> Then many here on both sides would say to you , you may have the
problem with the
> nature of God, but they do not. Look at them write, it is so, because
they said so,
> tell them otherwise and you are in for "hell on earth"
I could care less whether anyone in the NG thinks I am headed for hell or
anywhere else.
Them, or you, saying I am going to hell doesn't make it so. That is a
decision for God,
not for you or anyone else here on earth.
> Fire and hot water, curses and
> foul terms and on and on, Some do not even stop with the person, they
go after your
> family, friends as if they know who they are. John if you really mean
any of this
> you wrote, do not waste time reading any of the replies come back in a
few weeks and
> just go on with your life.
I DO try to come in here and impart some knowledge and a different point
of view. Perhaps
YOU should be one who when you see my name, don't bother to read it. You
don't seem to
understand most of what I am saying most of the time, anyway. So why
waste your time on
my posts?
> Some here do not care what you have to say, they will
> deny it, they will fight it, and hair spiting is their full time job,
it would seem.
>
Yes, I suggest you move on. Don't waste any more of your time on my
posts. You see? The
nature of this news group is that people of a variety of opinions and
beliefes can come
in here and post. This news group is not restricted to people who agree
with you.
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> Raymond.
>
> > john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I am going out on a limb here, but I would say that Jesus is
telling those
> > > standing around Him that the spirit inside of Him is God.
> >
> > So, are you here saying that He was not God before He was baptized
and the
> > Spirit descended upon Him?
> > This is dangerous ground. When the Archangel Gabriel came to Mary and
told her
> > she would give birth to God the Son, He didn't tell her that her baby
would
> > BECOME God the Son. He told her she would give birth to the Son of
God. "the
> > holy one to be born will be called The Son of God." Luke 1:35
> > He was born God.
> >
> > > What makes Him
> > > the same God is that while I can say I have the spirit of God
inside of me,
> > > He doesn't have my spirit inside of Him, nor do I possess the
totality of
> > > God inside of me, as Jesus did.
> > > The totality of Jesus was in the Father, as well as the totality of
the
> > > Father was in Jesus. How can two "persons" be inside each other,
if they
> > > are different?
> >
> > Again, you are trying to reason the nature of God. We don't find one
single
> > verse in the entire Bible that allows or invites us to reason God's
nature. Be
> > VERY careful with that.
> > john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >
> > > >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Apostolic Stupidity?
Date: 2000/04/16
Message-ID: <38F9E9D1.7709F056@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 611885038
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8bk17g$28q$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sdt21gbklul127
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sef4moos824107@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <seh4g0kleop37
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cao6i$iic$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sehsb3s2eop93
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <82pG4.60823$17.1333229@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sekcabmpeop47@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <selevak1rfg69@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sen018g6rfg161@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cg8dj$n9m$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sepl65farfg174@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8civ0m$mun$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38ef1b6e.13588757@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <serqc8jlrfg44
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sesanc8prfg60@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cm1c6$18d$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sev4jgmkcqv137@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8coc55$dnt$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sevfr9jlcqv141@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sevotl8lcqv15
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <skGI4.130221$Pa1.3451791@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 955902367 207.224.251.168 (Sun, 16 Apr 2000
11:26:07 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:26:07 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
> Since when does any Christian follow the example of the RCC pagans?
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> What is the attack the UPCI for, check out the nuns in the Roman
Catholic Church how
> many nuns wear pants?
> Than the Pope doesn't even wear pants, at least no one would know with
all the robes
> and such.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Apostolic Stupidity?
Date: 2000/04/16
Message-ID: <38F9EBC4.84745343@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 611887248
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8bk17g$28q$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sdt21gbklul127
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sef4moos824107@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <seh4g0kleop37
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cao6i$iic$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sehsb3s2eop93
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <82pG4.60823$17.1333229@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sekcabmpeop47@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <selevak1rfg69@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sen018g6rfg161@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cg8dj$n9m$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sepl65farfg174@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8civ0m$mun$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38ef1b6e.13588757@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8ckj0b$dkl$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sersfocerfg120@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8clj1p$hto$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sev1blddcqv130@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cpheb$4d7$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sf3n3u87cqv18@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8cuas2$i5m$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sf67ued0cqv104@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 955902861 207.224.251.168 (Sun, 16 Apr 2000
11:34:21 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:34:21 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
I think that we should move on. Obviously Joy isn't going to change. She
also
doesn't get it that there is no list of acceptable garments given in
scripture,
which lieaves it up to each culture to decide. She will never change past
the
garbage that's been pumped into her tiny brain, and we who think aren't
going to
get sucked into her mindless drivel.
Besides, clothing that "pertains" is no more im****tant these days than is
the
Adventist debate that, contrary to clear scripiture in Exodus and Acts,
and
Colossians, we don't still have to wor****p on Sabbath. Some of these
"churches"
are actually founded on minor dissensions. Otherwise too many wannabe's
who want
to preach and call themselves "ministers" and "pastors" would have no
flocks.
By the way, Joy, there ARE indeed cultures even today wherein men DO wear
skirts, and they do so proudly. The Scots wear skirts, which they call
"kilts".
And if I were a Scotsman in Scotland today, I'd probably be wearing the
garb of
my tribe as many do..It's a CULTURAL issue.
Let's move on to something relevant.
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/29
Message-ID: <390BA49B.991AFD62@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sge2jmoeqgc88
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39078EC6.346ABCE0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sgh083a1qtj138
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 957064278 63.225.165.229 (Sat, 29 Apr 2000
22:11:18 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 22:11:18 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Juggernaut wrote:
>
> Well, John 3:5 clearly says that baptism will bring us into the kingdom
of
> God, and thus we are reborn.
John 3:5 says unless a *man* is born of water (physical birth possibly,
or water
baptism perhaps) *and of the Spirit*, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.
This
verse says nothing about infants. It refers to a grown adult "man" (or
woman).
Contrary to your false contention above, the verse you refer to clearly
teaches
baptism of believers, not infants. And John 3:16 says we must believe to
be
re-born. An infant can't "believe", much less be reborn.
>
> As for infant baptism, baptisms were performed on entire households in
the
> New Testament, which most likely had small children. Also, Paul argues
in
> his epistles that baptism now replaces cir***cision as the sign of the
> covenant. So, since babies were cir***sised, so are babies baptized.
>
"...which most likely had small children..." is your assumption, not a
statement
in scripture. And while Paul argues that "baptism replaces cir***cision",
there
is no statement made that baptism takes place or should take place at
birth. And
while cir***cision may have been a symbol of the Abrahamic covenant, it
didn't
save anyone. It only indicated that the one being cir***cised/or the one
cir***cised, was a Jew or had been born to a Jewish household. Baptist of
believer was what was specified in the New Testament, as Jesus Himself
said in
Matthew 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved. He who does
not
believe will be condemned." The issue was not being baptized as an
infant. The
issue was to believe and to evidence that belief by being baptized.
