>>>know it today was not formalized
>>
>> Formalized, schmormalized!
>
>Are you trying to say that Jesus read from do***ents not yet written?
>>
>> I didn't say the whole thing was bound and 10 million copies printed!
>> I said that NUMEROUS COPIES of the various epistles were circulated as
>> quickly as Christian scribes could copy those epistles. And it might
>> take a year or two for a Jew to copy an "Old Testament" (44 books). It
>> certainly didn't take a year or two for a Christian scribe to copy a
>> single letter.
>
>Then you agree with me that when Paul and the other apostles *first*
wrote
>what later became scripture it was only read by those for whom it was
>intended. Even with their being copied and circulated during the
apostles
>lifetimes their writing would not have been considered as scripture.
>Expressly by the apostles their self; because at the very least they
would
>not consider their writings as something that was worthy of being
*added* to
>the Tora. I doubt that they would have considered it as being something
to
>put down as a sort of Jewish jubilee either.
>>
>> with the books we know today until Constine
>>>and the council at Nicea in the 4th century bce.
>>
>> All that means is that 100 4th C "churches" got together in the 4th C
>> and "decided to make this book official!" "Now," they asked one
>> another, "what books should we "put the OFFICIAL STAMP of approval
>> on?"
>
>Agreed, so do you accept that the books they included are part of the
NT?
>What about the books they rejected? That is what I am getting at. Back
>then different people considered various and different writings as being
>scripture.
>
>>
>> Don't believe for one nano-second that God didn't guide those men to
>> pick the books He had already picked!
>
>Man always has had free will, and when ego's and money get involved free
>will can cause men to do things which God doesn't condone. So you are
>saying that the evil one had no say, even though the bible says that the
>devil is the prince of this world?
>
>John 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of
this
>world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
>Ephesians 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of
>this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit
that
>now worketh in the children of disobedience:
>
>Considering that the bible also says that if the last days be not
shortned
>that even the very elect would be led astay ,and that they should
believe a
>lie.
>
>2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong
>delusion, that they should believe a lie:
>
>Don't get me wrong I certainly believe that the bible is the inspired
word
>of God. I sometimes wonder if it is *all* there, or if that council
left
>out some books that God intended for us to have. Books being missing
would
>certainly explain a lot about why the body of Christ is so divided.
>
>
>
>>
>> You give a handful of men too much credit for God's work!
>>
>See my above statement, it is not God I am worried about having an evil
>agenda; but seeing what some of those at Nicia's agenda's were at the
time
>and their reasons for wanting this book and not wanting that book, I
believe
>that God gave men free will and that he would not interfere with their
free
>will in the selecting or rejecting of books. I believe he made
available
>what books he wanted in the bible; but that it was men's free will that
>decided what did and did not make it into it.
>
>>
>> Are you aware that the
>>>Catholic NT has two more books then the Christian bible?
>>
>> In the NT?
>>
>> ?????
>>
>> What are they?
>
>I will have to look up which ones; but I think they are in the OT; but I
do
>know they are there.
>
>>
>> I just looked in my Roman Catholic Bible and I don't see ANY "extra"
>> books in the NT!
>
>Tobit, Judith are the two books and I they are in the OT
>>
>> Do you know the "New American Bible?" THAT's the RCC "Bible" in
>> "Modern English".
>>
>> Mine has the same # of books in the NT that my NIV has!
>
>The below are from http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/
>here is another
>http://www.equip.org/free/CP0804.pdf
>
>The NIV also has a few less verses then the KJV
> Greek Orthodox Church: The Bible of the Greek Orthodox church comprises
all
>of the books accepted by the Roman Catholic church, plus I Esdras, the
>Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and 3 Maccabees. The Slavonic canon adds
2
>Esdras, but designates I and 2 Esdras as 2 and 3 Esdras. Other Eastern
>churches have 4 Maccabees as well.
>
> Luther And "New Testament Apocrypha", A. Wikgren in R. H. Fischer's A
>Tribute To Arthur Vööbus: Studies In Early Christian Literature, 1977, ©
>University of Chicago Press, pp. 379-390.
>
> Luther's treatment of four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude,
>Revelation) reflected his early doubts about their full canonicity. This
>created a huge impact for over two centuries, in certain printed
editions of
>the Bible. These four books were either printed as "apocrypha" or
sometimes
>they were eliminated altogether from the printed editions!
>
> Anglican Church: The canon of the Anglican falls between the Catholic
>Church and many Protestant denominations by accepting only the Jewish
canon
>and the New Testament as authoritative, but also by accepting segments
of
>the apocryphal writings in the lectionary and liturgy. At one time all
>copies of the King James Version of 1611 included the Apocrypha between
the
>Old and New Testaments.
>>
>>
>> Before the council
>>>at Nicea there were several times more books being circulated and read
>>>then
>>>what Constine and *his* council at Nicea ended up putting in.
>>
>> I do not subscribe to any churches that teach that view.
>
>Just because *you* do not subscribe to any churches that teach that
view,
>has *no* baring on whether the view they teach is valid or not.
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Bible didn't need any man to authorize it.
>>>>
>>>Of course not.
>>
>> Then we are going in circles!
>
>I am not; but I am still considering your posts. I don't intend for
that to
>sound facetious; but we seem to agree in part more or less except for a
few
>things.
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044217
alt.christnet.public:3115 alt.religion.christian.baptist:41628
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2782 free.christians:6336
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!teal.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian.
baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,free.christians
Subject: Re: Is the gift of Tongues for the church today?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:01:09 -0700
Message-ID: <06djc2hdm6pq8j4frj53mo01rvo660s0jd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <f4kdc2pjjajafb55tvtqvsubb0ur9hnm6h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6RDxg.12313
$2v.10539@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<lq6fc2lhkpf2j1pgnb5aa68jofc5gt2hru@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <82Oxg.135710$dW3.105270
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8kefc252rdmll2s312r3qfpdvatnb7iuku@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<0q2dneuZ0ZsMQ1rZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<gcbgc2h0lbtgo43dupb646t52smqo66f4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<B6udnf195M1C31XZnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<88bhc2h9cjb8rvflkokg76qt02i6j2cgal@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <C7GdnY859d0oyFTZnZ2dnUVZ_r-
dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 121
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 90e44beb.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=fHN=YXU1FNEDYJOC]85Q:OF85SKJoGf>DeFI7PYH;[jLgRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.bible:1227821
alt.bible.prophecy:691548 alt.christnet.public:224132
alt.religion.christian.baptist:931132
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440999 free.christians:97631
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 20:09:29 -0400, "Sugien" <dinosoft@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:88bhc2h9cjb8rvflkokg76qt02i6j2cgal@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 00:36:47 -0400, "Sugien" <dinosoft@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
><snip>
>>>>>bible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What I am saying is that the book of 1 Cor was in WIDE circulation
in
>>>> the 1st Century AD, and the CHURCH of THAT day was WELL aware of
>>>> Paul's teaching CENTURIES before any "Nicean Council" made any
>>>> "decisions" or "canonized" any books.
>>>
>>>Are you aware that the letters of Paul were correspondence sent to the
>>>various churches they are named for?
>>
>> Of course! If you are a "Johnny-come-lately", I am one whose pastors
>> these past 50 + years have been NOTED scholars (Bible translators all)
>> I doubt if you could tell me much
>
>I never said nor intended to imply you were a "Johnny-come-lately",
BOY! Did you garble that! I said
if YOU are a Johnny-come-lately IN THIS GROUP, you may not be aware of
the LONG list of Bible scholars I've studied with.
I trust them more than I trust you.
I also
>never intended to imply that I was qualified to *tell* anyone
*anything*. I
>only try and express what I have been led by the spirit to understand
>concerning the material under discussion which I have read after praying
for
>the holy spirit to lead me into understanding.
Yeah! I get that a lot from "Pentecostals". Only problem with invoking
the Holy Spirit is, you very likely don't know Him!
I have heard FAR too many "Pentecostals" refer to the Holy Spirit as
"it."
And He will NEVER tell you ANYTHING contrary to the Bible. And since
you absolutely cannot prove "an angelic language" or "a prayer
language" in the Bible, the Holy Spirit didn't give it to you.
>
>>
>> (other than in the original languages/I have NO gift for languages)
>>
>> that I don't already know.
>>
>> I have MANY times had people comment that my list of pastors reads
>> like a "Who's Who" of 20th and 21st C Christian Theologians.
>
>I have no reason to doubt that ither
>>
>>
>> As such they were *not* read as
>>>scripture,
>>
>> Say your "sources", and my sources would not agree. This precise issue
>> has been discussed /debated at more than one church, and in more than
>> one SEMINARY.
