DAVEH: I'm not sure I'd agree with you on that, Terry. Do you have a
reference? It seems to me that there was a lot of stuff that was
meant to be hiddenespecially from those whose intent is to do
harm. Seems like Jesus set an example in Mk 15 when he refused to
answer those who made f
DAVEH: It is posts like this that confirm my presumption that you
lack understanding, perception and truth, Perry. I understand your
need to wing it, so to speak, in an effort to by chance hit a
soft spot in my armor. Instead, as I see it by making incorrect
assumptions, you are simply pro
DAVEH: I'm less embarrassed to answer questions than you may think,
Izzy. (Witness the God/Mary sex accusations.) ButI am embarrassed
for some of those TTers who would ask some of the questions you've seen
posted. :-(
ShieldsFamily wrote:
It seems
obvio
DAVEH: I find it interesting that at times TTers accuse me of
ignoring what JS said, and at other times I am accused of believing
what JS said. As I see it, no matter what I say or believe.there
are going to be some TTers who just won't be happy!
ShieldsFamily wrote:
what if Dave is deceived and is indeed paying homage to Satan
without knowing it
DAVEH: Perhaps that is why it's futile to discuss LDS theology with
anti-Mormons.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Lance, what if Dave is deceived and is indeed paying
homage to Satan without knowing it. Will you sta
Commentary on M. Scott Peck’s passing:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47057
He is one of my favorite authors. izzy
By the way, Peck was one to give better advice
than he ever followed:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8123-1606175,00.html.
So much wisdom on paper—so little in
life. izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily
Sent: Friday, Oc
Each Mormon who sees Christ's Gospel through the
the lenses of these glasses (Joseph Smith's) will always come to the same
conclusions as those of their 'prophet'.
Were there Jehovah's Witnesses on here then, their
lenses would be those provided by Russell and Rutherford.
The commitment m
Good points, Lance. iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005
4:24 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] 'Smithian'
Glasses
Each Mormon who sees Christ's Gospel through the the lenses
of
Given the pedantic redundancy of your intermittent commentary Perry, IFO
view it as pretty much doing nothing.
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Perry Locke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: October 27, 2005 13:02
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Lanc
Just wondering, DaveH, which pro-mormons are you here to discuss LDS
theology with? Izzy
>> DAVEH: Nor has my implied answer been clear to you. I've previously
>> said I would not discuss our Temple ceremonies, nor do I want to discuss
>> LDS theology with anti-Mormons.
--
"Let
- Original Message -
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 10/28/2005 6:24:15 AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] 'Smithian' Glasses
Each Mormon who sees Christ's Gospel through the the lenses of these glasses (Joseph Smith's) will always come to the same conclusions as t
And of course any true LDS information DaveH would proffer could only
discredit LDS theology. I think that point went right over Perry's head.
Perry is a good guy, but irony eludes him entirely. izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance
cd: Brother Perry-You are asking DavH to cast his pearls before swine-That is why he will not answer your question-if he were a true believer in Christ he would give his brother ( isn't he the one whom wants to call us brothers and claim Jesus as his savior) an answer to this question. If another
> [Original Message]
> From: Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 10/28/2005 6:30:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
>
> Given the pedantic redundancy of your intermittent commentary Perry, IFO
> view it as pretty much doing nothing.
cd: Intrep
> [Original Message]
> From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 10/28/2005 6:43:16 AM
> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
>
> Just wondering, DaveH, which pro-mormons are you here to discuss LDS
> theology with? Izzy
cd: :-)
>
>
> >> DAVEH: Nor
Agreed, cd. That’s why I don’t
get into theological wrangling with the mormons. I have observed their
distaste for Truth. Without a desire for truth they will never come to
know God, and no sea of words or reason will force them there. IF they DO
desire Truth, they will find it no matte
And some WEAR Barth Glasses!Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Each Mormon who sees Christ's Gospel through the the lenses of these glasses (Joseph Smith's) will always come to the same conclusions as those of their 'prophet'.
Were there Jehovah's Witnesses on here then, their lenses would
IF
, and that is a pretty BIG IF,
that would put him on the same plane as you. DOing Nothing
And Yes Perry the answer is he WILL Do Nothing.
No WILL, maybe some Barth would help.Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Given the pedantic redundancy of your intermittent commentary Perry, IFO view it
Many are leaving the cult.
