subject:"\[TruthTalk\] Cross"









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 8:39:48 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

You have turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, Kevin. This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one tooth.

I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian. I met your challenge and what did we get for that -- yet another challenge of someone else. You are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to be proud of. 

You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of us. 

jd
cd: Kevin is not a lazy Christian-I have seen his works and he is very active-It is wrong to call him lazy-Compared to Kevin and the brethren I am lazy but not them.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.
When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!

It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such  such when one doesNOTHING.

God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate..
They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to brag

Invariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...)
I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week?
They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward.
Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO?
Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them.
They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate. 

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom." 

You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. 
Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. 

jd




-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?

AND how do you do such?

Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
The bible speaks of it this way.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!

As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL!
Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean Moore wrote: 




You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry






cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omiss

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-16 Thread Judy Taylor




I was reading in Romans 12, the last 
phrase of verse ten says "honor one another, preferring one another" The 

world teaches 
the exact opposite, but if we follow this guideline, we 
willhavepeace and calm. Paul also writes 
about the same 
thing in Phillipians 2:3 So thanks Dean for your example - in doing 
this.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 06:49:11 -0500 "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
cd: Kevin is not a lazy Christian-I have seen his works and he is 
very active-It is wrong to 
call him lazy-Compared to Kevin and the brethren I am lazy but not 
them.

  
  `JD:
  
You have turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, 
Kevin. This is not completely true, however, if you still have that 
one tooth.

I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian. I met your 
challenge and what did we get for that -- yet another challenge 
of someone else. You are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so 
often do not count for much but take a considerable amount of 
time.nothing to be proud of. 

You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of us. 


jd
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAW I am 
just sick of people that flap their gums.

  When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!
  It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such  
  such when one doesNOTHING.
  God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
  
  They profess that they know God; but in 
  works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every 
  good work reprobate..
  They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not 
  want to brag
  Invariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me 
  and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had 
  a nickel for every time...)
  I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week?
  They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their 
  reward.
  Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT 
  DO?
  Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them.
  They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear 
to be appropriate. 

-- 
  Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  A rather simple task is to read the post instead of 
  going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  
And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have 
to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single 
thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad 
hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By 
definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to 
thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another 
phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." 
"Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD 
HOM."This is just something you allmade 
up. If the response is an atack on any other issue 
but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad 
hom." 

You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's 
work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or 
two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You 
are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure 
up to YOU.. 
Get a life and stay on subject --- or 
maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. 

jd




-- 
  Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  You have got to be joking, 
  Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ 
  only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a 
  thirsty man?
  
  AND how do you do such?
  
  Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing 
  of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
  It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
  The bible speaks of it this way.
  
  My little children, let us not 
  love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed 
  and in truth.
  Talk is cheap it does not cost a 
thing!
  
  As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
  Pure religion and undefiled 
  before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and 
  widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from

Re: *Moderator Comment Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





Blainerb: There are none so blind as he who will 
not see. Ad libbing, flapping the gums, rationalizing the truth, 
gainsaying, etc., sets up a snow storm intended to do but one 
thing--deceive.Whenthat fails, one resorts to being 
unreasonable--it always 
comes down to stubborn, obstinate refusal to be reasonable. So goes 
it on TT, and Kevin? Whew! Is this the epitome of this tactic 
or what? 

In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:23:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  You have 
  turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, Kevin. 
  This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one 
  tooth. I suspect that Terry is a full-time 
  Christian. I met your challenge and what did we get for 
  that -- yet another challenge of someone else. You are a 
  lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count 
  for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to 
  be proud of. You get no more tired of the 
  senseless than do the rest of us. 
jd

Re: *Moderator Comment Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-16 Thread Charles Perry Locke

Blaine, please don't stir up the pot. You contribute nothing with your 
comments.  Also, you say below, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:, but you have 
not included anything I wrote! You must have removed the part I wrote 
without removing the attribution.  I doubt it was intentional, but please be 
careful to properly attribute comments to the original authors.


Perry


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: ***Moderator Comment** Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:50:03 EST


Blainerb:  There are none so blind as he who will  not see.  Ad libbing,
flapping the gums, rationalizing the truth,  gainsaying, etc., sets up a 
snow
storm intended to do but one  thing--deceive.   When that fails, one 
resorts to
being  unreasonable--it always  comes down to stubborn, obstinate refusal 
to be

reasonable.  So goes  it on TT, and Kevin?  Whew!  Is  this the epitome of
this tactic  or what?

In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:23:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 You have  turned the flapping of the gums into a vocation,  Kevin.
This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one  tooth.

   I suspect that Terry is a full-time  Christian.  I met your challenge 
and

what did we get for  that  --  yet another challenge of someone else. You
are a  lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not 
count
for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to  
be

proud of.

   You get no more tired of the  senseless than do the rest of us.

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: *Moderator Comment Re: [TruthTalk] Cross




In a message dated 12/16/2005 12:26:25 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Blaine, 
  please don't stir up the pot. You contribute nothing with your 
  comments. Also, you say below, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:", but 
  you have not included anything I wrote! You must have removed the part I 
  wrote without removing the attribution. I doubt 
  it was intentional, but please be careful to properly 
  attribute comments to the original authors.Perry

This happens to me all the time, especially on Kevin's posts. But you 
are right, I did not even notice it until you pointed it out. Sorry.
Blainerb
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: ***Moderator Comment** Re: 
  [TruthTalk] CrossDate: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:50:03 
  ESTBlainerb: There are none so blind as he who 
  will not see. Ad libbing,flapping the gums, rationalizing 
  the truth, gainsaying, etc., sets up a snowstorm 
  intended to do but one thing--deceive. When that fails, one 
  resorts tobeing unreasonable--it always comes down 
  to stubborn, obstinate refusal to bereasonable. So 
  goes it on TT, and Kevin? Whew! Is this the epitome 
  ofthis tactic or what?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross






  
Blainerb: It is 
common knowledge that the morning star is Venus. Thus it is an obvious 
symbol of Jesus Christ, as it represents the death, burial and resurrection 
of our Lord as it alternates between shining as the evening star and the 
morning star. As either, it is the brightest star in the heavens. 
InRev. 22:16 Jesus even calls 
himself "the Bright and Morning Star. 

Likewise, the North Star, never failing to give 
us a constantbearing on direction to follow, is a symbol of Jesus 
Christ and his gospel, which if adhered to, can lead to salvation, or, in other 
words, a "safe harbor."I see nothing in these assertions that 
would warrant Dean's scornful com-

ments 
below. 

:In a message dated 12/13/2005 
7:13:22 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes
Except it 
is not Biblical. (Not that you would care.) 
iz


  Blainerb: Revelation 2:28 "and I 
  will give him the morning star . . 
  . (the morning star here symbolizes the first resurrection from the 
  dead--those who come forth in the morning of the first resurrection . . 
  .)
  Revelation 22:16 ""I, Jesus, 
  have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I 
  am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and 
  morning star."
  cd (Dean) : If you used these stars to remember Christ why don't 
  you live by his words who told us to remember the cross?Add these to you 
  collection of stars. Amos 5:26 But you have borne the tabernacle of your 
  Molock and Chium your image, the star of your god, which ye made to 
  yourselves.27 Therefore I will cause you to go into 
  captivity...
  Isaiah 47;13 Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy 
  counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly 
  prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from the things that shall come upon 
  thee.14 Behold they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them, they shall 
  not deliver themselves from the power of the flame:... And just think Dave say 
  there is no fire in hell-Mormons have it backwards God does not like people 
  that look to stars and Blain thinks we should all throw our crosses away and 
  get stars-but coming from one that said Smith should have killed the preacher 
  who told him what the bible said instead of merely beating him across the 
  yard-I would expect such as 
this.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





In a message dated 12/14/2005 5:00:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
cd: The why don't Mormons live by Jesus's words instead of 
  Smith's words.

Blainerb: . Smith lived and died for his testimony of Jesus 
Christ, whom he saw and spoke with on several occasions. Smith was His 
prophet, just as Moses was his prophet.There are exciting parallels 
between the two, in fact. If JS ever spoke anything contrary to the 
mind and will of the Lord, he spoke of himself. Being a man, having the 
weaknesses of a man, he may have done that on occasion. But that did not 
mean he was not a prophet who revealed the mind and will of Jesus Christ to man 
in these last days. Use the Holy Spirit, and the spirit of charity to be 
your guide in discerning the difference . . .

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





I looked, but did not see anything denigrating or mocking Christians in 
either site, Dean? Could you quote what you are getting at?

Blainerb



In a message dated 12/14/2005 4:59:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  http://www.hillcumorah.org/Pageant/
  
  http://www.mormonmiracle.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  wrote:
  
times and dates???