>
>Let me clarify, that when the letters of Paul were first sent by *Paul*
to
>the various churches, they were sent as admonitions, directions and as
>instruction.
Correct.
At the *time* they were written by Paul they were *not*
>intended by Paul to be scripture.
I got that the first time, and AGAIN, you are now disagreeing with
Paul's own words.
Indeed I doubt that Paul would even have
>considered himself worthy of writing *scripture*;
I see! So you have been taught that-- if Paul denies the false
teaching you've been filled with-- you are to REJECT Paul's teaching.
Let's put it THIS way, shall we? (and after this, I will endeavor to
not interact with you further, as I now consider you apostate)
Whether Paul understood at the time he WROTE that he was writing
scripture, what he wrote is NOW in the Bible. What we NOW call "The
Word of God."
Both those passages we LIKE, and those passages we do NOT like.
but rather he wrote them
>in an earnest attempt to try and help people draw closer to God.
In your case, it doesn't seem to be working.
You only follow those passages you like!
It was not
>until century's later that his letters were *canonized*; but I don't
believe
>Paul himself ever intended them to be such.
Ah! So, God INSPIRED Paul, and so you are now saying "God made a
mistake!"
We are done!
john w
snip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044213
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41627
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2781 free.christians:6335
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-
spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!
newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!statler.nntpserver.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.
christian.biblestudy,free.christians
Subject: Re: Is the gift of Tongues for the church today?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:53:42 -0700
Message-ID: <i0djc213fjbmjjfvoesjsh2feoe4sf1qqu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <to3ec21sfbmdn4kvo13kjf27n0fpgacagt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5n6fc2t5r3s1avop48prceuppshet15q3k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ctcfc2de21f59rqule30dvmuurk3j1d87p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<i3agc217hfs5kp9lg0mcvklqk1h74e1u6h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mcdgc25b2g55jh4s3egjnanqshbq5h98ef@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<0hahc2l49kuh02g053upph3usijmffen43@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1154005763.955690.117600
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <j4shc2t7uhqq0f3f3augindi2iqavbr982@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mkeic21o0l7rho24rbi76ot8g4mo5bdbqr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1154052032.779069.150620@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 90
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=QW5=E;kmW8W=VeAl>mEBORF85SKJoGf>Ta1GT2T`_UJU?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.bible.prophecy:484878
alt.religion.christian.baptist:845249
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:397057
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On 27 Jul 2006 19:00:32 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:58:46 GMT, Bible Bob <biblebob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >On 27 Jul 2006 06:09:24 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >
>> >>john w wrote:
>> >>
>> >>[Snip]
>> >>
>> >>> >> Why? Because God
>> >>> >>>has revealed unto us all things that pertain to life and
godliness
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>If that were true, there would be NO reason for us to pray.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >There is no reason for us to pray that prayer.
>> >>>
>> >>> AGAIN, Satan! You have NO clue, and I am not going to mince words
with
>> >>> you!
>> >>>
>> >>> Jesus gave the Lord's Prayer to the apostles!
>> >>
>> >>As usual, any time anyone responds to Weatherly with much of
substance
>> >>at all, Weatherly is out of the pool.
>> >>
>> >>> You God damned LIAR!
>> >>
>> >>Feel the love.
>> >
>> >jw,
>> >
>> >That's called using the God's name in vain.
>>
>> Actually, BB, if you pulled your head out for a change, the way I used
>> the term, it is NOT taking God's name in vain!
>>
>> I have heard that term FROM THE PULPIT in church on a Sunday morning.
>>
>> Would you not agree that Satan is a "God damned sinner?"
>>
>> THAT use is NOT "taking the Lord's name in vain!"
>>
>> And you have simply proved that you don't THINK before you REACT!
>
>This has to be one of the most pathetic attempts
I'm sorry! Remind me again, when I said your opinion mattered.
to justify a sin that
>I have seen in some time, and I've seen some pretty pathetic attempts.
>
>
>> Satan!
>
>For the readers, Bob is not Satan. He's a human being. Satan does not
>exist.
I'm sorry! Remind me again, when I said your opinion mattered.
And that was another of your MANY lies, Dave! Because YOU are Satan!
;-)
>
>> > Did you know that is a
>> >sin?
>>
>> Actually, dumbass, it's not.
>
>Actually, it is.
Actually, dumbass, it isn't.
The phrase and the context that occur with respect to
>Weatherly's comment are the im****tant factors, here, and Weatherly's
>after-the-fact excuse won't cut it.
I'm sorry! Remind me again, when I said your opinion mattered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044210
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2780 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16107 alt.religion.christianity:2593
Path: pubnews.gradwell.net!news-peer-lilac.gradwell.net!news-
peer.gradwell.net!83.128.0.11.MISMATCH!news-out1.kabelfoon.nl!
newsfeed.kabelfoon.nl!xindi.nntp.kabelfoon.nl!204.153.247.121.MISMATCH!
indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!teal.octanews.net!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-01.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.reli
gion.christianity,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Is God singular or plural?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:49:35 -0700
Message-ID: <oqcjc2hach5s32bsvpruraovgv80qqbing@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153298746.209175.137790@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<c5esb2tafadcarlglpabgucup25fak8m73@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153332897.516565.187310
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c2dec3$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153692217.353168.291260@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c48943
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153777435.430720.41530
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c5e08f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153865218.046360.245520@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c6e109$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 37
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=R?^<NjXPT=`S8TVYY7YP1aF85SKJoGf>da1GT2T`_UJe?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pubnews.gradwell.net alt.religion.christian.baptist:546073
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:203199 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:621467
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:43:29 +1200, colp <colp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>Rather than requoting all the clutter I will address the individual
issues.
>
>D: Matthew makes clear Jesus is God, as recently as Matthew chapter 26.
>
>C: 'God' (as Elohim) can refer to more than one deity, while 'God' (as
>theos) refers to a single deity.
To answer your Subject question:
"Is God singular or plural?"
Both.
john w
>
>D: That God is more than one was made clear since Genesis colp, when God
>referred to Himself as us.
>
>Your statement is meaningless. In Genesis, they referred to themselves
>as us. The singular sense of theos in Matthew does not agree with the
>plural sense of Elohim in Genesis.
>
>D: You have not shown that Jesus and YHWH are the same.
>
>C: This is true colp, I did not show it, instead, Matthew and Genesis
>showed that Jesus and YHWH are the same.
>
>False. You are unable to show that they are the same.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044202
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2779 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16106 alt.religion.christianity:2592
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-
spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!
newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!
meganewsservers.com!feeder2.on.meganewsservers.com!feed.news.qwest.net!
mpls-nntp-04.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.reli
gion.christianity,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: According to the Bible, God is one but also three plus some
disciples.
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:48:36 -0700
Message-ID: <vncjc21qu0e5imc1hunhkmn4m6qs54t09k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <44c6e109$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153899967.747567.198470
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c7339c$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153906164.592297.207880@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<u65fc296s1kbq7lvu2mls0k0vagi7gcp5o@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153937334.937743.75590
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <uscfc29i0p283495lanvpf7rhdsvlou6uo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Shasta-2707061310320001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<g29hc2hut1hbatf3p6tpfkvtsasi1a6cbm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c946d9$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 36
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=R?^<NjXPT=0RMm98]e\hS:F85SKJoGf>4a1GT2T`_UJ5?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.religion.christian.baptist:845246
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:397055 alt.religion.christianity:337417
alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:1241879
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:22:21 +1200, colp <colp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:10:17 +1000, Shasta@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bree)
>> wrote:
>
>>>No you have tried and failed to EXCUSE it
>>
>>
>> I wasn't addressing you, buttface!
>>
>> And you are not one to talk, since you have YET to even ATTEMPT an
>> explanation of why an OPEN atheist like you continues to hover in a
>> CHRISTIAN group like you do!
>
>Such an explanation is not necessary to post here.
>
>If it were, who would decide what the acceptable level of "Christian
>belief" would be?
Since you obviously don't include yourself in the category
"Christians", I'll take that as a rhetorical question.
I am also wondering why a demoniac like you would bother even to post
in here!
???
(strictly rhetorical question, I assure you)
john w
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044154
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41623
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2778 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16105
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!cox.net!news-
xfer.cox.net!news.glorb.com!indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!
mauve.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-03.inet.qwest.net!
news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.relig
ion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: TO RETURN TO..The Keeping of His Commandments--Praise God!
