David Miller wrote:
Aw, Lance. I liked the exchange.
DAVEH::-D It does seem that way, DavidM. Today I received well
over a hundred TT posts. Interestingly, a TTer who once suggested we
limit our daily posts to 8, made nearly a quarter (28) of them
today! ;-)
Peace be with you.
D
why aren't you
followg your advice to Jeff (Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:11:46
-0500)?
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:49:08 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jt: What do you mean the translation is faulty Gary?
||
It’s not a book for Girlie Men. My husband has a copy that he hasn’t
had a chance to read yet. It was highly recommended by a friend of his. (But he’s
such a wild man already.) J Izzy
-Original Message-
Maybe Lance can help us out here with a
book he may have read called "Wild
ï
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Judy wrote:Being 'easily offended" happens to both men and
women David and has nothing to do with feminized conversationsand
emasculated men. Do love and good manners have to be genderized? From
whence are the roots of sucha concept as this?
If yo
jt: What do you mean the translation is faulty Gary?
It's the majority text..
Do you just find a translation to suit what it is you
want to believe?
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:25:58 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
myth (the
translation is faulty)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:11:46 -050
In a message dated 11/16/2004 4:00:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jeff in Red:
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Powers
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 5:19
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 613 Commands
John, start with Acts 15. Realizing that
myth (the
translation is faulty)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:11:46 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asserts:
"These women are two
covenants..
In a message dated 11/16/2004 2:10:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are plenty of folks
on this list and elsewhere in this world who hate me greatly.
There is NO ONE on this list who hates you -- not one. Repent.
John
In a message dated 11/16/2004 1:01:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Come to think of it, Jesus was not an author. :-)
Actyally, He is the author of the book of Revelation, is He not?
JD
In a message dated 11/16/2004 1:32:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In a word: Yes! Izzy
jt: I'll second that; I gave up trying to figure out what Lance was about a long time ago
because it doesn't seem to be important to him to m
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:04:27 -0500 "Jeff Powers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mr.G?
jt: Wrong one to consult Jeff you'd be
much better off reading your Bible :)
"These women are two covenants; one from
Mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. Now this Hagar
answereth t
In a message dated 11/16/2004 12:47:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:48:19 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 11/15/2004 5:28:41 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The indicatives of Grace always preceed the imperatives
In a message dated 11/16/2004 12:27:15 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am going through the same frustration with my little
boy.
Suzy
Me too -- only he is 29 !!!
Father Smithson
In a message dated 11/16/2004 10:40:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Such a viewpoint is anathema.
>It denies the gospel. It denies the righteousness of Christ,"
verses -- "As for Lance, however, you AGAIN clearly misread what I wrote because I do not consider Lance to
the Ap. Paul
sanctioned one covenant in this context, a reality for which DavidM has no
apparent feeling, hence his use of the word 'are',
below
the concept the Ap
Paul presents in Gal is that 'these women represent two covenants, one which is
valid now, relative to JC, one which is not';
I
Jonathan wrote:
Creation --> The Fall --> Law --> Failure to uphold the law --> Grace
enters in Jesus Christ
So Creation and grace occur almost simaltaneously (from man's point of view0 - man is created with a view to maturity (thus the illusion of "fallen" nature) in Christ i
In a message dated 11/16/2004 9:33:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Smithson wrote:
>Additionally, a comparison of Ps 7 complete with
>the arrogance of the self-righteous in stark contrast
>to the wording of one who is suddenly and completely
>humbled by the fact of sin
Mr.G?
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004
20:33
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Two
Covenants
myth (the ff.
concept is not true)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:15:46 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAI
Jeff Powers wrote:
Suzy,
it looks as though the light may have gotten a little brighter!
Terry,
So you don't reject these, just reduce them to 2?
Jeff
Something you need to understand guys. Terry is a nobody. What I
accept or reject means squat.
David,
I see one covenant. God's covenant with man, begun with Abraham, amended
with Moses, Again amended with David. Jeremiah prophesied a renewal, as did
Isaiah, etc. That renewal was accomplished through Yeshua. The "New
Covenant" is not new, it is Renewed. Sorry David, but Cut and Paste
Th
myth (the ff.
concept is not true)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:15:46 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:||
>Sha'ul specifically says, "these women are two
covenants."