-- 
  Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  The Mormon pageant in NY is for Gentile consumption and is Squeaky 
  clea, everything is veiled.
  BUT go to Manti UT and see a pageant where they MOCK Christians, 
  cause it is for Mormon 
consumption

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross






Neither is the Devil lazy--being full of "works" does not always tell us 
much. :)

Blainerb


In a message dated 12/16/2005 5:26:39 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 06:49:11 -0500 "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  cd: Kevin is not a lazy Christian-I have seen his works and he is 
  very active-It is wrong to 
  call him lazy-Compared to Kevin and the brethren I am lazy but 
  not them.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/16/2005 4:13:24 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


I looked, but did not see anything denigrating or mocking Christians in either site, Dean? Could you quote what you are getting at?

Blainerb
cd:Again I don't know what you are talking about-I never sent the below web sites-I am Carroll or Dean if you prefer, not Kevin-you got the wrong brother- am I my brothers keeper?



In a message dated 12/14/2005 4:59:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

http://www.hillcumorah.org/Pageant/

http://www.mormonmiracle.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

times and dates???

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
The Mormon pageant in NY is for Gentile consumption and is Squeaky clea, everything is veiled.
BUT go to Manti UT and see a pageant where they MOCK Christians, cause it is for Mormon consumption

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/16/2005 4:08:55 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


In a message dated 12/14/2005 5:00:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
cd: The why don't Mormons live by Jesus's words instead of Smith's words.

Blainerb: . Smith lived and died for his testimony of Jesus Christ, whom he saw and spoke with on several occasions. Smith was His prophet, just as Moses was his prophet.There are exciting parallels between the two, in fact. If JS ever spoke anything contrary to the mind and will of the Lord, he spoke of himself. Being a man, having the weaknesses of a man, he may have done that on occasion. But that did not mean he was not a prophet who revealed the mind and will of Jesus Christ to man in these last days. Use the Holy Spirit, and the spirit of charity to be your guide in discerning the difference . . .

cd: And the sad part is you actually believe a man who said there were 6 ft quaker like people living on the moon-as a prophet of God-very sad indeed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/16/2005 6:25:23 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



Neither is the Devil lazy--being full of "works" does not always tell us much. :)

Blainerb

cd: The Devil don't preach Jesus Christ as the only Savior for mankind as Kevin does.The Devil doesn't tell others to stop sin-as Kevin does.The devil encourages sin-Tell me do you think the spirit inside Kevin is of the Devil? Remember the unforgivable sin?What say ye?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-15 Thread Lance Muir




HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to 
earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS 
STATEMENT?

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Taylor 
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: December 14, 2005 19:32
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
  
  Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and 
  walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our 
  salvation . . .
  
  Huh?
  
-Original Message-From: 
Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgDate: 
Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:16 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
CrossWell stated, Dean. I liked this part 
best.TerryDean 
Moore wrote: 

  
  
  cd: Case and point without the cross there 
  could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure 
  all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added 
  to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But 
  you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all 
  that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you 
  gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came 
  down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the 
  cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I 
  say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We 
  bring you tidings of Great 
joy"

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: Judy Taylor; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/14/2005 8:28:11 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

mental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. 

jd
cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?
-- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Who is trying to kill you, Blaine, or anyone else JD. Don't make this into something it's not. The men Jesus was
speaking to were going to stone the adultress to death but noone said a word about the man and the Law said they
were both to be stoned. As for TT. Mormon handshakes and sacred signs are occult and Mormonism itself is
considered to be a cult by Mainstream Christianity. So what is your problem? Does speaking the truth to you
make the messenger your enemy?

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:00:22 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I didn't take it as a personal insult. I knew you didn't have that thought. No apology needed, but yours is appreciated, nonetheless. Fair is fair, Blaine, but I think we both know the rest of the story. You are right -- on TT it is apparently OK to do or say whatever as long as one thinks the opponentisthe enemy. 

When Christ said "He who is without sin cast the .," it is clear the He believed that all possess sin at any given momenton some level ...but the sinless 
perfection crowd arrogantly disagrees (when it is so obvious otherwise.)

jd

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



Hmmm, JD is right, denigrating the symbols of another's religious beliefs was wrong. I apologize--apparently I offended JD, although I did so unthinkingly and without intention. It just came off the top of my head. Sometimes we get too caught up in proving our opinions and beliefs are more valid than every one else's, and I think I may have done just that. 
Now, if I may, I would like to ask for an apology from anyone who supported waving Mormon underclothing in public by the street preachers at general conference in Salt Lake City. And, the same for those who more recently have denigrated Mormon handshakes, and other sacred symbols on TT. And the same for those who have insisted on spelling "Mormon" with a lower-case letter.:)
What is fair is fair, huh? 
Blainerb

In a message dated 12/13/2005 8:37:10 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Yes ! and , by the way, DH, your assessment of the world's point of view on this is neither accurate or relevant. 

and this statementborders on insulting:  
One of the weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged Cross. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of that old rugged cross. :)
Blainerb


I have to say something here -- both of you have made it clear (and I am not angry , by the way) that your stay here on TT has given you nothing in terms of reason for crossing over. Well, consider your failure in this regard, as well. With asmuchvariety as exists here amongst us Christians, you would think someone would consider the Mormon religion.But this latest discussion, while revealing, would surely close the door to any serious student of the Bible. To put down "death" and the "cross" is to simply miss the point of the life of Christ here on this earth .. and miss the mark by a wide margin !!! 

jd


 judyt He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments is a liar (1 John 2:4)

RE: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/13/2005 8:53:21 PM 
Subject: RE: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


Isnt it interesting that the mormon viewpoint about the Cross is the same as the JWitnesses? They also think of it as an ugly symbol. iz
cd: I view this as a way of removing honor from Christ for the work done on the cross-which was the will of God. So to them -the will of God was a sad thing- as if we got a bad/sad thing from the Lord in his plan of redemption?







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]But we still think the cross as a visible symbol of Jesus falls short of what He stands for--the most important of which is resurrection to life in the Kingdom of God--God's life. We do not think that is adequately represented by a cross.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-15 Thread Taylor





Dean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there 
could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure 
all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to 
his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you 
must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that 
goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave 
me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came 
down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross 
for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say 
rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said We 
bring you tidings of Great joy

Hey Dean, I underlined a statement in your post. Did you 
intend to say it that way? Bill



From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down 
to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS 
STATEMENT?

From: 
Taylor 


Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth 
and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for 
our salvation . . .

Huh?

From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]Well 
stated, Dean. I liked this part 
best.TerryDean 
Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the 
cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping 
the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for 
redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not 
sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember 
that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes 
with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you 
gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the 
Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth 
and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in 
heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his 
name-even the angels agreed as they said We bring you 
tidings of Great 
joy

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Lance Muir 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 5:43:32 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?
cd: It is I said the preacher.

- Original Message - 
From: Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: December 14, 2005 19:32
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation . . .

Huh?

-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgDate: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:16 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossWell stated, Dean. I liked this part best..TerryDean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





I do not know if you served your country or not ,Dave, but if you did,
one of the first items of information recorded about you was your
"religeous preference" . It is on file. It may even be noted in some
way on your dog tags, I am not sure. It's been a long time. This I do
know. You get the marker that describes who you claim to follow. It
is not a one size fits all thing.


Dave Hansen wrote:

  
  
  it indicates that the deceased desired to be recognized as a
Christian
  
DAVEH: Whew.that's a pretty broad brush you are painting
with, Terry. Do you think the guys who were buried in this cemetery
  
.were asked if they wanted to be recognized as a
Christian before they died? To me that seems a bit of a stretch.
  
  
  
  No one gets a
cross that does not want one.
  
DAVEH: Do you really believe that, Terry. Look at this
website
  
  
  
Over 9300 dead buried there.  Do you think they refused
to bury the guys in Normandy who did not want to be recognized as a
Christian??? I suspect that if you died on the Normandy beaches,
and were subsequently buried there.you got a cross whether you were
Christian or atheist. Do you disagree? (BTWYou will notice a
single Star of David in the middle forefront of the picture.)
  
Terry Clifton wrote:
  


In a national cemetery, Dave, you will see the cross over those who
claimed to be Christians and a star of David over those who were
Jewish. As I pointed out before, many people claim to be Christians
who are not. They are wannabees who have the desire but not the
faith. The cross does not guarantee that the person was born again, but
it indicates that the deceased desired to be recognized as a
Christian, and the government honored their desire. No one
gets a
cross that does not want one. I do not know what they put over a
Mormon's grave. Perhaps you could enlighten us.



