Re: [TruthTalk] I found it Blaine...but you lost it

[Blaine R Borrowman]

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:33:19 -0500 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Blaine wrote: > > Dignity should be a part of anyone who thinks > > to represent the Lord--I think he was a man > > of great dignity and presence. > > You might want to rethink this.  The week of his crucifixion, he > came > into town meek and lowly, sitting on a donkey not some great steed. > Remember how Isaiah described Him: Blaine:  That's just it, he had the same dignity and presence on the colt as he did otherwise.  He was always dignified, even naked upon the cross.  He had inner dignity.  Salt Lake City street preachers have no presence.  That is why they need to bang on drums, blow whistles, wave underwear, etc.  Noone will pay heed to them otherwise.  They look and act like they need a handout. (:>)  Are these guys even employed other than their street preaching?  Jesus had a job as a carpenter, Paul was a weaver, Peter was a fisherman, etc.  Every male in Israel was supposed to have a way of making a living.  Even the Priests and Levites performed services for what they got.   What do these street preachers do for a living?   I bet they have their wives working.  > > For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out > of > a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see > him, > there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and > rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we > hid > as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him > not. > (Isaiah 53:2-3 KJV)   Blaine:  Through it all, did he ever resort to undignified methods?  Even when he cleansed the temple, he retained his dignity--it must have been awesome to see his righteous indignation!! > > And don't forget John the Baptist, whose clothing was described for > us. > He was one rough looking character. God's messengers don't always > look > like Mormons.  :-)   Blaine:  John did the best he could with what he had.  Many Mormons have doen the same.  Brigham Young often wore a suit until it was ready to fall apart.   Of course, he tried to keep it clean and neat.  And he did not write on the front of it.  > > Blaine wrote: > > Having discussed this before, I know what you > > are thinking  (:>)  But LDS concept of authority > > is different.  For instance, I can trace my own > > line of authority as  a holder of the Melchizedek > > Priesthood back to the Saviour himself--through > > Joseph Smith, who received it of Peter, James and > > John, who received it from the Saviour.  All Mormon > > missionaries can do the same.  Can any street > > preachers do that?   > > This is the same line of thinking that the Roman Catholic Church > uses.   Blaine:  There is some truth in this, but just because it was the Catholic way does not mean it had no roots in original Christianity.  In fact, it seems to me this is an argument for organized authority, rather than against it. > I see a lot of wickedness that comes from thinking this way.  It is > glorying in the flesh.  I think Paul addressed this error in the > following verse: > > For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves > with > some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by > themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise. > (2 > Corinthians 10:12 KJV)   Blaine:  Sorry David, this does not compute??? > > The Biblical way of receiving authority is directly from the Lord > Himself.  If the Lord Himself is not sending you into ministry, then > you > are following a ministry of men and not of the Lord.  Ultimately, we > are > all accountable to him for what we say and do.   Blaine:  There were several apostles and many other officers of the church called after the Lord was gone.  You mentioned one office, that of a Bishop.  "Let no man take this honor unto himself except he be called of God as was Aaron."  Aaron was called by revelation, through Moses.  Was this authority from men?  Mormons receive their callings in much the same way--they are called of God by revelation through their leaders who have themselves been called of God in the same manner.  > > Blaine wrote: > > But when they go walking down the street, and have > > bullhorns blaring, whistles, or whatever, it seems > > this is crossing the line into imposition.  They do > > not usually go out walking expecting or wanting to > > encounter this.  > > They don't expect it only because free speech ended with the > electronic > age.  Only recently are people putting it back into practice now > that it > has become clear that the ones with the power of communication keep > out > those who have some valid things to say.    Blaine: Free speech does not give a man the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, or other wise impose difficulties or hardships on others.   We all have the right to shut it off, but these Salt Lake City preachers refuse--they obviously have no respect for the rights of others.  Saddam Hussein was the same way.  He imposed HIS WILL over all others, often with his speeches, obnoxious though they were, but even resorted to unrighteous dominion by physical force.  