Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
In a message dated 4/29/2004 10:14:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Chapter two it is. And my point remains unanswered - women can give orders just as long as they offer no new information (?) And what about foot washing and the cultural impact of water baptism? Did your mother teach you or is this some kind of biblical injunction put into force after you left home? Daniel responds: Ummm ... hypocrite -- how does Miriam asking YahShua to go fetch some wine for a marriage feast translate into TEACHING MEN DOCTRINE? ARE YOU REALLY THIS STUPID?? You once again missed the point, genius. She did not simply ask Jesus -- she told him to do something that He did not want to do. And I missed your answer to the question of cultural commands such as baptism and foot washing. You are 0 for 2 -- try to catch up. Danny Boy says: Literally iniquity means ANTI NOMOS -- OR ANTI LAW -- or against the Law of Moses. Or, to put it simply -- against the Torah. Jesus came to redeem us from being against the Torah. The Bible says: We are saved by grace apart by obedience to the Law of Moses (Romans 4) Jere 31 prophecies the end of Law as a covenant relationship. In His Grace John
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
This one said: You are a hoot. Great scripture. I am startled that it is actually in your Bible. Daniel responds: I read a King James Bible and use it for all my preaching and study. The difference between you and me, however, is that I ACTUALLY OBEY THE ENTIRE BIBLE. You pagan Christians like to pick and choose which parts you want to obey. For example -- Leviticus condemns homosexuality and a few verses later, it condemns eating pork. You Christians will loudly condemn the homosexuals and yet go eat your pork. HYPOCRICY So, yes, my Bible does have that verse -- and I heed them all. You, my little hypocrite -- do not. Pathetic lot you pagan Christians are. you said: Chapter two it is. And my point remains unanswered -women can give orders just as long as they offer no new information (?) And what about foot washing and the cultural impact of water baptism?Did your mother teach you or is this some kind of biblical injunction put into force after you left home? Daniel responds: Ummm ... hypocrite -- how does Miriam asking YahShua to go fetch some wine for a marriage feast translate into TEACHING MEN DOCTRINE? ARE YOU REALLY THIS STUPID?? you concluded: In His Grace John Smithson Daniel responds: Titus 2 defines what grace is. You seem to have no understanding of grace. Titus 2:11-15 gives us a very good idea. GRACE TEACHES US TO DENY ALL UNGODLINESS . . . AND TO LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY. Ungodliness is that which does not confrom to Torah. Living righteously is living according to Torah. . . . He might redeem us from all iniquity Literally iniquity means ANTI NOMOS -- OR ANTI LAW -- or against the Law of Moses. Or, to put it simply -- against the Torah. Jesus came to redeem us from being against the Torah. This is grace, pal. And you have rejected it. REPENT YOU TORAH BREAKERS! WWW.TORAHANDSPIRIT.COM -- DANIEL JOHN LEE _ TheFreeSite.com: Home of the Web's best freebies. http://www.thefreesite.com -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
You said: And, earlier in that post he writes the words Judy Jezebel -- proving that he can actually rhyme and write at the same time. Daniel -- do you walk upright while slinging the club and dragging your woman back to the cave? Daniel responds: And have you not ever read Psalm chapter 1? Blessed is the man . . . WHO SITTETH NOT IN THE SEAT OF THE SCORNFUL. You enjoy making stupid, unfoudned statements of mockery to see who will laugh along with you? Never outgrew your school bully days? Typical of you pagan Christians. Typical. You said: Seems like Mary, the mother of a very adult Jesus, was deserving of full respect as she issued orders to her son in John 3. Or is it that women can give orders but not teach. And your wife goes for this? Give me a break. Daniel responds: YHVH will take care of your breaks soon enough. Unlike Spingola, I'll leave the fist throwing to Yah. He packs a much tougher punch than I do anyway. Miriam (Mary) did not teach anyone in John chapter 3. By the way, imbecile -- Miriam is not even mentioned once in John chapter 3. I think it was John chapter 2 you were referring -- but she doesn't teach anyone in that passage either. You said: I'll go find a hiding place, now Daniel responds: Revelation 6:16 will be a verse I pray you will taste in the near future. All married females should be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen -- as much as possible. If you'd like scriptural support of that statement -- I'd be happy to give it! :) In YahShua and defending His Eternal Torah, Daniel John Lee _ TheFreeSite.com: Home of the Web's best freebies. http://www.thefreesite.com -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