Dave Hansen wrote:

  
  DH, your assessment of the world's point of view on this is
neither
accurate
  
DAVEH: I assume you saw the picture of the cemetery with all the
crosses on it, John? (If not, I've posted it below.)  Do you think
those crosses indicate that those buried below them are Christians?
  
 Perhaps I am wrong, but as I see it most Christians are myopic in
their religious perspective. I think much of this is based on their
Biblical steadfastness in believing in the only true living God in such
a narrow sense that all others are of a minority status and their
perspective is not really relevant. Therefore, it is easy for
Christians who are surrounded by other similar thinking Christians to
perceive the world revolves around their Christian theology.
So, when most Christians see a cross, their immediate perception is one
of Jesus due to their lives being immersed in Christian culture, and
hence I believe they tend to impose their presupposed believes upon
others of whom they do not consider their cultural, historical or
religious background. (I have noticed a similar effect with the way
many Christians impose their religious perceptions on what they think
LDS folks believeand often times simply get it wrong due to their
biases.)
  
 Consider that only about a third (2 billion) of the world is
Christian, and two-thirds (4 billion) are non-Christian..
  


  
  
  -- 
~~~
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.

many Churches have a cross on top. Is that just a coincident? There is a reasonLDS buildings have a Golden Angel on top pointing east just another coincident? Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you hate the cross also?DAVEH: No Kevin..I do not hate the cross. I just find it peculiarly interesting that many Christians seem so attached to the device used to torture and kill our Lord. When Jesus returns to the earth, do you think it likely he will be wearing a chain around his neck with a cross attached? Furthermore, why do you feel the implied need to categorize people as cross lovers or cross haters? Is it not possible that one can look upon the cross in its historical context, by
recognizing what it did to our Savior without categorizing him (not referring to Jesus) as a cross hater? How would you categorize Jesus.is he a cross lover or hater?Kevin Deegan wrote: So you find it WEIRD too Do you hate the cross also?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *EXACTLY what he finds weird.*DAVEH: WWJD.Have you ever wondered if Jesus feels like..._/I will cling to the old rugged cross/_.again.ordo you think he wants to be reminded of..._/The emblem of suffering and shame/_...it he experienced on it? Do you think Jesus feels the
cross*/_Has a wondrous attraction..._/*.For...*/_'twas on that old cross Jesus suffered and died,_/*which may not be something our Lord needs to be reminded about, so why do Christians think he'll..*/_cherish the old rugged cross,_/*...Unless they feel he needs to be re minded of.._/The emblem of suffering and shame;/_...it represents. IFF it wouldn't be surprising that Jesus would find such thinking weird, then why wouldn't Christians consider the feelings Jesus may have about the cross?Kevin Deegan wrote: Still waiting on Blaines explanation of *EXACTLY what he finds weird.* */ShieldsFamily /* wrote: *THE OLD RUGGED CROSS * *On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross, *_/The emblem of suffering and shame;/_*
And I love that old cross where the dearest and best For a world of lost sinners was slain.* *_/So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,/_ Till my trophies at last I lay down; *_/I will cling to the old rugged cross,/_* And exchange it some day for a crown.* *O that old rugged cross, so despised by the world, /_Has a wondrou s attraction for me_/; For the dear Lamb of God left His glory above To bear it to dark Calvary.* */_So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,_/ Till my trophies at last I lay down; /_I will cling to the old rugged cross,_/ And exchange it some day for a crown.* *In that old rugged cross, stained with blood so divine, A wondrous beauty I see, /_For 'twas on that old cr oss Jesus suffered and died,_/ To pardon and sanctify me.* */_So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,_/ Till my trophies at last I lay down; /_I
will cling to the old rugged cross,_/ And exchange it some day for a crown.* *To the old rugged cross I will ever be true; /_Its shame and reproach gladly bear;_/ Then He'll call me some day to my home far away, Where His glory forever I'll share.* */_So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,_/ Till my t rophies at last I lay down; _/I will cling to the old rugged cross,/_ And exchange it some day for a crown.* Yes, a lost person would think that those lyrics are "weird", indeed. iz *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] *On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:*
Monday, December 12, 2005 10:11 PM *To:* TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org *Subject:* Re: [TruthTalk] Cross In a message dated 12/12/2005 7:42:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One of the best songs I ever heard was titled, "He Loved Me with a Cross". iz One of the weirdest songs I ever heard was //The Old Rugged Cross//. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of t hat old rugged cross. :) Blainerb Yahoo! Shopping Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping -- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping -- ~~~ 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.

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 1:15:57 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

In a message dated 12/13/2005 7:13:22 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Except it is not Biblical. (Not that you would care.) iz
Revelation 2:28 "and I will give him the morning star . . . (the morning star here symbolizes the first resurrection from the dead--those who come forth in the morning of the first resurrection . . .)
Revelation 22:16 ""I, Jesus, have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
cd:If you used these stars to remember Christ why don't you live by his words who told us to remember the cross?Add these to you collection of stars. Amos 5:26 But you have borne the tabernacle of your Molock and Chium your image, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.27 Therefore I will cause you to go into captivity...
Isaiah 47;13 Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from the things that shall come upon thee.14 Behold they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them, they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame:... And just think Dave say there is no fire in hell-Mormons have it backwards God does not like people that look to stars and Blain thinks we should all throw our crosses away and get stars-but coming from one that said Smith should have killed the preacher who told him what the bible said instead of merely beating him across the yard-I would expect such as this.

It is common knowledge that the morning star is Venus. 

Blainerb





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 4:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



Blainerb: Crosses, or any other symbols of religious belief should never be denigrated. But I still like stars better as symbols for Jesus Christ, especially "the Bright and Morning Star." That star (Venus) symbolizes the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ," asit appears first in the evening, then gets lost (buried) behind the sun, and then later appearson the eastern horizon preceding the sun as the morning star.  The symbolism is so much more precise and meaningful.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





Dean Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission?
Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a
drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road
to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate?
Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and
leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles
from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.
  

Terry

  
  
  
  
  

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and
stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in
the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a
hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission
in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are
living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of
omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by
correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then
there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other
sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Dave Hansen 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/14/2005 2:22:27 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

EXACTLY what he finds weird.DAVEH: WWJD. Have you ever wondered if Jesus feels like...I will cling to the old rugged cross.again.ordo you think he wants to be reminded of...The emblem of suffering and shame...it he experienced on it? Do you think Jesus feels the crossHas a wondrous attractionFor...'twas on that old cross Jesus suffered and 
died,which may not be something our Lord needs to be reminded about, so why do Christians think he'll..cherish the old rugged cross,...Unless they feel he needs to be reminded of..The emblem of suffering and shame;...it represents.  IFF it wouldn't be surprising that Jesus would find such thinking weird, then why wouldn't Christians consider the feelings Jesus may have about the cross?
cd: Then tell me whydoes Jesus wears the marks of the cross on his body? Thomas was told to touch the nail prints in his hands and to trust his hand into the spear mark in his side-Christ wears them so that we will remember to give his glory for our salvation on the cross-that is why the cross is mentioned many times in the NT.The Cross is for the glory of Christwho went humblythere to die as a lamb lead to the slaughter.Yet Mormons claim that Smithwas as a lamb lead to the slaughter-while killing two men and seriously wounding a third to keep from dying so he could keep from meeting God. John the Baptist according to history-on the other hand ran and placed his heard on the chopping block to meet God. Something strange is going on in Mormonland.Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Still waiting on Blaines explanation of EXACTLY what he finds weird.ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
















THE OLD RUGGED CROSS 


On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross,The emblem of suffering and shame;And I love that old cross where the dearest and bestFor a world of lost sinners was slain.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
O that old rugged cross, so despised by the world,Has a wondrous attraction for me;For the dear Lamb of God left His glory aboveTo bear it to dark Calvary.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
In that old rugged cross, stained with blood so divine,A wondrous beauty I see,For 'twas on that old cr oss Jesus suffered and died,To pardon and sanctify me.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
To the old rugged cross I will ever be true;Its shame and reproach gladly bear;Then He'll call me some day to my home far away,Where His glory forever I'll share.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my t rophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
Yes, a lost person would think that those lyrics are weird, indeed. iz





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 10:11 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



In a message dated 12/12/2005 7:42:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

One of the best songs I ever heard was titled, He Loved Me with a Cross. iz

One of the weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged Cross. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of that old rugged cross. :)

Blainerb


Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping -- 
~~~
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.

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 7:52:09 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Dean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"

Hey Dean, I underlined a statement in your post. Did you intend to say it that way? Bill
cd: Yes I did Bill.




From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?

From: Taylor 


Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation . . .

Huh?

