Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 6:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Grimy Teeth
©2004 by Jonathan Scott
Once upon a time there were two boys and
they were the best of friends. Unfortunately for
both though, they were both about
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 11:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] A few more representative quotes...
--Quoting President Hinckley --
There are those who would have us believe in the
validity of what they
choose to
It's not about either of you. You two were having a
discussion about the difference between the law of Christ and the law
of Moses. Ron's take seemed to be that the focus with Christ's plan
was in forgiveness and repentance. Your take seemed to focus on the
whole punishment aspect of the
At 05:24 PM 3/22/2004, Ron Scott wrote in response to Jim Cobabe:
Equal protection is already afforded in our laws, for
legitimate and
traditional marriage. Nothing in the constitution
envisions the
degraded definition of marriage that encompasses any
particular union
of convenience, affection,
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 05:24 PM 3/22/2004, Ron Scott wrote in response to
Jim Cobabe:
Equal protection is already afforded in our laws
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
I believe President Hinkley's remarks on this issue
succinctly and
precisely outline the present direction of church
policy
At 08:46 AM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
I believe President Hinkley's remarks on this issue
succinctly and
precisely outline the
When Richard Wilkins lays out a real constitutional argument I
will be first in line to read it. So far, he resorts to bombast
and preaching rather than jurisprudence.
The local option you propose does have some major practical
complications (as we have discussed), ones that could be sorted
out
At 08:29 AM 3/23/2004, Ron Scott wrote:
Obviously these thoughtful judges are simply
wrong--in light of the
Church's teachings on this subject, as well documented by Jim.
Must I point out to you, of all people, that church teachings are
not part of the U.S. Constitution, which is the guide that
First, the father should be the same individual for both children. The
difference being one child is willing to live a higher law, with the
other needing to be prodded along.
I didn't focus on the Law of Moses. I focused on eternal laws of God.
You'll note that I not only quoted from the Old
: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 05:24 PM 3/22/2004, Ron Scott wrote in response to
Jim Cobabe:
Equal protection is already afforded in our laws, for
legitimate and
traditional marriage. Nothing in the constitution
envisions
But only if the current Constitutional powers are obeyed and honored.
When we have mayors in San Francisco and elsewhere giving out marriage
certificates in defiance of the law, then what piece of paper is there
that can establish the law? And when judges overstep their proper role
and
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 08:29 AM 3/23/2004, Ron Scott wrote:
Obviously these thoughtful judges are simply
wrong--in light of the
Church's
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Just because a judge is an activist judge, does not make him a
thoughtful one.
I'm growing weary of the tiresome assumption
Steven Montgomery wrote:
If, as BYU Professor Richard Wilkins states, we need a Marriage Amendment
because activist judges have misinterpreted the Constitution (See the URL
immediately below), then why not simply limit their jurisdiction as
outlined in Article III, Section 2?
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Marriage and the Constitution
Steven Montgomery wrote:
If, as BYU Professor Richard Wilkins states, we need a
Marriage Amendment
because
RB Scott wrote:
I do not support extramarital sex of
any kind.
What about sex within marriage if marriage is redefined to permit a man to
marry his German Shepherd or his boy friend? --JWR
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER:
RB Scott wrote:
I agree, John. Notice that yesterday the proponents of the
amendment expanded language of the proposed amendment to give
states the right to adopt same sex union legislation and even
Orrin Hatch was dithering.
Where can I read about this? --JWR
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 2:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
RB Scott wrote:
I do not support extramarital sex of
any kind.
What about sex within marriage if marriage
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 2:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Activist Judges
RB Scott wrote:
I'm growing weary of the tiresome assumption that activist
judge is a negative description. By definition any
: RE: [ZION] Marriage and the Constitution
RB Scott wrote:
I agree, John. Notice that yesterday the proponents of the
amendment expanded language of the proposed amendment to give
states the right to adopt same sex union legislation and even
Orrin Hatch was dithering.