In a message dated 4/27/2004 11:58:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You said: And, earlier in that post he writes the words "Judy Jezebel" -- proving that he can actually rhyme and write at the same time. Daniel -- do you walk upright while slinging the club and dragging your woman back to the cave? Daniel responds: And have you not ever read Psalm chapter 1? "Blessed is the man . . . WHO SITTETH NOT IN THE SEAT OF THE SCORNFUL." You are a hoot. Great scripture. I am startled that it is actually in your Bible. You enjoy making stupid, unfoudned [actually spelled "unfounded"] statements of mockery to see who will "laugh" along with you? Never outgrew your school "bully" days? Typical of you pagan Christians. I do such for my own benefit. And you are right -- a bit of humor in the midst of such rantings is a good thing. You said: Seems like Mary, the mother of a very adult Jesus, was deserving of full respect as she issued orders to her son in John 3. Or is it that women can give orders but not teach. And your wife goes for this? Give me a break. Daniel responds: YHVH will take care of your breaks soon enough. Unlike Spingola, I'll leave the fist throwing to Yah. He packs a much tougher punch than I do anyway. Miriam (Mary) did not teach anyone in John chapter 3. By the way, imbecile -- Miriam is not even mentioned once in John chapter 3. I think it was John chapter 2 you were referring -- but she doesn't teach anyone in that passage either. Chapter two it is. And my point remains unanswered - women can give orders just as long as they offer no new information (?) And what about foot washing and the cultural impact of water baptism? Did your mother teach you or is this some kind of biblical injunction put into force after you left home? In His Grace John Smithson
RE: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
David wrote: What I meant was that the MODERATOR did not have a history with you, so I was stepping in to help the moderator out a little bit. I am the list administrator. Daniel repsonded: Yet you did not take it upon yourself to rebuke Ruben and hit two birds with one stone. Probably because you have a case of jude syndrome. Refer to the Book of Jude and you will read about those who hold mens' persons in advantage. I know how it works -- you pick on the guy you don't like or esteem, and let it slide with those you deem honorable. It's hypocricy and sick, David Miller. Daniel wrote: I Timothy chapter 2. Shall I quote it for you? 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. David wrote: The passage seems to omit the part you have added about burning in Hell for all eternity. We also need to talk about what the word teach means here in this particular context. Somehow you equate this with posting doctrine on this forum. Daniel responds: Only because your brain has an omission, David. Does YHVH have to spell everything out for you? When a command is given in scripture, it is implied that if the commanmdent is broken, you will burn in hellfire. Or when YHVH commands us not to commit adultery in Exodus 20 -- are you going to promote adultery merely because the consequence is not given in that same chapter??? Gee, David Miller, with logic like yours I'm beginning to more and more wonder why this forum is called truthtalk at all. David wrote: From my perspective, much of what we call teaching in modern times is highly feminized and not at the level being discussed in this passage. The stress in this passage is not teaching, per se, as much as it is the woman not usurping authority over the man. Daniel responds: Oh, give me a break. You're about as obfuscating as any politician. Teaching is teaching is teaching. If I put forth a concept concerning scriptural doctrinal matters -- it's teaching. Even if my pupils want to discard it. When Judy Jezebel Taylor took it upon her female self to dissect my Romans 7 article it was her TEACHING the interpretation of scriptural doctrines. This is strictly forbidden in I Timothy 2. The only thing feminized is you and the rest of the pencil necked wimps who refuse to abide by scripture and put these jezebels in their place. David wrote: By your agreement here that women may prophecy, pray, share, relay a joke, or tell about their cat or dog, you have just agreed that the word silence in 1 Timothy 2:11 does not mean absolute silence all the time. In other words, you are interpreting silence in a particular context, and not arguing that women ought to be silent all the time. However, you do not seem to be applying this same method of interpretation to the word teach. When it comes to the word teach you have a much broader application. Daniel responds: Paul wrote for a woman to be in silence as it pertains to teaching doctrine to men. It's not too difficult to understand when you've been delivered from the effiminate devils that control your soul, David Miller. Daniel wrote: You brought up Titus 2:3 . . . try completing Paul's thought by reading