From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]Well stated, Dean. I liked this part best.TerryDean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Terry Clifton 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 8:06:31 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

"Take up your star daily, and follow me".
cd: LOL[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Well, JW's have their own reasons, I suppose--probably different from ours. Most JW's despise Mormons, just as they despise all non-JW Christians. I don't believe we despise your religious tenets--we honor your right to believe as you wish, we just don't agree with everything you teach. Sometimes the contrast seems to be a put down for you, but it is more just an assertion of what we believe, and some take offense at that. The cross is a deeply embedded symbol of Jesus Christ, and I have no real argument with that--I just like stars better, especially since kevin and Co. have been so aggressive in trying to make the ones on our temples appear to represent Satanism. His efforts have only all the more convinced me that stars are better than crosses--actually I never really thought much or even cared much about the subject until coming under attack. But now, I have to take sides, and you guys are forcing me (us) to take a position. So, my position, is naturally, stars are better than crosses. :) However, I have to say I still have no really strong feelings against crosses--as I said, they are clearly deeply embedded in the Christian psyche--which includes mine as well as yours. 



In a message dated 12/13/2005 7:13:18 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Isnât it interesting that the mormon viewpoint about the Cross is the same as the JWitnesses? They also think of it as an ugly symbol. iz







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]But we still think the cross as a visible symbol of Jesus falls short of what He stands for--the most important of which is resurrection to life in the Kingdom of God--God's life. We do not think that is adequately represented by a cross. <
/DIV>

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross




cd: I have underlined some of my words that you need to reread as you are actually agreeing with what I wrote.




- Original Message - 
From: Terry Clifton 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 8:33:44 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Dean Moore wrote: 




You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry






cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-15 Thread Charles Perry Locke


Blaine,

  Try reading through the NT and replace every occurrence of the word 
cross with star. The text becomes meaningless. The cross is a MAJOR part 
of the Chrsitian landscape, directly from scripture. It has meaning and 
value beyond merely an instrument of death, and is the VERY symbol of our 
freedom in Christ. The star does not.


  The atonement did not happen in Gethsemane, it did not happen at the 
resurrection. It happened on the cross. Our Lord cried out it is finished 
at the moment the debt we can never pay was paid by Him. To deny or to try 
to change that is to deny scripture.


Perry



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:24:13 EST


As I said to Iz, the cross is deeply  embedded in the Christian psyche.  It
is in mine as well. But since  you guys have made an issue of the stars 
thing,

it has occurred to me that stars  are better than crosses, and I advocate
changing crosses on all Christian  churches to stars--whether 5 or 6 
pointed, is
not an issue with me.The Jewish star of David, by the way, is probably 
a
symbol of their expected  Messiah--I'd have to check that out.  Maybe they 
had

it right in the  beginning.

Blainerb
In a message dated 12/13/2005 7:36:59 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

check  out these  crosses:

http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/index.html


From:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Date:  Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:39:55 EST


Blainerb:  There are  quite a few cross  songs in the LDS hymnbook.  It 
is
not a  bad word, it is just the context in  which it is used.  We believe 
 in
taking up our cross,  so to speak,  which means we give  up the 
pleasures

of the
world, and are even willing to   suffer if necessary to live more
righteously.
  But we  still think the cross  as a visible symbol of Jesus falls short 
 of
what He stands for--the most  important of which is  resurrection to life 
in

the
Kingdom of God--God's   life.  We do not think that is adequately
represented
by  a  cross.  Now stars, whether pentagrams or whatever, obviously fill  
the
bill, since that's where we hope to be--in heaven, where the stars  are 
at.

  :)
  Stars make for an excellent  symbol of Jesus Christ, whereas a cross  
is

dubious at  best.


In a message dated 12/13/2005 5:56:55 A.M.  Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  writes:

Why did  the LDS CHOIR sing songs about the  Cross you dispise at 
general

Conference  last  October?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message  dated 12/12/2005 7:42:12 A.M. Mountain Standard  Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

One of the  best  songs I ever heard was titled, Ã¢â¬ÅHe Loved Me with 
a

CrossÃ¢â¬
Â.   iz


One of the  weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged  Cross.  It
seemed
to glorify the cross in a negative  way.  I  doubt the Lord even to this 
day

is overly fond of that old  rugged  cross. :)
Blainerb









--
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] Cross

God is against IDOLATRY of any kind Who are these mysterious people who IDOLize the cross?Why did it take all these years for you to be forthright with your FEELINGS about the cross?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All these years on TT and we are just now learning how you really feel about the CrossDAVEH: ??? You disagree, Kevin? Are you suggesting that those who do idolize the cross do not offend Jesus??? Just for so there is no misunderstanding in my thinking about thisFTRI believe Jesus is not pleased with anybody who idolizes the cross. If
you disagree, say so..I will not denigrate you for disagreeing with me on this.Kevin Deegan wrote: DAVEH: Do you suppose the same could be said of those idolizing crosses? All these years on TT and we are just now learning how you really feel about the Cross. How can that be? Have you been shielding us from certain "Truths" because we are Not worthy nor Ready for the Meat of the word? Is it because ofLDS teaching on "milk before meat." ?http://home.teleport.com/~packham/tract.htm They have been trained, however, to give investigators "milk before meat," that is, to postpone revealing anything at all that might make an investigator hesitant, even if it is true.
Apostle Boyd Packer Teaching some things that are true, prematurely or at the wrong time, can invite sorrow and heartbreak instead of the joy intended to accompany learning. W hat is true with these two subjects is, if anything, doubly true in the field of religion. The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat. The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy. What other beliefs have you shielded us from?Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You OFFEND Jesus ChristDAVEH: Do you suppose the same could be said of those idolizing
crosses?Kevin Deegan wrote: You OFFEND Jesus ChristI almost thought you were serious in your Apology tillNow, if I may, I would like to ask for an apology from anyone who supported waving Mormon underclothing in public by the street preachers at general conference in Salt Lake City. And, the same for those who more recently have denigrated Mormon handshakes, and other sacred symbols on TT. And the same for those who have insisted on spelling "Mormon" with a lower-case letter.:) What is fair is fair, huh? Blainerb

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to deathYou take this too lightly. There are some who can not bear any correction. Any correction or reproof to them strikes them at the core, it might as well be a stone! When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.Correction is
grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.DON"T SAY THOSE THINGS! HB 12 the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more: For they could not endure that which was commanded Like the crowd that only knows One thing in the Bible "Jesus said Don't judge" it becomes their Indulgence to SIN with both hands fervently!REFUSAL to
HEARJeremiah 5:3 O LORD, are not thine eyes upon the truth? thou hast stricken them, but they have not grieved; thou hast consumed them, but they have refused to receive correction: they have made their faces harder than a rock; they have refused to return.Jeremiah 7:28 But thou shalt say unto them, This is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the LORD their God, nor receiveth correction: truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth.Dean Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: Judy Taylor; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/14/2005 8:28:11 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Crossmental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A
THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. jd cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction
their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission? -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Who is trying to kill you, Blaine, or anyone else JD. Don't make this into something it's not. The men Jesus was speaking to were going to stone the adultress to death but noone said a word about the man and the Law said they were both to be stoned. As for TT. Mormon handshakes and sacred signs are occult and Mormonism itself is considered to be a cult by Mainstream Christianity. So what is your problem?
Does speaking the truth to you make the messenger your enemy?On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:00:22 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:I didn't take it as a personal insult. I knew you didn't have that thought. No apology needed, but yours is appreciated, nonetheless. Fair is fair, Blaine, but I think we both know the rest of the story. You are right -- on TT it is apparently OK to do or say whatever as long as one thinks the opponentisthe enemy. When Christ said "He who is without sin cast the .," it is clear the He believed that all possess sin at any given momenton some level ...but the
sinless perfection crowd arrogantly disagrees (when it is so obvious otherwise.)jdFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hmmm, JD is right, denigrating the symbols of another's religious beliefs was wrong. I apologize--apparently I offended JD, although I did so unthinkingly and without intention. It just came off the top of my head. Sometimes we get too caught up in proving our opinions and beliefs are more valid than every one else's, and I think I may have done just that. Now, if I may, I would like to ask for an apology from anyone who supported waving Mormon underclothing in public by the
street preachers at general conference in Salt Lake City. And, the same for those who more recently have denigrated Mormon handshakes, and other sacred symbols on TT. And the same for those who have insisted on spelling "Mormon" with a lower-case letter.:) What is fair is fair, huh? BlainerbIn a message dated 12/13/2005 8:37:10 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Yes ! and , by the way, DH, your assessment of the world's point of view on this is neither accurate or relevant. and this st

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Take up your star daily, and follow me.Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Take up your star daily, and follow me".[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, JW's have their own reasons, I suppose--probably different from ours. Most JW's despise Mormons, just as they despise all non-JW Christians. I don't believe we despise your religious tenets--we honor your right to believe as you wish, we just don't
agree with everything you teach. Sometimes the contrast seems to be a put down for you, but it is more just an assertion of what we believe, and some take offense at that. The cross is a deeply embedded symbol of Jesus Christ, and I have no real argument with that--I just like stars better, especially since kevin and Co. have been so aggressive in trying to make the ones on our temples appear to represent Satanism. His efforts have only all the more convinced me that stars are better than crosses--actually I never really thought much or even cared much about the subject until coming under attack. But now, I have to take sides, and you guys are forcing me (us) to take a position. So, my position, is naturally, stars are better than crosses. :) However, I have to say I still have no really strong feelings against crosses--as I said, they are clearly deeply embedded in the Christian psyche--which
includes mine as well as yours. In a message dated 12/13/2005 7:13:18 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Isnât it interesting that the mormon viewpoint about the Cross is the same as the JWitnesses? They also think of it as an ugly symbol. izFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]But we still think the cross as a visible symbol of Jesus falls short of what He stands for--the most important of which is resurrection to life in the Kingdom of God--God's life. We do not think that is adequately represented by a cross.

