Moderator:
Kevin can you prove this to be true about Lance?
Ex 20:16 thou shalt not bear
false witness against your neighbor
Read the post from DH about then lance's
response, he says
"Me too, Dave. When
TRUELY OBJECTIONABLE BEHAVIOUR is objected to (by 'acting out') these
persons occasionally do seem surprised."
Does repeating stories about which one was not a witness
qualify for bearing FALSE WITNESS?
IF YOU WANT TO BE JUDGE then according to DU 19
you need to make DILIGENT INQUIRY INTO THE MATTER! This
is only FAIR and according to God's word it is also RIGHT!
Du 19:16 If a false witness
rise up against any man to testify against him that which is
wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is,
shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which
shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and,
behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath
testified falsely against his brother; Then shall
ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so
shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
Let me present some FACTS for your consideration:
1) Let me remind you I was an EYE WITNESS to the
events.
Du 19:15 One witness shall not rise up
against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he
sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three
witnesses, shall the matter be established.
It is my Person that has been the victim of the attack.
In the SPIRIT of fair play I posted additional questions to defend
my good name that has been wrongly DEFAMED.
Salt Lake City is a place to which Lance probably has never set
foot let alone during our preaching activities there. In fact he has
never seen me preach PERIOD. So how could he be a witness, other than a
false?
DH was not a witness either.
Neither DH nor Lance qualify as a eye witness nor a
single witness.
according to DU 19:15 they are then both in SIN!
I refuse to apologize for the truth of my statements.
2) Then to address/correct the issue I asked for a description
of the so called "OBJECTIONABLE BEHAVIOUR"
Of course none was forthcoming!
According to God's word this BEHAVIOUR is an additional
OFFENCE!
Leviticus 5:1. And if a
soul sin, and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether he
hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his
iniquity.
The particular QUESTIONS which I originaly
posed:
What was the MOST OBJECTIONABLE part for you Lance?
What Behavior did you REALY REALY find Offensive.
Please fill us in on the deatails
We are waiting for the LOW DOWN
Where were you when you OBSERVERED this deplorable action?
Or are you just BEARING TRUELY False witness
again?
where you there?
BTW no SP was taken to Jail it was a Mormon HIGH PRIEST that was
carted off, and charged in CRIMINAL COURT!
This mormon HIGH PRIEST is therefore DISQUALIFIED:
A bishop then must be
blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good
behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine,
no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient,
not a brawler
FALSE, a.
L. falsus, from fallo, to deceive. See Fall and
Fail.
1. Not true; not conformable to fact;
expressing what is contrary to that which exists, is done, said or
thought. A false report communicates what is not done or said. A false
accusation imputes to a person what he has not done or said. A false
witness testifies what is not true. A false opinion is not according to
truth or fact. The word is applicable to any subject, physical or
moral.
2. Not well founded; as a false
claim.
3. Not true; not according to the lawful
standard; as a false weight or measure..
4. Substituted for another; succedaneous;
supposititious; as a false bottom.
5. Counterfeit; forged; not genuine; as
false coin; a false bill or note.
6. Not solid or sound; deceiving
expectations; as a false foundation
False and slippery ground.
7. Not agreeable to rule or propriety; as
false construction in language.
8. Not honest or just; not fair; as false
play.
9. Not faithful or loyal; treacherous;
perfidious; deceitful. The king's subjects may prove false to him. So we
say, a false heart.
10. Unfaithful; inconstant; as a false
friend; a false lover; false to promises and vows.
The husband and wife proved false to each
other.
11. Deceitful; treacherous; betraying
secrets.
12. Counterfeit; not genuine or real; as
a false diamond.
13. Hypocritical; feigned; made or
assumed for the purpose of deception; as false tears; false modesty. The
man appears in false colors. The advocate gave the subject a false
coloring.
False fire, a blue flame, made by the
burning of certain combustibles, in a wooden tube; used as a signal
during the night.
False imprisonment, the arrest and
imprisonment of a person without warrant or cause, or contrary to law;
or the unlawful detaining of a person in custody.
FALSE, adv. Not truly; not honestly; falsely.
FALSE, v.t.
1. To violate by failure of veracity; to
deceive. Obs.
2. To defeat; to balk; to evade.
Obs..
