Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah

[Lance Muir]

I do not have a problem with 'exposure'. I don't think that that is Dave's point though. May I suggest that an equal. if not greater, danger to believers lies within Islam. Could you imagine David Miller or Kevin going to Mosques and, utilizing bullhorns, villify the attendants by addressing THEM as servants of Satan? ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: June 20, 2005 06:24 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Hill Cumorah I would think it would be more like Jeremiah (see Jer 13:1,2); this is obviously a one time object lesson to the part of Israel Jeremiah was ministering to rather than a pattern of behavior for all time.  However, part of public proclamation of Truth by nature involves exposing the lie of the false gods which of course will be offensive to those who worship them.  Why do you have such a problem with this?  jt   On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 05:58:55 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Elijah. From: Judy Taylor   Can you give us a "for instance" DaveH?  jt Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: DAVEH:  As I understand your position (and please correct me if I am misunderstanding your position), many Christians (specifically you, in this instance) believe that everything written in the Bible is specifically applicable to Christians today.   So, if a prophet of the Bible used a technique of mocking, that means it is OK for you to do the same thing.  If a prophet of God in the Bible is commanded to go preach on the streets, you assume that instruction applies to you as well....is that correct, Kevin?     To me, that isn't logical at all.  Just as what he compelled the prophets of the OT to do was not necessarily applicable to the prophets of the NT, what the Lord wants us to do today may or may not be what he wants us to do today.  It seems to me that the Lord over time has commanded various people to do things that he may not have commanded at a subsequent time or other peoples.   Hope that makes some sense..... Kevin Deegan wrote: DAVEH:  And because some of the early prophets mocked with God's blessing, you believe it is your right to do so as well?  Isn't that stretching logic a bit beyond it's breaking point? NO How so? Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Kevin Deegan wrote: Yes, but where they "Contending for the faith"? DAVEH:  What do you think they were disputi9ng if it wasn't their perspecdtive of the faith?  Don't you think they were arguing the truth as they saw it, perhaps in the same way it is done on TT occassionally?   Please show me where God admonished Paul, for his "much contention" DAVEH:  My last post about admonishment was regarding the bickering (if that's the proper word for it) Christians who Paul admonished.      If you were an apostle as was Paul and admonished me for arguing about theology, I would pay heed.  But I don't think you've even claimed to be an apostle, Kevin.   (Am I wrong on that?)  >From my perspective you seem to be one who is contributing to the contention.  Why do you think Paul's admonishment not to contend (Titus 3:9) doesn't apply to you?  Isn't it just a matter of perspective?  If another TTer were to argue against your understanding of whatever doctrine, why do you think you would be in the right and he would be in the wrong?  Do you sincerely believe you are right on all your points of doctrine, or do you allow you may at times be wrong? Show me where Elijah was admonished in the scriptures for MOCKING. In fact right after Elijah Mocking the prophets of Baal, God answered his prayer. DAVEH:  And because some of the early prophets mocked with God's blessing, you believe it is your right to do so as well?  Isn't that stretching logic a bit beyond it's breaking point?   God Mocks Prov 1:26 Because I have called, and ye refused... But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: DAVEH:   Were not a lot of early Christians in contention, and admonished for it? Kevin Deegan wrote: No read the scriptures. They were "IN God" with MUCH Contention. Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: DAVEH: Do you suppose that could have been one of Paul's faults? Kevin Deegan wrote: > By the way did you know that Paul was VERY CONTENTIOUS? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.