One more word, David: When I said that perhaps you
were indeed more righteous, I meant it. You may well be far ahead of me
on many matters of behaviour. But you alternate between harshness and
condescension in the way you talk to other believers on TT, which you do not
seem to see. I imagine
It's a pleasure to address you as
'colleague'!
- Original Message -
From:
Debbie Sawczak
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 23, 2005 00:03
Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] More
wisdom from Dallas Willard
Hi David,
1. Why "flux": As has alread
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Hughes
To: Lance Muir
Sent: April 22, 2005 21:27
Subject: Book of Mormon and the KJV Bible
The Book of Mormon and the King James Version (1999)
Curt van den Heuvel
Introduction
The King James Version of the Bible is, in all likelihood, the mo
Guilty of what JD? Could you please leave enough
of the message so that the rest of us can understand
what you are responding to in context. Thank
You
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:50:29 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 4/12/2005 1:24:41 PM Pacific Daylight
Time, [EMAIL PROT
ï
But what about the immerson JD? Jesus would not
be involved with 'sarcasm' humorous or otherwise
because it's definition is "caustic and often ironic
language to express contempt or bitterness especially
toward an individual" so whether harsh or humorous
sarcasm would be the fruit of the ot
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:26:03 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jt: Do you hate him
JD because he
speaks the truth to you?
Not even close --
hatred expects and desires harm. I hope only the best for King
David. I was quite taken with David in the
beginning.
jt:
Hi Caroline,
This image of hell may be true for you but I don't get
hell images from any of those places - However, I do believe what Jesus had
to say about it ie: weeping and gnashing of
teeth and I don't believe purgatory to be a scriptural concept. How is it
that you, as a professing b
Jt says that 'calling him king is sarcasm'. Shall
we direct this question to David himself? What did 'hail David'
mean?
The important thing, vis a vis the 'king' thingy',
is what God says on this matter. Does David or, anyone in relationship with
him, think this of him? (i.e. that he is, in
Bizzare and unlawful.
It was practised by THOSE outside of the faith.
It is forbidden as practised by the LDS
The Bible is clear NO Communuion with the DEAD!
To change a LDS quote, it should be:
The living should NOT hear from the deadDave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: Kevin, do you think ba
1 Co. Chapter 15: Verses 1,2,3,9,10,11,12,14,15,17,19 Contains FIRST Person pronouns, "we" "our" "you" "your" "ye", Paul is speaking to his Christian audience about things that pertain to them.
1 Co 15:29 Else what shall THEY do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why ar
THEY were not doing it!
It is clearly an actpractised by those outside the Curch.
Besides it is NOT even a statement IT IS A QUESTION. You build you house on SINKING SAND!
MT 7 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was th
When you give me ONE example of PROXY Baptism either in the Bible (not even 1 Co 15 says ANYTHING about a PROXY) or in the Book o Mormon. Then maybe we could discuss such as existing before 1834! Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: Then why do you think those early Christians who practiced prox
Lance,
Only those in the 'liberal' camp have this problem with
DavidM because you find the way he says things to be
offensive. IMO this is because you are all
respecters of persons. I can and do say the same kinds of things as
DavidM quite often and you just blow it off because I'm
nobody a
No he can not; that is part of his devices.
Straw men can't dance.Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Guilty of what JD? Could you please leave enough of the message so that the rest of us can understand what you are responding to in context. Thank You
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:50:29 EDT [EMA
Do much reading of Atheist sites Lance?Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Hughes
To: Lance Muir
Sent: April 22, 2005 21:27
Subject: Book of Mormon and the KJV Bible
The Book of Mormon and the King James Version (1999)
Curt van den Heuvel
In
Lance Muir wrote:
It's a pleasure to address you as
'colleague'!
Isn't that something like a crime pardner?
Thank you David.
Jt:Please note the language you are obliged to
employ in order to 'disqualify' observations that differ from your own vis a vis
David.
Poor ol' David, he was born with a silver vowel in
his mouth.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk
A little, yes.
- Original Message -
From:
Terry Clifton
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 23, 2005 08:14
Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re:
[TruthTalk] More wisdom from Dallas Willard
Lance Muir wrote:
It's a pleasure to address you as
No.