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the
Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to
Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If
we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

cd: Then tell me whydoes Jesus wears the marks of the cross on his body? Thomas was told to touch the nail prints in his hands and to trust his hand into the spear mark in his side-Christ wears them so that we will remember to give his glory for our salvation on the cross-that is why the cross is mentioned many times in the NT.The Cross is for the glory of Christwho went humblythere to die as a lamb lead to the slaughter.Yet Mormons claim that Smithwas as a lamb lead to the slaughter-while killing two men and seriously wounding a third to keep from dying so he could keep from meeting God. John the Baptist according to history-on the other hand ran and placed his heard on the chopping block to meet God. Something strange is going on in Mormonland.You hit the "NAIL" right on the
head! Are you Bearing the MARKS? Gal 6:17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.2 Co 4:10 Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. Dean Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 12/14/2005 2:22:27 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossEXACTLY what he finds weird.DAVEH: WWJD. Have you ever wondered if Jesus feels like...I will cling to the old rugged
cross.again.ordo you think he wants to be reminded of...The emblem of suffering and shame...it he experienced on it? Do you think Jesus feels the crossHas a wondrous attractionFor...'twas on that old cross Jesus suffered and died,which may not be something our Lord needs to be reminded about, so why do Christians think he'll..cherish the old rugged cross,...Unless they feel he needs to be reminded of..The emblem of suffering and shame;...it represents. IFF it wouldn't be surprising that Jesus would find such thinking weird, then why wouldn't Christians consider the feelings Jesus may have about the cross? cd: Then tell me whydoes Jesus wears the marks of the cross on his body? Thomas was told to touch the nail prints in his hands and to trust his hand into the spear mark in his side-Christ wears them so that we will remember to give his glory for our salvation on the cross-that is why the cross is mentioned many times in the NT.The Cross is for the glory of Christwho went humblythere to die as a lamb lead to
the slaughter.Yet Mormons claim that Smithwas as a lamb lead to the slaughter-while killing two men and seriously wounding a third to keep from dying so he could keep from meeting God. John the Baptist according to history-on the other hand ran and placed his heard on the chopping block to meet God. Something strange is going on in Mormonland.Kevin Deegan wrote: Still waiting on Blaines explanation of EXACTLY what he finds weird.ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: THE OLD RUGGED CROSS On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross,The emblem of suffering and shame;And I love that old cross where the dearest and bestFor a world of lost sinners was slain. So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown. O that old rugged cross, so despised by the world,Has a wondrous attraction for me;For the dear Lamb of God left His glory aboveTo bear it to dark Calvary. So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown. In that old rugged cross, stained with blood so divine,A wondrous beauty I
see,For 'twas on that old cr oss Jesus suffered and died,To pardon and sanctify me. So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown. To the old rugged cross I will ever be true;Its shame and reproach gladly bear;Then He'll call me some day to my home far away,Where His glory forever I'll share. So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my t rophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown. Yes, a lost person would think that those lyrics are weird, indeed. izFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 10:11 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossIn a message dated 12/12/2005 7:42:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:One of the best songs I ever heard was titled, He Loved Me with a Cross. izOne of the weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged Cross. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of that old rugged cross. :)Blainerb Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





My apology, Dean. I was trying to read everything before going to work
and got to reading too fast to understand what I was reading.
Terry

Dean Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  
  cd: I have underlined some of my words that you need to reread
as you are actually agreeing with what I wrote.
  
  
  
  
-
Original Message - 
From:
Terry Clifton 
To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent:
12/15/2005 8:33:44 AM 
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


Dean Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of
omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about
giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on
the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the
interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to
be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy
broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and
neither would you.
  

Terry

  
  
  
  
  

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error
and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so
in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a
hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of
omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If
we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin
of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by
correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then
there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other
sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



Funny -- I thought this came from a Dean post. So he and JS kinda think alike at this point !!! Interesting. 

jd
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?


Joe Smith

Joseph Smith's 1832 account of the First Vision spoke only of one personage and did not make the explicit separation of God and Christ found in the 1838 version. The Book of Mormon declared that Mary "is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh," which as James Allen and Richard Howard have pointed out was changed in 1837 to "mother of the Son of God." Abinidi's sermon in the Book of Mormon explored the relationship between God and Christ: "God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son-The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son-And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth." (Mosiah 15:1-4.) 
http://www.lds-mormon.com/changod.shtmlLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?

- Original Message - 
From: Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: December 14, 2005 19:32
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation . . .

Huh?

-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgDate: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:16 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossWell stated, Dean. I liked this part best..TerryDean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"



Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom."

You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU..
Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?

AND how do you do such?

Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
The bible speaks of it this way.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!

As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL!
Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean Moore wrote:

You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





:









- Original Message - 
From: Dave Hansen 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/14/2005 2:22:27 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

EXACTLY what he finds weird.DAVEH: WWJD. Have you ever wondered if Jesus feels like...I will cling to the old rugged cross.again.ordo you think he wants to be reminded of...The emblem of suffering and shame...it he experienced on it? Do you think Jesus feels the crossHas a wondrous attractionFor...'twas on that old cross Jesus suffered and 
died,which may not be something our Lord needs to be reminded about, so why do Christians think he'll..

cd: Here is the truth of Mormonism-they do not view themselves as Christians-They make that claim to draw Christians away from Christ but as shown here DaveH does not view himself as a Christian-I have found with dealing with Mormons that they are snakes in the grass-Snakes use the grass to hide themselves until one get close enough then they bite but in this case the harmis tothe soul. That is why Mormons want to be called brothers as we will lower our guard around a loving brother. This is why the bible instructs us not to eat nor fellowship with false prophets it is for our protection not theirs.He that is able to hear let him hear. I also noticed at the Mormon Church I attended (only once to see if these things I heard were true)in Franklin, NC that when the Mormons partook of the Lords supper that water was used instead of wine -or grape juice-but the bread was used. Why was the blood removed from the ceremony-as without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin-does this ha
ve anything to do with their dislike for the cross? I'll bet Satan hates the cross for it is also a symbol of his defeat?cherish the old rugged cross,...Unless they feel he needs to be reminded of..The emblem of suffering and shame;...it represents.  IFF it wouldn't be surprising that Jesus would find such thinking weird, then why wouldn't Christians consider the feelings Jesus may have about the cross?
cd: Then tell me whydoes Jesus wears the marks of the cross on his body? Thomas was told to touch the nail prints in his hands and to trust his hand into the spear mark in his side-Christ wears them so that we will remember to give his glory for our salvation on the cross-that is why the cross is mentioned many times in the NT.The Cross is for the glory of Christwho went humblythere to die as a lamb lead to the slaughter.Yet Mormons claim that Smithwas as a lamb lead to the slaughter-while killing two men and seriously wounding a third to keep from dying so he could keep from meeting God. John the Baptist according to history-on the other hand ran and placed his heard on the chopping block to meet God. Something strange is going on in Mormonland.Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Still waiting on Blaines explanation of EXACTLY what he finds weird.ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
















THE OLD RUGGED CROSS 


On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross,The emblem of suffering and shame;And I love that old cross where the dearest and bestFor a world of lost sinners was slain.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
O that old rugged cross, so despised by the world,Has a wondrous attraction for me;For the dear Lamb of God left His glory aboveTo bear it to dark Calvary.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
In that old rugged cross, stained with blood so divine,A wondrous beauty I see,For 'twas on that old cr oss Jesus suffered and died,To pardon and sanctify me.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
To the old rugged cross I will ever be true;Its shame and reproach gladly bear;Then He'll call me some day to my home far away,Where His glory forever I'll share.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my t rophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
Yes, a lost person would think that those lyrics are weird, indeed. iz





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 10:11 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



In a message dated 12/12/2005 7:42:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

One of the best songs I ever heard was titled, He Loved Me with a Cross. iz

One of the weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged Cross. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of that old rugged cross. :)

Blainerb


Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Terry Clifton 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 1:45:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

My apology, Dean. I was trying to read everything before going to work and got to reading too fast to understand what I was reading.Terry
cd: I have done the same thing-no problem:-)Dean Moore wrote: 



cd: I have underlined some of my words that you need to reread as you are actually agreeing with what I wrote.



