Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
ftr, partic DaveH--* = an influential phrase (to me) from the title of a Warren Zevon song, the best rendition of it iv'e heard by the Pixies with Zevon's son Jordan after Warren's relatively recent death--on the Zevon post-mortem CD 'Enjoy Every Sandwich' (indeed:) On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:55:51 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:41:19 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * ..& it ain't that pretty at all
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:41:19 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..& it ain't that pretty at all On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:17:57 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || "but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: .. "Tweedle-dee Dum and Tweedle-dee DeeThey're throwing knives into the treeTwo big bags of dead man's bonesGot their noses to the grindstones Living in the Land of NodTrustin' their fate to the Hands of GodThey pass by so silentlyTweedle-dee Dum and Tweedle-dee Dee Well, they're going to the country, they're gonna retireThey're taking a streetcar named DesireLooking in the window at the pecan pieLot of things they'd like they would never buy Neither one gonna turn and runThey're making a voyage to the sun"His Master's voice is calling me,"Says Tweedle-dee Dum to Tweedle-dee Dee Tweedle-dee Dee and Tweedle-dee DumAll that and more and then someThey walk among the stately treesThey know the secrets of the breeze Tweedle-dee Dum said to Tweedle-dee Dee"Your presence is obnoxious to me."They're like babies sittin' on a woman's kneeTweedle-dee Dum and Tweedle-dee Dee Well, the rain beating down on my windowpaneI got love for you and it's all in vainBrains in the pot, they're beginning to boilThey're dripping with garlic and olive oil Tweedle-dee Dee - he's on his hands and his kneesSaying, "Throw me somethin', Mister, please.""What's good for you is good for me,"Says Tweedle-dee Dum to Tweedle-dee Dee Well, they're living in a happy harmonyTweedle-dee Dum and Tweedle-dee DeeThey're one day older and a dollar shortThey've got a parade permit and a police escort They're lying low and they're makin' hayThey seem determined to go all the wayThey run a brick and tile companyTweedle-dee Dum and Tweedle-dee Dee Well a childish dream is a deathless needAnd a noble truth is a sacred creedMy pretty baby, she's lookin' aroundShe's wearin' a multi-thousand dollar gown Tweedle-dee Dee is a lowdown, sorry old manTweedle-dee Dum, he'll stab you where you stand"I've had too much of your company,"Says, Tweedle-dee Dum to Tweedle-dee Dee" B Dylan :: Copyright © 2001 Special Rider Music
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:17:57 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ..perhaps while yer curled up fondling myow myow.. ..re-consider your role in repentance, even some rock stars aren't adverse to it, e.g., "_sitting_ under my blue sky of deceptionthe colors run every time it rainswrought brought forth fashioned from inceptionmy own hands and i take all the blame refrain: as the light goes outdarkness with her bated breathwaits out on periphery of the camp firedecadence and violence we do best burned out face down in the gutterlowest point i could find to ground zeroroll back alibis and skies are crushingdo we paint with much too black a brush rock and roll what is it any moreyouth profound or profane to endurepassion in the back seat or at the foot of the crossgoing going gone and finally lost" Bill Mallonee (BMI) ©1997
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
..& it ain't that pretty at all On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:17:57 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: || "but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')]"
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
interesting --perhaps while yer curled up fondling myow myow, try to juxtapose your inadvertant underlying insight to the real point: "but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')]" ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ..Wal-Mart? ..they dont pay enough or give enough benefits to those POOR people who work there so SAD!
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
And OH YEAH, JD Be sure to list what the men you have "Mentored" are doing now. Things like Full time missionaries, Pastors, Street Preachers, or in your case whatever it is that they DO and that you have mentored them up & onward to... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Can't make disciples without mentoring - it is impossible. Apparently you do not know this -- I'm guessing you don't do it or you wouldn't make fun of the idea. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Go ye into all the world and Mentor the Gospel! Who have you mentored? Do you have any men?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:tower power -- nothing much to report in terms of results. Protest-evangelism -- ditto. Mentor evangeliism -- it is the method of historical record --- how he church grew from 12 to several million within its first 100 years of life. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lanc
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Not so JD. that is Job ONE 1 CO 1:11 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Lets compare lists of "men" that follow. Since you are big on this is the way let us see how you walk in it. BTW just what things in you, do they follow? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Can't make disciples without mentoring - it is impossible. Apparently you do not know this -- I'm guessing you don't do it or you wouldn't make fun of the idea. jd jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Go ye into all the world and Mentor the Gospel! Who have you mentored? Do you have any men?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:tower power -- nothing much to report in terms of results. Protest-evangelism -- ditto. Mentor evangeliism -- it is the method of historical record --- how he church grew from 12 to several million within its first 100 years of life. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Can't make disciples without mentoring - it is impossible. Apparently you do not know this -- I'm guessing you don't do it or you wouldn't make fun of the idea. jd jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Go ye into all the world and Mentor the Gospel! Who have you mentored? Do you have any men?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tower power -- nothing much to report in terms of results. Protest-evangelism -- ditto. Mentor evangeliism -- it is the method of historical record --- how he church grew from 12 to several million within its first 100 years of life. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM .C>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> &g
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
The liberals have some kind of Papist FIXATION that their Opinion should affect your Opinion! Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Opinion??? Oh well!! "So what is man whose breath is in his nostril??" I will "ditto" Izzy - There is just one that matters to me and it is not yours JD On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 02:18:30 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Judy -- I do know what you believe. Let me make something clear since our time together is quickly coming to an end. "Carnal" applies to you, IMO, because of what I see as a reliance on your own brand of intellectualism. As a result, you own the most unusual collection of theological opinions I have ever seen. On the good side, you are one of the most imaginative theologians I know something I actually respect. It is what I see in Barth and the others. what is most difficult is your attitude during a discussion. You simply do not know how to disagree without the personal assault. On other forums, I am not nearly as aggressive as I am here -- but there simply is no other way to be when in the presence of you, Linda, Kev and even David (at times). I know that you will not agree with any of my view expressed above -- but most of what I have said is, IMO, a good report of you. Finally, if your posts do not tell us what you believe, your purpose for writing is suspect. Since I can read, I do know what you believe. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I know enough to recognize the real when I see it and so do my BSF buddies You JD, don't know what I believe, nor can you evaluate my BSF buddies Quit being so presumptuous, it is not a godly trait On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:26:45 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Refer to Matt 28 19ff and Mark 16:15 ff -- and stop prestending that you alone understand scripture. Your BSF buddies do not think much of your theology, that is for sure. jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" Aberrent theologies make little cookie cutter disciples just like Lance and Bill Only Jesus' Words make disciples that look like Him On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:46:52 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Pretty close! J From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:15 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Izzy PS She was driving a nicer car than I have; but then so does everyone. “-) ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh, how the Libs LOVE demeaning Wal-Mart! How very predictable you would bring it up. And what is your PROBLEM with Wal-Mart? Oh, they don’t pay enough or give enough benefits to those POOR people who work there; so SAD! My book club (SLU Women’s Club) read some lib’s expose on Wal-Mart and they were all up in arms about how they refuse to shop there. A few months later which merchant allowed us to solicit funds for our SLU Hospital Auxiliary at their doors? You guessed it, Wal-Mart! Did they boycott that; no way, Baby! So, while I was there soliciting donations I noticed this young female Wal-Mart employee on her cellphone trying to get someone to come and pick her up because she locked her keys in her car; obviously with no luck. So when it was time for me to leave I said Come on, I’ll give you a ride home. While we were driving to her apartment we were talking, and she told me that she (around age 24) had full custody of four children (her sisters, brothers, nephews in some combination). She is raising them as a single woman, while attending classes at the U of Mo in STL on a psychology degree, while volunteering part time at a local hospital and working part time cleaning houses and part time at Wal-Mart. I asked What do you think about how Wal-Mart treats its employees? She said Oh it’s so wonderful working there. They treat us all SO well. And if it weren’t for my benefits there I could never dream of taking care of my kids! So stick that in your pipe and puff on it. Izzy PS She was driving a nicer car than I have; but then so does everyone. “-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:07 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism myth [the writer's a blamer with an evident feminist' bias, but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')] || We wouldn’t be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadn’t thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) || Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > &g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationi
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
PTL your Grandkids are recieving a education instead of indoctrination!ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Yeah; well this church member is going to be very vocal about the discrimination against Christianity, Bible and Truth in the government schools!!! iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:06 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism 0[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer that un
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Go ye into all the world and Mentor the Gospel! Who have you mentored? Do you have any men?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:tower power -- nothing much to report in terms of results. Protest-evangelism -- ditto. Mentor evangeliism -- it is the method of historical record --- how he church grew from 12 to several million within its first 100 years of life. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & amp;g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Yeah; well this church member is going to be very vocal about the discrimination against Christianity, Bible and Truth in the government schools!!! iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:06 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Those who really know it are thankful enough to SERVE Him joyfully. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:37 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism ..knew God's grace We wouldn’t be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we..