Jeff, I also neglected to say in my last post that Terry also has pointed
out that besides the issue of circumcision, there is the issue of being born
of Abraham in order to be part of that covenant. For reference, pay
attention to verse 13 below:
Genesis 17:10-14
(10) This is my covenant, whi
Jeff wrote:
When looked at properely one can (should?) easily see that the issue
Sha'ul is addressing is CIRCUMCISION! What did the Jerusalem
Council determine? What we have here is the same legalistic Judaisers
causing trouble, and Sha'ul saying that legalistic observance is
worthless.
You are a
Slade wrote:
Please tell me where Scripture says the Law of Moses is a hard yoke?
Now... before you get your panties all in a knot, please remember
that there is a heavy yoke in Scripture: Legalism (the belief that Law
-- if followed -- will grant Eternal Life). Aside form THAT yoke,
show me one...
Slade wrote:
You have successfully failed to answer any
of my questions.
Slade, if I could interject here...
In the past, Judy has failed to hear you answer her questions. In this
case, I think I am beginning to see how you are not hearing her. Let me try
and explain what I understand of Judy's
In reply to David's question,
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. What is the context of
Sha'ul's letter to Galatians? When looked at properely one can (should?) easily
see that the issue Sha'ul is addressing is CIRCUMCISION! What did the
Jerusalem Council determine?
What we have here is the same l
I agree with you, Lance. I think the term is Covenantal Nomism.
-- slade
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, 16 November, 2004 13.13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Can God's covenants be broken?
I would
Beautiful example of Grace. Even in the times before Yeshua's death, the
Levites did not authorize the stoning of a person when they were repentant.
After all, a Sanhedrin who authorized the capitol punishment of a single person
on 75 years was called a bloody Sanhedrin. God didn't have David
Judy wrote:
Being 'easily offended" happens to both men and women
David and has nothing to do with feminized conversations
and emasculated men. Do love and good manners
have to be genderized? From whence are the roots of such
a concept as this?
If you were a man, you might understand this better.
Please tell me where Scripture says the Law of Moses is a hard yoke? Now...
before you get your panties all in a knot, please remember that there is a
heavy yoke in Scripture: Legalism (the belief that Law -- if followed --
will grant Eternal Life). Aside form THAT yoke, show me one...
-- slade
You
have successfully failed to answer any of my questions.
#1 --
I asked HOW or WHAT ARE WE TO DO? Is this a moot question? Do you believe in
nonaction? short accounts -- asking forgiveness? In your faith, how do we
REPENT? We're to walk in the light? How? By carrying torches or flashligh
Judy wrote:
There are two covenants Suzy, which are spoken of by
the apostle Paul ie: "It is written that Abraham had two
sons, one by the bondmaid, and one by the freewoman.
Howbeit, the one by the bondmaid is born after the flesh;
but the son by the freewoman is born through promise.
Which things
Jeff in Red:
- Original Message -
From:
Jeff
Powers
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004
5:19
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 613
Commands
John, start with Acts 15. Realizing that Gentiles
coming into the faith presented a problem for fello
ï
?
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:01:47 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:||
>These conversations should never be taken
personally.
||
then righteousness
is a behavioral ideal
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:14:23 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
[One] can choose to
be a slave to righteousness instead of a slave to sin.
myth (the ff.
concept is not true)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:13:03 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:||
>Romans 7 simply [describes] .. a person
who has
>not yet been set free through Jesus
Christ.
||
myth
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:56:05 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:||
Psalm 40 ..speaks about the sins of Jesus Christ
being more than the hairs of his head.
||
ï
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>It seems to me
that conversations have been feminized for decades now and many men simply
do not realize it. They have been emasculated and do not know how to
stand up for themselves and say what they believe. We have spent way
too much time talking
From: Susan Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>I am
sorry, Judy, but I find your defenses very confusing. First you say there is a
new covenant thatwe follow which gets rid of the old (this is my way of
saying it). Now you are saying that technically thereisn't a new
commandment. Which one is it?
Gee Suzy,
I have been down this road before on here! Try asking for an explanation of
Acts 15:21! You'll either laugh, cry, or want to throw your 'puter out the
window!! But then I love being abused (it helps to have skin like a rhino
here!)
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: "Susan Pete
Suzy, You have to keep in mind the confusion created when one choses to
believe the replacement theory of theology. There I go again with mistakes,
I meant replacement theology! We have to deal with some of them here!!