- Original Message - 
From: Terry Clifton 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 8:33:44 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Dean Moore wrote: 




You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry






cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: Kevin Deegan
Sent: 12/15/2005 1:57:37 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


Funny -- I thought this came from a Dean post. So he and JS kinda think alike at this point !!! Interesting. 

jd
cd: uag-Tell me this is not so-I don't really have room for another wife at this point-I am just now learning about how to get alone the one I have had for 24 yrs. MaybeI can send the new one(s) to the dark side of the moon with the 6'2" Quaker like people.
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?


Joe Smith

Joseph Smith's 1832 account of the First Vision spoke only of one personage and did not make the explicit separation of God and Christ found in the 1838 version. The Book of Mormon declared that Mary "is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh," which as James Allen and Richard Howard have pointed out was changed in 1837 to "mother of the Son of God." Abinidi's sermon in the Book of Mormon explored the relationship between God and Christ: "God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son-The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son-And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth." (Mosiah 15:1-4.) 
http://www.lds-mormon.com/changod.shtmlLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?

- Original Message - 
From: Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: December 14, 2005 19:32
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation . . .

Huh?

-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgDate: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:16 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossWell stated, Dean. I liked this part best...TerryDean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"



Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





To tell you these things would be bragging, Kev. What I am doing is
known by the One who needs to know. He does it through me. Remember
the instructions? Don't let your right hand know what the other is
doing. Those who brag about their deeds already have their rewards.
You might think about that.
Terry
=

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  You have got to be joking, Dean! There
is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting
others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?
  
  AND how do you do such?
  
  Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of
consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
  It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
  The bible speaks of it this way.
  
  My little children, let us not
love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
  Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!
  
  As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
  Pure religion and undefiled before
God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their
affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
  
  What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
  Looking foward to your
TESTIMONY! PTL!
  
  
  
  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Dean
Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of
omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about
giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on
the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the
interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to
be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy
broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and
neither would you.
  

Terry

  
  
  
  
  

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error
and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so
in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a
hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission
in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are
living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of
omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by
correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then
there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other
sins of omission?

  


  
  
  
   
  Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo!
Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


tongue in cheek - for sure. 

-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Cc: Kevin Deegan
Sent: 12/15/2005 1:57:37 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


Funny -- I thought this came from a Dean post. So he and JS kinda think alike at this point !!! Interesting. 

jd
cd: uag-Tell me this is not so-I don't really have room for another wife at this point-I am just now learning about how to get alone the one I have had for 24 yrs. MaybeI can send the new one(s) to the dark side of the moon with the 6'2" Quaker like people.
-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?


Joe Smith

Joseph Smith's 1832 account of the First Vision spoke only of one personage and did not make the explicit separation of God and Christ found in the 1838 version. The Book of Mormon declared that Mary "is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh," which as James Allen and Richard Howard have pointed out was changed in 1837 to "mother of the Son of God." Abinidi's sermon in the Book of Mormon explored the relationship between God and Christ: "God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son-The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son-And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth." (Mosiah 15:1-4.) 
http://www.lds-mormon.com/changod.shtmlLance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




HUH?? INDEED!! 'God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach..and die on the cross'?

WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS STATEMENT?

- Original Message - 
From: Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: December 14, 2005 19:32
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation . . .

Huh?

-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgDate: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:16 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] CrossWell stated, Dean. I liked this part bestTerryDean Moore wrote: 



cd: Case and point without the cross there could be no savior-hence no salvation and as keeping the law was a failure all were headed to hell-no way to pay for redemption. Yes, our sins added to his suffering-so let us not sin any more as to crucify Christ anew. But you must remember that God gave us the gift of Christ-suffering and all that goes with him is the gift of God-Would you tell God I am sad that you gave me such a great gift? Or should one have Joy that God the Father came down to earth and walked as a man to teach us truth and to die on the cross for our salvation-Who now stand in heaven with Great honor-Sad? I say rejoice and praise his name-even the angels agreed as they said "We bring you tidings of Great joy"



Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: Dean Moore 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/15/2005 2:19:09 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross



:









- Original Message - 
From: Dave Hansen 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 12/14/2005 2:22:27 AM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

EXACTLY what he finds weird.DAVEH: WWJD. Have you ever wondered if Jesus feels like...I will cling to the old rugged cross.again.ordo you think he wants to be reminded of...The emblem of suffering and shame...it he experienced on it? Do you think Jesus feels the crossHas a wondrous attractionFor...'twas on that old cross Jesus suffered and 
died,which may not be something our Lord needs to be reminded about, so why do Christians think he'll..

cd: Here is the truth of Mormonism-they do not view themselves as Christians-They make that claim to draw Christians away from Christ but as shown here DaveH does not view himself as a Christian-I have found with dealing with Mormons that they are snakes in the grass-Snakes use the grass to hide themselves until one get close enough then they bite but in this case the harmis tothe soul. That is why Mormons want to be called brothers as we will lower our guard around a loving brother. This is why the bible instructs us not to eat nor fellowship with false prophets it is for our protection not theirs.He that is able to hear let him hear. I also noticed at the Mormon Church I attended (only once to see if these things I heard were true)in Franklin, NC that when the Mormons partook of the Lords supper that water was used instead of wine -or grape juice-but the bread was used. Why was the blood removed from the ceremony-as without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin-does this ha
 ve anything to do with their dislike for the cross? I'll bet Satan hates the cross for it is also a symbol of his defeat?cherish the old rugged cross,...Unless they feel he needs to be reminded of..

cd: Here it is again. "they" is referring to Christians-He is making a distinction between us (Mormons) and they (Christians).Yet earlier he lied and said he was a Christian. Clearly he does not view himself as such. Why is he here if not to promote Mormonism that is why he invited me to attend the Mormon church as He did to Judy a few days back-To bring us away from the cross that Mormonsdispise.So when Dave calls you brother does he really mean it or is it just another lie "they".The emblem of suffering and shame;...it represents.  IFF it wouldn't be surprising that Jesus would find such thinking weird, then why wouldn't Christians consider the feelings Jesus may have about the cross?
cd: Then tell me whydoes Jesus wears the marks of the cross on his body? Thomas was told to touch the nail prints in his hands and to trust his hand into the spear mark in his side-Christ wears them so that we will remember to give his glory for our salvation on the cross-that is why the cross is mentioned many times in the NT.The Cross is for the glory of Christwho went humblythere to die as a lamb lead to the slaughter.Yet Mormons claim that Smithwas as a lamb lead to the slaughter-while killing two men and seriously wounding a third to keep from dying so he could keep from meeting God. John the Baptist according to history-on the other hand ran and placed his heard on the chopping block to meet God. Something strange is going on in Mormonland.Kevin Deegan wrote: 

Still waiting on Blaines explanation of EXACTLY what he finds weird.ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
















THE OLD RUGGED CROSS 


On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross,The emblem of suffering and shame;And I love that old cross where the dearest and bestFor a world of lost sinners was slain.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
O that old rugged cross, so despised by the world,Has a wondrous attraction for me;For the dear Lamb of God left His glory aboveTo bear it to dark Calvary.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
In that old rugged cross, stained with blood so divine,A wondrous beauty I see,For 'twas on that old cr oss Jesus suffered and died,To pardon and sanctify me.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my trophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
To the old rugged cross I will ever be true;Its shame and reproach gladly bear;Then He'll call me some day to my home far away,Where His glory forever I'll share.
So I'll cherish the old rugged cross,Till my t rophies at last I lay down;I will cling to the old rugged cross,And exchange it some day for a crown.
Yes, a lost person would think that those lyrics

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross


Not sure why you are talking about the sin of omission.Christ obviously believed that personal sin was a part the (ontological ??) equation. We see it's implicite reference in the words "andif ye being evil know how to do good .." and again " ..he who is without sin .." and again " .. there is none who are good ..." His sermonrecorded in Matt 5-7 gives usadditional "legal requirement" that most surely finds us all standing "in error."  As a matter of fact, oneof the above quotes comes from that sermon. 