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:38:36 -0700
Message-ID: <ctbjc2p5b76ij6676rtf2tq6j2vdppm9i2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <6I6dnZ4m7KGPs1jZnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MIpxg.72646
$Lm5.17521@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MdGdneE_QtvyyVvZnZ2dnUVZ_s-
dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <jgNxg.73157$fb2.7728@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3ZSdnc4x86xuOFrZnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <lCSxg.437$0e5.233
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <D6Xxg.12003$Oz3.5566@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<cn8hc2d1hdr02hlh3gscml55k8lap9h1ar@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <N83yg.12046$Oz3.4218
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <KIayg.923$0e5.83@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 96
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=i86aA;G5=M>RMm98]e\hS:F85SKJoGf>4a1GT2T`_UJ5?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net
alt.religion.christian.adventist:172933
alt.religion.christian.baptist:931126
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440993 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:1392246
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:01:14 GMT, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>"Whazit Tooyah" wrote in message news:N83yg.12046$Oz3.4218@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Actually, God i.e. the Trinity endorses seven days a week wor****p. To
>> answer your question, resurrection was on a Sunday, all of the post
>> resurrection appearances of Jesus where the day is recorded are on
Sunday,
>
>I found only one, which was at evening the day of the resurrection.
There was
>another appearance "after eight days" (Jn 20:26)
Funny stuff! I have a DOZEN different translations. I even looked
this one up on the web. I only found "your version" in ONE of them.
All the rest say, "a week later" or words to that effect, meaning,
"the following Sunday."
And likely they didn't want to go on Sunday MORNING because they were
trying to sneak around in the DARK.
which could not have been a
>Sunday.
He also appeared in Galilee after the crucifixion and was teaching for
>"FORTY DAYS" before His assension, which would presumably have been
>'every' day.
>
>There is no record in any of this that He gave instruction regarding a
change in
>the weekly day of rest and wor****p which He sanctified and blessed at
the end
>of creation week.
No, there is no instruction regarding what day they were to wor****p,
PERIOD.
Leaving it to the disciples themselves to choose a day.
>
>> The Holy Spirit was given to the general population of the church on a
>> Sunday. There are two apparent church meetings occuring on Sunday
>> recorded in the Bible, one in Acts, the other in 1 Corinthians.
>
>The one in Acts is a nighttime farewell meeting for the apostle Paul.
No, it's not. That is a mis-translation.
The farewell meeting for Paul began on a Sunday morning, and ran all
night (so long a young boy fell asleep in an upper window and fell to
his death. Paul interrupted the "all day, all night" meeting long
enough to raise the boy from his death.)
Paul left Monday afternoon.
The
>reference in Corinthians is an admonition to a regular accounting method
>for a specific purpose at that time. Some have even tried to ****tray it
as
>a Sunday morning church collection - which it certainly was not.
You can explain Sunday services away however you wish. I doubt
seriously if you will affect anyone's destiny other than yours.
You continue to IGNORE the FACT that Pentecost was a Sunday Christian
church service that the Holy Spirit BLESSED by giving the church the
Sign Gifts!
If they had been FLAGRANTLY disobeying, He most certainly would NOT
have REWARDED this "Sunday Wor****p Stuff!"
"Get real!"
john w
>
>> The presence of God is very apparent in many churches today on Sunday.
>
>That's true.
>
>> (The latter point would apply to any spirit filled church meeting on
any
>> day of the week)
>
>Agreed.
>
>> --
>> WT
>>
>> By this all men will know that you are My disciples,
>> if you have love for one another
>>
>
>
>Andrew
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044155
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2777 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16104 alt.religion.christianity:2591
Path: pubnews.gradwell.net!news-peer-lilac.gradwell.net!news-
peer.gradwell.net!83.128.0.11.MISMATCH!news-out1.kabelfoon.nl!
newsfeed.kabelfoon.nl!xindi.nntp.kabelfoon.nl!news.glorb.com!
feed.cgocable.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-03.inet.qwest.net!
news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.reli
gion.christianity,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: According to the Bible, God is one but also three plus some
disciples.
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:47:07 -0700
Message-ID: <bicjc2ltimao5bjhl3scl3mb5rub6jg82q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153777435.430720.41530@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<44c5e08f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153865218.046360.245520@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c6e109$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153899967.747567.198470@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c7339c$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153906164.592297.207880
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <u65fc296s1kbq7lvu2mls0k0vagi7gcp5o@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c81579$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<169hc2puf4fqv653a8q506mb79o278pe8b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <44c95142@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 77
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=G^MBoY[`bP]NiJg=d3Bfe\F85SKJoGf>Ta1GT2T`_UJU?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pubnews.gradwell.net alt.religion.christian.baptist:546071
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:203197 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:621465
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:06:45 +1200, colp <colp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:39:27 +1200, colp <colp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>>
>>>john w wrote:
>>>
>>>>This argument "Is Jesus divine" is almost as old as the argument 'Is
>>>>there a God?" and will not be resolved before the Christ (the Jesus
>>>>God/man) returns in His glory to establish His earthly Kingdom once
>>>>and for all.
>>>
>>>The prophecy spoke of the son of man. The title 'son of man' is not
>>>exclusive; it also applied to Ezekiel.
>>>
>>>
>>>>For then, "every knee shall bow".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>John 1 made it quite clear that the Son was the Father in flesh, as
>>>>did Paul in Colossians 2. 'For in Him (the Son/Christ Jesus) dwelt
all
>>>>the fullness of the Godhead (Father/Son/Holy Spirit) in Flesh."
>>>
>>>The Godhead as a trinity is an artificial concept.
>>
>>
>> That is one of your errors
>
>It's not an error,
Yes, it is.
as shown:
>
>That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee,
>that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou
>hast sent me.
>John 17:21
>
>Here Jesus is saying that the disciples relation****p with the Father is
>equivalent with his own.
That is not what was meant, and you have stones to tell ANYONE that
only YOU know "The Truth".
And as I have read half-a-dozen of your demon-inspired comments, and I
now know who you are,
I won't bother with you further.
I simply must wonder why you demoniacs must park your arses in the
Christian groups and make noises with your armpits.
What are you trying to achieve, except wasting my bandwidth?
I may never convince you,
but you thinking you are going to make any impression on me!
lol!
I used to eat two of your kind for breakfast in my youth!
tsk tsk
john w
snip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044140
free.christians:6334
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!66.150.105.54.MISMATCH!newsfeed-
east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!statler.nntpserver.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-04.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.baptist,free.christians
Subject: Re: Whats the Purpose of my Life?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:31:30 -0700
Message-ID: <4abjc2l11ahu1p2t65io046tt1hftn7hff@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153977295_13077@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153978153.297096.98730@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<qi7hc29linicmcsgq64oouc7c4l7i32tja@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fm8yg.138518$H71.115918
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <35cic29vpnmitn35jmdqd5agel324hi1o1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<39gyg.73513$fb2.60177@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 143
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=Ge=<L8j6VD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>DGkJa5l_e6KIgRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.bible:1227818
alt.religion.christian.baptist:931124 free.christians:97629
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 04:12:47 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:20:43 GMT, "Mike Painter"
>> <mddotpainter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>>> john w wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [Snip verses]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Truth is OFTEN "situational".
>>>>
>>>> If you are having a HORRIBLE day (the wife left you, the engine blew
>>>> up, the house burned down, and your 16 year old just got busted for
>>>> selling 5 pounds of cocaine to an undercover narc),
>>>>
>>>> then you go on a job interview, and the prospective employer asks,
>>>> "How are YOU today?"
>>>>
>>>> Do you TRULY think he/she wants to hear you gripe for 10 minutes
>>>> about your HORRIBLE life?
>>>
>>> He was not asked to speak for ten minutes.
>>>
>>> "How are YOU today?"
>>>
>>> "Not to good but thanks for asking." would be perfectly acceptable.
>>
>> Wrong form. S/b "Not too (two "o"s) good, but thanks for asking."
>> (and you forgot the comma.)
>
>Gosh jw plays editor
Yep!
In fact, there was a time I did it professionally, and made a lot of
money! Likely a LOT more than you ever did!
;-)
>
>>
>> And your suggestion is NOT "perfectly acceptable", as the prospective
>> employer is not remotely interested in your personal woes.
>
>Perhaps in your world, but most of the people I know care about others
and
>that includes the few people who interviewed me when I applied for a
job.
Perhaps in YOUR world. I happen to live in a VERY liberal state in
which one of those topics we are advised to NOT get into is our
personal lives beyond, "Yes, I have a wife and 3 kids."
Another is, they don't particularly care what church you go to, or
which synagogue, or which temple, or which coven.
Perhaps your state is less uptight.
In my state, they DO want you to assure them that you're a "Good,
Voting Democrat", and at that point, I defer to "I don't want to
discuss my politics, thanks!"
Perhaps you live in a state where your potential employer wants to
know if you're bonking your neighbor's wife (or daughter).
