That one I'll give you..
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Christlike Love and Devoted Service
What is the greater feat, feeding the starving of India, or
putting
One of my favorites too, ambiguous though it may be, amiguous as love is.
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Love is...
One of my favorite characterizations of love is
Doubt she'll need much preaching to. But, the hoops, yes, and the 100 year
wait, unless she has a relative to do the work for her.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: George Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Love isn't just something claimed, it must be felt by the object of
that love.
==
Grampa Bill opines:
Not sure I can agree with this statement. When a loving parent
(heavenly or mortal) disciplines a wayward child, seldom does that child
At 03:40 PM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 4:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 10:17 AM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
At 04:50 PM 11/5/2003
-Original Message-
From: Elmer L. Fairbank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 8:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Church Doctrine #1
At 10:23 PM 11/5/2003 -0500, Uncle Ron wrote:
Mormons talk too much, I think.
Ayup!
Till the
At 07:22 PM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
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
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 03:40 PM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Definitions
At 07:22 PM 11/5/2003, you wrote:
I think that just as there are true doctrines and the twisted apostate
faux
At 07:49 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
So for the moment I will abide your claims above. Meantime, please answer
the key question I asked earlier: Give us specific examples of ... how
secular humanism and athiesm are bigger threats to us today than they were,
say, a couple of hundred years ago.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 07:49 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
So for the moment I will abide your claims above.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Definitions
At 07:56 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL
At 08:09 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 07:49 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
So for the moment I will
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 10:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 08:09 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven
This isn't the way I feel today, but it's a sentiment that I understand
about giving.
Sonnet 180 (I'm snuggled in a cotton batting bath)
By Tom Matkin, June 6, 2002
I'm snuggled in a cotton batting bath
My senses stuffed with wool and fire in one
A victim of some tiny microbe's wrath
My goose
Ron,
I'm not familiar with your work, but I get the feeling from this short
piece that the boy didn't really love SLC. At least not with his whole
heart. It is fascinating to him, eating at him, part of him, betraying
him, shaping him, annoying him and clinging to him like a familiar odor,
but he
The piece was extracted adapted from a chapter in a (forthcoming) novel.
I'd say you're quite the perceptive reader. And, thanks so much for
commenting.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You're giving spirit is, ah, catching.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 10:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Starts with G Giving
This isn't the way I feel today, but it's a sentiment that I understand
Kent Francis responds with a personal example:
Let me introduce myself. My name is Kent Francis and I currently
live in West Jordan, Utah. I grew up in the Bay Area of California and
graduated with a Masters Degree in Cybernetics from San Jose State. I
worked for IBM and Control Data for
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 6, 2003 7:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Death of the Dinosaurs -- Revisited
Since this was the topic of an earlier discussion about a looming and
lowering lunar orbit threatening the
To me such worries have a familiar John Birchian
ring to them, no offense intended.
Ron Scott
Some people (on this list even) are singularly unoffended by the taint
of John Birchism. Or so I've noticed.
Tom
//
///
And I'll take the John Birchian comment as a compliment--thank you.
--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
My point exactly! Sometimes I read through all the messages before
replying and other times I just dig in and start pushing the send button
without reading everything. Guess
Kent:
Interesting and provocative commentary. But, I will point out that my own
children attended public schools in Connecticut from pre-k through high
school in Wesport, Ct., arguably the most liberal school system in the state
(as you doubtlessly know, Kent). They were NOT exposed to the
At 11:43 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
Ron Scott wrote:
Well, by all means, clue them in as to what they've been missing. Be sure to
show how it correlates neatly with Mormon teachings.
Do I detect a note of sarcasm here.? LOL --JWR
More like a whole symphony grin.
--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL
At 10:36 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 12:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
Just hazarding a guess, but I suspect that most people, some
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 1:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
Ron Scott wrote:
Well, by all means, clue them in as to what they've been
missing. Be sure
-Ron-
Ah, the Church of Ezra resurrects itself. Who is its profit: Reed?
I don't understand this. Why would the prophet's words in General
Conference constitute the Church of Ezra? And why would Reed Benson
be called its profit? While I don't know Reed Benson personally, I
have had a few
Eternal Marriage Is Essential for Exaltation
Many people in the world consider marriage to be only a social custom, a
legal agreement between a man and a woman to live together. But to
Latter-day Saints, marriage is much more. Our exaltation depends on
marriage. We believe that marriage is the
Ron Scott wrote:
Ah, the Church of Ezra resurrects itself. Who is its profit: Reed?
Speaking of dead prophets, which are we to disdain more, Ezra Taft Benson
or Bruce R. McConkie? And after President Hinckley dies are we to discount
his words immediately, or should we wait an appropriate
What is this, some kind of litmus test? Please define new and everlasting
covenant?