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 23, 2005 08:06
Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Book
of Mormon and the KJV Bible
Do much reading of Atheist sites Lance?Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Debbie writes in part:
4. Extremely embarrassed to come before the Lord and have this brought up:
(a) We are before the Lord
at all times. (b) Do you really think he
is logging incidents and shelving the ledger each time in order to bring it all
up later? Forgive me, David, but your god so
It used to be people who believed in the five
fundamentals :-) Now I don't think people know what those were and who the
original debaters were!
Anyway, I agree with you:
1. to know we belong to God (body, soul, spirit
:-)
2. to acts towards Him accordingly
I think we're all here the best
Even the Encyclopedia of Mormonism admits that only a few isolated sects have practiced it, including the heretical Marcionite sect in the second century, and the Ephrata Society, a occult group in Pennsylvania in the 1700s The claim that baptism for the dead was part of Primitive Christianity tha
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DAVEH: Then why do you think those early Christians who practiced proxy
baptism were doing it? Do you think they believed was simply a
*REPRESENTATION*? Or do you suppose they thought it might have more
significance than simply being a "*LIKENESS*".
Dave, you ar
See, this is what kills me about me. I could have written something similar except for one thing -- I am a "liberal" wrapped in the emotional butt kicking blanket of a red neck conservative (like the Fundies). Plenty of patience for most - little patience for David and those who seek m
I think we're all here the best kind of fundamentalists!
I think NOT! These are more descriptive of a FEW on TT Some may be a FOUR Point "Fundamentalist" some a FIVE.
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/9963/106038 The Five Liberal Fundamentals
1. There are many paths to the same truth, so it d
In a message dated 4/23/2005 1:40:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's a pleasure to address you as 'colleague'!
How do you collect such a group of friends. All my firends live in Colorade and chew !!
JD
Also, Judy, it grieves me that you would think you
are taken less seriously because you are a woman. Nothing could be further from
the truth, for my part.
Debbie
In a message dated 4/23/2005 2:03:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But what about the immerson JD? Jesus would not be involved with 'sarcasm' humorous or otherwise
because it's definition is "caustic and often ironic language to express contempt or bitterness especially
to
Where then is the EVIDENCE that the people of the BoM KNEW of or practised baptism, let alone PROXY Baptism?
The Book of Mormon teaches baptism is a covenant for mortal life. Mosiah 18:13 And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said, Helam, I baptize thee, ha
In a message dated 4/23/2005 6:17:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It used to be people who believed in the five fundamentals :-) Now I don't think people know what those were and who the original debaters were!
Almost sounds like you are speaking of my old buddies in the C
JD, I am not being sarcastic, I am as serious as can
be; I do see a contradiction between what you
claim is "the immersion" and your sarcasm. As for
Jesus - Do you know what he actually wrote in
the sand? What he said to Pilate is fact - IOW
"That's what you say" - I don't see any sarcasm i
The Bible tells us to avoid foolish genealogical work.1 Tim 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; fo
In a message dated 4/23/2005 7:19:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JD, I am not being sarcastic, I am as serious as can be; I do see a contradiction between what you
claim is "the immersion" and your sarcasm. As for Jesus - Do you know what he actually wrote in
the sand?
In a message dated 4/23/2005 5:03:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Straw men can't dance.
I like. I will add this to my new and profoundly revised, kind and gentler sarcasm commentary.
JD
DAVEH: What ppl, Judy? Do you know to whom Paul was referring?
Paul used Pagan authorities to teach and contrast as in the Pagan poet he quoted on Mars Hill. Just north of Corinth was a city named Eleusis. This was the location of a Pagan religion where baptism in the sea was practiced to guarant
Your buddies were not Fundamentalists, they were restorationist's to the core.
Now everybody wants to get in to the act.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 4/23/2005 6:17:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It used to be people who believed in the five fundamentals :-) No
In a message dated 4/23/2005 7:37:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Your buddies were not Fundamentalists, they were restorationist's to the core.
Now everybody wants to get in to the act.
Fundalmentalist to the core. I didn't say they were right. But they could beat up
Okay, so you have more to add to Terry's
original definition of what is the best kind of fundamentalist. It seems that
only (some) Baptists qualify as fundamentalists. Evangelicals are not
fundamentalists.
The next question would be
1. Terry, what is your response to this? Do you
consider
JD, your affirmation is most bracing.
Thanks.
