> On Jun 18, 2008, at 9:34 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > You give me a chuckle there Ed. It has worked because Gods grace
> > is there
> > for for all of us.
>
> If I understand things correctly, it always was supposed to be
> there.
You do not understand correctly. Before Christ's at
On Jun 18, 2008, at 9:34 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> You give me a chuckle there Ed. It has worked because Gods grace
> is there
> for for all of us.
If I understand things correctly, it always was supposed to be there.
We were talking about the teachings of Jesus, and how more mur
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Wow. Another complete non-response.
>
>You talk about the way that this message is spread, and claim that
> it
> worked great. We see the result of this method 2000 years later, and
> you think it worked. Sheesh.
Stephen Russell wrote:
>>But these teachings are not the same. This isn't something where you
>> are given a choice; you either choose the path laid out by Jesus, or
>> you burn in Hell for all eternity. If he is casting out these
>> teachings like so many seeds, expecting a large number n
Bob Calco wrote:
> Too clever by half. Agape and eros are Greek, not English words. I was
> clarifying that the kind of love I meant was Agape love--the unconditional,
> and completely non-sexual, variety--not eros.
Do you often find yourself clarifying things that are obvious to any
educated per
On Jun 18, 2008, at 6:16 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>>Are you serious? It worked? You think that the world has
>> understood
>> and embraced the message that Jesus was preaching?
>>
> ---
>
> The world restated time's starting point going forward.
>
> Some of us talk abou
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > For a long time I have said that God must be frustrated that man is
> > dumb as
> > a rock.
>
> ???
>
>How could he be frustrated? Man is *exactly* the
> On Jun 18, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > For a long time I have said that God must be frustrated that man is
> > dumb as
> > a rock.
>
> ???
>
> How could he be frustrated? Man is *exactly* the way he wants him
> to
> be. After all, he is all-powerful, and could h
>WWJB? (Who Would Jesus Bomb?)
I don't think he would bomb anyone. That is just such a crude way of doing
people in. Ed keeps conveniently forgetting that when the Israelites returned
from Egypt they were instructed to kill every man, woman and child of the
people who lived in the land. Ano
On Jun 18, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> For a long time I have said that God must be frustrated that man is
> dumb as
> a rock.
???
How could he be frustrated? Man is *exactly* the way he wants him to
be. After all, he is all-powerful, and could have made man a
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2008, at 4:53 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > Sorry Ed but it is not about the environment. It is about the
> > person =
> > seed. I am not saying that everyone who hears you should jump on
> > Dabo. It
> > was j
> >
> > Agape love, Ricardo; not eros. Confusion between the two is a plague
> of the
> > carnal mind, which is beset by many sad, dark misapprehensions
> regarding
> > reality. You can't help it in your current state. I understand. :)
> >
>
> Wrong again Bobby. It's you people who can't tell the
Bob Calco wrote:
>>> But I love you anyway, because God loves you anyway! (Romans 5:8)
>> Yep, I was almost sure you were gay.
>
> Agape love, Ricardo; not eros. Confusion between the two is a plague of the
> carnal mind, which is beset by many sad, dark misapprehensions regarding
> reality. You c
On Jun 17, 2008, at 4:53 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Sorry Ed but it is not about the environment. It is about the
> person =
> seed. I am not saying that everyone who hears you should jump on
> Dabo. It
> was just a reference for the various people and how they can react to
> hearing abou
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Bob Calco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Seems that Jesus is saying that God is more like the careless
> > > sower, who doesn't consider the seeds precious enough to plant
> > > carefully.
> >
> > "Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > Ed you live this parable, in that you talk about Dabo. Some folks
> > her it
> > and think it's great but never do anything with it. Others
> > download it and
> > in
>
> > Seems that Jesus is saying that God is more like the careless
> > sower, who doesn't consider the seeds precious enough to plant
> > carefully.
>
> "Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see,
> and
> hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." Matt 13:13.
> Seems that Jesus is saying that God is more like the careless
> sower, who doesn't consider the seeds precious enough to plant
> carefully.
"Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and
hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." Matt 13:13.
- Bob
_
>
> This is a terrible comparison. I don't expect everyone to need or
> want Dabo; I only mention it in case there are those out there for
> whom it would be useful. I certainly don't plan on condemning anyone
> who doesn't use it!