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
tower power -- nothing much to report in terms of results. Protest-evangelism -- ditto. Mentor evangeliism -- it is the method of historical record --- how he church grew from 12 to several million within its first 100 years of life. jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM .C>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & amp;g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PR
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So tell us about it. Results?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > &g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are lik
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Izzy PS She was driving a nicer car than I have; but then so does everyone. -) ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Oh, how the Libs LOVE demeaning Wal-Mart! How very predictable you would bring it up. And what is your PROBLEM with Wal-Mart? Oh, they dont pay enough or give enough benefits to those POOR people who work there; so SAD! My book club (SLU Womens Club) read some libs expose on Wal-Mart and they were all up in arms about how they refuse to shop there. A few months later which merchant allowed us to solicit funds for our SLU Hospital Auxiliary at their doors? You guessed it, Wal-Mart! Did they boycott that; no way, Baby! So, while I was there soliciting donations I noticed this young female Wal-Mart employee on her cellphone trying to get someone to come and pick her up because she locked her keys in her car; obviously with no luck. So when it was time for me to leave I said Come on, Ill give you a ride home. While we were driving to her apartment we were talking, and she told me that she (around age 24) had full custody of four children (her sisters, brothers, nephews in some combination). She is raising them as a single woman, while attending classes at the U of Mo in STL on a psychology degree, while volunteering part time at a local hospital and working part time cleaning houses and part time at Wal-Mart. I asked What do you think about how Wal-Mart treats its employees? She said Oh its so wonderful working there. They treat us all SO well. And if it werent for my benefits there I could never dream of taking care of my kids! So stick that in your pipe and puff on it. Izzy PS She was driving a nicer car than I have; but then so does everyone. -) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:07 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism myth [the writer's a blamer with an evident feminist' bias, but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')] || We wouldnt be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadnt thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) || Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Oh, how the Libs LOVE demeaning Wal-Mart! How very predictable you would bring it up. And what is your PROBLEM with Wal-Mart? Oh, they don’t pay enough or give enough benefits to those POOR people who work there; so SAD! My book club (SLU Women’s Club) read some lib’s expose on Wal-Mart and they were all up in arms about how they refuse to shop there. A few months later which merchant allowed us to solicit funds for our SLU Hospital Auxiliary at their doors? You guessed it, Wal-Mart! Did they boycott that; no way, Baby! So, while I was there soliciting donations I noticed this young female Wal-Mart employee on her cellphone trying to get someone to come and pick her up because she locked her keys in her car; obviously with no luck. So when it was time for me to leave I said Come on, I’ll give you a ride home. While we were driving to her apartment we were talking, and she told me that she (around age 24) had full custody of four children (her sisters, brothers, nephews in some combination). She is raising them as a single woman, while attending classes at the U of Mo in STL on a psychology degree, while volunteering part time at a local hospital and working part time cleaning houses and part time at Wal-Mart. I asked What do you think about how Wal-Mart treats its employees? She said Oh it’s so wonderful working there. They treat us all SO well. And if it weren’t for my benefits there I could never dream of taking care of my kids! So stick that in your pipe and puff on it. Izzy PS She was driving a nicer car than I have; but then so does everyone. “-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:07 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism myth [the writer's a blamer with an evident feminist' bias, but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')] || We wouldn’t be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadn’t thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Judy -- I do know what you believe. Let me make something clear since our time together is quickly coming to an end. "Carnal" applies to you, IMO, because of what I see as a reliance on your own brand of intellectualism. As a result, you own the most unusual collection of theological opinions I have ever seen. On the good side, you are one of the most imaginative theologians I know something I actually respect. It is what I see in Barth and the others. what is most difficult is your attitude during a discussion. You simply do not know how to disagree without the personal assault. On other forums, I am not nearly as aggressive as I am here -- but there simply is no other way to be when in the presence of you, Linda, Kev and even David (at times). I know that you will not agree with any of my view expressed above -- but most of what I have said is, IMO, a good report of you. Finally, if your posts do not tell us what you believe, your purpose for writing is suspect. Since I can read, I do know what you believe. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I know enough to recognize the real when I see it and so do my BSF buddies You JD, don't know what I believe, nor can you evaluate my BSF buddies Quit being so presumptuous, it is not a godly trait On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:26:45 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Refer to Matt 28 19ff and Mark 16:15 ff -- and stop prestending that you alone understand scripture. Your BSF buddies do not think much of your theology, that is for sure. jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" Aberrent theologies make little cookie cutter disciples just like Lance and Bill Only Jesus' Words make disciples that look like Him On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:46:52 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Refer to Matt 28 19ff and Mark 16:15 ff -- and stop prestending that you alone understand scripture. Your BSF buddies do not think much of your theology, that is for sure. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" Aberrent theologies make little cookie cutter disciples just like Lance and Bill Only Jesus' Words make disciples that look like Him On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:46:52 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & amp;g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Results that combine both commands, "preach the gospel" and "make disciples/" jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .C OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > &g t; > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. &g
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Results? #3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
..knew God's grace We wouldnt be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we..
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
lance saying this is like saying he knows how CanaDUHS GDP worksLance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You, Judy, could teach researching. However, you could not teach 'conclusions'!- Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 07:58 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on CreationismIf there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage ----- > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
0[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage ----- > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >&g
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
myth [the writer's a blamer with an evident feminist' bias, but Am. conservative Muslim theory ain't really their fault: 'either get our new WalMarts opened on time in Baghdad or face us blowin' you to (the other) hell (we're financing')] || We wouldnt be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadnt thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) ||
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Shouldn't have to teach 'conclusions' 1 Cor 3:6 tells
us that one scatters and another waters
but only God can give the increase ... so what's wrong
with scattering a few seeds out there in
the Public School System. by giving Truth equal time
with all the theories and watch them fall
just like Dagon.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:10:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
You, Judy, could teach researching. However, you
could not teach 'conclusions'!
From: Judy Taylor
If there are christian teachers in the system (and
there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they
do not believe. What's wrong with teaching
the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it
There are also unbelievers in different churches
these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has
the responsibility to search it out for
themselves.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an
antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you
thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly
negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world,
Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work
to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??)
favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the
stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really
meaningless.
From:
"ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the
max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the
issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see
. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006
5:46 AMTo:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this
case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want
the secular world to be responsible -- I
don't.
jd
-- Original message
-- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be
taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't
following your logic? iz > > -Original
Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM >
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > IZ:No, I would not. > > >
----- Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To:
> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14
> ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual.
iz > > > > -Original Message- >
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> I refuse to live in fear Stay in the states then... --- ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between > the > Left and Right. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP > allow > turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in > the Q'ran > > (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When > you > choose shallowness of thought you become > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > > Hmm > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something > to be > >> true > >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see > why some > >> of > >> us aren't following your logic? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> IZ:No, I would not. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: > >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > >>> > >>> . > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were > true, > >>>> you > >>>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were > those > >>>> the > >>>> words? Probably got it comin'. > >>>> > >>>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools > (i.e. > >>>> creationism) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >>>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. T
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
See I warned you if the USA keeps on the present path we are headed here and will end up like that poor pathetic State Canada. The PC ideal leads to total imbicility. --- Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP > allow turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you > choose shallowness of thought you become > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > > Hmm > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something > to be > >> true > >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see > why some > >> of > >> us aren't following your logic? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> IZ:No, I would not. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: > >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz > >>> > >>> -----Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > >>> > >>> . > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were > true, > >>>> you > >>>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were > those > >>>> the > >>>> words? Probably got it comin'. > >>>> > >>>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools > (i.e. > >>>> creationism) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >>>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all > that's > >>>>> left. > >>>>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>>>> > >>>>> -Original Message- > >>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Logic & Lance? No one can really be sure if there be any, since no one can be sure, really! --- ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to > be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were > true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were > those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools > (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all > that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, > Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If > that's it > >>>> then, > >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in > schools > >>>> either. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in > schools, > >>>>> Williams > >>>>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > >>
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Wasn't there a movie about your dodgeball team? --- Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > ----- Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were > true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were > those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools > (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all > that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, > Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If > that's it > >>>> then, > >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in > schools > >>>> either. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in > schools, > >>>>> Williams > >>>>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > >>>>> > >>>>> So how have I mischaracterized him? > >>>>> > >>>>> David Miller > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> - Original Message - > >>>>> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>> To: > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creatio
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
You mean DODGEBALL is not spelled with a TT? --- ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were > true, you > > would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were > those the > > words? Probably got it comin'. > > > > Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools > (i.e. > > creationism) > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all > that's left. > >> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> Still no. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: > >> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, > Lance? > >>> JD? > >>> izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance > Muir > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If > that's it > >>> then, > >>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in > schools > >>> either. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in > schools, > >>>> Williams > >>>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > >>>> > >>>> So how have I mischaracterized him? > >>>> > >>>> David Miller > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his > position. > >>>> DOUBLE > >>>> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly > trapped, > >>>> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you > >>>> believe, > >>>> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've > done to > >>>> you > >>>> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be > triple > >>>> yikes) > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Where did you go to school ? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Great idea, jd!!! And how about everyone who wants their child to grow up to be a son of hell should send their children to the local government schools? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:08 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Willia ms on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Mes sage - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> >
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
All these so called paradigms need to be put to bed Without the Spirit of God there is nothing happening but dead religion and who needs that One of you is enough JD. God's Spirit anoints or empowers His Words only; your life may make one curious for any number of reasons - but without Him you can do nothing. Oh! you can influence your children but that is our responsibility as parents anyway On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:18:47 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Great idea, jd!!! And how about everyone who wants their child to grow up to be a son of hell should send their children to the local government schools? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:08 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism)
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Jesus used the word often. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:05 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The 'if road' can be walked on only hypothetically, Iz. We all spend time there don't we? - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 07:54 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism We wouldn’t be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadn’t thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:43 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Linda -- politically, I am a rightwinger -- but who went to war for what reason? And, did you miss Lnace's good point? What kind of fit will you pitch when the Muslim population wins a court fight to teach their view of whats happening now in our schools !!?? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between the > Left and Right. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow > turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran > > (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you > choose shallowness of thought you become > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] DSFAMILY.COM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > > Hmm > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> S o, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be > >> true > >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some > >> of > >> us aren't following your logic? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> IZ:No, I would not. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > >>> > >>> . > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >>>> you > >>>> would want it taught in scho
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Three kinds of evangelism present on this list. 1.. Drive-bye or protest evangelismKevin , Dean, David (often but not always) 2. Tower of power evangelism -- where the saint does her best work at home and not in the real world. 3. Mentor evangelism (Lance , Bill and others) We don't agree, Judy, because the paradigm for evangelism is not the same. you in your home and me in my world, where I live, where people see me everyday. -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If there are christian teachers in the system (and there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it There are also unbelievers in different churches these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has the responsibility to search it out for themselves. On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Me s sage ----- > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" &
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
You've got to be kidding; right now most of the church
isn't doing it's job in the church let alone
out there in the world. I suppose you have noted
the preacher's wife shooting her husband in the
back in TN and they are CofC. Wonder what
underlies that tragedy.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:07:40 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job
!!
