On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 04:01:08 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. Where does it say that man is to be stoned for having sex with a single woman or a prostitute?Who said anything about single or prostitute? The woman was committing adultery which means shewas married or else she was carrying on with a married man, either way both were to be stoned.How do you get that either were married?If there was no marriage involved then it would have been fornication.2.. How do you know that the man was not stoned?They were to stone both, and they came to Jesus asking for some kind of an OK, so why would theybring just one of them?Why am I not allowed to speculate -- ala Judy --- that the man was already stoned or that he would be dealt with at a later time?Why would you want to add your own speculation to what is written?3. Who are you accusing in the subject line above?What does it say JD? TruthTalk ??!!
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What on earth are you talking about JD? I understand that Jesus was teaching at the Mt. of Olives and it wasearly in the morning. There were ppl there listening to him teach - does it matter how many?. The Scribesand Pharisees (the ones Jn the Baptist called a generation of vipers in Matt 3:7) brought a woman to himsaying they had caught her committing adultery, right in the act - then they reminded him of the Law and askedwhat he wanted to do with her. The Law (Lev 20:10) states clearly that both man and woman are to be stoned.Since you are so keyed in to what you call "ontological truth" - what was their game? No mental gymnasticshere JD - No desire to add or take away one jot or tittle. Lets see a little of your theological expertise in action ....Were they trying to get him to OK stoning just one of them? Whatever it was they were setting Him up toaccuse Him. I'm glad He was not on TT. Don't need any setup to be accused here.On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:28:10 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:mental gymnastics will get you nowhere, Judy. The fact is, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A THOUSAND PEOPLE standing there. Some of them wanted to stone the woman -- but others, I am sure , were not going to participate. But none of that makes any difference. Jesus knows that they are all sinners and in possession of sin -- so He can make a general challenge, such as He did, knowing that the challenge will not be rebutted -- except, of course, 2000 years later by Judy Taylor. jd
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Who is trying to kill you, Blaine, or anyone else JD. Don't make this into something it's not. The men Jesus was speaking to were going to stone the adultress to death but noone said a word about the man and the Law said they were both to be stoned. As for TT. Mormon handshakes and sacred signs are occult and Mormonism itself is considered to be a cult by Mainstream Christianity. So what is your problem? Does speaking the truth to you make the messenger your enemy?On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:00:22 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:I didn't take it as a personal insult. I knew you didn't have that thought. No apology needed, but yours is appreciated, nonetheless. Fair is fair, Blaine, but I think we both know the rest of the story. You are right -- on TT it is apparently OK to do or say whatever as long as one thinks the opponent is the enemy.When Christ said "He who is without sin cast the .....," it is clear the He believed that all possess sin at any given moment on some level ...........but the sinlessperfection crowd arrogantly disagrees (when it is so obvious otherwise.)jdFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm, JD is right, denigrating the symbols of another's religious beliefs was wrong. I apologize--apparently I offended JD, although I did so unthinkingly and without intention. It just came off the top of my head. Sometimes we get too caught up in proving our opinions and beliefs are more valid than every one else's, and I think I may have done just that.Now, if I may, I would like to ask for an apology from anyone who supported waving Mormon underclothing in public by the street preachers at general conference in Salt Lake City. And, the same for those who more recently have denigrated Mormon handshakes, and other sacred symbols on TT. And the same for those who have insisted on spelling "Mormon" with a lower-case letter. :>)What is fair is fair, huh?BlainerbIn a message dated 12/13/2005 8:37:10 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Yes ! and , by the way, DH, your assessment of the world's point of view on this is neither accurate or relevant.and this statement borders on insulting:One of the weirdest songs I ever heard was The Old Rugged Cross. It seemed to glorify the cross in a negative way. I doubt the Lord even to this day is overly fond of that old rugged cross. :>)BlainerbI have to say something here -- both of you have made it clear (and I am not angry , by the way) that your stay here on TT has given you nothing in terms of reason for crossing over. Well, consider your failure in this regard, as well. With as much variety as exists here amongst us Christians, you would think someone would consider the Mormon religion. But this latest discussion, while revealing, would surely close the door to any serious student of the Bible. To put down "death" and the "cross" is to simply miss the point of the life of Christ here on this earth .............. and miss the mark by a wide margin !!!jd
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