>
> Also, the parable shows how much of a difference
On Jun 17, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Ed you live this parable, in that you talk about Dabo. Some folks
> her it
> and think it's great but never do anything with it. Others
> download it and
> install it but don't come back. Others use it, ask questions and
> interact
>
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Bob Calco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Moreover, in the words of Christ, you see an amazing synthesis of the major
> concepts that clearly flow from God through all the books of the Bible,
> from
> Genesis on. Sure, any idiot can find this or that line that off
>
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:02 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > I think that when the split of the Christians occurred there were
> > two known
> > versions of the Old Testament. I thin it was Judea had one and
> > Israel had
> > the other. So at the Christian split they took the official "other
On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:02 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> I think that when the split of the Christians occurred there were
> two known
> versions of the Old Testament. I thin it was Judea had one and
> Israel had
> the other. So at the Christian split they took the official "other"
> version
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 4:39 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > Which "they" are you talking about? I thought that EVERY group that
> > regarded the bible as their foundation did it's own tweaking to fit
> > the
> > leaders of the t
> Bob Calco wrote:
> >> So you're telling us you were never in love with your wife, or with
> any
> >> other person ever.
> >
> > Not so. Just that love of God must be greater than love of mankind,
> or any
> > particular person, or created thing--even one's wife, or child, or
> parents.
> > (Matt
John Harvey wrote:
> Yeah, the quote isn't "judge not", it is actually, " Judge not, that ye be
> not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with
> what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again"
>
Meaning that if you forgive somebody for killing your wife you
Bob Calco wrote:
>> So you're telling us you were never in love with your wife, or with any
>> other person ever.
>
> Not so. Just that love of God must be greater than love of mankind, or any
> particular person, or created thing--even one's wife, or child, or parents.
> (Matt 10:37)
>
So you l
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hey, I grew up being told that the Catholic version was the correct
> one, and that the Protestants changed it just to be different. They
> also added a clause to the Lord's Prayer; again, just to be different.
I was at
On Jun 16, 2008, at 4:39 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Which "they" are you talking about? I thought that EVERY group that
> regarded the bible as their foundation did it's own tweaking to fit
> the
> leaders of the time.
There have been several revisions of the Bible over the centurie
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > So this was Gods way of telling Peter that a newer set of rules were
> > to be
> > followed.
>
> Oh, ok. So why bother with the Old Testament, then? Over the y
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > So this was Gods way of telling Peter that a newer set of rules were
> > to be
> > followed.
>
> Oh, ok. So why bother with the Old Testament, then? Over the
> years
> they've edited the Bible so many times, why not just remove th
On Jun 16, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> So this was Gods way of telling Peter that a newer set of rules were
> to be
> followed.
Oh, ok. So why bother with the Old Testament, then? Over the years
they've edited the Bible so many times, why not just remove the stuff
th
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 9:53 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
> > Well one of the initial chapters of Acts has Peter seeing a dream with
> > flowing animals from God who says if I made them they are all Clean.
>
>
> Oh, so some
> > Is this the word of God or not? If not, is the Bible WRONG?
> >
>
> > > " Exodus 21: 20 And if a man smite his slave, with a rod, and he
> > > die
> > > under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 But if he live
> for a > > day or two, he shall not be punished, for he is his money. "
On Jun 16, 2008, at 9:53 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Well one of the initial chapters of Acts has Peter seeing a dream with
> flowing animals from God who says if I made them they are all Clean.
Oh, so someone has a dream, and that invalidates the Old Testament?
Couldn't it be that Pe
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Justin Darnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John -
>
> This isn't a personal attackbut come on, cherry picking?
>
> While I agree with Bob's explanation above about Christ, forgiveness,
> etc overcoming the old law, it sounds like you believe Leviticus is
> sti
EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Helio W.
>
> > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 7:22 AM
> > To: ProFox Email List
> > Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay
> > wedding
> >
>
> > Is this the wo
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Helio W.
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 7:22 AM
> To: ProFox Email List
> Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay
> wedding
>
> Is this th
ing
>>
>> JH
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
>> Of Helio W.
>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 2:44 PM
>> To: ProFox Email List
>> Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican
Helio W. wrote:
> In which context does this have any value?
>
> " Exodus 21: 20 And if a man smite his slave, with a rod, and he die
> under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 But if he live for a
> day or two, he shall not be punished, for he is his money. "
Hi Helio!
History. In the
Bob Calco wrote:
>> I was surprised that you did not quote the LAW in Lev.?
>
> The law in Leviticus, technically speaking, is fulfilled/superseded by the
> new law of love in Christ. That is, adherence to the law and all the
> regulations put forth in Leviticus and Deuteronomy per se is not goin
>
> There's a difference between judging someones soul an judging their
> behavior.
Indeed, repentance cannot come unless the person hears the righteous
judgment of the *behavior*.
As long as the judgment of the *behavior* is spiritually true and offered
*in love*, and pierces the heart as such,
s.com/rightwingmike/4236924
--- On Sun, 6/15/08, John Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: John Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
> To: "'ProFox Email List'"
> Date: Sunday,
MAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Bob Calco
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 5:54 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
>
> Justin Darnell wrote:
> > Everyone has to believe and follow in their own way but my person
>
> Justin Darnell wrote:
> > Everyone has to believe and follow in their own way but my personal
> > understanding of what is required of me is to love first and to leave
> > the judging to God.