verse 4. Women are allowed to teach OTHER WOMEN. Not other men. David wrote: My Bible in verse 4 does not say, not other men. Daniel responded: I Timothy 2 tells women not to teach or usurp authority over men. Titus says women can teach good things -- to other women. Is this really so difficult for you? I am convinced more than ever that you are not filled with the Holy Spirit as the simplicty of YahShua the Messiah has been squeezed out by your effeminate parsing of the Word. David wrote: Did your mother ever teach you? Daniel responded: Why, she sure did. But she NEVER taught me doctrinal matters. That was my dad's department PER I TIMOTHY CHAPTER 2. As I say, let the women teach other women and children -- but not doctrinal matters to man. That is what the jezebels on this forum are doing and that is why they are headed for eternal torment -- along with you men for allowing the women to become so unscriptural in their actions. David said: I do not believe that women should exercise authority over men and teach them from that kind of context. Daniel said: There is only one way for a woman to teach men doctrinal matters. It's called teaching men doctrinal matters. Judy's done it, and others have as well during the short time I've been here. Don't play these silly games Miller, you know what scripture
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
In a message dated 4/21/2004 11:40:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And, David, I will start with you. Repent you hypocrite before you burn in the Lake of Fire for all eternity. In YahShua and by His Torah, Daniel John Lee www.TorahandSpirit.com Maybe having a computer virus wasn't so bad. John (I'm still reading)
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:26:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Daniel responds: Oh, give me a break. You're about as obfuscating as any politician. Teaching is teaching is teaching. If I put forth a concept concerning scriptural doctrinal matters -- it's teaching. Even if my "pupils" want to discard it. When Judy Jezebel Taylor took it upon her female self to dissect my Romans 7 article it was her TEACHING the interpretation of scriptural doctrines. This is strictly forbidden in I Timothy 2. The only thing feminized is you and the rest of the pencil necked wimps who refuse to abide by scripture and put these jezebels in their place. And, earlier in that post he writes the words "Judy Jezebel" -- proving that he can actually rhyme and write at the same time. Daniel -- do you walk upright while slinging the club and dragging your woman back to the cave? Too bad there is no attention paid to cultural "requirements" such as this prohibition against women teachers and the washing of feet and the cultural impact to the Jewish community of "water baptism for the remission of sins." Seems like Mary, the mother of a very adult Jesus, was deserving of full respect as she issued orders to her son in John 3. Or is it that women can give orders but not teach. And your wife goes for this? Give me a break. I'll go find a hiding place, now In grace John Smithson -- a new grandpa -- 6.4 pounds named Lilly Marie. Bare foot, pregnant and submissively silent will not be my prayer for her.
RE: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
Congrats on the new grandchild John. Good to see you back on the list again. I was wondering where you were. Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 9:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:26:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Daniel responds: Oh, give me a break. You're about as obfuscating as any politician. Teaching is teaching is teaching. If I put forth a concept concerning scriptural doctrinal matters -- it's teaching. Even if my pupils want to discard it. When Judy Jezebel Taylor took it upon her female self to dissect my Romans 7 article it was her TEACHING the interpretation of scriptural doctrines. This is strictly forbidden in I Timothy 2. The only thing feminized is you and the rest of the pencil necked wimps who refuse to abide by scripture and put these jezebels in their place. And, earlier in that post he writes the words Judy Jezebel -- proving that he can actually rhyme and write at the same time. Daniel -- do you walk upright while slinging the club and dragging your woman back to the cave? Too bad there is no attention paid to cultural requirements such as this prohibition against women teachers and the washing of feet and the cultural impact to the Jewish community of water baptism for the remission of sins. Seems like Mary, the mother of a very adult Jesus, was deserving of full respect as she issued orders to her son in John 3. Or is it that women can give orders but not teach. And your wife goes for this? Give me a break. I'll go find a hiding place, now In grace John Smithson -- a new grandpa -- 6.4 pounds named Lilly Marie. Bare foot, pregnant and submissively silent will not be my prayer for her.