However, I will not continue to debate this. You will believe whatever
the RCC
pagan religion tells you to believe, and you will not believe whatever
the RCC
pagan religion tells you to NOT believe!
>
> And you can't be a Catholic, unless you believe in God.
I undestand that. However, as I have alreasdy alluded, I have personally
talked
with numerous RCCs who would NEVER admit to being born again. When I
asked them
if they were born again, according to John 3:16, believeing on Jesus
Christ for
their salavtion, they all said they didn't hvae to be born again. They
were
Catholic! Jesus said, No one can get to heaven unless he is born again.
John
3:16 says you must believe to be born again. Infants can't believe.
>
>
> Now, I might ask you, what happens to little children if they die
before
> they believe in your religion?
>
The Bible teaches that before children reach the age at which they
understand
what salvation is all about, they are without sin. We doin't believe in
"original sin" as do Roman Catholics. Children who are innocent--those
who don't
yet understand right and wrong--aren't going to hell when they die. Read
King
David's comments on the death of his child born of adultery. King David
said,
"My son cannot come back to me! I will go to him!"
God had told King David that he would see his infant son again, in
Heaven!
>
> >
> > This is one of the many anti-scriptural, pagan heresies we call Roman
> > Catholicism.
> >
> > john weatherly
> > john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/29
Message-ID: <390BA55C.1ADD999D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 617374072
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sge2jmoeqgc88
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39078EC6.346ABCE0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Hw2O4.36584
$fV.2233706@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 957064468 63.225.165.229 (Sat, 29 Apr 2000
22:14:28 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 22:14:28 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Nowhere do we find any commandment for Christian parents to baptize
their infants.
john weatherly
Orthodox wrote:
> John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:39078EC6.346ABCE0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Baptizing infants doesn't count as "being born again", since Jesus
> specified
> > that we must "believe".
>
> The parents of the infant being baptized believe, and they are being
> obedient to the Word of God.
>
> Orthodox
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/29
Message-ID: <390BA62E.3617EB4E@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 617375120
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <omFN4.864$d73.14523
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39079856.93BEAB60@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Iw2O4.36585
$fV.2232588@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 957064679 63.225.165.229 (Sat, 29 Apr 2000
22:17:59 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 22:17:59 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Either you are a liar, orthodox, or you just don't know what you are
talking
about.
I have read in the RCC Encyclopedia, that Mary is considered the 4th
person of
the Trinity, since she was the Mother of God. The RCC Encyclopedia also
made it
clear that she was born of a virgin as well as Christ was. These
teachings
clearly represent Mary's deity whether you wish to accept the end result
of your
religion's teachings or not.
john weatherly
Orthodox wrote:
> John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:39079856.93BEAB60@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Wor****ping Mary as the Blessed Virgin, and Mother of God is also
pagan.
> Mary is
> > not God.
>
> Neither the Roman Catholics, nor the Orthodox, wor****p Mary. It is
possible
> that some of the Protestant cults do, however.
>
> And both Roman Catholics and the Orthodox know that Mary is not God.
It is
> possible that some of the Protestant cults think she is, however.
>
> Orthodox
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: OJ Simpson was innocent!
Date: 2000/04/29
Message-ID: <390B9E9F.3D687AA0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 617368315
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <sgdjlpclcdo136@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 957062743 63.225.165.229 (Sat, 29 Apr 2000
21:45:43 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 21:45:43 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.boston-church
I don't know what OJ has to do with the boston church, but in case you
hadn't heard, K2000, O.J. admitted he murdered Nicole awhile back. Since
he can't be retried under the American legal system, he let it slip
during an interview over a year ago. O J may not even realize that he
admitted murdering Nicole and Ron, but he did.
The re****ter was interviewing him, and he asked OJ why he didn't just
admit that he'd killed Nicole and Ron, now that he can't be prosecuted.
O.J said, "Well, I didn't kill her, and I'll never admit that I did, but
if I did, it was only because I loved her so much." In case you don't
follow the line of discussion, that statement constitutes an admission
of guilt.
Just thought you might appreciate that update, K2000. O J has publicly
admitted killing his ex-. I don't know if he even realizes that he
admitted it, but he admitted it.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> that's right, a jury of his peers found him not guilty
>
> old news?
>
> yeah
>
> but it's worth repeating
>
> k
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Thou shalt not thump your bible...
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <390798FB.3E89BBB@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 616157686
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8e77ll$fpj$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956799124 63.225.167.220 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
20:32:04 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:32:04 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.abortion,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.mtv-
sucks,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.baptist
Let me clue you, you immature, gutter mouth cretin!
In a few years, when Jesus comes back, you will care.
John 3:16
For God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son, so that
whoever
believes on Him should not perish but shall have eternal life."
I don't expect you to believe, but now, you've heard the Gospel, so I
will not
be blamed for not having told you.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sub One Genius wrote:
> "He said 'You're long gone, can't you tell?' and I said 'Mister, if I'm
> going, I'll see you in hell!" -Gene Simmons, 1992
>
> Bible thumpers have this tendency to tell me that I'm going to hell if
I
> don't repent my sins. Who are they to judge? I thought judgement day
was
> the second coming of Christ, not having some religious puke wanting to
shove
> his/her beliefs down my ****ing throat!!!
>
> Let me let you in on a little secret about these overly-religous bible
> thumping Christian assholes - They aren't the son of man, they aren't
> teaching the "REAL" word of the holy bible, and as far as what they
have to
> say - I'M NEVER GOING TO GIVE A ****!!
>
> Thank you and save your prayers!!
>
> Senator Sub One Genius
>
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> "There is always a certain meanness in the argument of conservatism,
> joined with a certain superiority of its fact."
> -- Ralph Waldo Emerson, lecture, December 9, 1841
>
> "The more people you have watching your back, the more you'll have
> to watch your own back" - Unknown Sicilian Professor, date n/a
>
> "Nowhere in the Bible is intelligence praised as a virtue."
> -Marilyn Manson from Rolling Stone, 1999
> #################################################
> Signed by: Senator Sub One Genius
> Check out my website: http://bleegen.home.sprynet.com/
and don't
> forget to SIGN MY GUESTBOOK
> Politics Page is located at
http://bleegen.home.sprynet.com/politics.htm
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Our Blessed Lady
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <390713D6.99FAC9DD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615952494
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <TtKK4.5891$xA.16251@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fb87cc.9437048
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fcf965.1542964@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <HGgL4.23295
$fV.1252314@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fdd954.5108739
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956765041 207.224.254.68 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
11:04:01 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 11:04:01 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian.east-
orthodox,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.bapti
st,alt.bible
Matthew 12:47 says that while Jesus was preaching one day, someone told
Him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to
you."
The Bible itself says Jesus had brothers. I believe elsewhere it says He
also had sisters.
The reason the RCC pagan religion wants to deify Mary (and rob Joseph of
his lawful wife) is that they consider *** evil, even within marriage.