> >
>
> I like this bloke.
>
Even I agree with leaving the judging to God. I think the nuance here
> >
> > It's deeper than that--it's about loving the creation more than the
> creator,
> > and becoming so far gone in self-love and man-worship that God
> basically
> > hands you over to your delusion. You're pretty far gone if you're
> gone that
> > far, and it's a hard way back (not for God but
Married a stud. You are so right!
JH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ricardo Araoz
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 5:10 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
John H
/rightwingmike/4236924
--- On Sun, 6/15/08, Ricardo Araoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Ricardo Araoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
> To: "ProFox Email List"
> Date: Sunday, June 1
John Harvey wrote:
> Context, my friend, context.
>
> So, you think Jesus would have said homosexuality was cool? Give me a break.
> It's a queer behavior, at best.
>
Mmmhhh What would Jesus have said about mating with animals?
And yet your wife married a ...
__
> Of course not...I don't speak for him ;)
>
> Let me rephrase - if we spent time trying to better the world through
> love as I think we're supposed to, we wouldn't have so much time to
> tell other people that they're doing wrong.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/04/martin.jesus/index.html
>
Justin Darnell wrote:
> Everyone has to believe and follow in their own way but my personal
> understanding of what is required of me is to love first and to leave
> the judging to God.
>
I like this bloke.
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subsc
John Harvey wrote:
> Gay priest? Isn't that an oxymoron? God says homosexuality is an abomination
> and they think it's ok to cherry pick the Bible. Hmm, I like that 'don't
> murder' one, but what the big deal with stealing
>
Or taking a "bite".
_
Bob Calco wrote:
>>> Sad. If these men understood the bond that was actually being forged
>>> between
>>> them spiritually, they'd be weeping, not celebrating.
>>>
>>> Proverbs 14:12. Jeremiah 17:9. Romans 1:24-32.
>>>
>>> But then, Luke 23:34.
>>>
>>
>>
Bob Calco wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/4g7um5
>
> - - -
>
> Sad. If these men understood the bond that was actually being forged between
> them spiritually, they'd be weeping, not celebrating.
>
> Proverbs 14:12. Jeremiah 17:9. Romans 1:24-32.
>
> But then, Luke 23:34.
>
Naahh!!! Luke skywalke
sexuality was cool? Give me a break.
> It's a queer behavior, at best.
>
> JH
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Justin Darnell
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 3:14 PM
> To: ProFox Email List
> Subject: Re: [
t; -Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
>> Of Bob Calco
>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 1:56 PM
>> To: 'ProFox Email List'
>> Subject: RE: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay
> wedd
roFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
John -
This isn't a personal attackbut come on, cherry picking?
While I agree with Bob's explanation above about Christ, forgiveness,
etc overcoming the old law, it sounds like you believ
John -
This isn't a personal attackbut come on, cherry picking?
While I agree with Bob's explanation above about Christ, forgiveness,
etc overcoming the old law, it sounds like you believe Leviticus is
still wholly valid. Am I reading you right? If you've read Leviticus
11:9-12 you shouldn'
You confuse "cherry picking" with "out of context" picking
JH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Helio W.
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 2:44 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglica
ible. Hmm, I like that 'don't
> murder' one, but what the big deal with stealing
>
> JH
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Bob Calco
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 1:56 PM
> To: '
L PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Bob Calco
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 1:56 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay wedding
> >
> > Sad. If these men understood the bond that was actually being forged
> > betwee
This is exactly what it is, a demonic mockery.
Nothing pleases Satan more than to corrupt the church, whether that is to lead
a priest to molest a child, or to lead a priest to marry two homosexuals.
Satan is smiling ear to ear.
This was not a wedding in any Christ-glorifying sense, but rat
> >
> > Sad. If these men understood the bond that was actually being forged
> > between
> > them spiritually, they'd be weeping, not celebrating.
> >
> > Proverbs 14:12. Jeremiah 17:9. Romans 1:24-32.
> >
> > But then, Luke 23:34.
> >
>
>
> Tell us ho
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Bob Calco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/4g7um5
>
> - - -
>
> Sad. If these men understood the bond that was actually being forged
> between
> them spiritually, they'd be weeping, not celebrating.
>
> Proverbs 14:12. Jeremiah 17:9. Romans 1:24-32.
Satan has infiltrated the Church, just as the Bible prophesied.
Big Brown Wins The Preakness Stakes
http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike/5591998
I Wish Hillary had married OJ
http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike/
65 matches
Mail list logo