Where can I read about
RB Scott wrote:
It would *seem* to you, perhaps. It doesn't *seem* so to me. I DO
NOT support same sex marriage, but my methods for opposing it do
not include (at this point) supporting a constitutional amendment
defining **marriage.**
Tell us more about your methods for opposing same-sex
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 2:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
RB Scott wrote:
It would *seem* to you, perhaps. It doesn't *seem* so
to me. I DO
NOT support same sex marriage
RB Scott wrote:
Tell us more about your methods for opposing same-sex
marriage. --JWR
I have done this before. I support the proposition that the state
should get out of sanctioning marriages altogether and should,
therefore ( as I noted in an earlier post today) draft
legislation that carefully
At 09:45 AM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
But only if the current Constitutional powers are obeyed and honored.
When we have mayors in San Francisco and elsewhere giving out marriage
certificates in defiance of the law, then what piece of paper is there
that can establish the law? And when judges overstep
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
RB Scott wrote:
Tell us more about your methods for opposing same-sex
marriage. --JWR
I have done this before. I
At 10:08 AM 3/23/2004, Ron Scott wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
But I thought you did support same sex civil unions. Am I
wrong?
Support
At 10:08 AM 3/23/2004, Ron Scott wrote:
I will continue to think...and will appreciate receiving
relevant, thoughtful comments from any of you.
RBS
I don't think that you will have any problem with a dearth of commentary
and opinion here on ZION. ;-)
--
Steven Montgomery
The most important
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 09:45 AM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
But only if the current Constitutional powers are
obeyed and honored.
When we have mayors
At 11:38 AM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
Steven Montgomery wrote:
If, as BYU Professor Richard Wilkins states, we need a Marriage Amendment
because activist judges have misinterpreted the Constitution (See the URL
immediately below), then why not simply limit their jurisdiction as
outlined in Article
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
SNIP
--RON--
2) As I read the constitution, the tax codes (for example) must
ensure equal treatment under law for all
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
At 10:08 AM 3/23/2004, Ron Scott wrote:
I will continue to think...and will appreciate receiving
relevant
At 02:05 PM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
Tell us how you feel about the amendment now that we know there's
a move afoot to change the language? grin What's Wilkins
reaction to same? This thing is beginning to feel like an
election year stunt gone haywire.
RBS
The marriage amendment is doomed to failure.
Ron Scott wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Just because a judge is an activist judge, does not make him a
thoughtful one.
I'm growing weary
At 07:22 PM 4/22/2004, you wrote:
I went with my 11 year old on a school choir trip today to Calgary for a
choral festival performance.
rest deleted
Hey Tom. Check the time and date on your computer. Your last email on ZION
was dated 4/22/2004 at 7:22PM grin. It sure makes a mess out of my email
force itself upon any other state that refuses it.
Gary Smith
Ron Scott wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 2:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
RB Scott wrote:
I do
So, in effect, you are not opposing anything. You are simply giving up
on the fight against moral crimes against society.
On the same note then, why do we not have the state get out of managing
crimes altogether. Let it all be resolved in the civilian courts.
Someone murdered? Why have
entitled to seek the full protection of the law, as
Steven will confirm.
RBS
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Okay, how about 200+ years of laws being interpreted
I think we should go for both of them. If one fails, we have an
alternative method. As it is, there probably will not be a perfect
solution, but in this case some solution may be better than allowing SSM
from proliferating.
Gary Smith
Steven Montgomery wrote:
At 02:05 PM 3/23/2004, you
: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
So, in effect, you are not opposing anything. You are
simply giving up
on the fight against moral crimes against society.
On the same note then, why do we
Are you related to Red Davis?
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
So are you or are you not saying that bestiality is
okay? If the state
gets out
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 02:05 PM 3/23/2004, you wrote:
Tell us how you feel about the amendment now that we
know there's
a move afoot to change
Ron Scott wrote:
Are you related to Red Davis?
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
So are you or are you not saying that bestiality is
okay
First, the father should be the same individual for both children. The
difference being one child is willing to live a higher law, with the
other needing to be prodded along.
