-Original Message-
From: Stephen Beecroft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Whom God hateth
Still, God has seen fit to represent his
feeling as hatred, so I don't think we have much business telling him
he's
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Whom God hateth
Stephen Beecroft wrote:
Still, God has seen fit to represent his feeling as hatred, so I don't
think we have
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
Anything controversial here? I don't think so. And yet we are the only
Church upon the earth that
-Original Message-
From: George Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Is God's Love Unconditional?
Ron, You may be right. As a matter of fact I agree with you.
However, Elder Nelson does not. He
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] A Question for George
SNIP
Well, good doctrine drives out bad, and vice versa. We are not free to
just believe whatever we want.
-Original Message-
From: Rusty Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 9:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] change the subject
it appears to me, that this subject of adultery and repentance is
one where
we will just have to agree to
I would be happy to teach Mother Theresa about the nature of God. Could you
arrange a meeting?
George
- Original Message -
From: Ron Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:05 AM
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
Why would you bring up specifically this book? All of the sunday school
manuals are correlated, therefore all could pass the same test you offer -
could they not?
As an aside of a general comment and observation. I had a discussion with a
friend who was not only on the committe that writes and
George:
I think it's safe to say at this point that Mother Theresa understands the
nature of God quite well, probably better than any of us. While she lived on
this earth she personified what God teaches. A refresher course from us
therefore is quite unnecessary.
Ron
-Original Message-
I think we are dealing with semantics here. God's love is infinite, and he loves all
his children, which is one definition of unconditional love. God does not accept
sin or wickedness, so another definition would suggest that God loves such people
less, making unconditional love an oxymoron.
Swans are Everything, Everything I Wish I Could Be
by Tom Matkin, October 25, 2001
I'll bet a day will come some time
When swans will be considered prime
When long necked birds will rule the roost
And man will be in deep decline.
With human influ'nce thus reduced
Economies will get a boost
And
Great to hear from you again, Ron! I was wondering about you the other day. I'm very
glad JWR invited you back. I think the list has moderated somewhat over the years, and
is more open to a variety of voices. Many of us are learning to not speak in such
shrill tones, but in our temple voices
At 07:42 AM 11/5/2003 -0700, St George wrote:
I would be happy to teach Mother Theresa about the nature of God. Could you
arrange a meeting?
Your place or hers?
Till
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
At 09:15 AM 11/5/2003 -0500, Uncle Ron wrote:
Ad hominem defined: he who defines the term, can always redefine it to
justify his attacks.
But thanks, Till. I hope my differences of opinion aren't inferred (again)
as ad hominems, but are regarded as they are intended: challenges to beliefs
and
Your list is doctrinal. But once one begins scratching the surface of these ideas, we
leave the area of doctrine and enter into speculation.
For example,
1. There is a God with a body, but was he a Savior on his own planet?
2. Is Christ the savior of just this world, all the universe? What?
3.
At 04:50 PM 11/5/2003 +, Gary wrote:
What is important is that we don't twist that love as did Nehor and as do
many today, to excuse their sinful natures.
Has anyone taken the time and energy to look at the Anti-Christs in the
Book of Mormon, such as Nehors, Korihor and company, to see
-Ron-
But a more important question: Why do people on ZION focus so
intently on such things -- judging others in particular --
anyway? Who authorizes us to hold people to artificial
standards that may or may not have anything whatsoever to do
with the gospel Christ taught and can not be
-Original Message-
From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Starts with G Green House Gas
Swans are Everything, Everything I Wish I Could Be
by Tom Matkin, October 25, 2001
I'll bet a day
-Ron-
To me, immortality and eternal life have the same meaning. Your
definition of immortality is mine for salvatation. Yours
for eternal life is mine for exaltation.
I think you meant salivation. ;)~ --(drool)
This points up once again that which I personally believe to be the
basis for
-Grampa Bill-
Not at all certain of this, but it appears that this might be
instruction rather than doctrine.
In this matter, I would be much more inclined to trust the understanding
of a bishop/former bishop than my own. (Especially since my
understanding of this principle is, as I
-Stephen-
However, as I pointed out, the very wording of the scriptural
verses I cited shows that God hates the person or people being
named
[Note that I believe you were replying to an earlier, erroneously-sent
version of my email. Possibly I expressed myself somewhat more clearly
in the
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Beecroft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 12:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Definitions (was: RE: Eternal Life vs. Immortality)
SNIP
I believe this is the case with God's hatred of sinful and unrepentant
At 10:15 AM 11/5/2003, Stephen Beecroft wrote:
I believe this is the case with God's hatred of sinful and unrepentant
individuals. Some object to the term hate, thinking that somehow it
lessens God's majesty or perfection to hate anyone or anything; or
perhaps they're afraid that if perfect
I agree Ron, and further think that the right question might be one of
trying to figure out why we misunderstand what he has said. The first
option ought to be to reconcile what I/You think he said with what we either
understand or could learn from a better understanding of his message.
It seems
Then why the silly suggestion you offered?
George
- Original Message -
From: Ron Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:56 AM
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
George:
I think it's safe to say at this point that Mother
You put me right in the corner with that observation. I try not to leave
myself open to such situations.
George
- Original Message -
From: Tom Matkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
At 10:17 AM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
At 04:50 PM 11/5/2003 +, Gary wrote:
What is important is that we don't twist that love as did Nehor and as do
many today, to excuse their sinful natures.