Definition from Webster's American Dictionary of the
English Language, 1828.
Dean Moore
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Moderator: Kevin can you prove
this to be true about Lance?If so please do so or stop the Ad. Hom .
Kevin wrote:"Or are you just BEARING TRUELY
False witness again?" (see your wording in the
below)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 3/6/2006 3:03:23 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The
'spirit' of truthtalk?
AH HAH you have found ABSOLUTE TRUTH again!
"TRUELY OBJECTIONABLE BEHAVIOUR"
See you can find the ABSOLUTE when you want to that is the
problem most O the time you just plain don't want to!
What was the MOST OBJECTIONABLE part for you Lance?
What Behavior did you REALY REALY find Offensive.
Please fill us in on the deatails
We are waiting for the LOW DOWN
Where were you when you OBSERVERED this deplorable
action?
Or are you just BEARING TRUELY False
witness again?
where you there?
Lance Muir
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Me too, Dave. When TRUELY
OBJECTIONABLE BEHAVIOUR is objected to (by 'acting out') these
persons occasionally do seem surprised.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: March 06, 2006
10:43
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
The 'spirit' of truthtalk?
DAVEH: OK Dean, I understand your
sensitivity to such and will respond without using the words you
find objectionable. I would like to continue to discuss
this, as I find it interesting to see how SPers
think.
I am curious as to why one
would still show up on somebody's doorstep when an objectionable
topic is mentioned rather than discuss it with them via the
phone or email? What is to be accomplished by a personal
visit? Most folks would understand such a visit to be a
physical threat, even though it could be claimed that the
offended has a constitutional right to confront the
offender.
The reason I ask this is
because it seems to me that many SPers seemed surprised that
they are physically attacked when confronting sinners on the
streets. Yet they feel compelled to stare the jaws of
death (so to speak) in the mouth. Is this a martyr complex
of sorts? Does it give SPers confidence if they are
persecuted for the Lord's sake ? I suppose an argument can
be made that if one dies while in the service of the Lord, it
would be a feather in the cap of the persecuted while at the
same time driving the persecutor even deeper into hell. To
me that seems like rather odd logic, considering that the SPer
(or guy showing up on the doorstep) is somewhat a catalyst in
this scenario. IOW....Is a SPer guilty of promoting a
problem when he uses his constitutionally guaranteed free speech
to aggravate a situation that can and will likely turn to
violence?
Dean Moore wrote:
Moderator: Wouldn't have to show up in
Portland DaveH-all I would have to do is click a button and my
problem is solved and that is exactly what I going to do the
next time you use the words-****************** in the
combination that you used them below. Discussion over-warning
given!
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
3/5/2006 12:52:41 PM
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] The 'spirit' of truthtalk?
DAVEH: Dean,
from what you said previously about the oneness of husband
and wife, if I were to ask you about ************,,
you would take that as a personal attack on ****** and would
then presume it to be a personal attack on you as well, and
then proceed to come to Portland and show up on my
doorstep.....is that correct? Wouldn't it be smarter
just to say the same thing to me via email or a phone call,
rather than show up on my doorstep? What would be
accomplished by coming to Portland?
If I were then to assume you are
on my doorstep for a reason other than an amicable
discussion, and felt my life was being threatened by your
presence on my doorstep, I would probably not answer the
door. Wouldn't that just frustrate your reason for
going to all that effort, cost, time and travel in an effort
to come to my doorstep? Would you proceed to pound on
my doo r expecting me to open it? If I did not respond
to your pounding, then what would you do? And if you
continued to pound on my door, what would you do if I opened
it with a gun in my hand, as I might do if I perceived you
as being a threat to me in my home?
At that point, if you turned and
left, nothing else would happen and you would have spent a
lot of effort for little reason other than to satisfy your
pride. If on the other hand you were to raise the
level of confrontation by arguing, and if I misunderstood
the reasons you were on my doorstep confronting me and
refusing to leave, would you be surprised if it led to a
lethal action on my part?
IF that
above scenario were to occur, how do you think the law would
view this matter? Would I be found guilty of
manslaughter, or would you be guilty of threatening my life
to the point of my using justifiable lethal means in
self-defense? In my defense, I'm sure my lawyer would
quote your comment.....
...
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life!
New
PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
Yahoo! Mail
Use
Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.