As shown in previous posts about the ZERO effective growth.
And yes some do get saved.
We could not calculate the amount of one souls worth!Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1
There are some posibilities which include:
He is ashamed of LDS doctrine
He is hiding LDS doctrine
(You are Gentiles and NOT WORTHY of some LDS "Truth")LDS doctrine is hard to defend, it takes a twist of logic and there are only a few stock answers. There are very few resourses or defenders of the
: ) LOL
Intrepertation-Not only will I do nothing but it is your fault that I do nothing.Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Original Message]> From: Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Date: 10/28/2005 6:30:59 AM> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know>> Given
When at least are you going to become CONSISTENT? : )Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: I find it interesting that at times TTers accuse me of ignoring what JS said, and at other times I am accused of believing what JS said. As I see it, no matter what I say or believe.there ar
Did I miss your answers?
This is of a truth a blackhole in reality!Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: I'm less embarrassed to answer questions than you may think, Izzy. (Witness the God/Mary sex accusations.) ButI am embarrassed for some of those TTers who would ask some of the
See here is an example of:
You are a Gentile
You are not Worthy to recieve the LDS Truth
Time to hide it
Is it hard to see that SOME LDS might take it to the point of LYING?
Who is the Elder talking about?
Elder Dallin H. Oaks "Some have suggested that it is morally permissible to lie to prom
Yes Dave, I have a reference and am ready to give an answer. Check out
first Peter, 3:15.
You appear to be a nice guy,Dave, or at least you did up to this
point. Now you are making yourself suspect by hiding your light under
a bushel. I, for one, would respect you more if you were forthright
1 Peter 3:15
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:08:58 -0700
DAVEH: I'm not sure I'd agree with you on that, Terry. Do you ha
If I lack insight and make wrong assumptions, Dave, set me straight. You
will not talk about Temple rituals because you have taken oaths not to, and
have been told of the penalties that you will endure of you reveal them,
like having your throat cut from ear to ear, or having you belly cut and
You are absolutely right, Dave. Your religion is ambiguous and confusing. If
you go completely by what JS said, you will at the same times have to ignore
the erroneaous and heretical claims he made (or just flat out deny them in
spite of the testimony of your fellow mormons), or follow the here
And, Dave, what if that indeed is so!
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:32:27 -0700
*what if Dave is deceived and is indeed pa
Lance, your post below is one of the most enjoyable I have read. I agree
with you. What really tips the scale for me is that I can SEE the lies,
deceit, hypocrasy, false prophecies, plaigerism, occultism, heretecism in
mormonism. JS (I mean Dave, looking thourhg JS' spectacles) cannot. In that
Izzy, you are right. I took Lance at face value (a dangerous occupation, at
best!)
From: "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 05:48:14 -0500
And of course any tr
Actually, Lance, the question was about YOU. "Will YOU stand by and do
nothing?" Trying to redirect the focus of that question to me does not
answer the question. Well? What is your answer?
Perry
From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To:
Subject: Re: [
Dean, I understand you entirely. I never expected Dave to answer...but in
that silence several points about this secret cult can be revealed. his
silence most likely means I am very near, if not dead-on right.
Perry
From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
MAY ANSWER IS (stage direction: everyone stops what they're doing and, with
rapt attention looks to the speaker - Lance) You've obviously not been
attentive to my engagement with the Mormons on TT. The periphoral issues
are, IMO, not worth the attention being paid them. I believe the central
i
Of course this is so, Perry. So would you, Kevin, David, Iz, et al. Nothing
surprising here.
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Perry Locke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: October 28, 2005 10:06
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] 'Smithian' Glasses
Lance, your post below is one of the most e
You already know the answers to your questions, Perry. He (Dave) has said
what he's going to say on this. He's also told you why he won't go further.
Give it a rest.
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Perry Locke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: October 28, 2005 09:48
Subject: Re: [T
Lance,
While the central issue may be WHO IS JESUS, the problem lies in the fact
that the mormon jesus has many characteristics that distinguish him from the
biblical Jesus. Same for the mormon god and the biblical God. The mormons
claim they are the same, but I (and just about any other Chris
NOW YOUR TALKING SHOP !!! Amen and amen. Thumbs up with wha - sup, dude !!
the hipster
JD -Original Message-From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 04:24:54 -0700 (PDT)Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 'Smithian' Glasses
And some WEAR Ba
If LDS had something great to talk about, they would not clam up.
if LDS have truth why not share it with everyone?