You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it.
jd
From:
"ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Solution: teach
false theories.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
What's scary is that you think the solution is to
have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe
-- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that
thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real
world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this
will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use ,
again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to
agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really
meaningless.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see
. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this
case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the
secular world to be responsible -- I
don't.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught
about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your
logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> IZ:No, I would not. > > > - ----
Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To:
> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14
> ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual.
iz > > > > -Original Message- >
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16
> > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > >> That wasn't the
question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, >
>> you > >> would want it
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
You, Judy, could teach researching. However, you
could not teach 'conclusions'!
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 25, 2006 07:58
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
If there are christian teachers in the system (and
there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they
do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the
other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it
There are also unbelievers in different churches
these days teaching all kinds of things. The student has
the responsibility to search it out for
themselves.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic
educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of
course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the
purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you
simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the
Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??)
favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the
stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really
meaningless.
From:
"ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see
. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this
case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the
secular world to be responsible -- I
don't.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught
about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your
logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original
Message ----- > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006
06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual.
iz > > > > -Original Message- >
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16
> > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > >> That wasn't the
question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, >
>> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You
said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >>
-Original Message- > >> From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Here's an idea -- maybe the church could actually do its job !! You know, instead of paying the local school district to do it. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actua lly Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage ----- > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
LOL we're talking serious humor. I am laughing too hard to do anything but go and put the coffee on. Back in a few. -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> How long Oh David, how long? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 07:32 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Me s sage ----- > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of La
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
If there are christian teachers in the system (and
there are) who must teach theories of evolution that they
do not believe. What's wrong with teaching the
other side also even if there are unbelievers teaching it
There are also unbelievers in different churches these
days teaching all kinds of things. The student has
the responsibility to search it out for
themselves.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:32:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic
educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of
course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the
purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you
simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian
church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In
fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism
would be so watered down as to be really meaningless.
From:
"ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see
. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this case)
so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular
world to be responsible -- I don't.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught
about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your
logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original
Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006
06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz
> > > > -Original Message- > >
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16
> > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > >> That wasn't the question;
I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you
> >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO.
Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original
Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM
> >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> >> > >> David you are like so right, man!
familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the >
>> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> >
>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in
schools (i.e. &g
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
We wouldn’t be HAVING a problem with Muslims if we hadn’t thrown God out of the government and schools a long time ago! (duh) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:43 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Linda -- politically, I am a rightwinger -- but who went to war for what reason? And, did you miss Lnace's good point? What kind of fit will you pitch when the Muslim population wins a court fight to teach their view of whats happening now in our schools !!?? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between the > Left and Right. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow > turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran > > (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you > choose shallowness of thought you become > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] DSFAMILY.COM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > > Hmm > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> S o, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be > >> true > >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some > >> of > >> us aren't following your logic? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> IZ:No, I would not. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > >>> > >>> . > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >>>> you > >>>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those &g
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Which is just continuing on doing what they are
already doing but all but the most gullible
have enough sense to know there are no part monkey/part
humans on this planet .
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 06:36:20 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Solution: teach false
theories.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have
an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you
thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly
negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world,
Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to
our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??)
favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the
stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really
meaningless.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see…. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this case)
so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular
world to be responsible -- I don't.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught
about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your
logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original
Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006
06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz
> > > > -Original Message- > >
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16
> > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > >> That wasn't the question;
I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you
> >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO.
Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original
Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM
> >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> >> > >> David you are like so right, man!
familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Linda -- politically, I am a rightwinger -- but who went to war for what reason? And, did you miss Lnace's good point? What kind of fit will you pitch when the Muslim population wins a court fight to teach their view of whats happening now in our schools !!?? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between the > Left and Right. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow > turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran > > (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you > choose shallowness of thought you become > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] DSFAMILY.COM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > > Hmm > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> S o, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be > >> true > >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some > >> of > >> us aren't following your logic? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> IZ:No, I would not. > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > >>> > >>> . > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >>>> you > >>>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >>>> the > >>>> words? Probably got it comin'. > >>>> > >>>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >>>> creationism) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > &g t;>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 &g
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
And forbid other theories that are “politically incorrect.” From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:36 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Solution: teach false theories. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:33 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24,
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
How long Oh David, how long?
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 25, 2006 07:32
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic
educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of
course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the
purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you
simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian
church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In
fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism
would be so watered down as to be really meaningless.
--
Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scary to the max.
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue.
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So IYO it is
better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I
see
. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this case)
so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular
world to be responsible -- I don't.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed
something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught
about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your
logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original
Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006
06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz
> > > > -Original Message- > >
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic
hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > -
Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16
> > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > >> That wasn't the question;
I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you
> >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO.
Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original
Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM
> >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> >> > >> David you are like so right, man!
familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the >
>> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> >
>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in
schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> >
>> > >> - Original Mes sage - >
>> From: "
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
What's scary is that you think the solution is to have an antagonistic educator "teach" what he does not believe -- you thinking, of course, that he will do so without commentary that thoroughly negates the purpose of this compromise. In the real world, Linda, you simply cannot construct a model in which this will work to our (the Christian church -- whose address do we use , again ??) favor. In fact, to get all the warring factions to agree, the stateent on creationism would be so watered down as to be really meaningless. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Mes sage - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >> > - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 &g t; >&g
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
I'd never suggest that you 'live in fear' nor do I believe that you would. Just BE REAL, (wo)man! - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 07:25 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between the Left and Right. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you choose shallowness of thought you become . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. Hmm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message ----- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM S
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Judy, IMO, actually can't discern some of the issues as written. Iz, on the other hand, IMO can but chooses to write as if she didn't. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 25, 2006 07:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 &g
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
I refuse to live in fear, but rather in faith. The difference between the Left and Right. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:23 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you choose shallowness of thought you become . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. > Hmm > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be >> true >> you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some >> of >> us aren't following your logic? iz >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> IZ:No, I would not. >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> Dodging the question, as usual. iz >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. >>> >>> . >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, >>>> you >>>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those >>>> the >>>> words? Probably got it comin'. >>>> >>>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. >>>> creationism) >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 >>>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> >>>>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's >>>>> left. >>>>> Pathetic IMO. izzy >>>>> >>>>> -Original Message- >>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM >>>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>>> >>>>> Still no. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: >>>>> Sent: March 2
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Sikhs are permitted to wear 'sacred' daggers to school. The RCMP allow turbans over traditional head gear.The Muslim creation story is in the Q'ran (soon to be taught at a school near you). Think long term, Iz. When you choose shallowness of thought you become . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 07:15 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. Hmm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message ----- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) ----- Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lan
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Scary to the max. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 &g t; >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: Trut
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So, in a public school you prefer that untruth be taught long-term. Hmm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:08 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be > true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some > of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> Dodging the question, as usual. iz >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. >> >> . >> - Original Message - >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, >>> you >>> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those >>> the >>> words? Probably got it comin'. >>> >>> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. >>> creationism) >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's >>>> left. >>>> Pathetic IMO. izzy >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> Still no. >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 >>>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> >>>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? >>>>> JD? >>>>> izzy >>>>> >>>>> -Original Message- >>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM >>>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>>> >>>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it >>>>> then, >>>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools >>>>> either. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: >>>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 >>>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>&g
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Of course. But that is not really the issue. -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So IYO it is better to have secular folk teaching untruth than truth. I see . izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > ; Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 &g t; >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > >>>> then, > >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > >>>> either. > >>>> > >&
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
In a public school. Think 'long term', Iz. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:37 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I exp
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So IYO it is better to have “secular” folk teaching untruth than truth. I see…. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:46 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > >>>> then, > >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > >>>> either. > >>>> > >>>> > >>&g
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
It's not what is taught (for me and in this case) so much as it is WHO TEACHES THEM. You want the secular world to be responsible -- I don't. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true > you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of > us aren't following your logic? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > IZ:No, I would not. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > & gt; Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > > > . > > - Original Message - > > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, > >> you > >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those > >> the > >> words? Probably got it comin'. > >> > >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > >> creationism) > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in scho ols. That's all that's > >>> left. > >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> Still no. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> To: > >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>> > >>> > >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? > >>>> JD? > >>>> izzy > >>>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > >>>> then, > >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > >>>> either. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> - Original Message - > >>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>> To: > >>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, > >>>>> Williams > >>>>> said: "I don&
