *yet defend their ignorance with
more
ignorance.*
[Original Message]
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Date: 11/25/2005 11:06:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Izzy's Sexual Experiences-Charles?
John
offense not right wrong . it is only
wrong
if you can find someone to be offended by it. Right?
*It seems DH is saying it is OK to talk about his
bedroom if
it is done in jest.*
*//* */Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]/*
wrote
Message] From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date:
11/25/2005 11:06:37 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Izzy's Sexual
Experiences-Charles? John, Izzy opened the door, and has realized
that and apologized for it(maybe you missed that post
wrong . it
is only
wrong if you can find someone to be offended by it. Right?
*It seems DH is saying it is OK to talk about
his
bedroom if it is done in jest.*
*//* */Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote
Dave, please read this note to Terry. It might help you to see how you have
behaved badly. Imagine this same conversation occuring in YOUR sunday school
class or other church meeting.
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk
as the underwear thing, will, no one can stop you. You want to
get violent with those on this list -- actually that can be stopped.
JD
-Original Message-
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:14:42 -0800
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk
:24 -0500
What ARE we talking about?Dean's life or Dean's theology of violence?
-Original Message-
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:57:10 -0800
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dave's Disrespect.
And what about the rest
The First Thanksgiving Proclamation (June 20, 1676)
On June 20, 1676, the governing council of Charlestown, Massachusetts, held
a meeting to determine how best to express thanks for the good fortune that
had seen their community securely established. By unamimous vote they
instructed Edward
Lance,
While I am sure Dave is joking, there are some who do not take kindly to
that type of joking. Dean is right in what Dave jokingly has proposed, but
there are some things that should not be joked about, and Dean is right to
take offense...Dave has gone over the line, Dean has been
John, Izzy opened the door, and has realized that and apologized for it
(maybe you missed that post). It was DH that walked through that door and
took it to the gutter.
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 07:49:49 -0800
Subject: [TruthTalk] **Moderator Comment** Izzy's Sexual
Experiences-Charles?
Lance,
While I am sure Dave is joking, there are some who do not take kindly to
that type of joking. Dean
A totally arrogant and insensitive reply, in my opinion.
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] DaveH's Reply to the Controversy
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 14:52:53 -0800
*And I apologize to all, especially to DaveH
Lance, the principle I was taught is that when you offend someone you
apologize...even if you didn't mean to, even if you were joking, even if you
think they are faking offense, apologizing is the right thing to do. Izzy
got it. Kevin got it. Evidently arrogant people don't get it.
While I
Typo correction: In the last line, and for us to be opffended should be
but not for us to be offended.
From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] Lance Mur says: I have a sense of DaveH that he ain't
?
*/Perry's subsequent revision: and for us to be opffended should be
_/*but not for us to be offended*/_
DAVEH: Ask yourself who is really offended by what I posted, Perry. I
suggest that it is the same ones who will be offended by this postthe
hypocrites of TT.
Charles Perry Locke
: Charles Perry Locke
Dave,
Thanks for answering at least one of the several questions I asked below.
Your silence on the others speaks volumes.
The fact that you use the KJV does not speak highly for the JST.
If I knew that a prophet had written an inspired version I would use no
other
John,
You say, In the Sermon on the Mount, we have Christ presenting a prayer
that is nowhere repeated in scripture. However, it IS presented in an
ancient jewish test called the Euchalogues! Jesus may have been
paraphrasing, rephrasing, or summarizing it. What do you think?
Apples and Oranges.
Why do the mormons use the KJV if they believe it has translation errors?
How do they know which verses are translated incorrectly?
Why does the Joseph Smith Translation (JST) of the NT contain words that are
not in the greek manuscripts?
How come most mormons do not use
Dave, why are you arguing with Christians who many many times have told you
that we believe, from scripture, that God the Father is a Spirit? You keep
trying to argue with Christians on that point, which you have asked and
heard the answer over and over. If you really want to know what
Izzy, consider this web page about a flat national sales tax:
http://www.noirs.com/
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] Flat Tax?
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 19:40:10 -0600
Here's a new subject that I
, because the
current
system is insanity and robbery. izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:24 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Flat Tax?
Izzy, consider this web
Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:24 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Flat Tax?