It is just a matter of degree  what street Preachers have been doing or attempt to be doing in Salt lake City.  > > Free speech should NEVER be looked upon as an imposition.  An > imposition > would be if they came into your Temple during the middle of one of > your > ceremonies and demanded that you listen.  To preach in a public area > is > never an imposition because it is a public area.  > > The imposition in a public area happens when someone complains and > claims that they have a right to quietness when they go out in > public > areas.  These are the ones who are imposing their unconstitutional > views > upon others.  These are the lawless ones.   Blaine:  What you are talking about is not free speech, it is making a public nuisance of yourself!!  You do not have the right to do that, no matter where you are.    > > You have to separate in your mind public areas and private areas to > understand this concept.  Once you recognize that public areas are > places where the public may gather and have assemblies and initiate > dialogue, etc., then you will be on the road to believing in free > speech.  If you don't recognize this, then you do not believe in > free > speech, but only in highly regulated and pre-approved speech.   Blaine:  Public dialogue is one thing, imposition of one man's views in such a way as to make a nuisance of himself is another.   > > Blaine wrote: > > This has been especially a problem with regards > > to the street preachers who descend on the Plaza > > in SLCity.  Many people, Mormons and non-Mormons, > > complain, but so far the street preachers have > > vowed to continue.  > > In this case, the ones who complain are acting lawlessly.  The > preachers > are engaged in free speech protected by the U.S. Constitution.    Blaine:  Are you saying the ones who complain have no right to free speech, to complain?  That they would be breaking the law if they did?  Whooo, this is getting good!! > > Blaine wrote: > > BY THE WAY, Mormon missionaries are REQUIRED to get > > permission/cooperation with any person they teach.  > > That is a shame.  They should be taught about free speech and > acting > under the free authority that comes from God Almighty.  They should > be > taught how to voice their dissent of Mormon authority in a > respectful > and proper way.  Instead they are programmed into being zombies of > the > Mormon church.    Blaine:  Wrong.  They get their calls and their training from the Holy Ghost.    They have the gift of the Holy Ghost to guide them at all times, so can't legitimately be called zombies.  Your calling them such comes from a complete misunderstanding of how the missionaries  (and other officers) operate.  They CHOOSE to do what they do, and usually love doing it.    > Blaine wrote: > > The key difference, however, is if you say "NO" > > loud and clear, they will back off.  > > In my opinion, I think most Mormon missionaries are spineless.  > They > won't stand up to a good discussion.    They are trained not to argue, but to teach.  If the situation gets argumentative, they do leave the scene.  ArgumentsThey back away.  They are > wimps. > You applaud them for backing off if I say "NO" but I consider that > a > weakness not a strength.   Blaine:  What if a woman said "no" to your request for sexual favors?  Would you go ahead anyway?  Would backing off be considered a weakness?  (:>)   What do you think?  Was Coby Bryant a strong person in your estimation?   Was he strong and of singleness of purpose, a hero when he  imposed his will on the woman at the motel?   > > Blaine wrote: > > Street preachers do not back off.  They just get > > more stubborn and insistent.  Even a used car > > salesman has nothing on them.    > > I think that is a good and admirable trait.  They are men of > character > and integrity.  They are soldiers who do not run from the enemy and > who > are not intimidated by the enemy.  Good for them.    Blaine:  Like Coby Bryant?  What I hear you saying is that noone has the right to speak against or otherwise resist listening to you.   You know this is wrong.  > > David Miller wrote: > >> Street preachers generally speaking will respect > >> others, but they rarely ever respect the religion > >> of others. >  > Blaine wrote: > > I can't help but think this would alienate more > > than it will attract. Maybe they need to reevaluate > > their tactics?   > > I can't speak for every preacher, but I always am re-evaluating my > tactics. I always go before the Lord and seek for better ways of > representing him.  I always am concerned of being too hard on > someone or > too easy on someone.    Blaine:  That's good, I agree that you should.   We all should be that way.  > > I think what you don't realize is that we obey the Lord in these > things > and seek to please God and not man.  We ignore what men think of us.   Blaine:  Exactly--That is the problem.  Since we all have to live in this world, why do you think it is OK to ignore the opinion of decent men and women?  That seems a sure road to failure.  Saddam Hussein did the same. So did Hitler with his campaign against Jews, handicapped persons, etc.  But then, if you are hell-bent on self destruction, be my guest.  LOL >  We > are not trying to get people to join our club or our religion.  