AGAIN, I'd decline to answer.
>>
>> Live a few more years, mature a little more (or a LOT more in your
>> case) and then we might take up the topic again.
>>
>> Maybe not!
>
>If being mature means not caring about people, I'll pass.
Ho, hum! It has nothing to do with caring or not caring about people.
It DOES have to do with proper topics to discuss at work.
One's religion and one's political views are NEVER safe.
And I didn't expect you to agree. It is YOU who expects everyone to
see everything as YOU do. I have no such quirks.
I do however plan
>on a few more years. 20 would be good.
Good luck, but I don't predict longevity with your attitudes!
Somebody's gonna hurt you SERIOUSLY, if you don't get your ****
together!
Looking for "people to put down" like me and more susceptible /
vulnerable folk should not be a lifestyle.
And in my case, you are wasting your time and energy.
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> "You should have asked me this yesterday when I was great, but
>>> today's been a bad one."
>>>
>>
>> Having been in the position of the employer interviewing on many an
>> occasion, had I been the employer, that would have been the end of
>> your interview.
>>
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> All honest and in no need of "situational" honesty.
>>>
>>> "Situational" honesty tends to lead to problems.
>>
>>
>> only for the dull of mind (that's you)
>
>My, my, my he corrects my grammar in one line and writes this a few
lines
>later.
>Droll.
smirk.
>
>But it's nice to see more examples of your christian nature.
Hey, sucka! It's YOU who started the rock-throwing! Even if I tossed a
hundred stones your way, you could have been the MAN and not "returned
insult for insult."
As it it, I mostly just ignore you.
And Jesus never said we had to be punching bags.
Kick me in the balls, and expect a kick in YOUR balls in return!
;-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044130
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-
spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!
newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-
online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.glorb.com!
indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Weatherley's Christspeak - just disgusting or cracking up?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:19:12 -0700
Message-ID: <a1bjc2hros71jqr4bgnmlnlk4nfjus1pko@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <Shasta-2807061410000001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 38
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=5c;3lHZlMEe9VP6^0Wja4bF85SKJoGf>dV8LM=gfhE2`gRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.religion.christian.baptist:845240
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:09:44 +1000, Shasta@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bree)
wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>In article <lsbic2poo1sif1cg0pu0armf1tv6unaqo3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, john w
><wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You SHRIEK for attention as you wet your diaper!
>>
>> Fine!
>>
>> You've had your allotted attention!
>>
>> Now shriek "mommy!" and she may stick her teat in your mouth, if
>> you're lucky!
>>
>>
>>
>> john w
>
>
>+++++++++
>
>MAD AS A RAT!
I continue to wonder why you are so RAVENOUS for my posts, if they
bother you so!
You are obviously on the masochist side of a sado-masochist
personality!
tsk tsk
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044126
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41617 free.christians:6333
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian.baptist,free.christians
Subject: Re: Uncle Davey your comments
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:17:57 -0700
Message-ID: <ovajc2lurpq8ss43q4fsp9mh4gqil7m03e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153783489_110211@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ugmac29fv9ti58cpk43ntfe6gried1i5nk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153800233_111661
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <a87bc2libdt7fuq5u48ee8ismsj0npmpda@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<2jkdc2hb2toilr41t6c52tbqve0ci1ancm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153977997.632637.217630
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <rhfhc2p237pqndnsufnmebfm9mhp9mji4p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1154051857.387332.100660@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 49
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=XJ1dKFF030KY>LI>QT:<WCF85SKJoGf>DV8LM=gfhE2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.christnet.public:224131
alt.religion.christian.baptist:931121 free.christians:97628
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On 27 Jul 2006 18:57:37 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On 26 Jul 2006 22:26:37 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >john w wrote:
>> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 04:32:00 GMT, Bible Bob <biblebob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of
>> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written consent
of
>> >> the author
>> >> >On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:18:39 -0700, "Bible John"
>> >> ><john.doggett@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>This argument is a debate between two professing christians. You
are not a
>> >> >>professing christian. Davey is a professing christian and holds
to the
>> >> >>essential tenants of the faith, which you reject, and it will
lead to your
>> >> >>doom in the Lake of Fire.
>> >> >>
>> >> >LOL! Sure it is. Okay, Davey is a Christian; who is the other
>> >> >Christian if not me. Davey and I are the only two Real True
>> >> >Christians.
>> >>
>> >> BB, why do you continue to attempt to interject yourself into
>> >> discussions that do not concern you?
>> >
>> >Well, apparently, even though Weatherly did graduate with a [chuckle]
>> >liberal arts degree from a second-rate college,
>>
>> tsk tsk. jealousy!
>
>Another Weatherly
snip
so, Dave!
Are there any men in your family?
just curious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060728044120
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-
spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wns14feed!worldnet.att.net!
216.196.98.141!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-
out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
02.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist,free.christians
Subject: Re: Uncle Davey your comments
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:16:32 -0700
Message-ID: <frajc2tgn16n8tl9h3f200gl4kqqmfkkk0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153783489_110211@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ugmac29fv9ti58cpk43ntfe6gried1i5nk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153800233_111661
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <a87bc2libdt7fuq5u48ee8ismsj0npmpda@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<2jkdc2hb2toilr41t6c52tbqve0ci1ancm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153977997.632637.217630
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <rhfhc2p237pqndnsufnmebfm9mhp9mji4p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4irvfoF56vhsU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ucbic2hajcb2tt2ql76kf5qubccd8lcefe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<6badna2EWr3rpVTZnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 85
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9f13287b.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=OAW8^6NoJDk5M6ZoYEXMklF85SKJoGf>dV8LM=gfhE2`gRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.religion.christian.baptist:845238
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:04:38 -0400, ujb <ujb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:08:07 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
>> <witchypoo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>>> "john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:rhfhc2p237pqndnsufnmebfm9mhp9mji4p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>> On 26 Jul 2006 22:26:37 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>>>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>>>> author
>>>>> john w wrote:
>>>>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>>>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 04:32:00 GMT, Bible Bob <biblebob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of
>>>>>> this article may be used elsewhere without express written consent
of
>>>>>> the author
>>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:18:39 -0700, "Bible John"
>>>>>>> <john.doggett@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This argument is a debate between two professing christians. You
are
>>>>>>>> not a
>>>>>>>> professing christian. Davey is a professing christian and holds
to the
>>>>>>>> essential tenants of the faith, which you reject, and it will
lead to
>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> doom in the Lake of Fire.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LOL! Sure it is. Okay, Davey is a Christian; who is the other
>>>>>>> Christian if not me. Davey and I are the only two Real True
>>>>>>> Christians.
>>>>>> BB, why do you continue to attempt to interject yourself into
>>>>>> discussions that do not concern you?
>>>>> Well, apparently, even though Weatherly did graduate with a
[chuckle]
>>>>> liberal arts degree from a second-rate college,
>>>> tsk tsk. jealousy!
>>> Tsk, tsk. Wishful thinking.
>>>
>>> BTW, jealousy should have been capitalized.
>>
>> Elaine! Elaine! Elaine!
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> BTW, genius! ;-)
>>
>> If you're going to "correct my grammar", get it right.
>>
>> When you referred to my non-capitalized word, you forgot the quotes.
>>
>> You should have said, "BTW, "jealousy: should have been capitalized."
>>
>> Which is wrong anyway! The word "jealousy" is not a SENTENCE
>> (something that NORMALLY requires capitalization.)
>> "jealousy" in the above instance is called a "fragment", and as a
>> writer (poetic license and all), I can do with it as I wish, including
>> telling YOU "bend over."
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> (and, again, sweetums! You are not required to read my posts)
>>
>> ;-)
>
>johnny, your "bend over" seems out of place for you as I don't think
>Robibnikoff is a boy?
Ah!
Igor returns!
I thought by now somebody had spit on you and drowned you!
john w
>jimmy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727180421
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41520
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2717 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16051
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.relig
ion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: The Sabbath made for man /Re: To whom was the Sabbath given?