Izzy, consider this web page about a flat national sales tax:
http://www.noirs.com/
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk
that to
irritate you. It is just one aspect of Protestantism that fascinates me,
and I assume you would have a similar view as most Protestants about
thisso, that's why I am asking you the question. How do you
rationalize that apparent contradiction?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
*Dave
.*/
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
Simply put, in Moses 1:2, PoGP, *if Moses did not see god's face (as
face described in Exodus on Mt. Sainai, upon which God said no man could
look and live), then the statement about him enduring it is unnecessary,*
because we know that men can gaze upon whatever
than an anti-Mormon) would be willing to discuss this
aspect, I'd sure appreciate it.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
My second question? If you have no rationalization, just say so instead of
dodging it.
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
to disbelieve the Bible. Anything I would
try to explain to you from LDS passages would be less productive than
talking to a brick.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave wrote:
After reading more of the account of how Moses saw God, do you still
think that the account you cited in Moses 1:2
as speaking *face to face* to
Moses. Are you clear on that, Perryor do you continue to believe
it is impossible to see God?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
You have made the statement Clearly the Bible does show that man can
see God. If it so clear, please show me so I can be clear
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One cannot but grow weary of the pedantic, repetetive anti-Mormon diatribes
put forward by CPL and others.Lance,
My argument is not with you...it is with Satan...and Dave is our
messenger boy. If you are put off by my continually pointing out the
not be intrigued. If you want to talk about
LDS theology, I have no interest in discussing it with you, Perry.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave, if I am not mistaken, it is a mormon belief that the mormon god was
once a man (from Kolob) who was a created being (if not as a man, at least
created
Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
Moses cannot see God and live in the Bible, but he can in the PoGP!
Exodus 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no
man see me, and live.
MOS 1:2 And he saw God face to face, and he talked with him, and the
glory of God was upon Moses
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Christ and the Law
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:23:22 -0500
Perry, the issue of sinless perfection or sinless maturity is not
resolved with Strong's definition of the Greek
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DAVEH: It seems to me that in whatever way God is perfect, or
complete.that is what we have the potential to become, and have been
commanded to do so. Do you agree, Perry?
I do not believe that the KJV translators intended to use the word perfect
with
DAVEH: FTRSo that there is no mistake or misunderstanding, I
declare that Jesus Christ is my Savior.
Which one? The One in the Bible, or the one whose father is a man from Kolob
and and whose brother is Satan?
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt,
:02:08 -0800
*
Which one?*
DAVEH: The one who died on the cross.*He* is my Savior and Redeemer.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
DAVEH: FTRSo that there is no mistake or misunderstanding, I
declare that Jesus Christ is my Savior.
*
Which one?* The One in the Bible, or the one whose
Dave, if I am not mistaken, it is a mormon belief that the mormon god was
once a man (from Kolob) who was a created being (if not as a man, at least
created as a spirit). Yet, in the PoGP (one of your standard works
consisting of revelation to JS, right?) I find the following, which appears
to
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Intent of the Law
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:28:06 -0800 (PST)
Since DH did not disassociate from the original statement of Dean, that
would be the one whoose father lives near KOLOB!
Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Which one
Dave,
Moses cannot see God and live in the Bible, but he can in the PoGP!
Exodus 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man
see me, and live.
MOS 1:2 And he saw God face to face, and he talked with him, and the glory
of God was upon Moses; therefore Moses could
Dave,
I understand that in 1611 perfect meant what complete means today.
So, what if you re-read that verse in today's language?
If you have a Strong's dictionary, read the definition for perfect (greek
5046). After reading it, do you still think this is a commandment to be
perfect as in
=
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
I know how this works if anyone is interested
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] amazing
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:43:42 -0500
I know how this works if anyone is interested
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] amazing
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:43:42 -0500
-Original Message-
From: Kathy Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
don't capture my attention at this point. ButIf there
are Baptists who are rooted in Protestantismthat's what I am curious
about. Sothat Kevin (or you) are referring to small groups who are not
associated with Protestantism is really not pertinent to my interests.
Charles Perry
be right, Perry. If you aren't a Protestant, and don't know
what they believe, there really isn't much reason for me to quiz you any
further about Protestantism.other than I would be interested in seeing
how you respond to the above questions.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
* If you
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As with any incorrect doctrine...it is not what can be found in
Scripture that is congruent with it, but rather that which is in the theory
that is not found in Scripture that defines whether or not it is
doctrinally correct.