The only thing RCC pagans believe makes *** in marriage okay is that it
produces children (more
little Catholics). So the RCC pagan religion has outlawed any *** that
doesn't allow for pro-creation. Forget pleasrure! This also means that,
once a man and his wife have found out that she's pregnant, even if she's
only a month pregnant,
any more *** before she's capable of being impregnated again is evil,
since the only valid reason within RCCism for *** is for procreation. If
you don't believe this one, ask your bishop!
But the Bible also makes it very clear that Mary and Joseph *did* have
intercourse, since it remarks that Joseph took Mary home to be his wife,
but had no union with her "until after she had given birth to Jesus".
Matthew 1:24-25
This passage *clearly* states that Joseph and Mary had marital relations.
Since there was no birth control in those days, we can assume that other
children would have been the natural result of Joseph and Mary having
intercourse, which
Matthew re****ts that they did, as husband and wife.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Townsend wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2000, "Orthodox" wrote:
>
> alias "orthodox" :
> >Modern-day "reformers" now even twist and deform the teachings of
*Luther*,
> >in their desperate attempt to get rid of the wrinkles in their man-
made dogma.
>
> Do you have any actual examples of these supposed "man-made dogmas" of
"modern-day
> reformers", or are you merely emitting warm smelly effluent ?
>
> alias "orthodox" :
> >Not only are many of today's various Protestant sects ignorant of the
writings
> >of the early Church fathers, they are also ignorant of the writings of
Luther.
>
> Even worse than that, many of today's various "orthodox" cults are
ignorant of the
> writings of the Reformers such as Hus, Wiclif, Luyher, Calvin, not to
mention the
> writings of John Owen, Arthur Pink, Thomas Dabney, Sibbes, Charnock,
Edwards etc.
>
> alias "orthodox" :
> >Today's Protestant realm (over 20,000 sects and still counting) has
truly become the >"Land of a million popes".
>
> Where did you dredge your figures from ? Wisden's "Cricket Almanac" ?
> The last time someone quoted "the number of protestant sects" it was
"34,000" and
> before that, it was "40,000". So it's good to know that the number is
reducing.
>
> Not that these figures mean much because they're mainly local
congregations just as
> there were local congregations in the first century AD; e.g. at Berea,
Philippi,
> Colossae, Corinth, Ephesus, Thessalonika, etc. Yet these local
churches were all
> included in Christ's one universal Church by virtue of their common
faith in Christ
> Jesus and they held to the one faith once delivered to tyhe people of
GOD. [ refer to
> Letter to Jude 3 ] On that basis, it doesn't matter if there are a
hundred million
> local congregations; but the more the better, because it proves that
Christ's great
> Commission and the Gospel of Christ have taken root as Christ requires.
>
> Get rid of the unBiblical and naive idea that Christ's one true Church
is a
> bureaucracy squatting in Rome or in Constantinople or in Moscow, and
that it's
> controlled by a caste of men play-acting as "e***enical patriarchs" or
"monsignors"
> or "cardinals" etc. all wearing women's long pretty dresses with big
hats, purple
> ****rts and brass crosses and waving "ikons". That's notging but a
heathenish
> make-believe "fancy-dress religion" out of the pages of paganism, and
has no
> nonnection with Christor with Christ's true Church, however much you
so-called
> "orthodoxists" like to pretend otherwise.
>
> alias "orthodox" :
> >Thank you for sharing your thought[less] post with us, johann.
>
> Johann :
> >As a Lutheran observer of the Orthodox Group, may I add that even
> >Luther himself assures us that Mary had but one child...Jesus.
>
> Luther never entirely rid himself of the deadly infection of "roman-
catholicism".
>
> Johann :
> >The "brothers" are sons of the older Joseph and hence Jesus must tell
> >his "brother" at the cross to take of Mary as his "mother," as Jewish
> >Law would not have required him to take care of her...she was not the
> >brother's mother, she was Christ's mother.
>
> The New Testament tells us that John the apostle was the son of
Zebedee; not the son
> of Joseph.
>
> Jesus deputed John the apostle [ "the beloved disciple" to care for
Mary in ther
> place of Jesus because Jesus was about to die, and though Jesus would
be raised from
> death, He would soon be ascending to GOD the Father.
>
> Johann :
> >Over the years in some non-Lutheran protestant circles the notion that
> >the "Bible teaches that Mary had more children" has been paraded
> >around, probably to diminish the role of the Virgin
>
> Once Jesus had been born, there was no need for Mary or for Joseph to
be celibate.
>
> ***ual intercourse between married people is not sinful despite the
opinions of
> repressed and psychologically-warped people to the contrary, but is
GOD's designated
> method by which His command of "Be fruitful and multiply" given by GOD
at creation is
> being fulfilled.
>
> Surely you don't think that your parents sinned or acted immorally or
promiscuously
> when they enjoyed loving GOD-designed ***ual intercourse with each
other and
> succeeded in conceiving you ?
>
> The Bible tells us that Mary and Joseph had ***ual intercourse with
each other after
> the birth of Jesus, just as husbands and wives have been doing ever
since Adam and
> Eve. There's nothing immoral or unusual in this.
>
> It's likely that the fable of Mary's imaginary "perpetual virginity"
was the
> invention of people with latent or actual homo***ual tendencies.
> Try to get used to the Biblical Fact that Hetero***uality is GOD's
specific approved
> design for humanity.
>
> Johann :
> >Luther maintains the ancient moniker of "Muttergottes" (Theotokos).
>
> Which proves that Luther was not infallible since the term "mother of
god" is absurd,
> since GOD is eternal and uncreated and thus cannot be "mothered".
> Mary was the mother of Jesus of Nazareth in h\His humanity,but not in
His eternal
> uncreated Deity.
>
> Johann :
> >One of the early E***enical Councils anathematized all who denied the
eternal
> >virginity of the Blessed Mother,
>
> Why should we care what these so-called "e***enical councils" say or
don't say ?
>
> "e***enical councils" have no authority in the sight of GOD.
> They're merely play-actors playing their "power-games".
>
> The so-called "council of Trent" anathematised the Biblical Truth of
Justification by
> Faith, which thus lays a curse upon Christ's apostle Paul, and a curse
upon Abraham,
> and a curse upon all of GOD's people, and and a curse upon Jesus
Christ, and and a
> curse upon GOD's Scriptures, and also a curse upon GOD Who teaches
Justification by
> Faith in His inspired infallible Scriptures.
>
> This proves that "councils" whether "e***enical" or otherwise, need not
and must not
> be taken seriously.
> What MUST always be taken seriously are GOD's inspired infallible
Scriptures.
>
> Johann :
> >and the Fathers of the Church have warned us that denigration of the
Virgin is none >other than rebuke and blasphemy of the Lord Himself.
>
> Mary was a virgin in physical terms only until the birth of Jesus when
her hymeneal
> membrane was irreversibly ruptured.
>
> In Principle, Mary ceased to be a virgin from the moment of her
miraculous
> impregnation by the Spirit of GOD.