RE: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
David Miller wrote: No, Ruben is not allowed to attack you either. I'm sure the list moderator will take care of all such problems privately. I stepped in to talk with you on the list and to make the rules clear because I had some history with you. Daniel wrote: And you have no history with Ruben??? Hmmm . . .something doesn't add up here, David. What I meant was that the MODERATOR did not have a history with you, so I was stepping in to help the moderator out a little bit. I am the list administrator. Daniel wrote: ALL WOMEN SHOULD STOP POSTING DOCTRINE on this forum or they will burn in Hell for all eternity. David Miller wrote: Uh, do you have chapter and verse on this? Daniel wrote: I Timothy chapter 2. Shall I quote it for you? 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. The passage seems to omit the part you have added about burning in Hell for all eternity. We also need to talk about what the word teach means here in this particular context. Somehow you equate this with posting doctrine on this forum. From my perspective, much of what we call teaching in modern times is highly feminized and not at the level being discussed in this passage. The stress in this passage is not teaching, per se, as much as it is the woman not usurping authority over the man. David Miller wrote: I believe that women have freedom to share on this forum. Titus 2:3 says that the women should be teachers of good things. This forum provides a place where women may teach others, and also a place for prophecy or prayer, or just to share or relay a joke, or tell us about their cat or their dog. :-) Daniel wrote: Scripturally, women may 1. prophecy 2. pray 3. share or relay a joke 4. tell us about their cat or dog but THEY MAY NOT TEACH OTHER MEN. Women may teach other women and children. But the scripture I just quoted is pretty clear. If women attempt to do what Paul suffured not, those women will burn for all eternity. By your agreement here that women may prophecy, pray, share, relay a joke, or tell about their cat or dog, you have just agreed that the word silence in 1 Timothy 2:11 does not mean absolute silence all the time. In other words, you are interpreting silence in a particular context, and not arguing that women ought to be silent all the time. However, you do not seem to be applying this same method of interpretation to the word teach. When it comes to the word teach you have a much broader application. Daniel wrote: You brought up Titus 2:3 . . . try completing Paul's thought by reading verse 4. Women are allowed to teach OTHER WOMEN. Not other men. My Bible in verse 4 does not say, not other men. You seem to have added that part. Nevertheless, it does say that women should teach the young women. That was my point. Paul would not contradict himself, so the letter to Timothy which says that he would not allow women to teach should be understood in a specific context. Otherwise, we have contradictory statements. We have Paul in one place teaching Titus that the elder women should be teachers of good things, and in another place telling Timothy that he does not allow women to teach. You reconcile the contradiction by arguing that women may teach other women but not other men. There are other ways of reconciling the apparent contradiction, but before we explore those, let me ask you a question. Did your mother ever teach you? Daniel wrote: Since you don't seem to yet grasp basic scriptural truths (such as not suffering a woman to teach doctrine to men), I do not believe that women should exercise authority over men and teach them from that kind of context. You are not a good listener if you came away thinking that I support women teaching doctrine to men. What you do not seem to comprehend is that we do not allow either men or women on this list to teach in that fashion. We share ideas and viewpoints with one another, but this forum is not for correcting and rebuking and straightening out the minds of one another. Therefore, this list is setup in such a way that both men and women may share freely. Daniel wrote: let us, for now, refrain from going into the more meatier and deeper truths in Romans 7. No good feeding you meat when you still choke on the milk. The milk of Romans 7 is very simple, but you just don't want to hear it. Daniel wrote: I really don't care if I am banned from this forum as it is obvious most of you don't have a clue of even the BASIC fundamentals of scripture. Pretty sad. This sounds like a very selfish
Re: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