/Re: Catholic Dogma and Authority of Bible/The term "Lord's day"
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:03:57 -0700
Message-ID: <efhic251k6lmb2qpflt8ue39cs9q06chcu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153496729.978342.33150@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<Ia9wg.1116$gF6.520@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<DbOdnUGgD7tp8V_ZnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <UcKwg.133766$H71.48686
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0ZudnQL-eOg2Gl7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <AeDxg.5362$fL3.4669
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mrafc2963sko356q9btpq1f6jfnfrfqluv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BeWdnWnMQ-
qbYFrZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 149
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: c44661dd.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=XZCNg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>DdSn[NU0`fWH?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net
alt.religion.christian.adventist:172914
alt.religion.christian.baptist:931002
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440880 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:1392128
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:19:36 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
<skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:mrafc2963sko356q9btpq1f6jfnfrfqluv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 05:39:44 GMT, "Whazit Tooyah" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of
>> this article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of
>> the author
>> >
>> >"Stephen Korsman" <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> "john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> news:d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> x-no-archive: yes
>> >>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 16:11:26 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >>> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of
>> >>> this article may be used elsewhere without express written consent
of
>> >>> the author
>> >>> >
>> >>> >"I. B. Wonderin" <posting@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >>> >news:UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> To man in the garden of Eden. That's why Jesus said The Sabbath
was
>> >> made
>> >>> >> for man, and not man for the Sabbath.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Mark 2, Matt 12, Luke 6
>> >>> >
>> >>> >(Mar 2:23) And it came to pass, that he went through the corn
fields
>on
>> >> the
>> >>> >sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the
ears
>of
>> >>> >corn.
>> >>>
>> >>> Um, Steve! You seem to have lost your way again!
>> >>
>> >> Nope, not really.
>> >>
>> >>> This is the Baptist group.
>> >>>
>> >>> The Roman Catholic group is
>> >>>
>> >>> <---------------------
>> >>>
>> >>> that way!
>> >>
>> >> Where does it say that in the Bible? Near the passage that says
Jesus
>> >> used
>> >> full immersion when he personally baptised people?
>> >
>> >Hmm, I don't think Jesus baptized any that I can remember.
>>
>> Perhaps-- rather than surmizing "from memory"-- you might take the
>> time to LOOK IT UP, rather than merely commenting.
>>
>>
>> JN 3:22 After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the
>> Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized.
>>
>> [ He spent some time with them (the disciples) AND [HE] BAPTIZED.]
>>
>> 23 Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim,
>>
>> [ John ALSO was baptizing] (at the same time Jesus was)
>>
>> because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming
>> to be baptized.
>>
>> 24 (This was before John was put in prison.)
>>
>> 25 An argument developed between some of John's disciples and a
>> certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial wa****ng.
>>
>> 26 They came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, that man who was with
>> you on the other side of the Jordan--the one you testified
>> about--well, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him."
>>
>> [ They (John's disciples) came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, that
>> man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan--the one you
>> testified about (Jesus)--well, HE is baptizing, and everyone is going
>> to him." ]
>>
>> John's own testimony (one of the 12) is that Jesus got baptized by
>> John the Baptist, and then Jesus began to baptize. He attracted so
>> many by baptizing, that John's disciples became concerned that
>> "everyone is now going to Him!"
>
>John 4:1-2 is referring back to the events in John 3.
Butt out, Roman! I wasn't talking to you!
TWO passages in John 3 say Jesus baptized!
Only ONE passage says He didn't!
That's called "majority rules!"
>
>> However, on the
>> >subject of baptism, it seems that it usually required much water,
i.e.
>John
>> >The Baptizer in the Jordan and Phillip with the Ethiopian.
>>
>> EXACTLY!
>> And if you look up the early church ruins on the internet ( I could
>> share some photographs with you), you will find many ruins of 1st and
>> 2nd C AD churches that contain BAPTISMAL pools, deep enough to fill
>> and then IMMERSE new believers.
>>
>> Why would churches of the 1st and 2nd Centuries built churches with
>> BAPTISMAL POOLS deep enough to submerge/immerse believers...
>>
>> and then not immerse new believers?
>>
>> (Yep, I'm a
>> >dunker) It also seems that scripturally baptism was done in response
to
>> >salvation and there is no scriptural record of anyone being baptized
>unless
>> >it was their desire to be baptized.
>>
>> NONE.
>>
>> In fact, Jesus PERSONALLY answered the notion that adults should CARRY
>> their infants forward to "be sprinkled" as infants.
>>
>>
>> "LET THE CHILDREN COME TO ME... and do not forbid them!"
>>
>> The child must be old enough to GO TO JESUS UNAIDED!
>
>Jesus wasn't speaking about the type of motion required to approach
baptism.
How would YOU know what He was talking about?
(you don't)
But you are MORE THAN HAPPY to speak for God!
john w
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727180108
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41519
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2716 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16050
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-
spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!
prodigy.net!news.glorb.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!
statler.nntpserver.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-03.inet.qwest.net!
news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.relig
ion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: The Sabbath made for man /Re: To whom was the Sabbath given?
/Re: Catholic Dogma and Authority of Bible/The term "Lord's day"
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:00:55 -0700
Message-ID: <k7hic2lea70d9feup1gd0glqt26hdjruuu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0ZudnQL-
eOg2Gl7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <AeDxg.5362$fL3.4669
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <oe-dnYnhg909P1rZnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<uhgfc21sl1bg97a8rse9lqkn4okh8pbfpl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BeWdnW7MQ-
qeYFrZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mbfgc2h8aj0ui1qebpc4uggkunqjedisp0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <VYKdnXXJWMlMZ1XZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 215
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: c44661dd.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=BELmD<6P;7bGCN<WKWBS4cF85SKJoGf>ddSn[NU0`fWh?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu
alt.religion.christian.adventist:155372
alt.religion.christian.baptist:845118
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:396937 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:1241756
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:54:14 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
<skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:mbfgc2h8aj0ui1qebpc4uggkunqjedisp0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:16:41 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >
>> >"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:uhgfc21sl1bg97a8rse9lqkn4okh8pbfpl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:33:54 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> >> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of
the
>> >> author
>> >> >
>> >> >"Whazit Tooyah" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >news:AeDxg.5362$fL3.4669@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Stephen Korsman" <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 16:11:26 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> >> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no
****tion
>of
>> >> >> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written
>consent
>> >of
>> >> >> >> the author
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >"I. B. Wonderin" <posting@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >news:UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> >> To man in the garden of Eden. That's why Jesus said The
>Sabbath
>> >was
>> >> >> > made
>> >> >> >> >> for man, and not man for the Sabbath.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Mark 2, Matt 12, Luke 6
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >(Mar 2:23) And it came to pass, that he went through the
corn
>> >fields
>> >> >on
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck
the
>> >ears
>> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >corn.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Um, Steve! You seem to have lost your way again!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Nope, not really.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> This is the Baptist group.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> The Roman Catholic group is
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> <---------------------
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> that way!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Where does it say that in the Bible? Near the passage that
says
>> >Jesus
>> >> >> > used
>> >> >> > full immersion when he personally baptised people?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hmm, I don't think Jesus baptized any that I can remember.
>> >> >
>> >> >He didn't.
>> >>
>> >> you forgot to say "in my opinion."
>> >>
>> >> Of course, if you OPPOSE water/immersion baptism, it would behoove
you
>> >> to discount any passages that say that Jesus baptised.
>> >> (and two passages say He did)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >John sees
>> >> >
>> >> >(John 3:22 KJV) After these things came Jesus and his disciples
into
>the
>> >> >land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
>> >> >
>> >> >and says Jesus personally baptised people.
>> >> >
>> >> >John 4:1-2 KJV When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had
>heard
>> >> >that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (2)
(Though
>> >Jesus
>> >> >himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
>> >> >
>> >> >This he doesn't believe.
>> >>
>> >> It's contradictory.
>> >
>> >Only if you force it to be.
>> >
>> >> It's as if, earlier eyewitnesses saw and re****ted that Jesus was
>> >> baptizing. This was re****ted on two separate occasions.
>> >>
>> >> Jesus went to another part of the river with His disciples, and
[He]
>> >> baptized.
>> >>
>> >> Some of John's disciples (spies) came to John later (2nd re****t)
and
>> >> told John, "that guy we saw you with awhile back, is now over there
on
>> >> the river, and He's baptizing! And more people are going to HIM
than
>> >> are coming to you!"
>> >>
>> >> 2nd re****t.
>> >>
>> >> Only LATER (a different CHAPTER) does a 3rd re****t come in (likely
>> >> from a 3rd source who went to check, and by THAT time, Jesus was no
>> >> longer baptizing), and he said, "No, Jesus wasn't baptizing."
>> >> (because, you see, he got there too late to witness Jesus
baptizing)
>> >>
>> >> When we see an apparent disrepancy, some tend to toss out what they
>> >> don't wish to believe.
>> >>
>> >> You wish to toss out TWO previous EYEWITNESS accounts that Jesus
WAS
>> >> baptizing, and go with the 3rd which says He wasn't!
>> >>
>> >> I choose to go with all three, and try to harmonize them. My
version
>> >> "works."
>> >>
>> >> By the time the third spy got there, Jesus had stopped baptizing.