>
> In terms of practical marital ***uality, Mary ceased to be a virgin
from the moment
> thather husband Joseph's erect male reproductive organ [ "*****" ]
penetrated Mary's
> vaginal and uterine cavities during Mary and Joseph's first act of
***ual intercourse
> together, which we are told in GOD's Scriptures, occurred after the
birth of the
> first of Mary's several children.
>
> Since there is not a shred of Biblical evidence or proof for the
pretentious fables
> of Mary's imagined "perpetual virginity", nor for a mythical
"immaculate conception"
> nor for an imagined "assumption", these man-made old wives' tales can
be ignored as
> superfluous, irrelevant and of no significance whatsoever.
>
> Johann :
> >Blessings at Pascha
>
> And may all of your hot cross buns have plenty of sultanas.
>
> Citation from the writings of Orthodox Saint Michael :
> >"For myself, I firmly believe all of GOD's inspired Scriptures because
of the absolute >Authority and the infinite Trustworthiness of GOD, Who
is the sovereign Divine Author >and Inspirer and thus the Owner of His
infallible Scriptures."
> >- Saint Michael Townsend, Believer in Christ Jesus by the Grace of GOD
!
>
> Michael Townsend
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: For David Grimes---
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <39070F18.1C8013A@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615944815
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <tknrfsgpararqsitgdj448m6di2ne599rm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956763828 207.224.254.68 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
10:43:48 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:43:48 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
"Ann Athema ---------- ©®" wrote:
> I see no reason why my reply to you should not be posted.
>
> At 02:38 00-04-19 -0400, you wrote:
> >Dear Ann A:
> > I am a Catholic and would like to correct a few things you wrote
in
> >your e-mail! Catholics kneel in front of statues and we do pray to
Mary
> >asking her to pray for us.
Ah Hah! You admit it! If you pray to Mary, you are saying you consider
her deity. See the passage in which the Angel Gabriel came to her and
announced that she would give birth to the Son of God. She acknowledged
the
announcement, and she called God her Savior! If she were without sin, she
wouldn't need a savior!
> I have seen many Protestants kneel in front of
> >their bible and pray...is that right???
While I have never seen a non-Catholic kneel in front of their Bible, it
would not be wrong. I see no commandment in the Bible that prohibits
Christians from praying near a Bible. But I do see a commandment in the
10 that
forbids Christians from having graven images (statues) of man, angel, or
beast. And I have never yet been to a Roman Catholic place of wor****p (I
won't call Catholic places of wor****p "churches") that didn't contain
several
statues (idols).
>
> Wrong.
> Anyone who DOES kneel in front of a Bible to pray is a false
> Christian, and is using the Bible as an idol.
Where do you get that? Not from the Bible! If so, please quote the verse.
Are you such a fool/so blind that you can't tell the differnce between
God's Word and a statue/Bible?
You are truly stupid, sir!
>
> We believe in intercessory prayer
> >as you do. Mary is the greatest intercessor and yes we ask her to
pray for us.
Please show me the verse that says we are to pray for Mary. The Bible
says there is one intercessor/mediator, Jesus Christ. So why are you
praying to anyone other than Jesus Christ? That is pagan, making Mary a
deity.
>
> Well, you should not be.
> NOWHERE does our Lord Jesus Christ approve, recommend or condone ANY
> prayer TO her.
> You are merely saying that Mary is an actual co-redemptrix, by
> claiming she in an intercessor. Jesus needs no intercessor, for JESUS
> IS the SOLE INTERCESSOR. He does not need help from anyone to
> intercede for Him on the behalf of anyone, for HE intercedes on our
> behalf to God, the Father.
>
> She is not dead, as some have written to me in the past. Look >in
> Revelation 12 and you will see her along with the Saints.
> No, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but she IS dead.
> She is as dead as any other human beings who have passed on, and their
> souls wing heavenward.. Her body still awaits the final resurrection,
> as do ALL Christian "saints" -- a term more correctly used to denote
> those who have died IN CHRIST.
Actually, the term "saint" does not refer to "those who have died in
Christ." This is an error some have fallen into in response to the RCC
pagan practice of "cannonizing" some who have died.
If you re-check the opening verses of each epistle, I believe you will
find that they are all addressed Acts calls them/us saints, 2 Corinthians
calls us saints, Ephesians calls us saints, and clarifies the word to
mean,
"believers" or "the faithful", Philippians calls us "saints", and I'll
stop there.
>
>
> >We honor Mary and the Saints and that takes nothing away from our love
and adoration of Christ.
We are all saints, so you should pray to me, then.
> There is a difference between *Adoration* (Christ alone) and
*veneration*(The Blessed Mother)
Please quote the verse that makes this distinction. Again, you quote the
RCC pagan religion, not the Bible. And I see nowhere that the Bible calls
Mary "the Blessed Mother", which again, is part of Maryiolatry.
>
> No, there isn't. The way that you revere her, and pray to her, plead
> to her, kneel before statues of her, etc-- this is idolatry.
> God forbids idolatry.
> You are praying to her, when you should be praying to God THROUGH
> JESUS CHRIST --- not Mary.
>
> > I take offense to you calling the Catholic faith a cult.
> Sorry if you do, but it bears ALL the typical earmarks of a cult.
> Until it can prove itself otherwise, I'm leaving it in the cult
> category.
>
Well, the above person may apologize to you for calling RCC paganism a
cult. I will call it pagan, and a cult, and I will not offer any apology.
>
> >I will not
> >stoop as low as that and call you *darling* or *dizzy broad* so >
please show my faith respect!!!
We will respect the person who is worth of such respect. You, who knew
the truth of non-Catholicism and left it for the paganism of Rome are not
worthy of any such respect. And your pagan religion isn't either.
>
> I can respect the person, yes-- but that's as far as it goes. I have
> no respect for a pagan following, no respect for idolatry, and
> certainly no respect for false teaching.
> I've been trying to keep from saying too much on this because I have a
> couple of relatives who joined it, but-- I will not stand by and allow
> Catholics to walk all over me either.
Good for you! Amen! Don't expect to get through to David. He is a true
pagan. But don't let him think he's right, either. Being RCC doesn't make
you automatically correct.
>
> Certain ones have been railing on to me about 'wrong', 'false', and
> 'unsaved' we supposedly are, I decided not to tolerate any more of it.
> As for the 'dearie' bit--- that's only mild-- one of your faith called
> me a 'fat, faithless old cow' because I don't swallow the teachings of
> the RCC. How's THAT for respecting MY faith then?
>
> > Prove your statement that indulgences are once again being
sold!!!
> >Where??? How did you obtain this information???
> I already gave the URL for checking it. I refuse to continue to repeat
> myself for the purposes of argument.
>
> > As for Grace alone being the means to salvation Catholic couldn't
agree
> >more. The Church has always taught that one is saved by Grace alone.
From
> >Grace comes faith and from that works.
Except you *do* continue to preach that the only church that can offer
salvation is the RCC pagan religion.
>
> Your church teaches a WORKS-BASED philosophy on salvation. That is
> wrong. We are not saved by works---
>
> James 2:24 is very clear as are
> >other passages I would share with you if you want.
