|
I take your correction to heart, Judy. As to the
aforemention persons, let's just say that you've offered a much milder treatmen
below than on other occasions.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: December 15, 2005 06:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy says:'I
don't know these men and I have said nothing, repeat nothing, about them
personally.."
You are doing with my words what your mentors do with
God's Word Lance - which is interjecting your own reasonings.
As for Calvin and Barth. Barth had his own
issues with God's Word which I prefer to let lie with him - Calvin however is
in my face at church and he is something else.
Here is a man who apparently taught and his disciples
today (who appear intelligent in every other way) - teach and lead
others to pass on the image of a Heavenly Father - the one Jesus
loved and communed with daily - who in His Sovereignty decrees a thing and
then punishes His Creation for doing what He decrees. Along the
same lines he decrees some saved and some lost so the responsibility there is
all on Him.
Since Jesus warned everyone (including you and I) to
take heed how we hear. I am amazed that this can be happening in our
day. In some circless there are more ppl paying heed to these men's
words than the Words of Jesus Himself.
As for what I said to you Lance - you have even put
your own spin on that. I never said anything about your
teaching.
Go back and read it again (I wonder if you do all of
your reading this way). I said you were reading MY WORDS with the help
of the powers of darkness who are the ones who scramble words, interject
different meanings, and keep confusion going. I said nothing at all about
your teaching or who does or does not help you. So let's at least deal
with the truth of the matter Lance.
"I don't have to accept their public teachings
when they are not in line with the CLEAR TEACHING OF GOD'S WORD' (implicit within this: AS I SEE IT/God has granted Me (Judy
Taylor) the 'spiritual discernment' to see what such as Calvin & Barth
could not see)
IMO, what is further
implicit in what you've said both here and previously, Judy:To reject
a person's public teaching is not the same as 'denigrating them personally'
so, I do separate teaching/doing/ the Word.
When I say of Lance 'YOU
ARE TEACHING WITH THE HELP OF THE POWERS OF DARKNESS, LANCE', I
refer, of course, only to Lance's teaching; not to his person. (Is this the
case, Judy)
May I then feel free to similarly adjudicate
with respect to your own teaching/person? MR MODERATER(S): May I employ
Judy's _expression_ when speaking of her word for
word?
I don't know these men and I said nothing, repeat
nothing, about them personally. I don't have
to accept their public teachings when they are
not in line with the clear teaching of God's Word.
To say that I personally denigrate these men is a
LIE
An evil accusation you say, Judy? Why don't
you research your comments on Polanyi, Torrance, Barth et
al?
You are reading with the help of the powers
of darkness Lance. I do not denigrate people. This is an
unfounded and evil accusation.
No accusation here, Judy. This is a
simple statement of objective truth.You are forever denigrating
persons both on and off TT. You call it speaking the truth when so
doing.
Oh, here is one I missed,
1. Yes most of the time I find your
writings to be unclear rather than plain Lance
2. No I don't imply anything, I figure
those who walk after the Spirit understand God's Word.
3. This accusation is uncalled for Lance
because what I addressed was personal accusations and this is what
you are
doing right
here. Obviously you didn't understand what I was addressing
... Oh well! What's new....
JUDY:Am I being unclear? (I often
am). Let me take another run at it. On those occasions in which you indicate that you've
CORRECTLY APPREHENDED THE MEANING OF GOD'S WORD(s) on given
issue, do you not implicitly or explictly indicate that the
one(s) with whom you are speaking do not? Would you have genuine difficulty if recalling
many such instances over the last 6 months?
What then, am I attempting to say?
YOU DO THAT WHICH WEARIES AND DISCOURAGES YOU. Thus, on
occasion(s) THAT WHICH YOU DO WEARIES AND DISCOURAGES SOME ON TT
IN EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION.
Do you understand?
Do you agree with this assessment?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: December 14, 2005
08:13
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
TT Double Standard
No Lance, I wouldn't acknowledge this
to be the case because everything that is spoken on TT is not
the
Word of God, and not everything
I write is the Word of God because that would have to
include opinion at
times along with personal
stories. So what is the point you are trying to make
here? Is it good to be calling one
another hypocrites and disrespecting
the Moderator? Where do you think this kind
of attitude leads??
When you describe that which
you say as THE TRUTH OF THE WORD OF GOD Judy, while that
spoken by another as OTHER THAN the truth of the word of
god, Judy then, you are doing the very thing that you speak
of as 'both discouraging and wearying'. Would you not
acknowledge this to be the case?
We should make accusing
each other personally a matter to be discussed
offline.
I find these constant
accusations to be both discouraging and wearying - are we
interested in Truth or not? Why give the enemy a platform to
tear each other down.
DAVEH: I don't think you understand the
nature of my posts, Perry. I'm not talking about
your sexual experiences. I'm talking about
Christian hypocrisy and the double
standard as practiced on TT. Is the double
standard on TT not a fair topic? Why should
I have to discuss that matter offline? Is
this not relevant to all TTers,
Perry?