Almost as cornfusing as the Two house theory! But ya just gotta love the
c
OK Izzy, I get the point! No excuse, I got momentarily
stupid. Thanks for the spanking. Now back to the bickering, errr, I
mean debate!
Jeff
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004
20:48
Subject: RE: [Truth
Suzy,
it looks as though the light may have gotten a little brighter!
Terry,
So you don't reject these, just reduce them to 2?
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: "Susan Petersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 14:28
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]139 - 1
Jonathan wrote:
I believe that there is a relational aspect that needs
to be forged prior to the logical being effective.
It is this relational aspect that you lack with John and
Lance. If they do not feel that you are giving credence
to their thoughts or 'listening' it becomes a tit for tat,
back
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>In a
word: Yes! Izzy
jt: I'll second that; I gave up trying to figure out
what Lance was about a long time
ago
because it doesn't seem to be important to him
to make himself understood.
Does anybody else have trouble understanding Lance's view
ROFL! The practical dreams often eclipse
the glorious ones. Izzy
PS Jonathan, It isn't hard to get
published. Just email it to someone who publishes things that are similar to
what you wrote. (Read their writer's guidelines first.) Go for it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMA
Today I have learned a new concept on TT: "scripture bombs". Izzy
-Original Message-
A number of scripture bombs are placed usually at the end of the email to
enforce that it is not just your opinion, but God's.
Jonathan
G, if this is a description of yourself,
it is your choice. You can choose to walk in the Spirit instead of the Flesh. You
can choose to be a slave to righteousness in stead of a slave to sin. (That’s
why Jesus came. That’s the “Good News”!) Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
In a word: Yes! Izzy
-Original Message-
Does anybody else have
trouble understanding Lance's view here?
Peace be with you.
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) ht
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:56:42 -0500 "Slade Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Those are the ones dealing with the woman who has
allegedly committed adultery. She's brought before the priest and has to drink
the bitter waters. K.
jt:
Apparently this is also obsolete because
Here, Lance. Does this revive your
memory? Izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:13 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Can God's covenants be broken?
I would 'sugge
Question: Are these all done away with since we're in the
New Kay
jt: Yes
-
1)
Fornicators with anyone at all don't inherit the
Kingdom
2)
Eunuch's for anything other than medical reasons are
i
Lance wrote:
David, seriously, please identify 15-20 authors who've influenced you.
It would be an aid. Plleese?
I suspect the following isn't what you want, but
Moses
Job
David
Solomon
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Daniel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:48:19 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 11/15/2004 5:28:41 AM
Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:The indicatives of
Grace always preceed the imperatives of Law. Take a lookat the paragraph
just prior to the decalogue in Exodus.
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 05:46:28 -0500 "Slade Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Sorry. What is clear to one is not clear to another. I see ONE HOUSE
and ONE servant (Moses) and ONE Son (Yeshua). God is the builder of the ONE
house.
jt: Have
you read Hebrews 3:4, Hebrews 3:5
I am going through the same frustration with my little
boy.
Suzy
--- Hughes Jonathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thank you for the compliment. I wrote this piece
> this morning while the
> event was still fresh in my mind. A dream of mine
> is to be published.
>
> Now if I cou
Hi David,
Thank you for the compliment. I wrote this piece this morning while the
event was still fresh in my mind. A dream of mine is to be published.
Now if I could just get him toilet-trained!
Jonathan Hughes
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
My husband has a theory on the shadow of things to
come. He says that in order for there to be a shadow
there has to be a real object or person casting that
shadow. Jesus is the real person casting the shadow.
If we take away the shadow then we take away Jesus who
is casting that shadow.
Suzy
---
Hi David,
A few (ok, seven) things to consider:
1) Lance typed up the Karl Barth quote as an addendum to the post he
wrote before it. It was not offerred up on its own although I can see
why it could be construed that way. Lance attempted to make it clear
that it belonged with his earlier post
No. David, seriously, please identify 15-20 authors who've influenced you.
It would be an aid.
Plleese?
.
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: November 16, 2004 14:35
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Self-deception
> Lance wrote:
> > Wil
Some would say it is a feat to observe the Feast. Others would say it is a
joy and a blessing
Kay
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Susan Petersen
Sent: Tuesday, 16 November, 2004 14.24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 613 C
I don't save posts, excepting of course those 'created from whole cloth' by
my buds (Jonathan & John). As you've offered a truncated version of what I
said (I don't even save my own highly esteemed posts) I seem to recall
answering your question near the end (the 'double move' business)..ergo
UNILA
Lance wrote:
Will you kindly write for us an underived paragraph?