> No thanks, I do know the Bible thank you. I also know that James 2:24
> is always being misread by you.
> That, too has been discussed previously, and I'll be darned if I'll
> waste more time reha****ng that either.
>
> On this we agree! We only 'agreed' on the salvation by grace through
> faith in Christ --- NOT in your works philosophy. The works are
> something we will willingly perform AS A RESULT of knowing our
> inclusion with Christ, of knowing our salvation is assured----- we do
> not perform works in order to BE saved...
>
Again, you don't preach salavtion by faith. You preach salvation by
believing in the RCC.
>
> >It is a blatant lie to accuse us of claiming works alone get one to
heaven...that
> >is not true!!! The Church doesn't teach that!!
> ---'Coulda fooled me-- a lot of us, in fact--- I've seen that claim
> far too many times.
Yep.
>
>
> > I take no offense to your statements about authority. Let me
give you some bible verses to substantiate our doctrine of infallibility.
And why do you continue to capitalize "Church", yet you continue to use a
small letter for "bible"? That, too is heresy. You put the church above
the Bible in authority, you pagan!
>
> Excuse me-- your 'infallibility doctrine' is NOT substantiated, and no
> matter how many of the Catholic version of Bible verses you hand me,
> that will still not make me believe that.
>
> >First, our priests are just as infallible as you or I.
> You are saying 'infallible' ---- I trust you mean FALLIBLE --- no
> person,. whether ordinary Joe-blow, doctor, nurse, cobbler, tinker,
> teacher, Indian Chief, baker, candlestick-maker, priest or pope is
> 'infallible'.
You consider your pope infallible. Isn't he a priest? What you believe is
that once he has been a RCC long enough, he eventually studies enough and
does enough good works to become infallible. You deify him! What a crock!
By the way, what's a good pagan Roman Catholic like you doing in a non-
Catholic news group like Christian Baptist? Just curious why you waste
your time when you could be out dragging innocent children in to
proselytize?
>
>
> The bible is very clear in
> >Matthew 16:19....."I will give you the keys to the kingdom of >
heaven.Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; >and whatever
you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Those are the words of
Christ, Ann
> >A!!!
> Yes, yes, I know-- like I said, I know my Bible, thank you.
> But as usual for your group, you are misreading it.
Yep. He spoke them to the apostles, not just to Peter. He didn't take
Peter aside and say this. He was talking to the apostles, and He asked
them several questions. You have to read the context here. One of the
apostles,
when asked, "Who do men say that I am?" answered "one of the prophets."
When Peter was asked, he said, "You are the Christ..." Jesus' remark,
which RCC pagans love to quote, meant that the church would be founded on
the
belief/understanding that Christ is God in flesh.
For proof of that interpretation, see Paul's quote that Christ Himself is
the cornerstone of His church, not Peter, not Paul, and not Mary. By the
way, why you wor****p Mary when she like any woman had other kids after
Jesus
is beyond me. Oh, that's right! You believe God stole Joseph's wife! You
believe that God committed spiritual adultery!
>
>
> If Peter and successive Popes bound something here on earth we have
> >Christ's promise that it would be bound in heaven.
> No--- Peter was not the first 'pope' and even if he had been, 'poe' is
> a merely man-made false title.
Please show us the title "pope" in the Bible.
>
> The first pope, according to history, was Cirrissius -- this was ALSO
> posted before, several weeks ago. Did you not read that either? As
> well, nowhere in the Bible is the term 'pope' mentioned, let alone
> even condoned or endorsed.
>
> >Now, I know all the Baptist arguments
> ---how singularly exciting for you---
>
> but they don't equal the words of Christ himself.
> Neither does the false teaching of the RCC. It leads AWAY from
> Christ-- not TO Him.
>
> >I take Christ at his word...don't you???
> Yes, indeed I DO take Christ at His word. That's why I so strongly
> fight against false teaching.
>
> >Christ again makes it very clear in
> >Matthew 18:18 so please read it carefully.
> Do not propose to instruct me as to HOW to read the Bible. I've read
> it in its entirety several times over, and continue to re-reead it on
> a daily basis, discerning from it as the Lord leads.
>
> When the Popes have used the
> >authority to bind and loose it came from Christ.
> No, you're mistaken. Christ did not even MENTION popes. Your pope is a
> man-mad false authority. He is not Christ's equal on earth. They are
> teaching you falsely that he is.
Jesus was talking to 12 apostles when He spoke those words, not just to
Peter. Matthew 16:18
Again, explain Ephesians 2:20. Where Paul says Jesus Himself is the
cornerstone, not Peter!
>
>
> > To address your statement concerning Pastors. Pastors, of >
course have no authority, because they are not in communion with Christ's
Church....the Catholic Church.
>
Yawn!
>
> Your stupid comment above does not even WARRANT any further
> discussion. You are lying. You've obviously been so fed with the RCC
> false teachings that you actually believe your pope has supernatural
> authority. I pity you.
> I pray that soon, before it is too late, your eyes will be opened.
> You claim that your 'popes' (with their horrendous bloodthirsty
> history of deceit, lies, greed, torture, imprisonment, murder, etc---
> to get ole ones out of the way to make room for the new) have special
> authority from Christ, which an outright LIE.
> You claim that our Pastors have 'no authority because they are not in
> communion with your church' -- that, too is a boldfaced LIE.
Actually, David is not the liar. David is the brainwashed. His sin was/is
allowing the brainwa****ng when the Bible itself is so clear. We can (as
the RCC pagan hierarchy do) explain scripture away, or we can read it and
accept it in black and white. David isn't capable anymore of
reading/understanding for himself. The demons which permeate the RCC
pagan religion are powerful demons indeed.
>
> We have nothing in communion with your 'church' because your religion
> is just that -- 'religion' -- a set of manmade rules... it's not
> Christianity in its doctrines and practices.
> As well, we NEVER would be so bold as to make false claims about
> imaginary 'authority' like you do.
>
> Your church wasn't even in existence until the 16th
> >century
>
Funny! I see 7 churches before the Bible was even finished. So how does
David claim that there was no church before the 3rd century? He is
absurd, as are most Roman Catholics. I have known a few/precious few
Roman Catholics
who became born again, according to John 3. But most excuse their
disobedience by calling themselves Roman Catholic. Let David explain his
open defiance of Scripture when he sees Jesus face to face.
We pray for you, David, that the God of the Bible (Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit) will reveal Himself to you in truth before it's too late.
In Christ,
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Friends are God's way of taking care of us."
> Please help sup****t the hungry: go to
> http://www.thehungersite.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: For David Grimes---
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <39071014.6F5FAB98@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615946276
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <tknrfsgpararqsitgdj448m6di2ne599rm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <APlL4.23563
$fV.1273511@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956764075 207.224.254.68 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
10:47:55 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:47:55 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
kneeling in prayer itself doesn't constitute praying to an idol; it's
praying
to an idol when you are kneeling in front of an idol (statue of a
person/beast), which was the point of the remark.