>> >> Rather than the third spy ASKING someone, "Was Jesus baptizing
>> >> people?" he simply returned to John and re****ted what he had SEEN,
not
>> >> what had actually been happening!
>> >>
>> >> However, we MUST account for the previous TWO EYEWITNESS accounts.
>> >>
>> >> Your version fails.
>> >
>> >Not if you read it in context.
>> >
>> >> And the most im****tant issue is this: Why does it matter?
>> >
>> >To you, I don't know.
>> >
>> >> It doesn't matter to ME! It's a minor issue, and I didn't even
>> >> DISCOVER this point until VERY recently! (I'd managed to survive
over
>> >> 55 YEARS without the information)
>> >>
>> >> It only seem to matter to those who HATE immersion believers's
>> >> baptism!
>> >
>> >Muslims?
>> >
>> >> If Jesus Himself IMMERSED His first followers, then we have to DEAL
>> >> with that! If, however, we can DENY that He did...
>> >
>> >The Bible doesn't say he did.
>>
>> You are a pathological LIAR!
>
>No, that is what you have made a name for yourself as. Not me.
You are right back to being a total asshole!
>
>> JN 3:22 After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the
>> Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized.
>> ( 1 )
>>
>> 23 Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was
>> plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized. 24
>> (This was before John was put in prison.) 25 An argument developed
>> between some of John's disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of
>> ceremonial wa****ng. 26 They came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, that
>> man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan--the one you
>> testified about--well, he is baptizing ( 2 ), and everyone is going to
>> him."
>>
>> In the course of 5 verses, it says TWICE that He baptized.
>
>But these are qualified immediately after this.
DEAL with the text as it appears!
NOT as you WISH it would appear!
What if the person who gave the 3rd account was WRONG? John doesn't
say the account was correct or not. John re****ts what he was told!
Does John say HE PERSONALLY went and checked it out?
You CONTINUE to REFUSE to deal with the TEXT AS IT IS WRITTEN!
AGAIN, I ask, what is the big deal with Jesus baptizing?
Because it brings up a concept Roman Catholics HATE!
"believer's baptism!"
And we are SOOOOOO done!
If you REFUSE to be HONEST in your discussion, I won't discuss!
john w
snip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727175750
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41518
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2715 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16049
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.relig
ion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: The Sabbath made for man /Re: To whom was the Sabbath given?
/Re: Catholic Dogma and Authority of Bible/The term "Lord's day"
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:56:27 -0700
Message-ID: <h4hic29v15g58ts6qd3nb7s0sgq61h1l6n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0ZudnQL-
eOg2Gl7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <AeDxg.5362$fL3.4669
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <oe-dnYnhg909P1rZnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<uhgfc21sl1bg97a8rse9lqkn4okh8pbfpl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BeWdnW7MQ-
qeYFrZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <l4fgc2tc79mv4e783905isonq9p0c3ors1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gYydnSxXqJFSZ1XZnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 282
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56777341.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>^_F85SKJoGf>TdSn[NU0`fWX?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net
alt.religion.christian.adventist:172912
alt.religion.christian.baptist:930999
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440877 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:1392125
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:49:48 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
<skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:l4fgc2tc79mv4e783905isonq9p0c3ors1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:16:41 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >
>> >"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:uhgfc21sl1bg97a8rse9lqkn4okh8pbfpl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:33:54 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> >> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of
the
>> >> author
>> >> >
>> >> >"Whazit Tooyah" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >news:AeDxg.5362$fL3.4669@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Stephen Korsman" <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:yKWd****addEXalvZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:d1mdc2dsq5r11fer10cd3p73ivqihofemn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 16:11:26 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> >> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no
****tion
>of
>> >> >> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written
>consent
>> >of
>> >> >> >> the author
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >"I. B. Wonderin" <posting@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >news:UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> >> To man in the garden of Eden. That's why Jesus said The
>Sabbath
>> >was
>> >> >> > made
>> >> >> >> >> for man, and not man for the Sabbath.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Mark 2, Matt 12, Luke 6
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >(Mar 2:23) And it came to pass, that he went through the
corn
>> >fields
>> >> >on
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck
the
>> >ears
>> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >corn.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Um, Steve! You seem to have lost your way again!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Nope, not really.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> This is the Baptist group.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> The Roman Catholic group is
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> <---------------------
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> that way!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Where does it say that in the Bible? Near the passage that
says
>> >Jesus
>> >> >> > used
>> >> >> > full immersion when he personally baptised people?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hmm, I don't think Jesus baptized any that I can remember.
>> >> >
>> >> >He didn't.
>> >>
>> >> you forgot to say "in my opinion."
>> >>
>> >> Of course, if you OPPOSE water/immersion baptism, it would behoove
you
>> >> to discount any passages that say that Jesus baptised.
>> >> (and two passages say He did)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >John sees
>> >> >
>> >> >(John 3:22 KJV) After these things came Jesus and his disciples
into
>the
>> >> >land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
>> >> >
>> >> >and says Jesus personally baptised people.
>> >> >
>> >> >John 4:1-2 KJV When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had
>heard
>> >> >that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (2)
(Though
>> >Jesus
>> >> >himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
>> >> >
>> >> >This he doesn't believe.
>> >>
>> >> It's contradictory.
>> >
>> >Only if you force it to be.
>> >
>> >> It's as if, earlier eyewitnesses saw and re****ted that Jesus was
>> >> baptizing. This was re****ted on two separate occasions.
>> >>
>> >> Jesus went to another part of the river with His disciples, and
[He]
>> >> baptized.
>> >>
>> >> Some of John's disciples (spies) came to John later (2nd re****t)
and
>> >> told John, "that guy we saw you with awhile back, is now over there
on
>> >> the river, and He's baptizing! And more people are going to HIM
than
>> >> are coming to you!"
>> >>
>> >> 2nd re****t.
>> >>
>> >> Only LATER (a different CHAPTER) does a 3rd re****t come in (likely
>> >> from a 3rd source who went to check, and by THAT time, Jesus was no
>> >> longer baptizing), and he said, "No, Jesus wasn't baptizing."
>> >> (because, you see, he got there too late to witness Jesus
baptizing)
>> >>
>> >> When we see an apparent disrepancy, some tend to toss out what they
>> >> don't wish to believe.
>> >>
>> >> You wish to toss out TWO previous EYEWITNESS accounts that Jesus
WAS
>> >> baptizing, and go with the 3rd which says He wasn't!
>> >>
>> >> I choose to go with all three, and try to harmonize them. My
version
>> >> "works."
>> >>
>> >> By the time the third spy got there, Jesus had stopped baptizing.
>> >> Rather than the third spy ASKING someone, "Was Jesus baptizing
>> >> people?" he simply returned to John and re****ted what he had SEEN,
not
>> >> what had actually been happening!
>> >>
>> >> However, we MUST account for the previous TWO EYEWITNESS accounts.
>> >>
>> >> Your version fails.
>> >
>> >Not if you read it in context.
>>
>> Steve, very little you say is "in context."
>
>Don't project your own problems onto the rest of us.
>
>> I have given you a PERFECTLY VALID explanation of why there are
>> "apparently contradictory" accounts.
>
>They are not contradictory. They are one passage.
Why must you argue such a small point? Is it THAT PAINFUL for you EVER
to be wrong?
Why is it SO CRUCIAL to YOU that "Jesus did not baptize?!"
What is gained? What is lost?
And they ARE contradictory. They are NOT "one passage."
You apparently have not learned to draw TIMELINES.
If you did, you would see at LEAST 3 SEPARATE EVENTS, taking place on
3 SEPARATE OCCASIONS.
But since you don't like the CONTENT of the first 2 EVENTS, you go
DA****NG PAST any TRUTHS they might teach you til you arrive, huffing
and panting at EVENT # 3!
That is called "intellectual dishonesty" and "spiritual dishonesty"
and "scriptural DISHONESTY!"
You are in essence saying,
"Well, I don't like what verses 1 through 25 say!
So let's JUMP AHEAD and see what's in the NEXT chapter!"
:-)
NO!
:-(
Deal with John 3 first!
It comes first in the Bible!
AFTER you deal with John 3,
THEN go on to John 4.
That is called "harmonizing the text",
(which I did)
It is
not
IGNORING those parts you don't like!
>
>"When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus
made
>and baptized more disciples than John"
>
>refers to the recent baptism session done by Jesus
correct!
and the Apostles - "After
>these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and
there
>he tarried with them, and baptized"
>
>This is the event the Pharisees had heard about. Either that, or this
>contributed to what the Pharisees had heard about. Either way, "Though
>Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples" qualifies both events.
THAT is NOT what the passage says. It says, Jesus baptized. And then
it says He didn't.
And since when do you believe every single word?