We > are > testifying to Jesus Christ and his standard of righteousness. We are > not > trying to attract, we are trying to bear witness of God and the > message > that God has for these particular individuals who cross our path. > > Blaine wrote: > > Just one thing--you can command attention and respect, > > but you can't demand it--and I feel thats what the > > street preachers in SLCity do. > > I doubt that any of them are trying to demand respect.    Blaine:  they are sure not trying to command attention, you mean.   If they > were > trying to do that, they would dress in a suit, they would not raise > their voice in any undignified way, they would not build and carry > these > big banners, etc.  These men are willing to appear foolish and to be > a > spectacle to the Mormons in order to get their message out.  If the > Mormons invited them into the Temple to address the convention with > their message, they probably would not be outside.  The Mormons > don't > realize it, but this is really the peaceful solution to what they > consider to be a problem.  They should allow Christians to teach > alongside their teachers at these conventions.  Then there would be > no > need for anybody to be outside protesting or preaching. > > Blaine wrote: > > They are called ELDERS because that is an office > > in the Melchizedek priesthood, which they are > > ordained to hold and exercise.  It has little > > to do with age.  > > I understand this, but such a view violates the Scriptures.  > According > to the Bible, we understand that the terms "elder" and "bishop" in > regards to a church office are interchangeable.  The term "elder" > refers > to the person not being a novice and being seasoned and older, while > the > term bishop refers to his function to oversee the flock.  > > For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in > order > the things that are wanting, and ORDAIN ELDERS in every city, as I > had > appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, > having > faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a BISHOP must > be > blameless ... (Titus 1:5-7 KJV) > > Once we understand that a bishop and elder is the same office, then > we > can read 1 Timothy 3 and see that elders are not to be novices, > that > they should be the husband of one wife, one that has his children > in > subjection to him, who has a household that he rules, etc. > > Blaine wrote: > > I know your belief that ELDER should mean a person > > of riper age than that, but that is not how it works.  > > I understand that, but you should not claim to believe the Bible > and > then define an elder differently than the Bible does.  Especially > in > this matter, it defies the English language and common sense. > > Blaine wrote: > > they really have a spiritual aura about them, which > > is more obvious as you get to know them.  And, most > > of them are more mature than you would expect a person > > of that age to be. (:>) > > Yeah, this reminds me of a time at college, I saw a young man > outside in > the back of the student union smoking a cigarette.  He looked > despondent > and I felt led by the Spirit to go share Christ with him.  It turns > out > that he was a Mormon boy who was about to go on his two year > mission > trip.  He was despondent about it, was not sure he really could do > it, > but he said the family pressure and pressure of the church was such > that > he saw no way of getting out of it.  I told him that he needed to > get > right with God before he did any kind of missionary work.  He > agreed > with me.  As I shared with him, he began to cry and I prayed with > him as > he wept before the Lord. > > Now I realize that he might be an exception to the general rule, > but > even Mormons who seem to be outstanding young men are very ignorant > of > the Scriptures, in my opinion.  They almost always promise to get > someone more knowledgeable to come back and talk with me, but > rarely > ever follow up with that promise.  Sometimes they do and I might > have a > weekly Bible study with them at my home for a few weeks before they > quit > coming back, but most of the time I never see them again.   Blaine:  Ever think maybe they don't come back because they see you are determined to be right regardless of what they say?  I have had that impression myself.  (:>) I think it might be this making up little straw men that you do, too.  That is always a communication blocker.  > > Blaine wrote: > > They should have gotten past being defensive about > > their title, but sounds like maybe you were making > > them defend themselves, huh?  I think if they had > > thought about it, they might have allowed you some > > slack there.  > > Oh, so its my fault, eh?  To be fair, the one guy seemed ready to > give > me his first name, but the primary speaker refused.  The other guy > just > followed his lead.    Blaine:  I was not there, so cannot make a judgement.    > Blaine wrote: > > I need to be nicer to Dean. (:>)  Do you suppose > > he will forgive me for tearing into him?  > > I'm certain of it.  Dean is a very nice guy. > > Peace be with you. > David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. > > ---------- > "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. > >