Orthodox wrote:
> Ann Athema ---------- ©® <persniff...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote
> in message news:tknrfsgpararqsitgdj448m6di2ne599rm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I see no reason why my reply to you should not be posted.
> >
> > At 02:38 00-04-19 -0400, you wrote:
> > >Dear Ann A:
> > > I am a Catholic and would like to correct a few things you
wrote in
> > >your e-mail! Catholics kneel in front of statues and we do pray to
Mary
> > >asking her to pray for us. I have seen many Protestants kneel in
front
> of
> > >their bible and pray...is that right???
> > Wrong.
> > Anyone who DOES kneel in front of a Bible to pray is a false
> > Christian, and is using the Bible as an idol.
>
> What is it with you Protestants? Since when does kneeling in prayer
> constitute "praying to an idol" ??? Your claims just keep getting
weirder
> and weirder, as you continue to spout your man-made "Reformation"
dogma.
>
> Orthodox
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <39078EC6.346ABCE0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 616145924
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sge2jmoeqgc88
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956796513 63.225.167.220 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
19:48:33 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 19:48:33 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Juggernaut, your reponse to my question that I posed to David, "Are you
born
again?" re: John 3:3, "All baptized Catholics are born again," is once
again,
absurd, heretical, pagan, and anti-scriptural to anyone who has read the
entire Bible. Look at John 3:16. Infants who are baptized within a week
or two
of their birth can't "believe" as Jesus said was required in John 3:16.
You RC
pagans call Baptists heretics and lunatics, yet we shove John 3:16 under
your
noses, and you are left with egg on your faces. John 3:16 says clearly
that
"...whosoever believes on Him (Christ) shall not perish, but shall have
eternal life."
Baptizing infants doesn't count as "being born again", since Jesus
specified
that we must "believe". I know/have known too many Roman Catholics in my
52
years who were little demons, and yet they insisted that they were
totally
okay, in spite of the fact that they didn't believe in God or Jesus, and
never
went to church. Why were they "okay"? They were okay, they explained,
because
they had been "baptized" (acccoring to what their RCC pagan parents had
told
them) just after they were born. I must ask, how can a Roman Catholic who
doesn't even believe in God, or remotely attempt to practice the
commandments
found in the New Testament, be "born from above". The Roman Catholic has
nothing to say about being "baptized" when he/she is an infant.
This is one of the many anti-scriptural, pagan heresies we call Roman
Catholicism.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > David!
> >
> > You claim to have a corner on the Bible and truth.
> > But you never answered my question which I put to you in e-mail,
> > Are you born again?
> > Jesus Himself said that we must be born again to enter God's Kingdom.
> >
> > "No one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again."
> > John 3:3
> >
> > Are you born again? I'd love to read your explanation of why Roman
> > Catholics are not required to be born again. Everyone else is.
>
> All baptised Catholics are born again (or "born from above" as the text
is
> also translated). This happens as is explained in John 3:5, that we
are
> born again by water and the Spirit, which is baptism.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <39079856.93BEAB60@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 616156711
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <omFN4.864$d73.14523
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956798963 63.225.167.220 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
20:29:23 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:29:23 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Wor****ping Mary as the Blessed Virgin, and Mother of God is also pagan.
Mary is
not God. Mary needed a savior just like you and me. And why do you insist
that
she is/was a virgin her entire life when the Bible also clearly says that
1. she
and Joseph were married, 2. they had *** after Jesus was born, 3. she had
other
children after she gave birth to Jesus.
Would your religion have God commit adultery? If Mary was promised to
Joseph in
marriage (marriage includes ***), but after she gave birth to Jesus, she
and
Joseph didn't ever have ***, then God stole Joseph's wife! That is
adultery,
punishable in their culture by stoning God to death. heresy you say? No
more
heretical than the RCC pagan religion saying that she was a virgin until
she
died, and then eleveting her to deity. And please point out in the Bible
where
it says that Mary was born of a virgin? The pagan dogma of the
"Immaculate
Conception" states that Mary was also born of a virgin. Where does the
Bible say
that?
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Achirami wrote:
> John Weatherly wrote in message <390707AE.5733A...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>...
> >David!
> >
> >You claim to have a corner on the Bible and truth.
> >But you never answered my question which I put to you in e-mail,
> >Are you born again?
> >Jesus Himself said that we must be born again to enter God's Kingdom.
> >
> >"No one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again."
> >John 3:3
> >
> >Are you born again? I'd love to read your explanation of why Roman
> >Catholics are not required to be born again. Everyone else is.
>
> No one pretends to have a corner on the Bible. You can have the four of
> them. There is no truth in you, just wind and it smells.
> Because Catholics and Orthodox are born again since Baptism at an early
age,
that defies Jesus' own words, in John 3:16, that "whosoever believes in
Him
shall have eternal life."
>
> only those who get lost on their way need be born again.
Again, Jesus said in John 3:3 that no one can get into the Kingdom w/o
being
born again. You re-write and ignore scripture at every turn.
> Probably your case.
> And then they become fanatics, just like you. Your holy sprout can only
be
> psychosis automation.
So adhering to the Bible rather than RCC pagan dogma is psychosis? If
that's
true, then thank you!
>
>
> >
> >And you justify Catholics kneeling before statues by the flimsy excuse
> >"Well, Protestants kneel before their Bibles and pray. Isn't that
> >wor****pping idols?"
>
What does your family experience have to do with Divine Revelation? You
have
chagned the subject, and you are soo spiritually blind/numb that you
don't even
realize it!
>
> When i was very young, my mother was my idol. When she died, i adopted
the
> Holy Virgin Mary, Christ Jesus' Mother. Then it got confused. When i
was
> speaking to Mary, asking Mary to pray for me, in my mind, She looked
exactly
> like my own mother. My mother's name was also Mary.
>
> Catholics and Orthodox do ask Mary to pray for them, they don't wor****p
The
> Mother of God, they venerate Her because She was the Mother of Christ
Jesus
> Who was the son of our Mother the Church, our Brother.
Prayer is an act of wor****p. The Bible states very clearly that only God
has the
power to answer prayer.
>
>
> My three year old grand daughter loves me as if i was her idol. I don't
> mind, because she is also my idol. My wife is another of my idols and i
have
> as many idols as i have children, in-laws and grand children. One
hockey
> player is my idol. Don Drysdale, (the Chief), a right handed baseball
> pitcher was another of my idols.
>
Again, you are mixing apples and oranges. I was discussing Idols in
church. You
are now talking about baseball.
>
> For Catholics and Orthodox, the Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of Christ
Jesus,
> and by consequence Mother of God, because Christ was the Son of God,
The
> Holy Virgin Mary is for her sons and daughters in Christ, a sort of
idol. I
> will not argue you on that point. Catholics and Orthodox venerate Her
for
> what She was and is, the Holy Mother of Christ Jesus, our Brother. God
is
> not the God of the dead but of the livings.
The Bible says quite clearly that after Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph
had ***.