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Goodbye, and thanks for all the ichthys
Amen and thank you. John -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Original Message - From: Debbie Sawczak To: 'Lance Muir' Sent: March 24, 2006 21:02 Subject: Goodbye, and thanks for all the ichthys I was afraid this was too long, but David's leisurely post has given me courage to blather a little, like the parting guest who suddenly becomes talkative in the doorway. Im glad for the time I spent on TT, even though I left. I did learn stuff, especially early on as I encountered some ideas for the first time; certain posts, especially at the beginning, opened windows for me. Even some of the more plodding discussions were an occasion for clarifying my own thinking or, alternatively, fuzzifying it if it was a little too sharp! And that may have been the best benefit of TT. I remember being surprised at the very beginning by the aggressivenessa newish thing for me among believers even though Ive moved in a wide variety of Christian circles. The exposure wasnt all bad--it made me a bit more assertive and thicker-skinned, and forced me to recognize how easily I can be provoked to snarkiness myself. But I often felt sad after an exchange. Sometimes, on the other hand, I was completely taken aback by the generosity and affirmation in people's responses. So I hope that if the experience has made me less naive about the behaviour of Christians, it hasn't gone so far as to make me cynical. I still think I might have misunderstood the culture of TT...I'm not very astute that way. < /FONT> Ive seen something of the serious limitations of e-mail, and yet I feel like Ive met real people. I found every character on TT interesting and memorable, and enjoyed the different flavours and the occasional anecdotal glimpses into peoples lives. I'd love to meet you all face to face. In the eschaton if not before! Thank you, Lance, for introducing me to TT and encouraging me to participate--an act so beautifully typical of you. But I especially want to thank David: you relentlessly engaged everybody, no matter how intractable, and even at your crazy-makingest you had the best manners of all--or at least made the best show of manners! J To me, the act of keeping this forum so wide open as long as you did, and the latitude you have given people to be themselves, show a broadness above and beyond your words that commands my respect. Just to irritate some of you, I was going to finish with an excerpt quoting Bonhoeffer on how we reflect Christ to each other, from the chapter I've just finished working on in Victor's book. Instead, here's something less lofty, which for me is a kind of parable for TT: I'm watching my husband gently heave our sleeping youngest son up from the living room couch where he has repaired in frustration at his brother's endless, irritating snores. He had taken his pillow and blankets there after incrementally severe degrees of poking and bedshaking had failed to correct his brother's breathing. But now he falls forward into his dad's arms, willingly allows himself to be moved, and wakes up as he is conducted by hands on his shoulders back to his own bed. He crawls in beneath the bunk of his brother who snores impenitently on, and sett les back to sleep. This is repeated two or three times a week, but is always forgotten in the morning, and neither brother will tolerate talk of separate bedrooms. Open hands, everybody, and Jude 24 & 25. Love Debbie --No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/291 - Release Date: 3/24/2006
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So, here we are, back to the fact that IF you believed something to be true you would NOT want children to be taught about it. Can you see why some of us aren't following your logic? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > Dodging the question, as usual. iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. > > . > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, >> you >> would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those >> the >> words? Probably got it comin'. >> >> Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. >> creationism) >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's >>> left. >>> Pathetic IMO. izzy >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> Still no. >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 >>> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? >>>> JD? >>>> izzy >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM >>>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it >>>> then, >>>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools >>>> either. >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> >>>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, >>>>> Williams >>>>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." >>>>> >>>>> So how have I mischaracterized him? >>>>> >>>>> David Miller >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. >>>>> DOUBLE >>>>> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, >>>>> David. You've bound yourself
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Goodbye, and thanks for all the ichthys
“Snarkiness” I like that. Blessing, Debbie, to you and yours. I’ll miss your beautiful writing talent. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:24 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: [TruthTalk] Fw: Goodbye, and thanks for all the ichthys - Original Message - From: Debbie Sawczak To: 'Lance Muir' Sent: March 24, 2006 21:02 Subject: Goodbye, and thanks for all the ichthys I was afraid this was too long, but David's leisurely post has given me courage to blather a little, like the parting guest who suddenly becomes talkative in the doorway. I’m glad for the time I spent on TT, even though I left. I did learn stuff, especially early on as I encountered some ideas for the first time; certain posts, especially at the beginning, opened windows for me. Even some of the more plodding discussions were an occasion for clarifying my own thinking or, alternatively, fuzzifying it if it was a little too sharp! And that may have been the best benefit of TT. I remember being surprised at the very beginning by the aggressiveness—a newish thing for me among believers even though I’ve moved in a wide variety of Christian circles. The exposure wasn’t all bad--it made me a bit more assertive and thicker-skinned, and forced me to recognize how easily I can be provoked to snarkiness myself. But I often felt sad after an exchange. Sometimes, on the other hand, I was completely taken aback by the generosity and affirmation in people's responses. So I hope that if the experience has made me less naive about the behaviour of Christians, it hasn't gone so far as to make me cynical. I still think I might have misunderstood the culture of TT...I'm not very astute that way. I’ve seen something of the serious limitations of e-mail, and yet I feel like I’ve met real people. I found every character on TT interesting and memorable, and enjoyed the different ‘flavours’ and the occasional anecdotal glimpses into people’s lives. I'd love to meet you all face to face. In the eschaton if not before! Thank you, Lance, for introducing me to TT and encouraging me to participate--an act so beautifully typical of you. But I especially want to thank David: you relentlessly engaged everybody, no matter how intractable, and even at your crazy-makingest you had the best manners of all--or at least made the best show of manners! J To me, the act of keeping this forum so wide open as long as you did, and the latitude you have given people to be themselves, show a broadness above and beyond your words that commands my respect. Just to irritate some of you, I was going to finish with an excerpt quoting Bonhoeffer on how we reflect Christ to each other, from the chapter I've just finished working on in Victor's book. Instead, here's something less lofty, which for me is a kind of parable for TT: I'm watching my husband gently heave our sleeping youngest son up from the living room couch where he has repaired in frustration at his brother's endless, irritating snores. He had taken his pillow and blankets there after incrementally severe degrees of poking and bedshaking had failed to correct his brother's breathing. But now he falls forward into his dad's arms, willingly allows himself to be moved, and wakes up as he is conducted by hands on his shoulders back to his own bed. He crawls in beneath the bunk of his brother who snores impenitently on, and settles back to sleep. This is repeated two or three times a week, but is always forgotten in the morning, and neither brother will tolerate talk of separate bedrooms. Open hands, everybody, and Jude 24 & 25. Love Debbie -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/291 - Release Date: 3/24/2006
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
IZ:No, I would not. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 25, 2006 06:14 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller ----- Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be alwa
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Dodging the question, as usual. iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:54 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you > would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the > words? Probably got it comin'. > > Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. > creationism) > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. >> Pathetic IMO. izzy >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> Still no. >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 >> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? >>> JD? >>> izzy >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM >>> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it >>> then, >>> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools >>> either. >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, >>>> Williams >>>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." >>>> >>>> So how have I mischaracterized him? >>>> >>>> David Miller >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> >>>> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. >>>> DOUBLE >>>> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, >>>> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you >>>> believe, >>>> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to >>>> you >>>> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple >>>> yikes) >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 >>>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>>> >>>> >>>>> Lance wrote: >>>>>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then >>>>>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. >>>>> >>>>> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to >>>>> be >>>>> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have >>>>> submitted >>>>> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. >>
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
It ain't true. It's a hyperbolic hypothetical, Iz. . - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 17:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller ----- Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may kn
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Mann instituted public education as an alternative to the existing private and religious system of the day. That is what I am talking about. What the Puritans did in the 1600's is NOT what I am talking about. I am telling you that public education started in Mass. as a reaction to "religious" and private systems of the day. That is how I remember my history on this. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Exactly right that Horace Mann introduced humanism in place of Christianity in the public education system. Until him the Bible was the basic textbook. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David MillerSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:56 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The history of public education is a little more complicated than this. I think the more forceful argument was making education available to those who were not wealthy. The non-sectarian nature of it came in because the originators, men like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Horace Mann, etc., were Deists and Unitarian, along with the fact that the U.S. was a melting pot of various religious groups. One simply cannot offer public education for all without setting aside the individual religious beliefs and focusing upon the knowledge that was more common among the different religious sects. What many people do not realize is that the concept of schools came from Christianity. Almost all the institutions of learning first came about through the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Calvinists, the Puritans, etc. Interestingly, non-Christian education never materialized until everyone was forced to pay for it through taxation, through the efforts of men like Horace Mann. Mann converted from Calvinism to the Unitarian church. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:12 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian education. jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases 'creation science' reflects neither. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Im so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Exactly right that Horace Mann introduced humanism in place of Christianity in the public education system. Until him the Bible was the basic textbook. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Miller Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:56 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The history of public education is a little more complicated than this. I think the more forceful argument was making education available to those who were not wealthy. The non-sectarian nature of it came in because the originators, men like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Horace Mann, etc., were Deists and Unitarian, along with the fact that the U.S. was a melting pot of various religious groups. One simply cannot offer public education for all without setting aside the individual religious beliefs and focusing upon the knowledge that was more common among the different religious sects. What many people do not realize is that the concept of schools came from Christianity. Almost all the institutions of learning first came about through the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Calvinists, the Puritans, etc. Interestingly, non-Christian education never materialized until everyone was forced to pay for it through taxation, through the efforts of men like Horace Mann. Mann converted from Calvinism to the Unitarian church. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:12 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian education. jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases 'creation science' reflects neither. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I’m so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Are you aware that it was a Christian who discovered the fallacy of that belief? Galileo Galilei, though famous for his scientific achievements in astronomy, mathematics, and physics and infamous for his controversy with the church was, in fact, a devout Christian who saw not a divorce of religion and science but only a healthy marriage: "God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word." iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:51 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Are you aware (seriously) that for a lengthy period people believed God's Word AND believe in a geocentric universe? - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 16:36 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Fortunately we comprehend the truth since we believe God’s Word. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:30 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I’m so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
That wasn't the question; I asked whether IF you believe it were true, you would want it taught in schools. You said NO. Pathetic, eh? iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. > Pathetic IMO. izzy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Still no. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? >> JD? >> izzy >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM >> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it >> then, >> I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools >> either. >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, >>> Williams >>> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." >>> >>> So how have I mischaracterized him? >>> >>> David Miller >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE >>> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, >>> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you >>> believe, >>> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to >>> you >>> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple >>> yikes) >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >>> >>> >>>> Lance wrote: >>>>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then >>>>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. >>>> >>>> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to >>>> be >>>> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have >>>> submitted >>>> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. >>>> >>>> Lance wrote: >>>>> He is a brother in Christ who believes >>>>> differently than you on some matters. >>>>> Now, if that makes him what you say >>>>> then, that makes you what I say. >>>> >>>> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The >>>> moniker >>>> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our >>>> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, >>>> assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in >>>> Christ, >>>> then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other >>>> believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will >>>> continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the >>>> acknowledgme
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
My answer is Lance's. In view of that , I will interject this comment -- your alternative is not the only consideration. I do not want the secular system giving review to matters of faith. Nothing good would be accomplished -- and high school kids, by and large, do not "believe in evolution" anyway. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. > Pathetic IMO. izzy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > Still no. > > > - Original Message - > From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? > > izzy > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > > then, > > I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > > either. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, > >> Williams > >> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > >> > >> So how have I mischaracterized him? > >> > >> David Miller > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE > >> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, > >> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, > >> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to > >> you > >> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple > >> yikes) > >> - Original Message - > >> F rom: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> To: > >> Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 > >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > >> > >> > >>> Lance wrote: > >>>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then > >>>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. > >>> > >>> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to > >>> be > >>> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have > >>> submitted > >>> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. > >>> > >>> Lance wrote: > >>>> He is a brother in Christ who believes > >>>> differently than you on some matters. > >>>> Now, if that makes him what you say > >>>> then, that makes you what I say. > >>> > >>> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The > >>> moniker > >>> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our > >>> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, > >>> assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in > >>> Christ, > >>> then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other > >>> believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will > >>> continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the > >>> acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was > >>> very > >>> damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the > >>> Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the > >&