I find it very telling
that you make false accusations against
me.......
you suggest I might have some
knowledge of Izzy's sexual
experiences,
.........which I did not
do. Go back and read my exact words if you don't
believe me. If you can't find them, I'll gladly
provide them and you can see for yourself that you are
again accusing me of something I did not
do.
you suggest that saying "one of Joseph
Smiths spiritual wives" might have some sexual
connotation,
..........That has been
suggested before on TT by other TTers, and the moderator
did nothing to discourage such comments. Now you
want to ban me from posting something other TTers can
post with no retribution. This is simply another
example of a double standard.
you try to spin
Dean up by suggesting he gets "excited" by sexual
references.
.........I merely stated the
truth about Deans sensitivity to such
things. This was not an ad-hom attack. Is
the truth now a problem on TT? People have
said a lot more vile things about me with no
condemnation by the moderator. Why the double
standard now, Perry?
these amount to false
accusations,
DAVEH: How can
that possibly be a false accusation if it
is true, Perry? If anything, it is you who
is making false accusations about me in
this matter. Once again....a TT double
standard.
the intentions of spinning Dean
up on a banned topic
DAVEH:
You are absolutely wrong again, Perry. You simply
fail to understand the nature of my posts. My
intentions are not to spin up Dean at all. It is
you who I am trying to enlighten as to the
Christian hypocrisy involving the double standard
practiced on TT with regard to Mormons. Until
you as the moderator recognize it, why should I
discontinue pointing it out every time it occurs?
Is not the TT double standard an acceptable discussion
topic?
Charles Perry
Locke wrote:
Dave, you suggest I might have some
knowledge of Izzy's sexual experiences, then
you suggest that saying "one of Joseph Smiths
spiritual wives" might have some sexual
connotation, then you try to spin Dean
up by suggesting he gets "excited" by sexual
references. These amount to false
accusations, with the intentions of
spinning Dean up on a banned topic. Any more
posts from you containing sexual references and I will
have to take you off the forum until you agree not to
do so. Take any issues you have up with me, offline,
at this address, not on the forum.
Perry
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] ** Moderator comment **
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 07:29:32 -0800
* Please try to /refrain /from making
sexual references, especially /false accuastions/.*
DAVEH: Let's see if I understand
this, Perry. Recently I asked some questions
that were no more sexually oriented than what you
commonly make, Dean then claimed foul......and you
banned further discussion based on the /perception
/you and Dean had about what those comments might
have implied.
Now you have made
a comment that can be perceived to be sexually
charged..........
*If lucky, you may become
one of his many spirit wives! *
..........and you don't want to recognize
the double standard? It is interesting that
when you or other TTers make any kind of denigrating
remarks toward LDS theology with sexual
implications, nothing is considered off
limits. When I point out this obvious double
standard, I am cautioned by the moderator to
/refrain /from bringing the discussion to the TT
table under the guise of making/ false
accusations/. It must be convenient to have a
moderator who can see non-LDS posters through one
non-judgmental eye, and perceive a completely
different perspective of LDS posters through the
other, more critical eye. I suppose if one has
an ax to grind against LDS theology, and is not
embarrassed to publicly admit such....then it should
not surprise anybody to find that person practicing
a double standard. The curious part about this
is that it happens on a forum called /TruthTalk/,
where /truth /is presupposed to be the dominating
factor, yet it seems to be suppressed when it comes
to recognizing the Christian hypocrisy found here.
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
Dave,
*
Please try to /refrain /from making sexual
references, especially /false accuastions/.* This
is not the forum for that? I am sure there are
many discussion forums about sex if that type of
discussion interests you.
Perry
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] Perry's Sexually
Suggestive Comments
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005
21:07:35 -0800
**If lucky, you may
become one of his many spirit wives! **
DAVEH: I wonder if Dean is
going to rebuke you for making such sexually
suggestive comments, Perry! If not,
will we then have another example of
hypocritical Christianity in TT?
Charles
Perry Locke wrote:
Just be sure you
remember your secret password and secret
handshake so Joseph Smith will allow you
entrance into heaven. *If lucky, you may become
one of his many spirit wives! *
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Signing off...
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 18:19:35 EST
I guess I never got to know you,
Christine--but hope to meet you in the
great
beyond--you may be required to testify at the
Bar of God as to what you
have seen and
heard on TT--
Blainerb
In a message
dated 12/11/2005 11:24:52 P.M. Mountain Standard
Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I am signing off. I have
gotten sucked into the world of TT, and I think
it
would be beneficial to my GPA to
bid adeiu. Thanks for all the discussions. I
have learned a great deal. May the
Lord bless you and keep you all.
It would be cool to meet you all
in real life some day. But maybe not all in
the same room. I wonder how that would
turn out... :-)
-Christine Miller
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
|