I just did. Those were my thoughts, not something derived from someone
else. This does not mean that other people have not influenced my thinking
in years past, but it means that I do not simply parrot others in the ideas
and th
That is exactly what we are saying. They all fall
under the "big two." But you keep saying that we do
not have to follow these laws. These are just some of
the laws in Torah. We need to follow these, right?
Suzy
--- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Slade Henson wrote:
>
> > Question:
Sukkot is also known as Feat of Tabernacles or Feast
of Booths.
Suzy
--- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Slade Henson wrote:
>
> > Hmm...why then, Terry, does God repeatedly say it
> was for the
> > "foreigner" among them as well?
> >
> > You mention feasts, sacrifices, tithing, a
Oops. "Feat" was a typo. It should read Feast.
Suzy
--- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Slade Henson wrote:
>
> > Hmm...why then, Terry, does God repeatedly say it
> was for the
> > "foreigner" among them as well?
> >
> > You mention feasts, sacrifices, tithing, and
> Sabbath. Does
Lance wrote:
I would 'suggest' that God's covenant with Abraham is,
in reality, unilateral and, thereby further 'suggesting' that
such an covenant does exist.
How do you reconcile your "suggestion" with the Scripture I had quoted where
God expected something from Abraham and his descendants?
Gene
Gary paraphrases:
"..I myself..in the sinful nature [am] a slave to the law of sin."
--the Ap. Paul (Rom 7)
Abbreviation gets you in trouble again. Consider the whole context of
Paul's message here. Paul describes in Romans 7 his experience of living
under the law and in the flesh. He preface
I am sorry, Judy, but I find your defenses very
confusing. First you say there is a new covenant that
we follow which gets rid of the old (this is my way of
saying it). Now you are saying that technically there
isn't a new commandment. Which one is it?
There is ONE theme throughout the Bible. ONE
God did not return to the "old". He had a plan right
from the start. He knew man would fall. From the very
start he planned to give His Son. He still set up the
Law so that we would know how to love Him and love our
neighbor. Jesus came to make God's covenant with us
fuller (Matthew 5:17). He broug
Gary wrote:
also, KDavid comments, "..may those who love your salvation
always say, "The LORD be exalted!" Yet I am poor and
needy [now*]; may the Lord think of me [now*].." (Ps. 40)
*presently, beyond his 'Uriah confession/s', "[KDavid's sins] are
more than the hairs of [his] head, and [his] heart
Kay wrote:
How, then, David, do you rectify Matt. 11:30...
My yoke is easy and my burden is light?
That's the point. The yoke of Christ's covenant is not the same as the yoke
of the covenant of the law. Acts 15:10 speaks about an unbearable yoke.
Define that unbearable yoke that they are talkin
DM:Will you kindly write for us an underived paragraph?
- Original Message -
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: November 16, 2004 13:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Self-deception
> John wrote:
> > Could it be that KB expresses that which Lance believes?
Jonathan, you are a very gifted writer. Did you submit this piece for
publication somewhere? Very polished writing. Delightful to read.
By the way, I have had five children go through this stage, so I relate to
your experience. :-)
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
--
"Let your spee
John wrote:
Could it be that KB expresses that which Lance believes?
David, you might try responding to those words, included
by Lance, and see what Lance has to say rather than resorting
to the kind of criticism, disguised as honest (no doubt) advice.,
as is recorded above. You the Teacher -- La
That is correct. All of the laws either talk about
loving God or loving your neighbor. They teach us how
to both love God and love our neighbor.
Suzy
--- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Susan Petersen wrote:
>
> >Jesus was asked by the Pharisees to rank the
> greatest
> >commandments
I would 'suggest' that God's covenant with Abraham is, in reality,
unilateral and, thereby further 'suggesting' that such an covenant does
exist. You are speaking of a bi-lateral covenant. God in Christ completes
what some have called the 'double move' (God toward man & Man toward God).
No 'conditi
"..I myself..in the
sinful nature [am] a slave to the law of sin."
--the Ap. Paul (Rom
7)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:41:36 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
myth
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:32:27 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:>God desires for us to st
Lance wrote:
If a covenant is unilateral, can it be broken?