I was just making a point that Judywas not prepared to accept - a point from scripture, by the way. 

jd



-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Cc: Judy Taylor; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/14/2005 8:28:11 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

mental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. 

jd
cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross









- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: Dean Moore
Sent: 12/15/2005 2:53:49 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Not sure why you are talking about the sin of omission.Christ obviously believed that personal sin was a part the (ontological ??) equation. We see it's implicite reference in the words "andif ye being evil know how to do good .." and again " ..he who is without sin .." and again " .. there is none who are good ..." His sermonrecorded in Matt 5-7 gives usadditional "legal requirement" that most surely finds us all standing "in error."  As a matter of fact, oneof the above quotes comes from that sermon. 

I was just making a point that Judywas not prepared to accept - a point from scripture, by the way. 

jd
cd: As stated before -there were people under the Old Covenant who had no sin upon them (Luke 1: 5,6).If they could be sinless under the Old Covenant why can we under the New Covenant?He ones who brought the adulteress women into the Temple were sinning by bringing her into the temple in the first place.And Christ knew this and their hearts.As we have the law of God written on our hearts,and theHoly Spirit living within us it is possible to be sinless. Sin is a transgression of the known lawand God also looks at the intent of the heart unto accountability. Every young true convertis without sin for a time as they were pardoned (justified) for all their past sins. We can be sinless-but one must walk in holiness to obtain this John.
sp;
 



-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 







- Original Message - 
From: 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Cc: Judy Taylor; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/14/2005 8:28:11 PM 
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

mental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. 

jd
cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom." You
have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?
Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that
and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out
those other sins of omission?Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

It is always Bragging not False Piety? To TESTIFY how you are giving Drink to a thirsty man is BRAGGING? You brought up the subject, I thought you were gonna bless us with some Testimony! Doesn't the bragging part come from ones ATTITUDE? Bragging is not in the essence of the act of compassion but is something that comes forth from within ones heart. To simply say I work at the mission with the homeless would not be bragging. Surely there must be some instance you could relate without bragging To avoid the issue by using a device like I don't want to brag, implies that you are doing so very much we could not avoid the thought. Or that you are doing nothing and must cover up. I see no reason that you could not give a simple statement and not brag. There is a difference between what you do for God AND What is God DOing Through you?
Was Paul BRAGGING in 2 Co 11Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.What was your purpose in the original comments, but to imply you are fufilling while Dean is "only about correcting others"Is the "One who needs to know" Blessed by that? You are concerned and do not want to BRAG but have NO Problem disparaging Dean? Funny how some preach but when asked to display how they are DOing what they ask others to do, well then it would be bragging LOL But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.BTW You are right that God already knowsTerry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To tell you these things would be bragging, Kev. What I am doing is known by the One who needs to know. He does it through me. Remember the instructions? Don't let your right hand know what the other is doing. Those who brag about their deeds already have their rewards. You might think about that.Terry=Kevin Deegan wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about
correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the
world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke
down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments
given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

The issue is NOT ERROR but wickedness Jesus was dealing with their HEART Condition NOT their ERROR![EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Not sure why you are talking about the sin of omission.Christ obviously believed that personal sin was a part the (ontological ??) equation. We see it's implicite reference in the words "andif ye being evil know how to do good .." and again " ..he who is without sin .." and again " .. there is none who are good ..." His sermonrecorded in Matt 5-7 gives usadditional "legal requirement" that most surely finds us all standing "in error." As a matter of fact, oneof the above quotes comes from that sermon. I was just making a point that
Judywas not prepared to accept - a point from scripture, by the way. jd-- Original message -- From: "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: Judy Taylor; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/14/2005 8:28:11 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Crossmental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any
difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. jd cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of
omission? __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





You have your reward, Kevin. I am still working on mine. Draw any
conclusion from this that suits you. It makes little difference what
you think.

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  It is always Bragging not False Piety?
  To TESTIFY how you are giving Drink to a thirsty man is BRAGGING?
  You brought up the subject, I thought you were gonna bless us
with some Testimony!
  Doesn't the bragging part come from ones ATTITUDE?
  Bragging is not in the essence of the act of compassion but is
something that comes forth from within ones heart.
  To simply say I work at the mission with the homeless would not
be bragging.
  Surely there must be some instance you could relate without
bragging
  To avoid the issue by using a device like I don't want to brag,
implies that you are doing so very much we could not avoid the thought.
  Or that you are doing nothing and must cover up.
  I see no reason that you could not give a simple statement and
not brag.
  There is a difference between what you do for God 
  AND
  What is God DOing Through you?
  
  Was Paul BRAGGING in 2 Co 11
  
  Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as
a fool) I am more; in labours more
abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent,
in deaths oft.
  
  
  What was your purpose in the original comments, but to imply you
are fufilling while Dean is "only about correcting others"
Is the "One who needs to know" Blessed by that?
  You are concerned and do not want to BRAG but have NO Problem
disparaging Dean?
  
  Funny how some preach but when asked to display how
they are DOing what they ask others to do, well then it would be
bragging LOL
  But I keep under my body, and bring it
into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached
to others, I myself should be a castaway.
  
  BTW You are right that God already knows
  
  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  To
tell you these things would be bragging, Kev. What I am doing is known
by the One who needs to know. He does it through me. Remember the
instructions? Don't let your right hand know what the other is doing.
Those who brag about their deeds already have their rewards. You might
think about that.
Terry
=

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  You have got to be joking, Dean!
There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting
others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?
  
  AND how do you do such?
  
  Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of
consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
  It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
  The bible speaks of it this way.
  
  My little children, let us not
love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
  Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!
  
  As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
  Pure religion and undefiled
before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows
in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
  
  What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
  Looking foward to your
TESTIMONY! PTL!
  
  
  
  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  Dean
Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of
omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about
giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on
the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the
interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to
be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy
broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and
neither would you.
  

Terry

  
  
  
  
  

cd: There is a difference in pointing out
error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to
do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a
hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission
in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are
living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of
omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by
correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then
there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other
sins of omission?

  


  
  
  
   Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo!
Shopping 

  
  
  
   
  Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo!
Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

AND how do you do such?

Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
The bible speaks of it this way.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!

As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL!
Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean Moore wrote:

Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums. When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such such when one doesNOTHING.God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.. They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to bragInvariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...) I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week? They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward.
Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO? Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them. They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate. -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And what does yourlittle chuck and jive
have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom." You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. Get a life and
stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little
children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





I am really sick of real stupid people who ASSUME to have facts they do
not have. I believe the Bible refers to them as gossips.
Terry


Kevin Deegan wrote:

  NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.
  When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!
  
  It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such 
such when one doesNOTHING.
  
  God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
  They profess that they know God;
but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto
  every good work reprobate..
  
  They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they
do not want to brag
  
  Invariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to
me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If
I had a nickel for every time...)
  I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week?
  They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want
their reward.
  Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO
NOT DO?
  Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them.
  They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST
  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be
appropriate. 

--
Original message -- 
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  A rather simple task is to read the post
instead of going off half cocked
  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with
Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have
a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By
definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to
thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is
"begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO
DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If
the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is
begging the question and is "ad hom." 

You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the
"Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two
levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding
that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. 
Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just
cannot do this rather simple task. 

jd




--
Original message -- 
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  You have got to be joking,
Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about
correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?
  
  AND how do you do such?
  
  Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing
of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
  It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
  The bible speaks of it this way.
  
  My little children, let us
not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and
in truth.
  Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!
  
  As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
  Pure religion and
undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless
and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the
world.
  
  What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
  Looking foward to
your TESTIMONY! PTL!
  
  
  
  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
  Dean
Moore wrote:

  
  
  
  You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of
omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about
giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on
the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the
interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to
be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy
broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and
neither would you.
  

Terry

  
  
  
  
  

cd: There is a difference in pointing out
error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to
do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a
hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission
in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are
living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of
omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by
correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then
there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other
sins of omission?

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Don't get so emotional.Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am really sick of real stupid people who ASSUME to have facts they do not have. I believe the Bible refers to them as gossips.TerryKevin Deegan wrote: NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums. When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such such when one doesNOTHING.God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work
reprobate.. They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to bragInvariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...) I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week? They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward. Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO? Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them. They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I read your post a couple of
times. My comments appear to be appropriate. -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go
directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom." You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in
truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Maybe you meantalebearer as the word gossip does not appearGossip n One who runs from house to house, tattling and telling news; an idle tattler.TA'LEBEARER, n. [tale and bear.] A person who officiously tells tales; one who impertinently communicates intelligence or anecdotes, and makes mischief in society by his officiousness.OFFI'CIOUS a. Busy; intermeddling in affairs in which one has no concern. Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am really sick of real stupid people who ASSUME to have facts they do not have. I believe the Bible refers to them as gossips.TerryKevin Deegan wrote: NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums. When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such such when one doesNOTHING.God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.. They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to bragInvariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...) I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week? They
want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward. Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO? Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them. They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate. -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] A rather simple task is to read the post instead of
going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom."
You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a
drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by
telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love
of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of omission?Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping Yahoo!