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Official Doctrine #2
Eternal Marriage Is Essential
At 12:48 PM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 2:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 11:43 AM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
Ron Scott wrote:
Well,
Was BRM a prophet? Actually, I continue to respect the words of dead
prophets, but I frame them in the context today. In doing so, I often
discover that much of what they had to say had revealed more of about their
personal opinions than church doctrine. I'd say this was the case for every
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Eternal Marriage Is Essential for Exaltation
(* * *)
Anyone disagree that this is official Church doctrine? Our missionaries
teach it to investigators and it is taught to all new members as part of
the Gospel Essentials Sunday School class. Is this
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 4:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 12:48 PM 11/6/2003, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery
Kent writes:
I make it a policy to stay out of boats in general {8^).
Actually I have been on and off the list for as long as there has been a
John Redelfs on the internet... usually I just lurk unless I feel I can make
a contribution.
Tom Matkin wrote:
Subject: Re: [ZION] Nehors - Humanism
No, Stephen, you did not misinterpret my comments. I did know Reed Benson.
He did try to capitalize on his connection to his father and he succeeded
from time to time. Frankly, it's my opinion when the unexpergated history
of the church is written, it will be shown that Reed Benson's skillful
Ron Scott wrote:
Was BRM a prophet? Actually, I continue to respect the words of dead
prophets, but I frame them in the context today. In doing so, I often
discover that much of what they had to say had revealed more of about their
personal opinions than church doctrine. I'd say this was the
Ron Scott wrote:
What is this, some kind of litmus test? Please define new and everlasting
covenant?
It is not a litmus test, it is a Sunday School lesson from the Gospel
Essentials Sunday School manual entitled GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. On another
thread George Cobabe said that official Church
If that's how you define, eternal marriage between one man and one woman,
then no problem.
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 5:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Doctrine #2
Ron Scott wrote:
At 03:37 PM 11/6/2003, Ron Scott wrote:
President Benson was good enough for me. His politics were not. For
additional comments, see my response to your fellow traveler.
Ron Scott
That's fine. The politics can come later--as you gain more light and
knowledge grin. Which reminds me of a joke.
Ron Scott wrote:
It also troubling that some members of the Church, particularly those with
far right political views, think he is the only latter-day prophet worth
listening to.
Strawman. There are no such far right members still in the Church that I
am aware of. And I know an awful lot of the
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
Ron Scott wrote:
It also troubling that some members of the Church, particularly
those with
Ron Scott wrote:
If that's how you define, eternal marriage between one man and one woman,
then no problem.
Between man and woman. According to DC 132, plural marriage is OK as long
as it is authorized by the priesthood. --JWR
Sandy and Melinda Rabinowitz wrote:
Celestial marriage is important...if I didn't think so, I wouldn't have
written so many woe is me posts over the years. ;-) But the
covenants made in the sealing room won't exactly hold a lot of water if
the persons who made them don't follow through, or in
Hey Ron, are you familiar with THE AMERICAN RELIGION by Harold Bloom? I've
been reading it the last couple of weeks, and I find it fascinating that a
Gentile (actually, he is an unbelieving Jew) would state a conviction that
1. The Latter-day Saints will resume the practice of plural marriage
For practical purposes, I'll stick with my previous statement -- one man,
one woman -- if you don't mind.
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Official Doctrine #2
Ron
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] THE AMERICAN RELIGION
Hey Ron, are you familiar with THE AMERICAN RELIGION by Harold
Bloom? I've
been reading it the last couple
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
At 03:37 PM 11/6/2003, Ron Scott wrote:
President Benson was good enough for me. His
Ron Scott wrote:
Ah yes. And no Korihors and wolves in sheeps clothing either, right John?
I'm pretty sure there are some Korihors and wolves in sheep's
clothing. Ezra Taft Benson said so. grin --JWR
//
/// ZION LIST
As you know, John, when you ask the question I can testify that this is
true. However there is more to the answer than what has been presented.
I would be delighted to discuss this topic with courtesy and good will, if
that would be possible.
George
- Original Message -
From: John W.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Ron Scott wrote:
If that's how you define, eternal marriage between one man and one
woman,
then no problem.
Between man and woman. According to DC 132, plural marriage is OK as
long
as it is authorized by the priesthood. --JWR
And, technically, it *is*
Ron Scott wrote:
That's fine. The politics can come later--as you gain more light and
knowledge grin. Which reminds me of a joke. Something about newborn mice
being good communists. When the commissar come back a few weeks later he
discovers they are not communists anymore--their eyes had
Tom Matkin wrote:
Strawman. There are no such far right members still in the Church
that I am aware of. And I know an awful lot of the far right crowd
being one of them myself. --JWR
I'm only able to follow this logically if you are out of the Church now
John. Help me understand what
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
Ron Scott wrote:
Ah yes. And no Korihors and wolves in sheeps clothing either, right John?