Ok. I agree. Although my guess is that that will make the story a
little more bewildering.
I didn't focus on the Law of
explains most of the difficulty
you're having with my posts.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 5:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Worth reiterating...
No, but I know the guy. Don't agree with him
Hello, Jim
thanks for your response. evidently age and education have not sharpened my
writing skills very much.
everything you stated was/is true-- historically, the Church has not fared
well in the hands of the U.S. legal system.
However, I was asking the opposite question:
would it be
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Does anyone know how I can find an online copy of Scalia's dissenting
opinion in Lawrence v. Texas? I've Googled, and all I can find are news
stories, not the actual dissenting opinion. --JWR
Nevermind. I found it. Sorry to bother you. --JWR
Here's the court's url
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01slipopinion.html
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 10:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Scalia and Lawrence v. Texas
Does anyone know how I can find
Bob, I do see your point about constitutionality. It is an interesting
idea. If I understand correctly, you are imagining what would result if
we begin from an axiomatic assumption that church doctrines reflect the
true constitutional ideal, and we might use this standard for judging
I sing (soprano, mostly, but can sing alto when needed) and play piano.
I'm not the greatest at piano but, with practice, I can play passably
enough to be the pianist in sacrament meeting when our regular
pianist/organist is out of of town. I used to take clarinet lessons, but
only because my
Jim-- thank you for articulating what I was trying to say. perhaps if I
hang out more with the members of Zion, some of that may rub off on me.
Bob Taylor
Bob, I do see your point about constitutionality. It is an interesting
idea. If I understand correctly, you are imagining what would
Hi, Jack Redelfs here, again.
Gerald Smith wrote:
Gary: Any group, whether a nation, community, business, or family has
culture. And the way cultures interact, adapt, fight, etc, are all the
same, regardless of the unit/organization. The only difference is the
time span required for change to
Jack Redelfs wrote:
I ... read Will Ariel Durant's _History Of Civilization_ series
twice) ...
Grampa Bill exclaims:
Yikes!!! The BLT's home schooling must'a been rough!
Love Y'all,
Grampa Bill in Savannah
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine!
On Mar 21, 2004, at 3:44 PM, RB Scott wrote:
Gary:
Look, I don't think we're ever going to agree. I'm probably as
aware as you are as to what God taught and what he didn't. I
think are differences are in approach. I'm inclined to teach the
gospel, you seem inclined to preach repentance.
This is
That's a cop out. A touchy, feely, liberal cop out. You either need to
defend your position, or give ground.
The Bible is VERY clear that Christ preached repentance. In Matthew
4:17, it tells us that From that time Jesus began to preach, and to
say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at
Only he can fully judge us, but the Lord calls upon mankind to judge.
Why else have judges in Israel? And we can often tell if a person has
repented or not, by whether they have abandoned their sins. Someone
living in a gay relationship and pushing for gay rights has not
abandoned his sins,
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 12:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
That's a cop out. A touchy, feely, liberal cop out.
You either need to
defend your position, or give ground.
Oh phooey. You're
Harold Stuart wrote:
[RB Scott] I'm inclined to
believe that God must be a pretty forgiving God if he's willing
to forgive the sins of repentant sinners like you and me. I
believe that God wants to include as many people as He possibly
can...and that it's my job to do my bit to ensure
-Original Message-
From: Sander J. Rabinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 2:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
SNIP
Now what the Lord says to us personally and through the
scriptures is clear and unmistakable, but part of that is
because
At 11:10 AM 3/22/2004, you wrote:
Thus sayeth the self-appointed Judge in Israel. By the way, who's
pushing for gay rights here? I've seen a few here calling for
equal treatment under the law for all, which is something
guaranteed by our divinely inspired constitution.
RBS
Yes, but equality
At 02:24 PM 3/22/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 4:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 11:10 AM 3/22/2004, you wrote:
Thus sayeth the self-appointed Judge in Israel. By the
way
:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
That's a cop out. A touchy, feely, liberal cop out.