ROTFL in the Matchless name of Jesus!!!Daniel Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear David,Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua!!!David, you said:You are welcome here as long as you donot flame other members. We do not allow attacking list members, suchas pronouncing curses on them, nor do we allow deriding them in how theypractice their faith.Daniel responds:Do you mean like the way Ruben non-Israel "flamed" and "attacked" me? I pointed out legitamate sin in Judy's life, Ruben the "clown" reviled me. Either way, you are a hypocrite. You allow Ruben to "flame" me and yet I am warned because I "flamed" Judy. You can't have it both ways, David.David said:In regards to allowing women to participate, it would be better if wedid not talk about a specific list member such as Judy. Daniel responds:That's fine. My rebuke was not limited to just Judy, but to any other female on a forum called TRUTHtalk that would post doctrinal positions to other men. I can see there are more than a few jezebels on this forum, albiet Judy seems to be the worst of the lot. So, in order not to make it specifc: ALL WOMEN SHOULD STOP POSTING DOCTRINE on this forum or they will burn in Hell for all eternity. As for my Romans 7 article . . . I did not "add" to the Word of Yah, rather I explained what Paul was saying. As another brother recently noted, Paul did not write in American english. He didn't even write in KJV english. However, if you believe Paul really meant being dead to the law as in not needing to keep the law anymore, then I suggest you go out and start murdering. After all, Paul said you don't need to keep that silly law anymore, right? David, I know you're smarter than that.Anyway, since you never reproved or warned Ruben for "flaming" me I will take your warning to me as a mis-statement on your part and will continue to point out specific sins in specific people's lives on this forum.And, David, I will start with you. Repent you hypocrite before you burn in the Lake of Fire for all eternity.In YahShua and by His Torah,Daniel John Lee www.TorahandSpirit.com_TheFreeSite.com: Home of the Web's best freebies.http://www.thefreesite.com--"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.orgIf you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
RE: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
David said: No, Ruben is not allowed to attack you either. I'm sure the list moderator will take care of all such problems privately. I stepped in to talk with you on the list and to make the rules clear because I had some history with you. Daniel responds: And you have no history with Ruben??? Hmmm . . .something doesn't add up here, David. David said: Uh, do you have chapter and verse on this? Daniel responds: I Timothy chapter 2. Shall I quote it for you? 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. David said: I believe that women have freedom to share on this forum. Titus 2:3 says that the women should be teachers of good things. This forum provides a place where women may teach others, and also a place for prophecy or prayer, or just to share or relay a joke, or tell us about their cat or their dog. :-) Daniel responds: Scripturally, women may 1. prophecy 2. pray 3. share or relay a joke 4. tell us about their cat or dog but THEY MAY NOT TEACH OTHER MEN. Women may teach other women and children. But the scripture I just quoted is pretty clear. If women attempt to do what Paull suffured not, those women will burn for all eternity. You brought up Titus 2:3 . . . try completing Paul's thought by reading verse 4. Women are allowed to teach OTHER WOMEN. Not other men. As Ruben is found of saying . . . this is Bible 101. Since you don't seem to yet grasp basic scriptural truths (such as not suffering a woman to teach doctrine to men), let us, for now, refrain from going into the more meatier and deeper truths in Romans 7. No good feeding you meat when you still choke on the milk. I really don't care if I am banned from this forum as it is obvious most of you don't have a clue of even the BASIC fundamentals of scripture. Pretty sad. So, again, I will tell you David to repent for your hypocricy in warning me but not warning Ruben and I will again state that the jezebels on this forum, such as Judy Taylor, are wicked wretches headed for eternal torment if they don't repent of their violation of I Timothy 2. Shame, shame, shame! In YahShua and by His Torah, Daniel John Lee www.TorahandSpirit.com _ TheFreeSite.com: Home of the Web's best freebies. http://www.thefreesite.com -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
[TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
Dear David, Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua!!! David, you said: You are welcome here as long as you do not flame other members. We do not allow attacking list members, such as pronouncing curses on them, nor do we allow deriding them in how they practice their faith. Daniel responds: Do you mean like the way Ruben non-Israel flamed and attacked me? I pointed out legitamate sin in Judy's life, Ruben the clown reviled me. Either way, you are a hypocrite. You allow Ruben to flame me and yet I am warned because I flamed Judy. You can't have it both ways, David. David said: In regards to allowing women to participate, it would be better if we did not talk about a specific list member such as Judy. Daniel responds: That's fine. My rebuke was not limited to just Judy, but to any other female on a forum called TRUTHtalk that would post doctrinal positions to other men. I can see there are more than a few jezebels on this forum, albiet Judy seems to be the worst of the lot. So, in order not to make it specifc: ALL WOMEN SHOULD STOP POSTING DOCTRINE on this forum or they will burn in Hell for all eternity. As for my Romans 7 article . . . I did not add to the Word of Yah, rather I explained what Paul was saying. As another brother recently noted, Paul did not write in American english. He didn't even write in KJV english. However, if you believe Paul really meant being