Debbie
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 9:52
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] the document
known as Seven
See, this is what kills me abo
Judy, you're partly right: I overstated it
when I said that there is absolutely no difference between "#$%&
you" and "You are of your father the devil". I really meant they are potentially
the same when used to express a certain attitude towards the other person and
ourselves. The same in th
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:52:50 -0400 "Debbie Sawczak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Judy, you're partly right: I overstated it
when I said that there is absolutely no difference between "#$%&
you" and "You are of your father the devil". I really meant they are
potentially the same wh
Caroline Wong wrote:
Okay, so you have more to add
to Terry's original definition of what is the best kind of
fundamentalist. It seems that only (some) Baptists qualify as
fundamentalists. Evangelicals are not fundamentalists.
The next question would be
1. Terry, what is your
Sorry, I meant Romans 8:33, 34!
Debbie
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 12:36
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judgment Begins
at the House of God
Lance wrote:
> IFF you are human, David, then
> you sin daily.
Jesus Christ was human and he did not sin daily. The event of Christ coming
in the flesh falsified this false concept that you have, that humans sin
daily. When will you agree and discard this lie of Satan? What would it
take to
I thought you were bang on with your previous
definition of a good fundamentalist. Those are fundamentals and everything else
that is true and important will connect with what you wrote. Is there really
anything more to add than the fact that we belong to God and our response is
obedience? E
Lance wrote:
> A part of your character is truly available on TT.
> It is on that part that you come to be known by
> TT participants. Is this not so?
Yes, it is so. Nevertheless, character also is one of the most
misunderstood aspects of a person when it is interpreted only from writings.
Some
*Note subject change
Subject was "Baptism 4 dead?" and is now "Revelation"
Judy wrote:
> As for revelation. My belief is that God reveals to us what
> has already been written and noone has as yet even begun
> to plumb the depths of that.
Scripture itself includes many examples of revelation tha
Caroline wrote:
> The real question is whether God and the Jewish
> people had in mind a place of eternal damnation
> and eternal conscious torture.
I believe that God did have this in mind, but the Jewish people had various
ideas just as people today have various ideas about it. Do you believe
Oophs!
Sorry David I misrepresented your point here; I
had forgotten your belief that Jesus was like us in every
way including the iniquities of the
fathers. Please forgive me. I'm not
to the point yet where I consider
myself His equal. jtFrom: "David
Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Lance
wr
David Miller wrote:
>> Furthermore, since you mention John, he professes
>> to continue in sin
John wrote:
> and in that continuation, I am no different
> that you, David.
I speak about your life according to what your testimony is. You should
speak about my life according to my testimony, or e
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*Note subject
changeSubject was "Baptism 4 dead?" and is now "Revelation"
Judy wrote:As for revelation. My belief is that God reveals to us
whathas already been written and noone has as yet even begunto plumb the
depths of that.
Scripture itself in
John wrote:
>>> Your doctrine is refuted by your character.
David Miller wrote:
>> It is? What's wrong with my character?
>> You have never met me, so what do you think
>> you know about my character?
John wrote:
> You act differently than you write
No, but my body language augments my comm
Perry wrote:
> Blaine, are you aware that "born of water" in
> v. 5 means physical birth?
Excellent point, Perry!
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) http
David wrote:
>> You have never met me, so what do you
>> think you know about my character?
Debbie wrote:
> Probably the same order of things you purport to know
> about other TT characters, David, without ever having
> met them.
You perhaps thought you perceived some sarcasm in my question. The
The one in Revelation about the smoke that goes on forever and the one in
Matthew about the sheep and goats. Were there other passages that you had in
mind?
Love
Caroline
- Original Message -
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 3:48 PM
Subject: [
There is the Wesleyan/Holiness movement and Pentecostal Holiness. I heard
Peter Wagner hasn't sinned in years. I had another friend who had a number
of months of sinlessness going. I wonder if he made it to the one year
anniversary. What is your record David or do you keep track? Another friend
Debbie wrote:
> 1. Why "flux": As has already been established ad
> nauseam, I disagree with you about biblical interpretation:
> I think it happens, and you don't. (Or is it that you think
> you always interpret aright? I forget.) You think it's possible
> to be certain about most everything, and
"The New Evangelicalism is a theological and moral compromise of the deadliest sort. It is an insidious attack upon the Word of God. ... The New Evangelicalism advocates toleration of error. It is following the downward path of accommodation to error, cooperation with error, contamination by error,
Debbie wrote:
> When I said that perhaps you were indeed more righteous,
> I meant it. You may well be far ahead of me on many matters
> of behaviour.