See Matthew 1:24-25
This account begins with (Joseph awaking from his vision with the angel
who
announced the impregnation of Mary by the Holy Spirit),
"When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him
and
took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave
birth to
a son (Jesus)."
Key words: "...he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave
birth to
a son..."
Elsewher in the Gospels, we are told Mary and Joseph had other children.
You are wor****ping Mary. She was not a virgin, she was Joseph's wife.
Your views
that Mary is The Blessed Virgin is pagan. You have diefied her. And she
was a
sinner just like you and me.
>
> >
> >The Bible isn't an idol. And nowhere in the Bible does God prohibit
> >using a Bible while praying.
> >But the 10 Commandments are VERY specific in prohibiting statues
(graven
> >images) either of man or beast in church.
> >"You shall not make for yourself an idol *in the form of anything in
> >heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." I dare
> >say, Mary and the 'saints" qualify to be "anything in heaven above or
on
> >the earth..."
>
> Who said the Bible was an idol.
IF you had followed the thread, David Grimes first alluded to the notion
that he
had "seen many Protestants kneeling before a Bible in prayer" and
compared that
to Catholics kneeling at a statue in church and praying.
> The Bible is a book. Not a historical book,
> but a book just the same.
Actually, parts of the Bible are the only histories we have of certain
peoples,
such as the Jews, the Cannanites, etc.
> A religious Holy Book. If you venerate your Bible,
> Catholics and Orthodox will respect your veneration.
That is appropriate. The Bible teaches us to venerate (not wor****p) the
Bible,
because it's God's word.
However, that does not compare to the RCC pagan wor****p of Mary and
"saints".
All born again beleivers are saints, anyway, according to the epistles.
So there
is no reason to wor****p "saints".
>
>
> The Jewish Thora is not applicable to Christians unless Christians
decide
> otherwise. So, don't throw the Thora at Catholics or Orthodox, for we
will
> throw the Kur'an at you and you won't like it. You know little about
the
> Holy Scripture, so read it and keep it to yourself. You citation from
the
> Jewish Thora is evidence that you don't know whether you are coming or
going
> in Scriptures.
You don't need to tell me how to wor****p. And don't bother to "throw the
Koran"
at me. Every thing you type here indicates you have no clue what you are
talking
about. You are merely parroting the Catechism with which you have been
brainwashed. I notice you don't quote the Bible very much. I also don't
agree
with your rip about "reading the Bible and keeping it to myself..." The
whole
point of being a Christian is to spread the Good News of Jesus, not keep
it to
myself. If you want anyone to shut up, I suggest You shut up.
>
> >
> >Since the RCC pagan religion breaks the laws of God openly, it's
> >obviously okay with you and other Roman Catholics because they're RCC
> >pagans. You are a hypocrite! And the truth of God is not in you!
> >
> Which Law of God? Catholics and Orthodox are not Jews. Catholics and
> Orthodox are supposed to abide by Jesus' Teachings, nothing else. Most
> interpret the NT as it should be while Fundamentalists sing the NT
instead
> of reading it and properly interpret it. You are making a mess of the
NT
> Scriptures you pretend to defend.
We are not to interpret when the meaning is clear. And When I say you
break the
laws of God openly, I am speaking about the 10 commandments, which tell
us 1.
"have no other gods (Mary) before me" 2 and no "graven images" (statues
of Mary
and "saints" which you have in your buildings). If you are goign to
respond to
my post, you could at least keep up with the thread.
And I don't "interpret" the New Tesatment. I am quoting it as I type. You
vaguely refer to yoru knowledge, but I don't see you quoting.
>
>
> >We are not to pray to Mary because the Bible quotes Jesus as saying
that
> >there is ONE MEDIATOR/INTERCESSOR between God and man, and that ONE
> >MEDIATOR/INTERCESSOR is Jesus, not Mary and not any "Saint".. Yet you
> >openly admit that you and other Catholics pray to Mary and the
"saints"
> >(every believer in Jesus Christ is a "saint" by the way) to
"intercede"
> >for you.
>
> As i mentioned before, Catholics and Orthodox do not wor****p Mary, they
> Venerate the Mother of Christ Jesus, God's Mother.
Show me one verse in the Bible that calls her "God's Mother". You are
wor****pping her. And she isn't God or a god.
> The One and only. They
> even compliment Her by a prayer called the Ave Maria. I still remember
a few
> words of that prayer which in fact is not a prayer but a Magnificat.
"Hail
> Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with Thee, blessed are thou amongs
women
> and blessed is the Fruit of thy womb, Jesus..." What do you have to say
> against that? Isn't that the kind of compliment you would address to
the
> mother of your own children? Jesus was for Christians the Child by
> excellence. Isn't his Mother the Mother by excellence. Like Mother like
Son.
> What can i say?
Why are you paying her any homage at all? I would certainly compliment my
mother, but I would not make my compliments a matter of worshp in church,
or a
matter of faith. You are so brainwashed you can't see straight, and you
wonder
why we call you pagans. If it isn't in the Bible, it isn't Christian
doctrine.
You guys make it up as you go.
>
>
> >
> >When you "cannonize" "Saints", you turn them into gods who you
consider
> >worthy of being prayed to "to intercede for us." That is heresy! Men
can
> >not make people into gods.
>
> I pray St. Christopher to see me through with this difficult post
because i
> am about to burst into laughing, at you that is. LOL.
See? There you go again, praying to a man. St. Christopher isn't a god,
so why
do you pray to him? The only person who has the power to intercede is
Jesus/Christ/Son of God.
>
> >
> >Every time I ask a Roman Catholic why they would need Mary or a Saint
to
> >pray for them, I hear, "Well, I figure some of my sins are so bad that
> >Jesus wouldn't listen." That is heresy. If Jesus loved you enough to
die
> >in your place, your lusting after your neighbor's wife, or even your
> >screwing your neighbor's wife when her husband isn't home, isn't going
> >to put you on Jesus' "brown list". Remember when the Jews brought to
> >Jesus the woman who had been caught in the very act of adultery? She
had
> >been caught having intercourse with a man whom she wasn't married to.
>
> I think you have a Catholic complex and it shows. Take a cold shower.
> You know little about Jewish habits at the time of Jesus. It was
permitted
> for a prostitute to have ***ual relations with unmarried Jewish men but
not
> Jewish married men.
You still have no concept of the New Testament standing alone without a
whole
lot of RCC pagan crap included. When you make these pronouncements about
your
faith in RCC paganism, I see no scripture references whatever. I shall
not
respond to any more fo your posts. I just have to wonder why you are in a
Baptist news group. ????? YOu are a waste of time.
>
>
> Women were not to prostitute for money. Knowing Jews, money was no
problem.
> You can trust the word of a Jew. He signs contracts only with gentiles,
not
> with his fellowmen. They didn't have to pay off gentile prostitutes
they
> owned them.
>
> They wouldn't have called a gentile woman a prostitute, simply a whore
or
> another woman. Oh, but a Jewish woman of little virtue was a bad, bad
woman.