You either need to
defend your position, or give ground.
Oh phooey. You're itching for a fight and I'm not going to give
you one, no matter what names you call me or how you twist my
I'm lousy at parables. Please explain.
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 6:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Grimy Teeth
©2004 by Jonathan Scott
Once upon a time there were two boys
Ron Scott wrote:
--
Thus sayeth the self-appointed Judge in Israel.
---
Actually, in the church our judges are appointed by inspiration from
God. They are not self-appointed nor is their administration a form of
political spoils for the party in power. Just in case you did not
realize this.
Well put, Sandy. To me -- others will surely differ -- the
divinely-inspired U.S. Constitution is the guide for how we
should deal with such matters. In asserting that the
Constitution is divinely inspired, God suggests that that
equality, rule of law, and freedom to worship and choose right
-Original Message-
From: Jim Cobabe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 7:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Ron Scott wrote:
--
Thus sayeth the self-appointed Judge in Israel.
---
Actually, in the church our judges are appointed
Ron Scott wrote:
I'm lousy at parables. Please explain.
Here's my interpretation. I hope that I am not too far off
the mark.
1) The filth represents sin, generally, through the individual
choices of the children involved. The effects of the filth
represents the effects of sin.
2) The
I went with my 11 year old on a school choir trip today to Calgary for a
choral festival performance. On the bus I listened to a CD tape of a
talk by Mike Wilcox called Noah Blindness It has some interesting
insights into a number of things, including seers, and judging. He
points out that the
Sorry had to teach a class.
Ron Scott wrote:
I'm lousy at parables. Please explain.
Here's my interpretation. I hope that I am not too far off
the mark.
1) The filth represents sin, generally, through the individual
choices of the children involved. The effects of the filth
represents the
Ron Scott wrote:
---
Sophistry? I beg your pardon. Has the Church indicated that
people who believe the courts should decide the matter, as
mandated by the divinely-inspired constitution, are out of step
with the church and its teachings? Please point me to the
statement.
---
Others with better
At 08:58 PM 3/20/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Grampa Bill in Savannah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Vote Now!
RB Scott wrote:
Seriously, I don't
recall Christ preaching death for any offense
At 09:00 PM 3/20/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
RB Scott wrote:
I think you've got it right. The old laws are off the
books. If
they become
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Hi Gary. My name's Jack, I'm the only son of the listowner.
===
Grampa Bill comments:
Love your style... love your writing... love your dad! Visit us more often.
Love Y'all,
Grampa Bill in Savannah
With sufficient thrust, pigs
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
At 09:00 PM 3/20/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday
Gary:
Look, I don't think we're ever going to agree. I'm probably as
aware as you are as to what God taught and what he didn't. I
think are differences are in approach. I'm inclined to teach the
gospel, you seem inclined to preach repentance. I'm inclined to
believe that God must be a pretty
I have no idea.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 8:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
What laws do you think?
At 06:04 PM 3/19/2004, you wrote:
What laws?
-Original Message-
From: Steven
Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 8:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
What laws do you think?
At 06:04 PM 3/19/2004, you wrote:
What laws?
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 19
Ah yes, and stone to death adulterers too. Cast that first
stone, Steven.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 9:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
How about the Law of Moses (Jarom 1:5)? Contained
/20/2004, you wrote:
Ah yes, and stone to death adulterers too. Cast that first
stone, Steven.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 9:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
How about the Law of Moses (Jarom 1
I think Christ provided the answer, don't you?
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 12:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Hey, all l did was point out the penalty of the law--in
the days of Moses
That's somewhat of a fallacious generalization, John. Yes, it is
difficult and it takes time. But you know what, in business management
terms, we see change as requiring time. When a business changes its
culture, it requires years for the complete change over. Behaviorists
will tell you that
So, Tom, are you saying there is a link between playing the harmonica
and being on death row? Maybe we should continue teaching kids to play
the recorder so we don't raise a generation of harmonica playing thugs!