-Original Message-
From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 7:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Nehors - was: Unconditional Love
Strawman. There are no such far right members still in the Church
that
I
am aware of.
George Cobabe wrote:
As you know, John, when you ask the question I can testify that this is
true. However there is more to the answer than what has been presented.
I would be delighted to discuss this topic with courtesy and good will, if
that would be possible.
If you have any information that
Tom Matkin wrote:
But I am curious how we are going to square the circle of proselyting
those corners of the world where it is in good standing. But God has
figured that out and he'll let us know when we have a need to know. For
now, those who insist on practicing it separate themselves from
Sandy and Melinda Rabinowitz wrote:
And, technically, it *is* presently authorized in one very specific
instance: Brother A is sealed to Sister B. B dies. (By definition,
this sealing continues beyond death.) Brother A can at a later point be
sealed to Sister C. In fact, I think that was what
Ron Scott wrote:
I'm pretty sure there are some Korihors and wolves in sheep's
clothing. Ezra Taft Benson said so. grin --JWR
He did? When? Was he eyeballing his son? grin
Maybe he was eyeballing his grandson, Steve. double grin --JWR
I understand all of the above, however, I go back to Joseph Smith in which
he was commanded to join none of them. Helping them on some project may
appear to be wonderful, but doesn't it suggest to some who have gotten
mixed signals that we no longer hold the doctrine of the restoration of the
Very good policy.
Stacy.
At 12:07 AM 11/06/2003 -0500, you wrote:
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
The following is from an author that has strongly shaped the man I am:
---
It was the genius of Jefferson to see that free people would rarely have to
defend their freedom against principalities and powers and satanic enemies
of the good, but that they would have to defend it daily against the
More from a great thinker on the topic of education:
Just as we cannot assume that what we call education is the same as
Jefferson's informed discretion, we cannot assume that Jefferson meant
what we mean by press and able to read. In our time, the press, in
spite of threats real or imagined,
My sentiments exactly!
Stacy.
At 02:50 PM 11/05/2003 -0900, you wrote:
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
John W. Redelfs wrote:
---
Would that all the single men in the Church were as devoted to keeping
the commandment to marry as seriously as you did and do.
---
Many of us take it seriously too. As a single man I am working on
addressing this concern as quickly as sanity and comfort can afford.
Tom Valletta has just joined us.
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
Jim Cobabe wrote:
Many of us take it seriously too. As a single man I am working on
addressing this concern as quickly as sanity and comfort can afford. I
have discovered that it is not an easy thing for an older man.
Jim, the Lord is going to bless you more than you can imagine. I know
it.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
---
How can we teach
1) that all the other churches contain some truth, and 2) that we are
the only true church? The two statements are not incompatible, but they
might easily be confused by those of inadequate education.
---
I believe it is being done as we speak. Do
Ron Scott is new on the list, and while he knows a few of us, there are a
great many others that he doesn't. I would love it if each of us would
post a short bio by way of introduction. We never know each other as well
as we think we do. Take R. Kent Francis, for an example. I've known him
There are those on this list that in the past have argued that Eternal
Marriage is NOT essential for exaltation. Exaltation is living in the
presence of God the Father and receiving His blessings. Yet it is suggested
that to live in the Celestial Kingdom it is not necessary to have an Eternal
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:14:18 -0900 John W. Redelfs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is a concern that I have, probably a futile concern. How can
we teach 1) that all the other churches contain some truth, and 2)
that we
are the only true church? The two statements are not incompatible, but
And I said that this is only true if we get into speculative
areas. As long as we stick to the most basic fundamentals, official
Church doctrine is easily determined.
And George would agree with this statement wholeheartedly.
It is the scope of the most basic fundamentals that is so very hard
Jim Cobabe wrote:
John W. Redelfs wrote:
---
How can we teach
1) that all the other churches contain some truth, and 2) that we are
the only true church? The two statements are not incompatible, but they
might easily be confused by those of inadequate education.
---
I believe it is being done as
Tom wrote---
The development of the church was leapfrogged a hundred years by polygamy.
In my completely unverifiable opinion.
does anyone on the list have some figures for the actual number of menb
that were practicing polygamy, versus the total number of marriage age men
in the church during
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Tom Valletta has just joined us.
Welcome, Tom!
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
75 matches
Mail list logo