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Excellent ! jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, I wish I could be with them every day to do that, but I only get to teach them when I visit them out of state. The girls have been reading since they were four years old and are SO smart!!! (Im not biased, either! J ) Since age 6 you could ask Gretchen to read any book, chapter and verse in the Bible, and she would pick it up, find the place, and happily read it to you without a problem. They are taught mostly by their mom and some by their dad. Their mother got a masters degree in education with the intent of becoming a homeschooling Mom. My (younger or two grown-up kids) son has his masters in aeronautical engineering with a minor in German, and now flies for Fed-Ex and teaches pilot training one week/mo nth in the Reserves. They can teach anything a school aged child might need to learn I think. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:04 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Are you the teacher? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Im so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:2
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Hats off to you , Linda, on this one. It starts with our families. We can yell and scream at each other, here on TT, but some of our decisions can damn our children. Your patience and trust in the Lord is above the call. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jd, I remember when my oldest son told me (when he was in college) that he was no longer a Believer. I calmly told him that he was going through a good and necessary stage of life in which he was rejecting what he had been taught as a child so that he could re-evaluate everything for himself. I assured him that when he had completed this task that he would find that what he had been taught about his faith as a child would not only prove to be true, but would be his very own, internalized belief. He is now a Christian, although he does not usually attend church although his wife usually does. He is more of a solitary person, like his father. I would appreciate prayers for his growth in the area of fellowship. He is as fine a young man as ever I have met. I have learned much from him over the years, and thoroughly enjoy every moment I get to spend with him. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:01 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What do I believe about Genesis? Did you read any of my posts? Science has no answers to our confusion, our bondage, our need for community and an innate longing to live beyond what we see. As soon as we turn Genesis into a statement of science, we lessen its value to the human spirit. What do I get from reading those first three chapters? That God is in control -- not that He is SOMEHOW in control - but that He is IN FACT in control. He is my creator. I am in His image. And even when I fall, He continues to hover over and round me. It tells me that I was created for others -- my wife, my children and the world in which I live. It tells me I am responsible for much of my actions. Work is a curse because I must be responsible !! I and my wife are one because God thought this to be the case from the beginning. and REST has as much a place in the coming and goings of man as work. That's what I get out of this Genesis account. While some of you only see a debate Do you know the best way of dealing with a child - in my case an older son -- who comes home announcing that he no longer believes in the bible??!! IGNORE that comment and continue to be a witness , using, at times, the very book that he rejects. DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT challenge him/her to a debate. You will not win, if your version of :winning" is to bring that child to say "Iwas wrong, Dad, and you were right again." He won't do it. But if you ignore the challenge, and give biblical presentations that make sense to the way he is living his life -- the objection vanishes into thin air. Theory? Nope. It worked on both of my older boys - the lawyer and the doctor. But I digress with some free advice. The long and short of the lesson is this -- make the Bible THE battle ground and you will lose the war !!! Present the Bible as something that offers life in the Spirit of God in the Christ of God and you have a winner. jd jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My goodness, jd. What DO you believe about Genesis??? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:36 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist. Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical does not mean that God did not create the world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today. Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this is impossible. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Are
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Ignorance of facts demonstrated here to the max. Public education WAS religious (Christian) education. I will do the homework and post the truth if I have time before we go down with the TT ship! iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:13 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian education. jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases 'creation science' reflects neither. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I’m so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
And you accused Kevin of making smart-assed replies??? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:51 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Who wouldn't be convinced when one employes terms/expressions such as 'testable by empirical means', 'model of creation..less than 10,000 years old' , 'a prediction that is testable scientifically?' and 'empirical clocks to test this prediction?' Now, why don't you take this on the road? - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 08:36 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Correct, and some of this activity proposes empirical predictions that are testable by empirical means. For example, if a model of creation says that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, isn't that a prediction that is testable scientifically? Don't we have empirical clocks to test this prediction? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:44 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Interpretation/interpolation/speculation re:Genesis leads one to that which one has just witnessed over the last week or so. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 17:01 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I don't know why you are getting so emotional over this. I think that when God spoke, in many situations, it took some time for what he said to take place. For example, if he spoke for the land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. He also may have been involved in other ways that we don't understand right now. Do you see it differently? It does not have anything to do with resting for the next day. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:36 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist. Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical does not mean that God did not create the world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today. Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this is impossible. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into being? I don't understand your point. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 5:29 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So which fundamentalist version of creation do you support. That A & E were spirit people. A 6000 year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that can be spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water because my mouth was getting dry. Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into the school system ??? We are still waiting?? jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don't you get it JT? TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS! The opinions of Men are the key. Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by t
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
If "it" refers to creationism , you didn't read my last paragraph. And I do believe in [my brand of ] creationism --- still don't want it taught in the secular school system. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> You didnt answer the question. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:41 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Linda, I believe that de-evolution is a much stronger force than evolution. I believe that natural selection only works when a mutation creates not only the change , itself, but a population with the same mutation and a reproductive proclivity that prevents the unique from being absorbed BACK into the general population. Even an old earth belief, IMO, does not present enough time for evolution to have occurred at the levels claimed by its believers. And theistic evolution is only a form of creationism -- God manipulating growth and change via a process. Micro - yes. Macro - no. I believe that the "eternity of God" is philosophically preferable to the eternity of matter (in whatever form ) and motion (of elementary particles). While at Cal Davis, my two sons had to deal with a radical and atheistic biology prof. These were some of the points I gave them. They used them in class. They semed to work. Do I want creationism forced into the curriculum of our schools. NO. Who would teach it? What brand of creationism would be taught? And how do you teach it without a knowledge of and the use of the Bible? I mean -- isn't that the point of creationism? The BIBLE says this BUT science says something else? IMO, there simply is no way such a concept could be implemented. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? > izzy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, > I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > either. > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> T o: > Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creation ism > > > > The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, > > Williams > > said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > > > > So how have I mischaracterized him? > > > > David Miller > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > > David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE > > YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, > > David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe , > > Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you > > and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be tri ple > > yikes) > > - Original Message - > > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> Lance wrote: > >>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then > >>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. > >> > >> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be > >> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have > >> submitted > >> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. > >> > >> Lance wrote: > >>> He is a brother in Chr ist who believes > >>> differently than you on some matters. > >>> Now, if that makes him what you say > >>> then, that makes you what I say. > >> &g t; >> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker > >> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our > >> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, >
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Depending, certainly, upon who stated it. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:43 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Less is more. - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:36 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism When was the last time on TT you posted more than two sentences? When was at least one of the sentences about those combat boots? Posts of web pages excepted. Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh ya? (see how content-filled that is?) - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism But you are inclined to making baseless assertions. Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh but I do, Kevin. However, I'm not inclined toward 'darkening the corner where you are'. - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 06:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you do not KNOW what it is how can you make a value judgement on it? Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Whatever 'YOUR JOB' is Kevin, y'all ain't bin doin' it all that well AT TT! - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 18:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system . I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove?
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Are you aware (seriously) that for a lengthy period people believed God's Word AND believe in a geocentric universe? - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 16:36 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Fortunately we comprehend the truth since we believe Gods Word. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance MuirSent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:30 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Im so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being t
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
David you are like so right, man! familiaritycontempt...were those the words? Probably got it comin'. Actually Lady Iz, I prefer that untruth NOT be taught in schools (i.e. creationism) - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 16:35 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) ----- Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was very damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but not from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor Rowland Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. David Miller -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubsc
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
And demonic beings encouraging one another in their strategies. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:27 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism A book truly perceptive re: human nature. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:12 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Why is this so hauntingly reminiscent of communication between Screwtape and Wormwood? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:40 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You have risen to new heights, soon to be appointed ARCHbishop, John. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 16:36 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist. Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical does not mean that God did not create the world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today. Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this is impossible. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into being? I don't understand your point. David Miller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 5:29 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism So which fundamentalist version of creation do you support. That A & E were spirit people. A 6000 year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that can be spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water because my mouth was getting dry. Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into the school system ??? We are still waiting?? jd -- Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don't you get it JT? TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS! The opinions of Men are the key. Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So? There isn't a single fiew of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John wrote: > The world in which we live would reject > any mention of God in the evolutionary process, > IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could > that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical > fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope you were being facetious on purpose. John wrote: > But to allow a mere statement that suggests God > is somehow in control as the Creator(?) If this > could be presented into the secular system of > education without it being coopted by the fundies > -- go for it. But I doubt that it can. What a shame > that radical fundamentalism within Christiandom forces > the Body to dismiss a perfectly wonderful opportunity > to introduce the Creator to others. In case you did not notic
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Fortunately we comprehend the truth since we believe God’s Word. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:30 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism I’m so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John wrote: > The world in which we live would reject > any mention of God in the evolutionary process, > IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could > that not be considered the beginnings of a f
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
So you prefer that untruth be taught in schools. That's all that's left. Pathetic IMO. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Still no. - Original Message - From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 23:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? > izzy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > then, > I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > either. > > > - Original Message - > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, >> Williams >> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." >> >> So how have I mischaracterized him? >> >> David Miller >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE >> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, >> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, >> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to >> you >> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple >> yikes) >> - Original Message - >> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> Lance wrote: >>>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then >>>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. >>> >>> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to >>> be >>> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have >>> submitted >>> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. >>> >>> Lance wrote: >>>> He is a brother in Christ who believes >>>> differently than you on some matters. >>>> Now, if that makes him what you say >>>> then, that makes you what I say. >>> >>> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The >>> moniker >>> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our >>> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, >>> assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in >>> Christ, >>> then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other >>> believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will >>> continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the >>> acknowledgment of God our Creator from the schools. What he said was >>> very >>> damaging to our society, to believers who want to acknowledge God the >>> Creator in their study of origins. To think that science and the >>> acknowledgement of God are incompatible is expected from scientists but >>> not >>> from theologians, and certainly not from the Right Reverend Doctor >>> Rowland >>> Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury. >>> >>> David Miller >>> >>> -- >>> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may >>> know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) >>> http://www.InnGlory.org >>> >>> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a >>> friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. >>> >> >> >> -- >> "Let your speech be always with grace, s
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
No, I wish I could be with them every day to do that, but I only get to teach them when I visit them out of state. The girls have been reading since they were four years old and are SO smart!!! (I’m not biased, either! J ) Since age 6 you could ask Gretchen to read any book, chapter and verse in the Bible, and she would pick it up, find the place, and happily read it to you without a problem. They are taught mostly by their mom and some by their dad. Their mother got a master’s degree in education with the intent of becoming a homeschooling Mom. My (younger or two grown-up kids) son has his master’s in aeronautical engineering with a minor in German, and now flies for Fed-Ex and teaches pilot training one week/month in the Reserves. They can teach anything a school aged child might need to learn I think. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:04 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Are you the teacher? -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I’m so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Deegan Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either.