One hindrance to our communicating is this idea of comparing ourselves with
one another. I do not do that, but you do. I have no thought of me b
Someone smarter than me might be able to point out something I missed,
but I think, like you, that that pretty well covers the essentials.
Terry
Caroline Wong wrote:
I thought you were bang on with your
previous definition of a good fundamentalist. Those are fundamentals
and e
August 10, 1984, Christianity Today "He believes all the 'fundamental' doctrines of traditional fundamentalism. He adheres to every line of the Apostles' Creed with a tenacity born of deep conviction. ... he avowed belief in a literal hell. He was not sure about its location, and the fire is to be
David writes:> Do you, Debbie, think
that my character refutes my doctrine? How?> Well, come to think of it, David, I guess you might be meeting
your very own standard quite perfectly. That's something, anyway. Bravo!
Debbie
The most beautiful word of all is you.
This is the word of relationship, of looking into another face, of thanking,
inviting, asking ("What do you mean?"), forgiving, permitting ("Of course you
may"), admiring, encouraging, assigning, begging, giving ("This is for you"),
serving, reaching, s
David, I am not understanding how you can say
"sanctification is not a process", and yet that "holiness is a growth process"
and that a work has been begun in you which is not yet complete.
Since I don't really know your heart, I must give
the benefit of the doubt and accept that all your
Francis Stiles -- "Neo-evangelicalism is a religious philosophy. It attempts to reach and minister to man through his felt needs. It seeks to commend man for his achievements and realign his energies for good. It emphasizes unity at the expense of truth and reduces the Biblical requirements of puri
David Miller wrote:
>> I think we all have agreed previously that
>> the one who is perfect in love does not sin.
John wrote:
> David thinks that he can manipulate the discussion
> with statements such as this one. He uses this tactic
> fairly often. The fact of the matter is this, "we" have
John wrote:
> How do you collect such a group of friends.
> All my firends live in Colorade and chew !!
LOL. I had breakfast with a group of men this morning, and it was rather
interesting that the conversation somehow got on how several of the men
there had chewed before they were saved. They
Debbie wrote:
> I overstated it when I said that there is absolutely no
> difference between "#$%& you" and "You are of your
> father the devil". I really meant they are potentially the
> same when used to express a certain attitude towards
> the other person and ourselves.
So do you believe that
Caroline wrote:
> The one in Revelation about the smoke that goes
> on forever and the one in Matthew about the sheep
> and goats. Were there other passages that you had
> in mind?
Yes. Have you ever studied hell? How about starting with the passages in
Mark 9.
Mark 9:42-48
(42) And whosoever
David,
I said (in a post I haven't seen come through yet) that I wasn't going to
talk for a while, but so as not to seem to ignore you, I will point out that
I am agreeing with you below. The two ways of speaking are the same in the
same way (and to the same extent) that calling our brother a fo
Caroline wrote:
> What is your record David or
> do you keep track?
I don't keep track. Such is not wise because it is not my righteousness.
Even Job, who God testifies was perfect, said that he could not say that he
was perfect (Job 9:20).
Caroline wrote:
> Question: do we still have our orig
Debbie wrote:
> David, I am not understanding how you can
> say "sanctification is not a process", and yet
> that "holiness is a growth process" and that
> a work has been begun in you which is not
> yet complete.
Did I say that sanctification is not a process? I don't have time to look
up the p
How about men like Billy Graham and Dallas Willard?
They have changed many people's lives and introduced countless to Jesus
Christ.
Love,
Caroline
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin
Deegan
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 5:22
PM
DAVEH: HmmmIs that really your answer to my specific
question, Kevin? If so, I do not understand how your answer relates to
Paul. I would prefer to think you simply went off on a tangent in
your explanation, rather than trying to dodge my question. Would you
be so kind as to ex
DAVEH: What!?!?!?! I didn't know liberals were allowed on TT.
That's what happens when you let a Mormon jointhen it opens the
door to just about anybody!