Dave, it really
Dave, do you consider the Wikipedia to be a reliable source of truth? Who
wrote the article? Who are these Christian church historians. Why is the
word protestant in quotes? This article has no credits and no citations.
Why should it carry any weight other than the fact that it mentions a few
Dave, you say, assuming the above website is correct. If it is not
can we accuse you spreading lies?
From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Date: Sun,
Dave,
Other than the heresy of JS, you can not historically substantiate ANY of
the following claim, our religious roots predate that time frame. If you
can, then do so. If you are going to ask me to rely on the claims made by an
occultic treasure hunter, count me out. Your whole faith
teaches, but rather you want to
destroy LDS theology. Am I perceiving your agenda correctly, Perry?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
*If I lack insight and make wrong assumptions, Dave, set me straight.* You
will not talk about Temple rituals because you have taken oaths not to,
and have been told
Don't you think that in these verses cirumcism means jew? Why does Paul
say that one who is circumcised should not become
uncircumsized...certainly he is not talking about physical circumcism in
this instance. He may be simply saying that jews should not become non-jews
and non-jews sould
thou this?
And he said: Yea, I believe that the Great Spirit created all things, and I
desire that ye should tell me concerning all these things, and I will
believe thy words.
More available upon request.
Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave wrote:
BTW.It is not altogether
Dave wrote:
BTW.It is not altogether surprising that some early Mormons
believed it [the Trinity], as most of them came from Protestant stock, and
would have been versed (and biased) in Protestant doctrines.
It was not a matter of a few biased people believing in the Trinity...I
be on the other foot?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
And, Dave, what if that indeed is so!
*what if Dave is deceived and is indeed paying homage to Satan without
knowing it*
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man
DAVEH: Is that so much different than many of the Jews a couple thousand
years ago failing to recognize Jesus as their Messiah?
Dave, quite different.
The Jews had the words of God's holy prophets to use to anticipate and
recognize the Messiah, mormons have the occultic teachings of a
From: Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perry wrote: The Jews had the words of God's holy prophets to use to
anticipate and recognize the Messiah,
DAVEH: Do you not find it interesting that some used *the words of God's
holy prophets *to try to entrap our Lord?
You will have to give me a few
not understand that I consider
it futile to *due business* with an anti-Mormon? As I see it,
anti-Mormons are not seeking truth, they are seeking to attack.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
Perhaps my question has not been clear...
What does Pay Lay Ale mean?
If we are going to *do
understanding, perception and truth, Perry. I understand your need to
/wing it/, so to speak, in an effort to by chance hit a soft spot in my
armor. Instead, as I see it by making incorrect assumptions, you are
simply proving your lack of insight.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
My
to *due business* with an anti-Mormon? As I see it, anti-Mormons
are not seeking truth, they are seeking to attack.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
Perhaps my question has not been clear...
What does Pay Lay Ale mean?
If we are going to *do business *your way than lay your cards face up
paying homage to Satan without
knowing it*
DAVEH: Perhaps that is why it's futile to discuss LDS theology with
anti-Mormons.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Lance, *what if Dave is deceived and is indeed paying homage to Satan
without knowing it*. Will you stand by and do nothing? At this moment
Lance, your post below is one of the most enjoyable I have read. I agree
with you. What really tips the scale for me is that I can SEE the lies,
deceit, hypocrasy, false prophecies, plaigerism, occultism, heretecism in
mormonism. JS (I mean Dave, looking thourhg JS' spectacles) cannot. In that
to attack.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
Perhaps my question has not been clear...
What does Pay Lay Ale mean?
If we are going to do business your way than lay your cards face
up
on the table.
Perry
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 06:31:02 -0400
Given the pedantic redundancy of your intermittent commentary Perry, IFO
view it as pretty much doing nothing.
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED
it, so to speak, in an effort to by chance hit a soft spot in my
armor. Instead, as I see it by making incorrect assumptions, you are
simply proving your lack of insight.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
My ultimate concern is that if you are raising your hands and chanting
words that you
attempted to speak to it on several
occasions. Should one theologically literate Mormon believer decide to do
so (address that issue) I believe that the matter could be put to rest once
and for all.
- Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk
101 - 200 of 1011 matches
Mail list logo