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Jd, I remember when my oldest son told me (when he was in college) that he was no longer a Believer. I calmly told him that he was going through a good and necessary stage of life in which he was rejecting what he had been taught as a child so that he could re-evaluate everything for himself. I assured him that when he had completed this task that he would find that what he had been taught about his faith as a child would not only prove to be true, but would be his very own, internalized belief. He is now a Christian, although he does not usually attend church although his wife usually does. He is more of a solitary person, like his father. I would appreciate prayers for his growth in the area of fellowship. He is as fine a young man as ever I have met. I have learned much from him over the years, and thoroughly enjoy every moment I get to spend with him. izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:01 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism What do I believe about Genesis? Did you read any of my posts? Science has no answers to our confusion, our bondage, our need for community and an innate longing to live beyond what we see. As soon as we turn Genesis into a statement of science, we lessen its value to the human spirit. What do I get from reading those first three chapters? That God is in control -- not that He is SOMEHOW in control - but that He is IN FACT in control. He is my creator. I am in His image. And even when I fall, He continues to hover over and round me. It tells me that I was created for others -- my wife, my children and the world in which I live. It tells me I am responsible for much of my actions. Work is a curse because I must be responsible !! I and my wife are one because God thought this to be the case from the beginning. and REST has as much a place in the coming and goings of man as work. That's what I get out of this Genesis account. While some of you only see a debate Do you know the best way of dealing with a child - in my case an older son -- who comes home announcing that he no longer believes in the bible??!! IGNORE that comment and continue to be a witness , using, at times, the very book that he rejects. DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT challenge him/her to a debate. You will not win, if your version of :winning" is to bring that child to say "Iwas wrong, Dad, and you were right again." He won't do it. But if you ignore the challenge, and give biblical presentations that make sense to the way he is living his life -- the objection vanishes into thin air. Theory? Nope. It worked on both of my older boys - the lawyer and the doctor. But I digress with some free advice. The long and short of the lesson is this -- make the Bible THE battle ground and you will lose the war !!! Present the Bible as something that offers life in the Spirit of God in the Christ of God and you have a winner. jd jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My goodness, jd. What DO you believe about Genesis??? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:36 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist. Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical does not mean that God did not create the world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today. Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this is impossible. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into being? I don't under
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Speaking for myself, I do not think creation(ism)
should be taught in schools.
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 16:14
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
You didnt answer the
question.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:41
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
Linda, I believe that de-evolution is a much stronger
force than evolution. I believe that natural selection only works when a
mutation creates not only the change , itself, but a population with the same
mutation and a reproductive proclivity that prevents the unique from being
absorbed BACK into the general population. Even an old earth
belief, IMO, does not present enough time for evolution
to have occurred at the levels claimed by its believers. And
theistic evolution is only a form of creationism -- God
manipulating growth and change via a process. Micro -
yes. Macro - no.
I believe that the "eternity of God" is
philosophically preferable to the eternity of matter (in whatever form ) and
motion (of elementary particles). While at Cal Davis, my two sons
had to deal with a radical and atheistic biology prof.
These were some of the points I gave them. They used them in
class. They semed to work.
Do I want creationism forced into the curriculum
of our schools. NO. Who would teach it? What
brand of creationism would be taught? And how do you teach it
without a knowledge of and the use of the Bible? I
mean -- isn't that the point of creationism? The BIBLE says
this BUT science says something else? IMO, there simply is no way
such a concept could be implemented.
jd
-- Original message --
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > If you
thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? >
izzy > > -Original Message- > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir >
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > David:Is that all
you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, > I'm with
RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools >
either. > > > - Original Message - >
From: "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent:
March 23, 2006 15:04 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creation ism > > > > The CNN report: Asked if
creationism should be taught in schools, > > Williams >
> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > >
> > So how have I mischaracterized him? > > >
> David Miller > >
> > > > - Original Message - > > From:
"Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006
10:41 AM > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
> > > > > > David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize
both Williams and his position. DOUBLE > > YIKES!! I know that you
will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, > > David. You've
bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, > >
Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you
> > and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be
tri ple > > yikes) > > - Original Message -
> > From: "David
Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To:
> > Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >
> > > > >> Lance wrote: > >>> If
Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then > >>> you are a
'sectarian loonie' , David. > >> > >> I'm
sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be
> >> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who
have > >> submitted > >> unto Jesus Christ as
their Lord and Savior. > >> > >> Lance wrote:
> >>> He is a brother in Christ who believes >
>>> differently than you on some matters. > >>>
Now, if that makes him what you say > >>> the
RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
You didn’t answer the question. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:41 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Linda, I believe that de-evolution is a much stronger force than evolution. I believe that natural selection only works when a mutation creates not only the change , itself, but a population with the same mutation and a reproductive proclivity that prevents the unique from being absorbed BACK into the general population. Even an old earth belief, IMO, does not present enough time for evolution to have occurred at the levels claimed by its believers. And theistic evolution is only a form of creationism -- God manipulating growth and change via a process. Micro - yes. Macro - no. I believe that the "eternity of God" is philosophically preferable to the eternity of matter (in whatever form ) and motion (of elementary particles). While at Cal Davis, my two sons had to deal with a radical and atheistic biology prof. These were some of the points I gave them. They used them in class. They semed to work. Do I want creationism forced into the curriculum of our schools. NO. Who would teach it? What brand of creationism would be taught? And how do you teach it without a knowledge of and the use of the Bible? I mean -- isn't that the point of creationism? The BIBLE says this BUT science says something else? IMO, there simply is no way such a concept could be implemented. jd -- Original message -- From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > If you thought it was true would you want it taught in schools, Lance? JD? > izzy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:32 PM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, > I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > either. > > > - Original Message - > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creation ism > > > > The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, > > Williams > > said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." > > > > So how have I mischaracterized him? > > > > David Miller > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > > David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE > > YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, > > David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, > > Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you > > and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be tri ple > > yikes) > > - Original Message - > > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > To: > > Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > > > >> Lance wrote: > >>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then > >>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. > >> > >> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be > >> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have > >> submitted > >> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. > >> > >> Lance wrote: > >>> He is a brother in Christ who believes > >>> differently than you on some matters. > >>> Now, if that makes him what you say > >>> then, that makes you what I say. > >> &g t; >> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker > >> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our > >> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, > >> assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, > >> then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other > >> believers corre
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Thanks for the footnote confirming John's
point.
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 10:55
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
The history of public education is a little more complicated than
this. I think the more forceful argument was making education available
to those who were not wealthy. The non-sectarian nature of it came in
because the originators, men like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Horace
Mann, etc., were Deists and Unitarian, along with the fact that the U.S. was a
melting pot of various religious groups. One simply cannot offer public
education for all without setting aside the individual religious beliefs and
focusing upon the knowledge that was more common among the different religious
sects.
What many people do not realize is that the concept of schools came from
Christianity. Almost all the institutions of learning first came about
through the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Calvinists,
the Puritans, etc. Interestingly, non-Christian education never
materialized until everyone was forced to pay for it through taxation, through
the efforts of men like Horace Mann. Mann converted from Calvinism
to the Unitarian church.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ;
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:12
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian
education.
jd
--
Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases
'creation science' reflects neither.
- Original Message -
From:
David
Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she
should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against
it, and its place in the history of science and
religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this,
but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the
same way?
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
You may feel to teach them that the
universe is geocentric if you like.
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006
23:23
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
Im so
thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can
be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to
be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be
illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea
about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the
lefties took over?) izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
DeeganSent:
Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE
SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB
Our Job is NOT the school system or
Politics, render unto Cesear
Unless of course you are swayed by the
Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What in the hell do you think I have been
talking about? You are so far off course here, as to
be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I
believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In
fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been
enough time for evolut
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
The history of public education is a little more complicated than
this. I think the more forceful argument was making education available to
those who were not wealthy. The non-sectarian nature of it came in because
the originators, men like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Horace Mann,
etc., were Deists and Unitarian, along with the fact that the U.S. was a melting
pot of various religious groups. One simply cannot offer public education
for all without setting aside the individual religious beliefs and focusing upon
the knowledge that was more common among the different religious sects.