dead to the law as in not needing to keep the law anymore, then I suggest you go out and start murdering. After all, Paul said you don't need to keep that silly law anymore, right? David, I know you're smarter than that. Anyway, since you never reproved or warned Ruben for flaming me I will take your warning to me as a mis-statement on your part and will continue to point out specific sins in specific people's lives on this forum. And, David, I will start with you. Repent you hypocrite before you burn in the Lake of Fire for all eternity. In YahShua and by His Torah, Daniel John Lee www.TorahandSpirit.com _ TheFreeSite.com: Home of the Web's best freebies. http://www.thefreesite.com -- Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man. (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] To flame or not to flame
Daniel wrote: Do you mean like the way Ruben non-Israel flamed and attacked me? I pointed out legitamate sin in Judy's life, Ruben the clown reviled me. Either way, you are a hypocrite. You allow Ruben to flame me and yet I am warned because I flamed Judy. You can't have it both ways, David. No, Ruben is not allowed to attack you either. I'm sure the list moderator will take care of all such problems privately. I stepped in to talk with you on the list and to make the rules clear because I had some history with you. David Miller wrote: In regards to allowing women to participate, it would be better if we did not talk about a specific list member such as Judy. Daniel wrote: That's fine. Thank you. I take this as an agreement between us. Daniel wrote: My rebuke was not limited to just Judy, but to any other female on a forum called TRUTHtalk that would post doctrinal positions to other men. I can see there are more than a few jezebels on this forum, albiet Judy seems to be the worst of the lot. So, in order not to make it specifc: ALL WOMEN SHOULD STOP POSTING DOCTRINE on this forum or they will burn in Hell for all eternity. Uh, do you have chapter and verse on this? I believe that women have freedom to share on this forum. Titus 2:3 says that the women should be teachers of good things. This forum provides a place where women may teach others, and also a place for prophecy or prayer, or just to share or relay a joke, or tell us about their cat or their dog. :-) Daniel wrote: As for my Romans 7 article . . . I did not add to the Word of Yah, rather I explained what Paul was saying. No, you added to the Word of Yah. You claimed that it made better sense if we added the words you suggested and then read the passage again with these words added. I think the passage reads better without adding your words. Daniel wrote: As another brother recently noted, Paul did not write in American english. He didn't even write in KJV english. So. That does not give you liberty to add words to Scripture. Saying that we are become dead to the law that we might be married to another is very different than saying that we are become dead to the condemnation that the law brings in order to be married to another. The whole context is talking about how it would be adultery for us to be married to the law and to Christ at the same time, but your added words obfuscate the Scriptural teaching here. The passage is talking about covenants, which is basically akin to a marriage agreement. Daniel wrote: However, if you believe Paul really meant being dead to the law as in not needing to keep the law anymore, then I suggest you go out and start murdering. After all, Paul said you don't need to keep that silly law anymore, right? David, I know you're smarter than that. I am free to do anything that would benefit another, and if murder was an expression of love, I would do it. The problem is that it is not a manifestation of love. In Christ, we KEEP THE LAW, but not by letter, nor by superficial observances which lack understanding, but by truthful obedience to Christ. Daniel wrote: Anyway, since you never reproved or warned Ruben for flaming me I will take your warning to me as a mis-statement on your part and will continue to point out specific sins in specific people's lives on this forum. Please don't do that. I am not the moderator any longer on this list. Perry is. He will likely ban you if you violate the list rule which has been here since the beginning of this list. The purpose of the rule is to facilitate communication. When people are railing at each other and calling each other names, and declaring others to be going to the lake of fire, learning ceases. Sorry, but this list is not a Christian list, it is not an evangelistic list, it is very simply a list for discussion and learning. We have a rule to preserve that as best as possible. It is not a perfect setup, and we all break the rule from time to time, but then we just encourage one another to back off the personal attacks and get back on subject. So, please, Daniel. How about trying to work with us on this, not against us, and let's see if we can actually discuss some of these issues with substantive arguments from the Word of God. Daniel wrote: And, David, I will start with you. Repent you hypocrite before you burn in the Lake of Fire for all eternity. Good idea. I repent of all my sins. Can we talk now? Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- 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
