|
May 'exactly' and your 'exactly' may not convey the
same meaning, Judy. This is, after all, what TT is about, is it not? My
'exactly' is, of course, God's 'exactly'. Once that is understood we can move
on.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: February 27, 2006 07:28
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Truth or the
Opinions of Men
Has Canada had a tsnuami? Is this a new Lance
or what?
Exactly!
----- Original Message -----
Sent: February 27, 2006 07:12
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Truth or the
Opinions of Men
Walking in as much light as one has been given so
far is not the same as what you have been promoting
Nor is it saying that ppl who have chosen
darkness are walking in light. It has to be one or the other
because there is no concord between Christ and
Belial.
Exactly!
I was in too much of a hurry; I meant to say
I do disagree Lance because as I see it some choose to
walk
in darkness; while others embrace the light
and as scripture says "the path of the righteous is like
the
light of dawn it shines brighter till the
full day". It is possible to be walking in all the light one has
and
ATST not be in error. Noone alive today
has the whole loaf.
You said 'No I don't disagree, Lance'.
Therefore some of that which you believe say is error.
Correct?
This is, IMO, being made unnecessarily
complex.
No Lance I don't because the condemnation
is that some prefer darkness to light and refuse to
come.
I believe some walk in complete and
total darkness and there is little or no fear of God in the land,
yours
or mine.
THERE IS OBJECTIVE TRUTH!! You,
Judy, see some of it. Everybody on the planet sees some of it.
Nobody, including you, has all of it. Do you
disagree?
You speak as though there were no
"objective Truth" Lance and to me it appears as though this is
where
you live. Not so for me and
others. We may be the minority but then just because your
opinion a majority or
ecumenical one; this
is hardly a recommendation -
is it??
I disagree. DH has chosen The
Mormon religion. To insult his religion is akin to the
"cartoon incident' re: the Muslims.
If John Lennon were to have
been my brother then, I'd most assuredly receive that as an
personal insult.
cd: Maybe to John Calvin but not towards
you-see the difference?If the truth insults then that
person needs to change not the truth. If I were to say
that John Lennon was a pig-that is acceptable as I am not
making a personal attack on you.But if I were to insult
you by calling you names then I have personally attacked
you and would be in error to do so Lance. If I were to say
to DavH : Mormons are stupid I have not attacked DavH but
rather my attack was on the teaching of Mormonism. In
short-express your self but don't let it get
personal.
IFO took your, and Judy's,
evaluation of John Calvin to be nothing short of an
insult. However, should you 'rule' on this matter thus
eliminating your/my assessment to be off limits then, we
would have no ongoing dialogue.
By the way, wasn't there
some kind of mystery 'rule' about not responding to
posts with the above subject heading?
No-there
isn't any "new rule". This is the same rule Perry
enforced. If I make the call that someone has broken the
Ad. Hom. rule- that protects others from verbal
assaults- then reply to that in private. If I did not
enforce this then the issue of that person wrongs
will become part of the debate and become unsolvable as
others got involved.-this is for you protection as well
as others. The non-enforcing of some past Moderators has
lead to many good minds leaving this site.If these
attacks continue Lance it will only be a couple of
people here and how long can two /three people carry on
the same conversation?
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: February
26, 2006 07:10
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] *********** To all list members-Moderator
Comment***************
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: 2/26/2006
4:13:42 AM
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] *********** To all list
members-Moderator Comment***************
You spoke my question
"G"?????????
Moderator-This simply
means that the rules against insults and personal
attacks are going to be unforced by me-others are
under my protection and will get fair treatment-I
owe that to God not to those who will not keep their
agreement and abide by the
rules.
----- Original
Message -----
Sent:
February 25, 2006 18:07
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] *********** To all list
members-Moderator Comment***************
ftr, what does this
mean?
I plan on enforcing the rules of protection
on TT against those who love
ch[ao]s
|