Has anyone taken the time and energy to look at the Anti-Christs in the
Book of Mormon, such as
George Cobabe wrote:
It is an interesting question to consider. How do we treat comments from
authoritative sources that disagree with others such sources, or with the
scriptures? It is too often a tendency to throw quotes rather than to think
through a question, and now we find it so easy to
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 6:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] A Question for George
Ron Scott wrote:
Well, good doctrine drives out bad, and vice versa. We are
not free to
just
Ron Scott wrote:
I'd guess it would be wiser of me to withhold comment on a topic so
potentially explosive here. So I will demur. But for me, and perhaps a few
others, please refine your alarm. Give us specific examples of the kinds of
apostates we have today (as foretold in the Book of Mormon)
Ron Scott wrote:
Anything controversial here? I don't think so. And yet we are the only
Church upon the earth that teaches this most basic and fundamental truth
about God, that he is an actual, physical being, as tangible as man
is. How can anyone know anything about God that is correct if
Ron Scott wrote:
The scripture above deliniates how the the church organization should deal
with adultery, IMO. Bear in mind that denying the Holy Ghost transforms one
into a candidate for a bunk with the Sons of Perdition. And, we've been
told that the Sons will be FEW IN NUMBER -- as few as
Gerald Smith wrote:
Your list is doctrinal. But once one begins scratching the surface of
these ideas, we leave the area of doctrine and enter into speculation.
For example,
1. There is a God with a body, but was he a Savior on his own planet?
I don't know.
2. Is Christ the savior of just this
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 6:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Repentance from adultery (was: RE: Is God's Love
Unconditional?)
Ron Scott wrote:
The scripture above deliniates how the the
Ron Scott wrote:
Was Mother Theresa more righteous or just more famous for her
righteousness
than say the widow in your ward that give the widows mite to the Fast
Offering? --JWR
Don't know any widows who my ward that gives a mite, so I can respond
specifically. The general answer to your
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
Ron Scott wrote:
Was Mother Theresa more righteous or just more famous for her
righteousness
At the present, I'm editing some short stories, columns, poems etc. for an
proposed anthology. I thought some of you may enjoy this short piece,
relevant somewhat to our discussions today.
A BEHOLDER OF ZION
By RB Scott
©2003, 1986
Cee's love for her Manhattan was not unlike Jeds for
Well she may have gotten the message, but was a long way from understanding
the nature of God and His real relationship with His children.
I do not think that is denigrating her offering and her truly magnificant
life at all. It is just the result of her religious affliation.
And while I am
Ron Scott wrote:
Sure. Just as soon as I finish running down your request on GBH and
unconditional love. What is this, a test? Your perverse way of getting me to
read the scriptures and conference addresses (Mel will be proud of you,
John. And, you know to whom he talks)? But if you've heard the
Ron Scott wrote:
You solicited a judgement. Sure I knew it was bait. A possible sandbag. But
what the hey, my day today was destroyed hours ago. So, based upon what I
know, I rendered unto man what he requested: a well considered judgement.
Gosh Ron, what ruined your day if I'm not being too nosy
I think that just as there are true doctrines and the twisted apostate
faux copies made by Satan, there are true passions and then there are
faux passions created by Satan.
Therefore, I believe God is capable of love, but not lust. God is capable
of a Godly hatred of wickedness, but not an evil
It is a wise person who can state when he doesn't know. There's nothing
wrong with pondering and some speculating, as long as it doesn't become a
personal doctrine that we insist on pushing onto others. I don't know the
answers to any of those questions, either. I do have some personal ideas
on
And it goes beyond that, as well. Just doing what is right is not enough
to entitle us to eternal life. We must do what is right, with the right
intent. Christ, Paul and other prophets condemned the Jews and others for
good actions without the right intentions behind the actions. We can't
just
Gary:
Thank you very much. I couldn't have said it better myself. But I'll add one
thing: I have a hunch that in the final analysis her life-long goodness
renders her doctrinal deficenies if not meanignless then very surmountable.
But that's just one man's opinion.
Ron
-Original
Are you suggesting the radical idea and true faith embodies good works
performed joyfully? What a radical you are!
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 9:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] A Question for George
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
Ron Scott wrote:
You solicited a judgement. Sure I knew it was bait. A possible
sandbag. But
Ron Scott wrote:
Thank you very much. I couldn't have said it better myself. But I'll add one
thing: I have a hunch that in the final analysis her life-long goodness
renders her doctrinal deficenies if not meanignless then very surmountable.
But that's just one man's opinion.
Who knows, maybe
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Doctrine #1
Ron Scott wrote:
Thank you very much. I couldn't have said it better myself. But
I'll add one
thing: I
Our characterizations and definitions of love itself are ambiguous at
best. No surprise that discussions of this quality in the character and
nature of God are fraught with difficulty.
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER:
I am not here. I'm over there.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Roll Call
Some former list members are returning. Hallelujah! I'm interested in
finding
Jon Spencer wrote:
I am not here. I'm over there.
Blown off course in that last hurricane, no doubt.
;-)
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
What is the greater feat, feeding the starving of India, or putting up with
John W. Redelfs? Now there is a challenging question. lol Perhaps my
wife is the most Christlike woman on earth. grin --JWR
//
/// ZION
Jon Spencer wrote:
It's hard not to love someone who loves the Lord, even if they don't have it
all quite right. It's hard not to be grateful to someone who thinks enough
of you to try to save you, even though they can't.
Changing the subject, how is it that when an anti-Mormon bashes me for
Absolutely true, but she will still need a teacher. She will still have to
listen to the missionaries and accept the truth. Short cuts? Maybe, but
she will still have to go through the hoops.
George
- Original Message -
From: Ron Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
But the Book of Mormon is still the Word of God, right? --JWR
The Iron Rod is the Word of God! (Like my voice??)
Jon
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html
Well, John, I would agree with you there. Bashing is not in the Christlike
action list of things to do. I am commanded to love the bashers, but I
certainly don't have to either like them or tolerate being around them.
But I was referring to those who try, out of love, to help me be saved.
My
56 matches
Mail list logo