Do you believe that Jesus was being QUITE LITERAL when He called Peter
"Satan?"
You are RIGHT BACK to believing what you want to believe, not
believing what you don't want to believe.
I am showing you what the text ACTUALLY SAYS.
You prefer to explain it away.
>
>> HOWEVER, since my explanation VIOLATES what you CHOOSE to believe, you
>> are willing to toss the TEXT in the garbage and
>>
>> PRETEND!
>>
>> I will not let you pretend!
>>
>> TWO passages from EYEWITNESSES say "Jesus baptized."
>
>Which two?
You can't find it for yourself?
I have quoted it SEVERAL times. You are now saying OPENLY that UNLESS
SOME THIRD PERSON SHOWS YOU, you are incapable of reading and finding
these passages for yourself!
>
>> You CONTINUE to reject the TEXT
>>
>> BECAUSE you CHOOSE to not believe it!
>>
>> NOT because that's not what it says!
>>
>>
>> AND AGAIN, what's the big deal that Jesus baptized?
>>
>> Except that it totally invalidates a KEY teaching of Rome!
>
>No, it doesn't.
Yes, it does. If Jesus was immersed, and then if He immersed His
first disciples (likely the 12), then that FACT invalidates infant
baptism.
And you AGAIN are a pathological liar!
>
>God bless,
>Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727174759
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41515
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2713 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:16045
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
03.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.relig
ion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: The Sabbath made for man /Re: To whom was the Sabbath given?
/Re: Catholic Dogma and Authority of Bible/The term "Lord's day"
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:45:41 -0700
Message-ID: <hqfic21bu8dhuvberb8t08vvhs1toc9oog@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <UcKwg.133766$H71.48686@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0ZudnQL-
eOg2Gl7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <lCMwg.134392$H71.57180
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <hqadne-Kxei_c17ZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1dmdc2hgaj25k0gpk6qhjqjn5a76ks33kf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<NNCdnYNDFskValvZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<0j9fc2l0lpkg4vh1ss5rrdrucscgk6i715@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BeWdnW_MQ-
qfYFrZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8jegc2hd10r9m57v9v1n7ngo8qrhd19f14@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <ZL-dnWZdgYVRZ1XZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 266
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56777341.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=L5>X@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>DdSn[NU0`fWH?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>RPjD
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net
alt.religion.christian.adventist:172911
alt.religion.christian.baptist:930995
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440874 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:1392120
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:35:37 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
<skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:8jegc2hd10r9m57v9v1n7ngo8qrhd19f14@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:12:07 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >
>> >"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:0j9fc2l0lpkg4vh1ss5rrdrucscgk6i715@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:58:34 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of
>> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written consent
of
>> >> the author
>> >> >
>> >> >"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >news:1dmdc2hgaj25k0gpk6qhjqjn5a76ks33kf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> >> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 20:34:15 +0200, "Stephen Korsman"
>> >> >> <skorsman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion
of
>> >> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written
consent
>of
>> >> >> the author
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"I. B. Wonderin" <posting@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> >news:lCMwg.134392$H71.57180@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God,
>> >and
>> >> >> >> the Word was God.
>> >> >> >> 2 The same was in the beginning with God.
>> >> >> >> 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any
thing
>> >made
>> >> >> >> that was made.
>> >> >> >> Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of
>> >every
>> >> >> >> creature:
>> >> >> >> 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven,
and
>that
>> >are
>> >> >> >> in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones,
or
>> >> >> >> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were
created
>by
>> >> >him,
>> >> >> >> and for him:
>> >> >> >> 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things
consist.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nothing about man being given the Sabbath in those verses.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he
had
>made;
>> >> >and
>> >> >> >> he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had
made.
>> >> >> >> 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because
>that
>> >in
>> >> >it
>> >> >> >> he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
>> >> >> >> 4 These [are] the generations of the heavens and of the earth
>when
>> >they
>> >> >> >> were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and
the
>> >> >> >> heavens,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nothing about man being given the Sabbath in those verses. God
>rested
>> >> >then,
>> >> >> >but it says nothing about man.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Exd 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
>> >> >> >> :9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
>> >> >> >> 10 But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God:
[in
>it]
>> >> >> >> thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter,
>thy
>> >> >> >> manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy
stranger
>> >that
>> >> >> >> [is] within thy gates:
>> >> >> >> 11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea,
and
>> >all
>> >> >> >> that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the
LORD
>> >> >> >> blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nothing about man being given the Sabbath in those verses.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven,
>having
>> >the
>> >> >> >> everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the
earth,
>and
>> >to
>> >> >> >> every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
>> >> >> >> 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him;
for
>the
>> >> >> >> hour of his judgment is come: and wor****p him that made
heaven,
>and
>> >> >> >> earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nothing about man being given the Sabbath in those verses.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Yes the Sabbath was made for man and the Lord Jesus made
both.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nobody is denying that.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am denying it. Jesus didn't make the Sabbath,
>> >> >
>> >> >Who made the Sabbath then, if not God?
>> >>
>> >> ????????????????????????????????
>> >>
>> >> You just changed the subject!
>> >
>> >Nope. Cindy said Jesus made the Sabbath.
>>
>> Cindy is wrong.
>>
>> You said he didn't.
>>
>> That is correct. Jesus didn't create Sabbath.
>>
>> Since Jesus
>> >is God, he must have.
>>
>> Not so. And if you believe that, you have a fundamental
>> misunderstanding of The Trinity.
>>
>> There is no "Jesus" mentioned in the Trinity.
>>
>> The Trinity consists of "The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit."
>>
>> You may use "Jesus" interchangeably with "The Son", but you are
>> incorrect.
>>
>> The MAN "Jesus" was born in the 1st C. He was merely the PHYSICAL
>> HOUSE that contained the Son of God.
>
>Jesus Christ was God. Fully God, and fully Man. Not a man being a
house
>containing God the Son. Jesus was God the Son.
You CONTINUE to strain gnats and swallow camels.
If you search throughout the Bible, you find no mention of "Jesus"
ANYWHERE in the Old Testament. When the SON took on FLESH in the 1st
C, that IN Carnation (God in FLESH) was given the name "Jesus." Prior
to the BIRTH of the Christ-child, there was no "Jesus."
>
>> The SON created the Sabbath in the beginning. Jesus was not there at
>> the time.
>>
>> It may seem like a PETTY distinction to some, but-- nevertheless--
>> Jesus was NOT involved in creating Sabbath.
>>
>> The Son was.
>
>In that sense you may be right,
In THAT sense, I AM right!
Thanks for opening your mind even a TINY CRACK.
AGAIN, read every single word of the Old Testament 10 times! There is
not ONE SINGLE mention of "Jesus Christ" ANYWHERE! "Jesus" is the
NAME GIVEN the INCARNATION of God in the 1st C. Do you understand
what "incarnation" means? Do you understand what "incarnate" means?
Both reflect that "God TOOK ON FLESH!"
That didn't happen in OLD TESTAMENT times. It was an EarthSHAKING
event that occurred for the 1st time in History in the 1st C!
"Jesus" was the name given the INCARNATION. "Christ" was the TITLE of
the INCARNATION!
There simply was NOT an "incarnation" or a "Jesus" or a TITLE "Christ"
BEFORE the 1st C!
AGAIN, you may consider this a tiny matter.
However, it is THEOLOGICALLY ACCURATE.
THAT is my point!
if that's how you define your terms.
How *I* define terms is not the point. The point IS how the BIBLE (you
so love) defines the terms. "Jesus" does not appear ANYWHERE in the
Old Testament.
And "Son" does not appear in Genesis 1!
For those who don't know their hermeneutics, the reference in
Genesis 1 to "our Image" doesn't even mean the Son. (it DOES mean "the
Son", but most don't even know THAT)
And
>technically, that is how it is defined.
"Technically?"
From someone who so LOVES to quote scripture, AND the Catechism, you
don't seem NEARLY so ready to accept "technical accuracy" when you
LOSE a point!
tsk tsk
But it's not how Cindy et al define
>it,
Perhaps Cindy could use an education in proper theology!
ya think?
;-)
so it's better to communicate with them in their own language.
"better?"
Better for whom?
If she decided to start using profanity, and she "God damned" this,
and she "Jesus F'in Christ" that, would you STILL want to communicate
with her using HER terms?
I don't think so!
>
>> >> Are you yet ANOTHER Roman Catholic (no shock) who doesn't know the
>> >> difference between God and Jesus ?
>> >
>> >Does JW stand for Jehovah's Witness? Prior to his incarnation, Jesus
was
>> >God the Son. (During and after as well.)
>>
>> Prior to His incarnation, there was no Jesus. "Jesus" was the name
>> given to INcarnate God.