;-)
As for me, I sing tenor. I've sung in two temple dedication choirs, in
: Saturday, March 20, 2004 9:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
How about the Law of Moses (Jarom 1:5)? Contained
within the law of Moses
are many commandments, among them this one:
(Old Testament | Leviticus 18:22)
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind
I play the Piano
Carinet
and Sing. None as well as I should, but I'm taking Clarinet lessons again.
From: John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Musical Instruments Survey
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:36:38 -0900
How many of you play a
Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
That's somewhat of a fallacious generalization, John.
Yes, it is
difficult and it takes time. But you know what, in
business management
terms, we
know mine.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 2:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Ron, why is it that you attack the commandments of God
like this?
Christ, to this day, condemns sexual impurity
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
Hey, all l did was point out the penalty of the law--in
the days of Moses
and of the people in the Book of Mormon. Since we don't
live under a
theocratic government, death penalties for sabbath
breaking and adultery
does seem to be going way
offense...well, murder
perhaps (but I don't recall it).
RBS
-Original Message-
From: Steven Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 6:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
If he did then perhaps I'm just too blind to see.
Perhaps you can
RB Scott wrote:
I think you've got it right. The old laws are off the books. If
they become laws again, they ought to be enforced. What do I
think the penalty ought to be for Sabbath breaking? Dunno. Let
me consult with my Jewish and SDA friends. Seriously, I don't
recall Christ preaching
Hi Gary. My name's Jack, I'm the only son of the listowner. Since I advised
him in writing the post you are responding to (I'm his history advisor), I was
interested in your reply and decided to respond.
Gerald Smith wrote:
That's somewhat of a fallacious generalization, John. Yes, it is
Gerald Smith wrote:
It might take Iraq 40-50 years to switch over to a strong democracy. So
what? It means our grandchildren's children will live in a world with
one more free nation that isn't run by radical kooks.
Hope springs eternal in the human breast,
Man never is but always to be blest.
RB Scott wrote:
Seriously, I don't
recall Christ preaching death for any offense...well, murder
perhaps (but I don't recall it).
=
Grampa Bill comments:
But the Christ of the New Testament IS the Jehovah of the Old
Testament and in those days with those
-Original Message-
From: Grampa Bill in Savannah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] Vote Now!
RB Scott wrote:
Seriously, I don't
recall Christ preaching death for any offense...well, murder
perhaps (but I don't
Gays and lesbians should stay in the closet.
Their choice. They should NOT be afraid to come out of the closet, nor
should they expect to be accepted.
In my own personal experience, those of my friends who came out of the
closet remained my friends, and were counseled by me in love to change
Watch The Patriot some time. The battles they had in that
war were fought by two sides who had access to very similar weaponry.
Things have changed a lot since then. Governments have access to
stuff that is much more advanced than what the people have.
The Iraqis didn't stand a chance of
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 12:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now!
RB Scott wrote:
Seriously, I don't
recall Christ preaching death for any
offense...well, murder
perhaps (but I don't recall
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 19, 2004 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION] Vote Now!
The USA and her allies will successfully establish democratic rule in
Iraq.
A. Certainly
B. Probably
C. Maybe
D. Unlikely
E.
A. Certainly.
However, the question will be how long it lasts. Once we start
concentrating on other areas, will the Iraqis keep it? I mean, look at
what the French and Germans have done with their freedom since we ended
the Cold War and didn't concentrate on them as much.
Gary Smith
John W.
E. Strongly Disagree. How else are we going to know which ones are the
tares, if they hide amongst the wheat??? There's gonna be a big
bonfire, and I'm hoping to watch it, not get burned mistakenly because
we can't tell the firewood from the cabinetry in the house of God.
Gary Smith
John
Presidente Tomas,
So, are you saying that instead of trying to help them democratize, we
should have just turned Afghanistan and Iraq into seas of glass, to get
the radical terrorists out of our hair?
Gary Smith
Tom Matkin wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs
1 - 100 of 3342 matches
Mail list logo
