draw our attention to it so, not to worry about that.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 14:18
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
Lance wrote:
When the Mormons speak of 'a historical christ
David Miller wrote:
The use of CE for a date kind of gives away
their bias, doesn't it. :-)
DAVEH:
The way you said that, it somewhat implies you
think you have no biases, DavidM. :-\
I'm biased toward naming our centuries after Christ our Creator. Any other
bias is the wrong bias
: January 02, 2006 09:57
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
David Miller wrote:
The use of CE for a date kind of gives away
their bias, doesn't it. :-)
DAVEH:
The way you said that, it somewhat implies you
think you have no biases, DavidM. :-\
I'm biased toward naming our
Lance wrote:
Offended at the 'name' of WHICH JESUS CHRIST,
DavidM? The Mormon jesus seems to cause you little
offence!
I'm talking about the NAME Christ. Mormons use the same name, Lance, or
haven't you noticed?
Peace be with you.
David Miller
--
Let your speech be always with
@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:11
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
Lance wrote:
Offended at the 'name' of WHICH JESUS CHRIST,
DavidM? The Mormon jesus seems to cause you little
offence!
I'm talking about the NAME Christ. Mormons use the same name, Lance, or
haven't you noticed
Lance wrote:
Syntax/Semantics, DavidM. When the NAME is
employed, it is filled out with a meaning. If your
meaning and theirs (the Mormons) is one and the
same then, that's your problem.
In regards to our date system, when I say BC or AD, I think we are talking
about the same historical
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 02, 2006 11:42
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
Lance wrote:
Syntax/Semantics, DavidM. When the NAME is
employed, it is filled out with a meaning. If your
meaning and theirs (the Mormons) is one and the
same then, that's
Lance wrote:
IFF BC/AD/BCE as employed by Mormon/Christian
are absent CONTENT then, indeed you are correct.
IMO, no word is employed without content, DavidM,
therefore, you are INCORRECT.
When the Mormons speak about the historical Christ, are they talking about a
different person? I don't
: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
Lance wrote:
IFF BC/AD/BCE as employed by Mormon/Christian
are absent CONTENT then, indeed you are correct.
IMO, no word is employed without content, DavidM,
therefore, you are INCORRECT.
When the Mormons speak about the historical Christ, are they talking about
-- often
punctuated; Common Era -- often punctuated
Dictionary.com: Com·mon Era n. Abbr. C.E. The period coinciding with the
Christian era.
Perry
From: Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ
Lance wrote:
When the Mormons speak of 'a historical christ',
David, they speak of THEIR HISTORICAL CHRIST.
I think you are letting your bias and sectarianism get in the way. How many
historical Christ's have their been? Do you really think the Mormons are
speaking historically of someone
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <TRUTHTALK@MAIL.INNGLORY.ORG> Sent: January 02, 2006 12:16 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of Christ Lance wrote: IFF BC/AD/BCE as employed by Mormon
/Christian are absent CONTENT then, indeed you are correct.
] The cross of Christ
There is no doubt that the cross was extremely important and
emphasized by the primitive Christians, much more so than by most Christians
today.
DAVEH: I've found a few comments that suggest some early Christians
were less than enamored by the cross
DAVEH: The way you said that, it somewhat implies you think you have
no biases, DavidM. :-\
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
What bis with this CE nonsense? It is Anno Domini,
the year of our Lord..If you have a Lord.
CE is for Lost sinners, not saved ones.
DAVID:I may have missed your reply to the 'spirit
of freemasonry/mormonism' thingy. Did you reply?
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: December 29, 2005 17:57
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of
Christ
Most
Terry wrote:
What bis with this CE nonsense? It is Anno Domini,
the year of our Lord..If you have a Lord.
CE is for Lost sinners, not saved ones.
Nice observation, Terry. The use of CE for a date kind of gives away their
bias, doesn't it. :-)
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
DAVEH: OK Terry.I understand your feelings about that. I'll try
to behave myself, as I sure don't want to be visited by the terminator
again :-(
Terry Clifton wrote:
Yeah, I have a big problem viewing anything that minimizes Christ. In
this case though, I will forgive you. If
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 1:38
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The cross of
Christ
There is no doubt that the cross was extremely important and
emphasized by the primitive Christians, much more so than by most Christians
today.
DAVEH: I've found
What bis with this CE nonsense? It is Anno Domini, the year of our
Lord..If you have a Lord. CE is for Lost sinners, not
saved ones.
Terry
Dave wrote:
There is no doubt that the cross was extremely important and
emphasized by the primitive Christians, much more so than
The power of the cross is found in the "turn the other cheek" doctrine of
Christ. Jesus said that his disciples must take up their cross and follow
him. It is the doctrine of self denial, illustrated most perfectly by
Jesus going to the cross to die for us. Without the cross, you have just
An apprehension of the crossis so important that it truly makes a
difference between those who are born from above and those who are not.
DAVEH: Do you believe the Primitive Christians had that apprehension?
David Miller wrote:
The power of the cross is found in the "turn the
DAVEH:
Do you believe the Primitive Christians had
that apprehension?
Yes, absolutely. Just look at how much the New Testament writes about the
cross. The earliest of the church fathers also wrote about the cross.
Ignatius of the first century magnified the cross even more than Paul did.
There is no doubt that the cross was extremely important and
emphasized by the primitive Christians, much more so than by most Christians
today.
DAVEH: I've found a few comments that suggest some early Christians
were less than enamored by the cross
The use of the cross as a
23 matches
Mail list logo