A covenant is an agreement between parties and there are always expected
obligations on both sides. If not, then there is no real covenant. One
party simply does something for someone else without any agreement between
them. So I wou
myth
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:32:27 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:>God desires for us to stand up like men of valor before him
with a heart free of any consciousness of sin.
also, KDavid
comments, "..may those who love your salvation always say, "The LORD be
exalted!" Yet I am poor and needy [now*]; may the Lord think of me [now*].."
(Ps. 40)
*presently, beyond
his 'Uriah confession/s', "[KDavid's sins] are more than the hairs
of [his] head, and [his] heart f
Not much time right now...will answer the rest later when I get a chance
How, then, David, do you rectify Matt. 11:30...My yoke is easy and my burden
is light?
K.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Miller
Sent: Tuesday, 16 November,
Terry wrote:
How to tithe to a priesthood that no longer exists would be
a good place to start, because if you fail to tithe to the priests
you break the whole law.
Terry's whole post was very good, but I would especially like to see this
comment addressed. Surely you interpret the meaning of the
Speaking for myself, I got it. Yes
mm!
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 16, 2004 12:15
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Gospel
Since you jumped in
on this, John, let me explain that I find it frustrating that al
John Smithson wrote:
Additionally, a comparison of Ps 7 complete with
the arrogance of the self-righteous in stark contrast
to the wording of one who is suddenly and completely
humbled by the fact of sin in his life (Ps 51) and in the
presense of a merciful God.
I believe there is an important dist
Negatory.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Gospel
Is this meant for David Miller?
- Original Message -
From: "ShieldsFamily"
Kay wrote:
I think it's been said repeatedly. The four "rules" given were what
they HAD to do in order to be granted entry into synagogues.
This is not true, Kay. Somebody has misled you on this point. Gentiles
already had access to the synagogues before they ever heard of Jesus Christ.
If you
Terry, You are wonderfully practical. J Izzy
===
Enjoy him while you can. Before you know it, he will be an unbearable
teen ager.
Terry
Lovely, Jonathan. And
so true. (You should see my daughter-in-law taking three girls, ages 6, 4, and
2, swimming—what a handful!) Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hughes Jonathan
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004
10:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the point, your
myth, remains
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:03:59 -0500 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:>after David had sinned, he made a decision that he [will]>confess his
transgressions.
Since you jumped in on this, John, let me
explain that I find it frustrating that almost every time someone tries to
discuss something with either you, Lance, or Jonathan one of you jumps in to
defend him (or more likely attack the person directly) before there is any
answer from the person
Is this meant for David Miller?
- Original Message -
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: November 16, 2004 12:02
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Gospel
> I Cor 13:4 Love...is not rude. Izzy
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [
Judy, what do you think of the following passages which speak of the Jew
FIRST?
Romans 1:16
(16) For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of
God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also
to the Greek.
Romans 2:9-10
(9) Tribulation and angui
Now you are doing it. The First Izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hughes Jonathan
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Gospel
Izzy,
The post before yours accusing Lance of 'interr
I Cor 13:4 Love...is not rude. Izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Gospel
Please explain the 'law of exclusivity' (#615) to me.
---
DM says of Sir Lancelot: 'you don't like the exchange' and why kind Sir L is
that? I OCCASIONALLY find you to be excessively pedantic.
- Original Message -
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: November 16, 2004 11:55
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 613 Commands
Lance wrote:
DAVID MILLER: This is what I'm meaning. SOMETIMES you
are a sophisticated version of Judy. One (this one) occasionally
'wishes' , not hopes, to say: Enough Already!
Aw, Lance. I liked the exchange. I think Slade made a good observation,
that Judy's response had an elitist implicatio
Hughes Jonathan wrote:
Last night I took my two and
a half year old son Noah to his first swimming lesson. Noah isn't
really afraid of water as much as he is afraid to spend time with
someone other than his mother. Last night was daddy time. He didn't
have his nap during the day
I did not write the post below. Izzy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004
8:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 613
Commands
In a message dated 11/15/2004 9:39:40 PM
Pacific Stand
Yes, that is what that first statement means and, as you just might recall,
I believe it to apply even to you.
You may not have a 'puny little mind' David, but you are regularly
small-minded. It's quite unbecoming for someone so obviously gifted.
By the by, I doubt that you've every written a tho
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