:-D
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See, this is what kills me about me. I could have written something
similar excep
DAVEH: Yes, Perry. I am making that assumption. Do you think I've
assumed incorrectly? Do you believe they were not Christians?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DAVEH: Then why do you think those early Christians who practiced
proxy baptism were doing it? Do you th
It is Necromancy & that is bizzareDave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: HmmmIs that really your answer to my specific question, Kevin? If so, I do not understand how your answer relates to Paul. I would prefer to think you simply went off on a tangent in your explanation, rather th
DAVEH: Ah..Thank you for your specific answer to my question,
Kevin. I apologize for responding in a parallel post tonight
requesting clarification on your answer.
Soyou think Paul thought it to be bizarre behavior. Does it
seem strange to you that he would use the bizar
I think "hear from the dead" would qualify as communication!
Thus it is Necromancy.
Apostle Parley Pratt "An important point is gained, a victory won, and a countless host of opposing powers vanquished, on one of the leading fundamental truths of Mormonism. That the living may hear from the dead.
-
---Original
A minister concluded that his church was getting into serious financial
troubles.
While checking the church storeroom, he discovered several cartons of
new bibles that had never been opened and distributed.
So at his Sunday sermon, he
DAVEH: How does that tie in to baptism for the dead, Kevin?
Kevin Deegan wrote:
I think "hear from the dead" would qualify as communication!
Thus it is Necromancy.
Apostle Parley Pratt "An important point is
gained, a victory won, and a countless host of opposing powers
vanquished,
DAVEH: You must define it differently than the dictionary I use..
necromancy
noun [U]
the practice of claiming to communicate with the dead in order to
discover what is going to happen in the future, or black magic (= magic
used for bad purposes)
..How does the above definition rel
In a message dated 4/23/2005 2:03:36 AM Pacific Daylight
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But what about the immerson JD? Jesus
would not be involved with 'sarcasm' humorous or otherwise
because it's definition is "caustic and often ironic
language to express contempt or bitterness e
Trust me, Lance-- In fact, get a CLUE:
DM’s wife, family, and friends all admire and love him—none fear
him. Your statements insinuating otherwise are ridiculous, false, libelous and
sinful. I doubt that bothers you in the least. Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PR
In a message dated 4/22/2005 8:43:45 PM Pacific Daylight
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So much for JD’s change of attitude. Izzy
No name calling -- good humored sarcasm is what I am about these
days. The desription of the conflict? --
right on. So whats the problem? Go bac
Just a question Lance: whenever you
applaud someone you agree with why is it not “fawning”, the word
you use for me when I applaud someone I agree with? Any hypocrisy there,
Lance? Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Saturday,
Right; they should not be dumping garbage,
in the form of untruths or ridicule, on their neighbors. It smells equally
bad. And contempt is not a Christian attribute. Let your yes be yes and your
no be no; anything else is of evil. Izzy
--
What is missing, and what is apparently no even desired, is a
kind and loving respect for those who are not in your camp (and I have
the same problem.) Jd
So why are you accusing David Miller of
something you admit to yourself? You are an admitted hypocrite. Izzy
In a message dated 4/23/2005 1:42:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
character also is one of the most
misunderstood aspects of a person when it is interpreted only from writings
And, yet, David, you assult character on a regular basis. As far as expressing you character f
In a message dated 4/23/2005 1:56:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I speak about your life according to what your testimony is. You should
speak about my life according to my testimony,
When your testimony is false, David, I go with the Truth. You have persisted in your
In a message dated 4/23/2005 2:12:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not sure who you are talking about when you say "ignorant" Church of
Christers, or what you mean by saying that I handled them so effectively.
Many of them have sought me out, some I have accepted invita
In a message dated 4/23/2005 2:12:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Wolf, Greg Haygood, Wesley McCarver, Paul Hodges, and
Kevin Kirsten.
these folks in Florida or where?
J
In a message dated 4/23/2005 2:12:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't remember everybody's names, but their arguments and
their faces are vivid.
For example ?
In a message dated 4/23/2005 6:58:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
LOL. I had breakfast with a group of men this morning, and it was rather
interesting that the conversation somehow got on how several of the men
there had chewed before they were saved. They got rather sp
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DAVEH: Yes, Perry. I am making that assumption. Do you think I've
assumed incorrectly? Do you believe they were not Christians?
Yes, I think you have assumed incorrectly. Paul does not identify "they" as
Christians, or as Kevin pointed out, as "we". But the way
95 matches
Mail list logo