>>
>> Before he took on FLESH, there was no "Jesus".
>
>Yes.
Then we have at LONG last found SOMETHING on which to agree!
However, something I KNOW you're going to love. Find me Mary in the
Genesis account! The ENTIRE TRINITY were involved in Creation.
Not Mary!
;-)
>
>God bless,
>Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727173229
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!feed.cgocable.net!feed.news.qwest.net!
mpls-nntp-01.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist,free.christians
Subject: Re: Uncle Davey your comments
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:31:02 -0700
Message-ID: <ljfic213p5djkpreiohc4cmd8ovl11js0v@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <ugmac29fv9ti58cpk43ntfe6gried1i5nk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153800233_
111661@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <a87bc2libdt7fuq5u48ee8ismsj0npmpda@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1153805052_112017@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ikkdc2t937gfaif04988fm55h7psqpbbkc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153885500.047653.25530
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6i7fc25l41tr0ta8l3tajk7i18mpj3r1hl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153963826.561212.191720@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<oidgc2dqsfpknpmr3g826qb1tcfscm62c3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4irqe5F55v2mU1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 28
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56777341.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=`5IAmNDOi5XE>S1?;<3miQF85SKJoGf>T7XHg7Y0jgXV?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net
alt.religion.christian.baptist:930993 free.christians:97558
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:41:55 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>snip
>>
>> Like I said, ****forbrains, you don't READ my posts; you just jump in
>> when you find it amuses you and make utterly asinine remarks!
>> True infantile behavior (thinking you're cute/ you're not)
>
>So, why don't you just ignore or killfile him?
Why don't you mind your own business, Elaine?
Why do you keep coming up with these absurd sock puppets?
And where did Mork go?
john w
snip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727173224
alt.religion.christian.baptist:41513 free.christians:6295
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
01.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian.baptist,free.christians
Subject: Re: Uncle Davey your comments
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:30:06 -0700
Message-ID: <1efic2de0nem8u9d57ssbh340256fhn8cs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153805052_112017@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ikkdc2t937gfaif04988fm55h7psqpbbkc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153885500.047653.25530
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6i7fc25l41tr0ta8l3tajk7i18mpj3r1hl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153963826.561212.191720@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<oidgc2dqsfpknpmr3g826qb1tcfscm62c3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1153979573.343005.228860
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gcfhc2donbad8tj0ajfsvt8okppeh2isb0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1154008373.188722.227590@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 144
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56777341.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=`5IAmNDOi5XbH<;Z;Vf:gVF85SKJoGf>T7XHg7Y0jgXV?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.christnet.public:224088
alt.religion.christian.baptist:930992 free.christians:97557
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On 27 Jul 2006 06:52:53 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>john w wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On 26 Jul 2006 22:52:53 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
>> author
>> >john w wrote:
>> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> On 26 Jul 2006 18:30:26 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> © 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
>> >> article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of
the
>> >> author
>> >> >john w wrote:
>> >> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> >> On 25 Jul 2006 20:45:00 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion
of
>> >> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written
consent of
>> >> >> the author
>> >> >> >john w wrote:
>> >> >> >> x-no-archive: yes
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:38:25 -0700, "Bible John"
>> >> >> >> <john.doggett@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> copyright 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no
****tion of
>> >> >> >> this article may be used elsewhere without express written
consent of
>> >> >> >> the author
>> >> >> >> >"Bible Bob" <biblebob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >news:a87bc2libdt7fuq5u48ee8ismsj0npmpda@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> You don't get to decide who is saved. God does.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Someone who rejects Jesus Christ (as you do) is not saved.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Read the bible.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> BJ, stop typing "Bible" lower case!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It is insulting, and it is blasphemous!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I own seven translations of the Bible, and I've never seen any
>> >> >> >Scripture that claims that it is "blasphemous" to refer to the
Bible
>> >> >> >using a lower case "b." I'd ask Weatherly to show us, but we
all know
>> >> >> >what kind of reaction *that* would get...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I could / would answer that.
>> >> >
>> >> >...Weatherly boasts, and then *doesn't* answer it...
>> >> >
>> >> >> However, "we all know" that you really didn't expect or
>> >> >> want an answer, now did you?
>> >> >
>> >> >Weatherly gets it half right. If I didn't *want* to see at least
an
>> >> >attempt at an answer, I wouldn't bother to type the question.
That I
>> >> >didn't expect to see an answer is certainly correct, and
Weatherly, in
>> >> >this message fulfilled my expectations.
>> >> >
>> >> >> You truly don't want answers, since you prefer to supply
>> >> >> them all yourself, don't you!
>> >> >
>> >> >There goes hypocritical Weatherly, presuming to read minds, again.
>> >>
>> >> Not at all, ****forbrains.
>> >
>> >Feel the love.
>> >
>> >> I merely observe and remark on your OBVIOUS
>> >> behavior/misbehavior.
>> >
>> >No, Weatherly decided my motive and declared it as such, without my
>> >having said anything on the matter (though I have responded to
similar
>> >claims before and refuted them). So Weatherly is not only a
hypocrite,
>> >he's a liar, as well.
>> >
>> >But we knew that.
>> >
>> >> Which AGAIN makes you the WORST of pathological liars. (no news
>> >> there)
>> >
>> >As usualy, Weatherly whimpers about lies, but can't sup****t nor
provide
>> >any evidence for a single lie, and countering and refuting claims
that
>> >he has made is not lying, by any definition.
>> >
>> >> You have REPEATEDLY "asked me questions" (as you have done to
others),
>> >> and then "supplied the answers" yourself.
>> >
>> >I have asked questions, and when answers weren't forthcoming, I
provide
>> >my own commentary on the matter. That is quite different from what
>> >Weatherly represents. That he doesn't understand that is hardly my
>> >problem.
>> >
>> >> >> However, for the benefit of the group (this HAS been asked and
>> >> >> answered any number of times, but since you don't bother to
follow the
>> >> >> threads (you're more of a harasser)...
>> >> >
>> >> >Actually, I follow what threads that I can or care to,
>> >>
>> >> Like I said, ****forbrains...
>> >
>> >Feel the love.
>>
>> You receive what you so love to give!
>
>I've already refuted Weatherly's assertions
You "refuted" me, and I in turn refuted you.
You point to "the Golden Rule". I point to "do not cast your pearls to
the pigs".
You being a pig, I don't show you love!
You, like other demoniacs, quote SO SELECTIVELY!
You also IGNORE "repent or perish", and you likewise ignore "you MUST
be BORN again!"
My GOODNESS, your Bible must only contain 3 verses!
of this sort and, of
>course, there's been no rebuttal from him.
Another psychotic, pathological, demonic lie!
From YOU, I have given better than I have received!
You merely LIE about it!
The fact is that, among
>other things, Jesus is not quoted as saying, "love only those who love
>you."
He DID say, "don't cast your pearls before the swine."
(YOU being the swine!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Hamster-Info: Score=500 ScoreLoad=500 ScoreSave=0 Received=
20060727172901
alt.christnet.public:3084 alt.religion.christian.baptist:41510
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:2711 free.christians:6293
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
01.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian.
baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,free.christians
Subject: Re: Is the gift of Tongues for the church today?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:26:29 -0700
Message-ID: <nafic2t5mgnmaljppc0f04tkn738deantu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1153783837_110217@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<96adneHxWtEWCljZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<bvjdc2he026mvk1g2hn9udi295k6crrq4i@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <At-dnY5U3IlQSFrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-
dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <2hcgc2ljonnpc916eigm56qemhlggbgocs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<n9udnQw6FcsA11XZnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kndhc29vcc71kv9f1gdmgj9b429klgur1q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MR3yg.57061$VE1.17551
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 36
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56777341.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=Tl3Al@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>D7XHg7Y0jgXF?
0m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.bible:1227630
alt.bible.prophecy:691476 alt.christnet.public:224086
alt.religion.christian.baptist:930989
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:440871 free.christians:97555
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0630-2, 07/26/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 14:13:00 GMT, "Songzster" <beethoven@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2006 John Weatherly; all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
article may be used elsewhere without express written consent of the
author
>
>"john w" <wjohn1134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:kndhc29vcc71kv9f1gdmgj9b429klgur1q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:09:48 -0400, "Sugien" <dinosoft@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>
>> AGAIN, show me a sign,
>>
>> and I will believe!
>>
>
>A wicked and adulterous generation
Terrell, you get stupider and stupider with every passing day!
Sugien says he believes the sign gifts are for today. I said, "fine!
show me one!"
You are one stupid demoniac!
seeketh after a sign; and there shall no
>sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah. And he left
them,
>and departed.
|