What many people do not realize is that the concept of schools came from
Christianity. Almost all the institutions of learning first came about
through the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Calvinists,
the Puritans, etc. Interestingly, non-Christian education never
materialized until everyone was forced to pay for it through taxation, through
the efforts of men like Horace Mann. Mann converted from Calvinism to
the Unitarian church.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:12
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian
education.
jd
--
Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases
'creation science' reflects neither.
- Original Message -
From:
David
Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she
should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against
it, and its place in the history of science and religion.
Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a
problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way?
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
You may feel to teach them that the
universe is geocentric if you like.
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
Im so
thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be
taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be
taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for
them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the
Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties
took over?) izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
DeeganSent:
Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL
SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB
Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics,
render unto Cesear
Unless of course you are swayed by the
Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What in the hell do you think I have been
talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be
just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe
that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am
with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for
evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean
evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is
I who digresses.
My point? If the church had not
surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity
system, we would not need this discussion.
The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to
convert to atheistic evolutionism
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Dog-gone it all. Why do you say such things??!! Past collegues? You mean those guys you knew 18 years ago before you became a software programer?? Your teachers back in the college days of your youth? jd By the way, every past colleague of mine that I have argued this point, about creationist models being scientifically testable, have had to agree with me that I was right, after MUCH arguing, but they will only concede that every Creationist model of origins that is scientifically testable has already been falsified. The ones that have not been falsified are still unscientific. Go figure.David Miller
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Public education was first offered as an alternaive to Christian education. jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases 'creation science' reflects neither. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Im so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- ther
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
No, it is not 'strange'. In most cases 'creation
science' reflects neither.
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 08:33
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should
teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its
place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how
science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation
science being dealt with in the same way?
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
You may feel to teach them that the universe is
geocentric if you like.
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Im so thankful
that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the
Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about
Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be
taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of
our public education system (before the lefties took over?)
izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE
DOING OUR JOB
Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics,
render unto Cesear
Unless of course you are swayed by the
Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What in the hell do you think I have been
talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just
plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung
fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing
opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have
worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some
level does not exist. But, now, it is I who
digresses.
My point? If the church had not
surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity
system, we would not need this discussion. The
church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert
to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE
SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF
CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am
not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ
actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most
of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to
others.
jd
-- Original message --
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why advocate
teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only
when we prove
evolution do we
need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with
theism. Evidence that
this level of
proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and
others who have abandoned
Darwinism because
they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support
it. So why
would you want to
warp young minds with useless information that is not
proven? judyt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm talking about fundy creationist
versions in the school systems and you are talking about
religious people!!!
Amazing
Maybe we should install a different
creationist version for every major school system
I am sure we can find enough
fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to
worry abou
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Who wouldn't be convinced when one employes
terms/expressions such as 'testable by empirical means', 'model of
creation..less than 10,000 years old' , 'a prediction that is testable
scientifically?' and 'empirical clocks to test this prediction?' Now, why
don't you take this on the road?
- Original Message -
From:
David Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 08:36
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
Correct, and some of this activity proposes empirical predictions that
are testable by empirical means. For example, if a model of creation
says that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, isn't that a prediction
that is testable scientifically? Don't we have empirical clocks to test
this prediction?
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:44
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
Interpretation/interpolation/speculation re:Genesis leads one to that
which one has just witnessed over the last week or so.
- Original Message -
From:
David
Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006 17:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
I don't know why you are getting so emotional over this.
I think that when God spoke, in many situations, it took some time
for what he said to take place. For example, if he spoke for the
land masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say
it, but hours for the land and water to do what he said. He
also may have been involved in other ways that we don't understand right
now. Do you see it differently? It does not have anything to
do with resting for the next day.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:36
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts
you have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no
atheist.
Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours
of time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to
actually speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost
the context of my statement. My comments go the the notion that
"day" is not a 24 hour period. To say that it is
metaphorical does not mean that God did not create the
world and even in the sequence depicted -- at least not to
me. Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I
believe the Genesis account to be "scientific" as we understand that
term , today. Look -- do you really believe that
God worked so hard in His creation activity that he needed a 24 hour
period of time to rest up !!!?? And "rest up " for
what? Com'on David, this is impossible.
jd
--
Original message -- From: "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through
faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak
words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into
being? I don't understand your point.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006
5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
So which fundamentalist version of creation do you
support. That A & E were spirit people. A 6000
year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The
version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that
can be spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just
did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of
water because my mouth was getting dry.
Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies
cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes
into the school system ??? We are still waiti
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
There is much about this list that I like. I remain a political conservative when it comes to the increase of states rights, free enterprise, spending within our means, property rights, and those sort of things. Neither the Republican nor Democrate parties demonstrate values similar to mine in these regards. I was a Democrate and voted for Carter - the first time. And, in fact, came within a breath of voting for Clinton , the first time. If he hadn't have said "I smoked but I didn't inhale" with a view that we take him seriously, I would have. He was not that bad of a preseident -- not a great one, by any means, but not that bad. He did talk the Jews into making all those concessions and that is overlooked by many. the fact that he used the room in the White House called an "office" to do his deed with Monica some 50 or 60 times is most disgusting to me. For my money, the worst, most immoral President of all time was Nixon. God is the judge, but I see Nixon as thoroughly reprobate. He used Vietnom to get re-elected and his party supported him in that !!??&n bsp; I am thouroughly anti-communist and anti-socialist. The problem with being anti-socialist is that our government has not conducted itself within the parameters of true compassionate conservatism -- making socialism in a number of venues a necessity. We have allowed the Mexican immigrant population to overwhelm us to the point that there is no solution other than amnesty. We have allowed the medical industry so much profit that socialized medicine -- someday -- will become the law of the land. We have so ignored Vocational Education as to make social welfare a greater demand than ever before. Anyway -- not a bad list. jd -- Original message -- From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm humbled at your objectivity, Kevin. - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:36 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Christian roots of our public education system No but I do know about the Lefty Fruits of our public education, it is not about education. it is all about Indoctrination. Government school Education is one of the promises of the Communist Manifesto 1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose. The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share". 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. We call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes. 4. Confiscation of the propert y of all emigrants and rebels. We call in government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Police confiscation and Court ordered political fines.5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. We call it the Federal Reserve which is a credit/debt system nationally organized by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State. We call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) madated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations. 7. Extention of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. We call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate reg ulations. 8. Equal li
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Correct, and some of this activity proposes empirical predictions that are
testable by empirical means. For example, if a model of creation says that
the earth is less than 10,000 years old, isn't that a prediction that is
testable scientifically? Don't we have empirical clocks to test this
prediction?
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:44
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
Interpretation/interpolation/speculation re:Genesis leads one to that
which one has just witnessed over the last week or so.
- Original Message -
From:
David
Miller
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006 17:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
I don't know why you are getting so emotional over this.
I think that when God spoke, in many situations, it took some time for
what he said to take place. For example, if he spoke for the land
masses to divide from the water, it took less than a minute to say it, but
hours for the land and water to do what he said. He also may have
been involved in other ways that we don't understand right now. Do you
see it differently? It does not have anything to do with resting for
the next day.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:36
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
David !! Honestly, this is one of the sorriest posts you
have ever written. First, an atheist mocks God and I am no atheist.
Secondly, the reason you are confused with what I said (144 hours of
time to speak the words of creation that took only 26 seconds to actually
speak) is rather simple -- you have somehow lost the context
of my statement. My comments go the the notion that "day" is not a
24 hour period. To say that it is metaphorical
does not mean that God did not create the world and even
in the sequence depicted -- at least not to me.
Such an admission , on my part, does not mean that I believe the Genesis
account to be "scientific" as we understand that term , today.
Look -- do you really believe that God worked so hard in His
creation activity that he needed a 24 hour period of time to rest up
!!!?? And "rest up " for what? Com'on David, this
is impossible.
jd
--
Original message -- From: "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Are you mocking the concept that God created the world through
faith and speaking? What does how long it takes for him to speak
words have to do with how long it took for the world to come into
being? I don't understand your point.
David Miller
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006
5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
So which fundamentalist version of creation do you
support. That A & E were spirit people. A 6000
year date or a 10,000 or an "unknown" e.t. ? The
version that says it took God 144 hours to speak words that
can be spoken in 24 seconds !!! I just
did it in 24 big ones !! including a drink of water
because my mouth was getting dry.
Consensus has NOTHING to do with !! Rad Fundies
cannot agree on much of anything. Which version goes into
the school system ??? We are still waiting??
jd
--
Original message -- From: Kevin Deegan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Don't you get it JT?
TRUTH is found in CONSENSUS!
The opinions of Men are the key.Judy Taylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So?