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

You have turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, Kevin. This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one tooth.

I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian. I met your challenge and what did we get for that -- yet another challenge of someone else. You are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to be proud of.

You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of us.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.
When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!

It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such such when one doesNOTHING.

God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate..
They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to brag

Invariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...)
I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week?
They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward.
Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO?
Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them.
They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate.

-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

AND how do you do such?

Ifind that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED!
It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
The bible speaks of it this way.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!

As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
Looking foward to your TESTIMONY! PTL!
Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean Moore wrote:

Yahoo! ShoppingFind Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross





Offi'cious is a new word for me, but I like it. It
does the job, maybe even better than gossip.



Kevin Deegan wrote:

  Maybe you meantalebearer as the word gossip does not appear
  
  Gossip n One who runs from house to house,
tattling and telling news; an idle tattler.
  
  TA'LEBEARER, n. [tale and bear.] A person who officiously
tells tales; one who impertinently communicates intelligence or
anecdotes, and makes mischief in society by his officiousness.
  
  OFFI'CIOUS a. Busy; intermeddling in affairs
in which one has no concern.
  
  
  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I
am really sick of real stupid people who ASSUME to have facts they do
not have. I believe the Bible refers to them as gossips.
Terry

Kevin Deegan wrote:

  NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.
  When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!
  
  It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such 
such when one doesNOTHING.
  
  God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
  They profess that they know
God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and
unto every good work reprobate..
  
  They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed
they do not want to brag

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

Well TerryI am not going to stoop to using the words real stupid.  Why have you become so emotional?Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  Offi'cious is a new word for me, but I like it. It does the job, maybe even better than gossip.Kevin Deegan wrote: Maybe you meantalebearer as the word gossip does not appearGossip n One who runs from house to house, tattling and telling news; an idle tattler.TA'LEBEARER, n. [tale and bear.] A person who officiously tells tales; one who impertinently communicates intelligence or anecdotes, and makes mischief in society by his
 officiousness.OFFI'CIOUS a. Busy; intermeddling in affairs in which one has no concern.  Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  I am really sick of real stupid people who ASSUME to have facts they do not have. I believe the Bible refers to them as gossips.TerryKevin Deegan wrote: NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.  When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such  such when one doesNOTHING.God's Work as
 you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE  They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate..  They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to brag
	
		Yahoo! Shopping 
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

if you still have that one tooth."Discussions" with you always devolve into questions of whether your gut hangs below your belt still. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:You have turned the "flapping of the gums" into a vocation, Kevin. This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one tooth.I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian. I met your challenge and what did we get for that -- yet another challenge of someone else. You are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to be proud of. You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of
us. jd-- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums. When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!It is a False Piety to saythat another should do such such when one doesNOTHING.God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.. They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not want to bragInvariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me
and says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a nickel for every time...) I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week? They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their reward. Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO? Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them. They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I read your post a couple of times. My comments appear to be appropriate. -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] A rather simple task
is to read the post instead of going off half cocked[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And what does yourlittle chuck and jive have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean? Not one single thing. Few on this site have a clue as to "ad hom." but your comments below are "ad hom." By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to thediscussion or remarks at hand. Another phrase for "ad hom" is "begging the question." "Truth" regarding "ad hom" has NOTHING TO DO WITH "AD HOM."This is just something you allmade up. If the response is an atack on any other issue but the one present, it is begging the question and is "ad hom." You have this fantasy that you are busier
doing the "Lord's work" than anyone else. A ridiculous assertion or two levels ("busier" and "Lord's work).. You are constantly demanding that those who offer a criticisim measure up to YOU.. Get a life and stay on subject --- or maybe you just cannot do this rather simple task. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man?AND how do you do such?Ifind
that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. They love in "WORD" but never in DEED! It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience. The bible speaks of it this way.My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!As a proponent of PURE RELIGION Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS. Looking foward to
your TESTIMONY! PTL! Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean Moore wrote: You have got to be joking, Dean! There is no sin of omission? Is following Christ only about correcting others? How about giving a drink to a thirsty man? How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus? How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate? Can you please God by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst. Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on? I would never do that and neither would
you.Terry cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission in this manner is clouding the true message of the Gospel-If we are living in the 11 commandments given to us then there is no sin of omission for to have love of the brethren we will be helping them-by correction their error(s) ,and giving to them for their needs-then there is on sin of omission.Ifnot- feel free to point out those other sins of
omission?

*Moderator Comment Re: [TruthTalk] Cross

2005-12-15 Thread Charles Perry Locke

John and Kevin, stop the name calling. Go private if you wish to continue.

From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:05:32 -0800 (PST)

   if you still have that one tooth.

  Discussions with you always devolve into questions of whether your gut 
hangs below your belt still.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have turned the flapping of the gums into a vocation,  Kevin.  
This is not completely true, however, if you still have that one tooth.

  I suspect that Terry is a full-time Christian.  I met your challenge and 
what did we get for that  --  yet another challenge of someone else. You 
are a lazy Christian, Kevin, doing those things that so often do not count 
for much but take a considerable amount of time.nothing to be 
proud of.

  You get no more tired of the senseless than do the rest of us.

  jd

  -- Original message --
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  NAW I am just sick of people that flap their gums.
  When it comes down to it they are all about words NOT DEEDS!

  It is a False Piety to say that another should do such  such when one 
does NOTHING.

  God's Work as you put it is NOT LIP SERVICE
  They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being 
abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate..

  They profess to be doing the WORK of God but when pressed they do not 
want to brag

  Invariably when preaching in public, some christian comes up to me and 
says you are doing it wrong you are going to turn them off. (If I had a 
nickel for every time...)

  I ask them How many people have you told about Jesus this week?
  They want to change subjects, any idea why? Guess they want their 
reward.

  Why would someone correct someone else about something they DO NOT DO?
  Only reason could be, their conscience is bothering them.
  They know it is RIGHT to witness to the LOST

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read your post a couple of times.   My comments appear to be 
appropriate.

  -- Original message --
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  A rather simple task is to read the post instead of going off half 
cocked

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And what does your   little chuck and jive 
have to do with Terry's remarks to Dean?  Not one single thing.   Few on 
this site have a clue as to ad hom.  but your comments below are ad 
hom.   By definition, ad hom is any statement that does not go directly to 
the  discussion or remarks at hand.   Another phrase for ad hom is 
begging the question.   Truth regarding ad hom has NOTHING TO DO WITH 
AD HOM.   This is just something you all made up.If the response is 
an atack on any other issue but the one present,  it is begging the 
question and is ad hom.

  You have this fantasy that you are busier doing the Lord's work than 
anyone else.   A ridiculous  assertion or two levels  (busier  and 
Lord's work)..   You are constantly demanding that those who offer a 
criticisim measure up to YOU..
  Get a life and stay on subject   ---   or maybe you just cannot do this 
rather simple task.

  jd

  -- Original message --
From: Kevin Deegan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  You have got to be joking, Dean!  There is no sin of omission?  Is 
following Christ only about correcting others?  How about giving a drink to 
a thirsty man?

  AND how do you do such?

  I find that most that speak like this are DOing nothing of consequence. 
They love in WORD but never in DEED!

  It tends to be a device to soothe their conscience.
  The bible speaks of it this way.
My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in 
deed and in truth.

  Talk is cheap it does not cost a thing!

  As a proponent of PURE RELIGION
  Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit 
the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself 
unspotted from the world.

  What are you DOing? Tell us of your DEEDS.
  Looking foward to your TESTIMONY!   PTL!

Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Dean Moore wrote:
  You have got to be joking, Dean!  There is no sin of omission?  Is 
following Christ only about correcting others?  How about giving a drink to 
a thirsty man?  How about passing by the wounded on the road to Damascus?  
How about the guy broke down alongside the interstate?  Can you please God 
by telling the thirsty guy he needs to be saved and leave him in thirst.  
Can you hand a tract to the guy broke down miles from nowhere and go on?  I 
would never do that and neither would you.

Terry

cd: There is a difference in pointing out error and stoning someone to 
death.We can call sin ,sin and are told to do so in the bible. Abstaining 
from original sin keeps one from being a hypocrite as you are trying to 
make Judy appear. Adding sin of omission

Re: [TruthTalk] Cross