They share with people who act like sheeple. (those that are EASY MARKS because they have no knowledge of scripture.)
Once they find out you have some knowledge of the scriptures they
Has anyone noticed that there are Several Doctrines that once they are under discussion apparently mkae DH very quiet?Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dean, I understand you entirely. I never expected Dave to answer...but in that silence several points about this secret cult can be re
Yes !!! and this is perhaps more to the point than my thinking. But the peripheral discussion(s) actually, in a way, strengthen(s) the "opposition" (in this case, DH) in that we allow him to (the opponent) continue in the single most important concept of his personal theology and upon wh
You may not know where you are going, but I for one know that I will never face the SECOND DEATH!
Born ONCE DIE TWICE!
Born TWICE DIE ONCE!Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course this is so, Perry. So would you, Kevin, David, Iz, et al. Nothing surprising here.- Original Message - F
NO PERRY! It is not 'may' be. Like I said previously, I've read the primary
source material. I've had conversations with professors at BYU. I've chatted
extensively with LDS stake leaders even to the point of having my
conversations taped and, people warned off from speaking with me. Thanks
bu
Lance wrote:
I believe the central issue to be: WHO IS JESUS? I've attempted to speak
to it on several occasions. Should one theologically literate Mormon
believer decide to do so (address that issue) I believe that the matter
could be put to rest once and for all.
Although I probably differ
This observation David (the 'for social reasons' thingy) has been one held
by my wife for years. I believe you both to be correct.
thanks,
Lance
- Original Message -
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: October 28, 2005 15:59
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inqui
cd: DaveH this is the event I was referring to in our earlier
conversation-Jeff had a chance for life and you made sure death remained
upon him.Poor Jeff.
>
> Although I probably differ from you concerning whether or not this
question
> of yours is the central issue, you might find it interesting
:-) Agreed.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:12 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know
Izzy, you are right. I took Lance a
Yeah, they like the underwear. iz
-Original Message-
It seems to me
that most LDS Mormons are part of the organization, not because of any
real
spiritual reasons, but because of social reasons.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
--
"[however] human
wisdom is more inclined to understand to understand the law of Moses, than the
law of the gospel. Old Adam will not out."
--Martin Luther, _Table Talk_ ,
c.1566/John Aurifaber, Eisleben, Germany
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 15:52:41 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apparently this
writer's (view) is a typical Morman view of God:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 15:59:11 -0400 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:||
>[Jeff] discussed the Godhead with me ..admitted that he believed the
>Trinity..as I had represented it to him.
||
correct/ed
quote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:55:40 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"[however] human
wisdom is more inclined to understand the law of Moses, than the law of the
gospel. Old Adam will not out."
--Martin Luther, _Table Talk_ ,
c.1566/John Aurifaber, E
What is at the root of the disagreement
between a knowledgeable Mormon
and the traditional Christian thinker? What say ye, DH.
DAVEH: There are quite a few sticking points with me,
John. I'm not sure I could focus on only one though. The foremost
one that comes to mind most of the ti
DAVEH: Kevin.Have you ever considered that you may be able to
learn more by listening, than preaching?
Kevin Deegan wrote:
Has anyone noticed that there are Several Doctrines that once
they are under discussion apparently mkae DH very quiet?
Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DAVEH: Dean...You should be thanking me for having prevented Jeff
from converting DavidM to Mormonism!
:-)
Dean Moore wrote:
cd: DaveH this is the event I was referring to in our earlier
conversation-Jeff had a chance for life and you made sure death remained
upon him.Poor Jeff.
DAVEH: Not so long ago, I tried to have an exchange with another TTer
about our respective beliefs about Jesus. As I remember, I started out
with about 4 attributes I believed about Jesus. The other TTer tried to
respond, but the discussion brought about such a ration of clutter (so
to spea
I must admit that this profession of faith of his in the Trinity had
me thinking he might just convert away from Mormonism, but it was not
to be.
DAVEH: Do you believe it was something I said that caused Jeff not to
convert, DavidM?
David Miller wrote:
Lance
wrote:
I believe the centra
57 matches
Mail list logo