There isn't a single fiew of the whole
church that is agreed upon
by the whole church either. What
does that prove? judyt
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Perhaps the Bishop has the same conc
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
She should not teach them that the universe IS geocentric, but she should teach them the geocentric model, evidence for and against it, and its place in the history of science and religion. Isn't it strange how science has no problem doing this, but it does have a problem with creation science being dealt with in the same way? David Miller - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism You may feel to teach them that the universe is geocentric if you like. - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 23:23 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Im so thankful that my 4 grandchildren are being homeschooled so they can be taught the Truth! Lance and jd; should it be illegal for them to be taught about Creationism at home? If not, why should it be illegal for them to be taught anywhere else? Do you have any idea about the Christian roots of our public education system (before the lefties took over?) izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin DeeganSent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
David:Want a crowd? Want to make some money? Design a travelling road show which will appear in major cities throughout your nation. Offer up yourself as, what the scientific community would call, the sacrificial lamb on the altar of truth. Contact the leading lights of the scientific community ahead of time. Select a venue. Sell tickets. Do exactly what you say below that you've already done. Invite the press. As you are CERTAIN of the outcome - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 24, 2006 08:18 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If I were teaching high school biology right now, I would spend one day out of the whole year to discuss the creation / evolution controversy. I would consider some of the stronger arguments for creation. Furthermore, I would teach them that science considers any mention of a Creator as something that puts a theory outside the realm of science, and I would teach them that the scientific establishment does not consider any model of origins that involves a Creator to be something that science could consider. Of course, I would also express my disagreement with this notion because religious theories that make empirical predictions can be tested scientifically. This is ignored by the scientific establishment in their zeal to outlaw religious theories in schools. By the way, every past colleague of mine that I have argued this point, about creationist models being scientifically testable, have had to agree with me that I was right, after MUCH arguing, but they will only concede that every Creationist model of origins that is scientifically testable has already been falsified. The ones that have not been falsified are still unscientific. Go figure. David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:58 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Just how wide do you wish the door open, scientifically speaking? This issue is akin to the 'prayer in school' issue. (Goose & gander thingy) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 16:57 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Do you think it should be illegal to teach in schools, or do you just think it is good advice not to mention the Creator in schools? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:32 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it then, I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools either. - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, Williams said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." So how have I mischaracterized him? David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to you and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple yikes) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Lance wrote: If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to be separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have submitted unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Lance wrote: He is a brother in Christ who believes differently than you on some matters. Now, if that makes him what you say then, that makes you what I say. He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The moniker was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in Christ, then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will continue to support the working of iniquity that seeks to remove the acknowledgment of God our Creator fr
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
If I were teaching high school biology right now, I would spend one day out of the whole year to discuss the creation / evolution controversy. I would consider some of the stronger arguments for creation. Furthermore, I would teach them that science considers any mention of a Creator as something that puts a theory outside the realm of science, and I would teach them that the scientific establishment does not consider any model of origins that involves a Creator to be something that science could consider. Of course, I would also express my disagreement with this notion because religious theories that make empirical predictions can be tested scientifically. This is ignored by the scientific establishment in their zeal to outlaw religious theories in schools. By the way, every past colleague of mine that I have argued this point, about creationist models being scientifically testable, have had to agree with me that I was right, after MUCH arguing, but they will only concede that every Creationist model of origins that is scientifically testable has already been falsified. The ones that have not been falsified are still unscientific. Go figure. David Miller - Original Message - From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:58 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism Just how wide do you wish the door open, scientifically speaking? This issue is akin to the 'prayer in school' issue. (Goose & gander thingy) - Original Message - From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: March 23, 2006 16:57 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > Do you think it should be illegal to teach in schools, or do you just > think > it is good advice not to mention the Creator in schools? > > David Miller > > - Original Message - > From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:32 PM > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > > David:Is that all you were meaning to say concerning RW? If that's it > then, > I'm with RW on this one. I don't think it should be taught in schools > either. > > > - Original Message - > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: March 23, 2006 15:04 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism > > >> The CNN report: Asked if creationism should be taught in schools, >> Williams >> said: "I don't think it should, actually. No, no." >> >> So how have I mischaracterized him? >> >> David Miller >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:41 AM >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >> David:YIKES!! You mischaracterize both Williams and his position. DOUBLE >> YIKES!! I know that you will continue to do so. You are truly trapped, >> David. You've bound yourself with your own theology (not, as you believe, >> Scripture). Your teachers will one day answer for what they've done to >> you >> and, what you now do to others.Yikes! Yikes! Yikes (that'd be triple >> yikes) >> - Original Message - >> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: March 22, 2006 10:25 >> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism >> >> >>> Lance wrote: >>>> If Williams is a 'liberal loonie' then >>>> you are a 'sectarian loonie' , David. >>> >>> I'm sectarian only in the sense that the holy and the profane ought to >>> be >>> separate. I am not sectarian within the group of those who have >>> submitted >>> unto Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. >>> >>> Lance wrote: >>>> He is a brother in Christ who believes >>>> differently than you on some matters. >>>> Now, if that makes him what you say >>>> then, that makes you what I say. >>> >>> He is not a liberal loony for believing differently from me. The >>> moniker >>> was offered because of his statement about how acknowledgement of our >>> Creator did not belong in schools. He made an irrational statement, >>> assuming that CNN reported him accurately. If he is a brother in >>> Christ, >>> then I expect to hear a retraction or clarification made soon as other >>> believers correct him. If he is not a brother in Christ, then he will >>> continue to support the working of iniq
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Less is more.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 07:36
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
When was the last time on TT you posted more than two sentences?
When was at least one of the sentences about those combat boots?
Posts of web pages excepted.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Oh ya? (see how content-filled that
is?)
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 07:06
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
But you are inclined to making baseless
assertions.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Oh but I do, Kevin. However, I'm not
inclined toward 'darkening the corner where you are'.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 06:29
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
If you do not KNOW what it is how can you make a value
judgement on it?Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Whatever 'YOUR JOB' is Kevin, y'all
ain't bin doin' it all that well AT TT!
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006
18:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE
DOING OUR JOB
Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto
Cesear
Unless of course you are swayed by the
Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What in the hell do you think I have been talking
about? You are so far off course here, as to be just
plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that
a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am
with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for
evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't
mean evolution at some level does not exist. But,
now, it is I who digresses.
My point? If the church had not surrendered its
college age young people to the Unisersity
system, we would not need this
discussion. The church is not in the High School and
our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic
evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE
SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH
OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD ---
and I am not just talking about "preaching to the
lost." Christ actually spent very little of
His time preaching. Most of His day was spent
in the offering of benevolent blessings to others.
jd
--
Original message -- From: Judy Taylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why advocate teaching what you don't
know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we
prove
evolution do we need to concern
ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism.
Evidence that
this level of proof has not been
achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who
have abandoned
Darwinism because they became
convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support
it. So why
would you want to warp young minds
with useless information that is not proven?
judyt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the
school systems and you are talking about religious
people!!! Amazing
Maybe we should install a different creat
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
When was the last time on TT you posted more than two sentences? When was at least one of the sentences about those combat boots? Posts of web pages excepted.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh ya? (see how content-filled that is?)- Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 07:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism But you are inclined to making baseless assertions.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh but I do, Kevin. However, I'm not inclined toward 'darkening the corner where you are'.- Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 24, 2006 06:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism If you do not KNOW what it is how can you make a value judgement on it?Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Whatever 'YOUR JOB' is Kevin, y'all ain't bin doin' it all that well AT TT!- Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 23, 2006 18:39 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on CreationismWE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto Cesear Unless of course you are swayed by the Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:What in the hell do you think I have been talking about? You are so far off course here, as to be just plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is I who digresses. My point? If the church had not surrendered its college age young people to the Unisersity system, we would not need this discussion. The church is not in the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to others. jd -- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why advocate teaching what you don't know JD? As has already been noted "Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So why would you want to warp young minds with useless information that is not proven? judyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the school systems and you are talking about religious people!!! Amazing Maybe we should install a different creationist version for every major school system . I am sure we can find enough fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I surmised as much JD; my point being that religious ppl have many and varied points of view about anything and everything and this is no measure by which to gauge what is needful or true. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:20:02 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Do you even know what this thread is about, Judy? WHICH VIEW OF CREATIONISM GETS INTO THE CIRRICULUM -- HUH ??? From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So? There isn't a single view of the whole church that is agreed upon by the whole church either. What does that prove? judyt On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:27:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Perhaps the Bishop has the same concerns I do. I know this -- there isn't a single view of creationism that is agreed upon by the whole church. jd -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John wrote: > The world in which we live would reject > any mention of God in the evolutionary process, > IMO. But creationism in the schools? Could > that not be considered the beginnings of a fanatical > fundamentalist take-over of the culture? ROTFLOL. I sure hope you were being facetious on purpose. John wrote: > But to
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
Oh ya? (see how content-filled that
is?)
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 07:06
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on
Creationism
But you are inclined to making baseless
assertions.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Oh but I do, Kevin. However, I'm not inclined
toward 'darkening the corner where you are'.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 24, 2006 06:29
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams
on Creationism
If you do not KNOW what it is how can you make a value
judgement on it?Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Whatever 'YOUR JOB' is Kevin, y'all ain't
bin doin' it all that well AT TT!
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: March 23, 2006 18:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw:
Williams on Creationism
WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING
OUR JOB
Our Job is NOT the school system or Politics, render unto
Cesear
Unless of course you are swayed by the
Reconstructionists.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What in the hell do you think I have been talking
about? You are so far off course here, as to be just
plain silly. I am not a "big banger" nor do I believe that a
lung fish is ancient family. In fact, I am with
the growing opinion that there has not been enough time for
evolution to have worked it's wonders. That doesn't mean
evolution at some level does not exist. But, now, it is
I who digresses.
My point? If the church had not surrendered its
college age young people to the Unisersity system,
we would not need this discussion. The church is not in
the High School and our senior class has yet to convert to atheistic
evolutionism...proving that WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE SCHOOL
SYSTEM IF WE ARE DOING OUR JOB -- AS A CHURCH OF CHRIST
IN MINISTRY TO THE WORLD --- and I am not
just talking about "preaching to the lost." Christ
actually spent very little of His time preaching. Most
of His day was spent in the offering of benevolent blessings to
others.
jd
--
Original message -- From: Judy Taylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why advocate teaching what you don't know
JD? As has already been noted "Only when we
prove
evolution do we need to concern ourselves
with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence
that
this level of proof has not been achieved
includes the long list of scientists and others who have
abandoned
Darwinism because they became convinced
that the scientific evidence DOES NOT support it. So
why
would you want to warp young minds with
useless information that is not proven? judyt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm talking about fundy creationist versions in the
school systems and you are talking about religious
people!!! Amazing
Maybe we should install a different creationist version
for every major school system
. I am sure we can find enough
fundy ideas to go around. That way , you would have to
worry about consensus and no one will have the slightest
idea what to believe. but you and Kev will be
happy. CONSENSUS BE DAMNED. KNOW THE TRUTH
AND IT SHALL MAKE YOU FREE !! jd
From:
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I surmised as much JD; my point
being that religious ppl have many
and varied points of view about
anything and everything and this is no
measure by wh