> A prostitute for sure. A Jewish woman had to be kosher. No one gave a
darn
> about Gentile women prostitutes, the Jewish law, for the most, did not
apply
> to them.
>
> In
> >Christ's day, that offense was punishable by death. Jesus was totally
> >within His rights to demand that she be stoned immediatley. He didn't!
> >He released her!
>
> I would like to know how many Jewish woman prostitutes were stoned. You
kill
> one and she is replaced by two. Jews were no smarter nor more prude
than
> most. You under estimate the virility of Jews. They have their little
idols
> too. One being the Golden Calf, but you don't see that one. Let me tell
you
> this, they did not leave that little Golden Calf in the desert. It was
made
> from jewels of gold and silver and it is still around, alive and
kicking.
> Most Christians also have thier little Golden calf. If you don't, give
me
> all of your possessions. Oh no hein! Shows how hypocrite you are
accusing
> others of idolatry.
>
> >
> >Can you sin so terribly that you must pray to Mary? Never!
> >
> >And when you pray to Mary, you make her into a god. She is not a god.
> >She is not part of the Trinity, above the Son in authority. That is
> >heresy, and it is pagan.
>
> Catholics and Orthodox are sinners. Simon, the Master fisherman was a
> sinner. We are all sinners. Only Reformists, Fundamentalists and born
again
> Christians do not sin.
I never said I don't sin. You are so twisted you must attack me.
I will not waste any more of my time with you. I will pray that before
you die,
you become exposed to the Truth. You are far from it at this time.
> Catholics and Orthodox are aware of that for they
> read from your Word of God. "Forgive them for they know not".
> >
> >And you, who give the RCC pagan religion every excuse in the world for
> >openly breaking God's laws, are a hypocrite!
>
> Ask your holy sprout and she will say the same thing. Socrates also had
his
> good little demon and Socrates has been dead for quite sometime. Wonder
> where his inspiring little demon went? Where will yours go?
"holy sprout?" What the heck are you talking about? Never mind! You are a
waste
of time.
>
> >
> >Any child can tell you the difference between a Bible and a statue! If
> >you can't tell the difference, you have no brain.
>
> You know something, you can wipe your ass with your Bible if you want
to.
> That is none of our business. Mind your own business, you are not God.
> Follow Jesus' Teachings and quit babbling.
Screw you and your insults. And I am being polite for where I am. I am
not
telling anyone I am superior. I am a sinner saevd by grace. But you
claimed
above that you aren't even a sinner. You said you didn't need to be born
again
becuase you were never lost. If you were never lost, why do you now claim
that
you're a sinner? You can't have it both ways. Which is why I say you
spout with
no idea of waht you are talking about. Which makes you a good Roman
Catholic.
You believe what you are told to believe, with no thought of what it
means and
that one half of what you say contradicts the other half. Are you a
sinner? Or
are you perfect, and not ni need of being born again, like you started
this post
saying?
> We will do the same. Why do you
> think i chose to answer your dribbles? Because you need help. Your
Catholic
> complex is hurting you and i don't like to see a person suffer. I just
want
> to help you organize your life and live your religious life the way you
> wish. The Catholic-Orthodox Church is not imposing anything on you.
What
> really is your problem? An obsession?
I didn't wriet to you. I wrote to David Grimes after I blocked his
ridiculous
e-mails. You chose to write this post to me. I responded. I won't again.
You
have nothing to say.
>
> >
> >But there you go, again and again, blindly defending the Roman
Catholic
> >pagan religion, while you also blindy comdemn born again Christians
who
> >aren't Catholic.
>
> You must be crazy. Do you think that Christ's Church needs defenders?
Those
> who defend the Church do it on their own, they do not really defend
Her,
> they are trying to educate the lost ones.
And you are carzy if you believe that the RCC pagan religion is "Christ's
Church". The church was started by Christ in the 1st Century. The RCC
pagan
religion didn't rear its ugly head until the 3rd century.
>
> >
> >I rebuke you in the name of Jesus!
>
> This is like a midget insulting a giant. What will the giant do? Give
the
> midget a candy or a cigarette. Your rebuke is insignificant not worth a
two
> cent candy.
> >
> John, do us all a favor, get real drunk or sniff ammonia or something.
Blow it out your ear! But then, a demon such as yourself doesn't have
ears.
And I will stop wasting my time on you now.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> How did you like my uppercuts? Well, to a stupid post a stupid answer.
You
> get what you SOW.
>
> What a confused world these NGs. Enough to become a complete Atheist.
> Christians? What's that. Many fakers, that's for sure.
>
> >john weatherly
> >john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
From: t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(New PF)
Subject: Re: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/30
Message-ID: <time-3004002248140001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 617477385
References: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sge2jmoeqgc88
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39078EC6.346ABCE0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sgh083a1qtj138
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390BA49B.991AFD62@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nina.pacific.net.au 957098890 13225 210.23.146.161 (30 Apr 2000
12:48:10 GMT)
Organization: Pacific Internet (Australia)
NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Apr 2000 12:48:10 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
In article <390BA49B.991AF...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, John Weatherly
<john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Now, I might ask you, what happens to little children if they die
before
> > they believe in your religion?
> >
>
> The Bible teaches that before children reach the age at which they
understand
> what salvation is all about, they are without sin.
Well that certainly goes for a lot of us
I certainly can't make head or tail of it
Have I got it right
1. god creates the world
2. Everyone sins because it is more fun than being righteous
3. God gets cross
4. Destroys everyone except Noah the "Arkfull Dodger" of Genesis and his
boatful
INTERLUDE
increase and multiply - start again - dry out - nice rainbow - off to
Egypt, bad move, descendents end up as slaves and god gets Moses to resue
them
INTERLUDE
5. Everything goes bung with sin again
6. This time god has a bright idea:
Problem - wages of sin is death -
lots of sin and the powers charging the ransom has to be paid.
Bible does not say who to but intimates existence of "other powers" in
Pauls writings. These "powers" are clearly stronger than god or he is in
hock to them for some reason.
Solution - Send son to be executed - Virgin birth(keep *** out of this) -
born in stable - Baptised by John the B. and starts ministry
7.Romans get real P.O with him and some of the Jewish authorities don't
like him
8.Crucified by Romans for sedition but this is a con by God - the Romans
are really being used by God to kill Jesus so he can pay the ransom for
sin (to the other powers aforementioned)
9. Jesus dies in agony
10 Three days later resurrects
11 now if you really believe numbers one to ten then you are saved
12. Im****tant Question is believing enough or do you have to live a nice
life and do what Jesus taught? - there is disagreement on this. Most
Americans seem to think lowering personal taxes is enough - some think
you
should make lots of soup too.
But I think you should do more - this is an impartial view - I'm not a
Christian in terms of these people.
Hope this helps some of you to go from the child level where your
ignorance and lack of understanding of salvation theology could get you
to
heaven to the conscious stage where they can send you to Hell.
Personally I am darned if I can get Salvation Theology to work so I guess
I'll have to put up with Heaven and all those kids
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: To: David Grimes, A Roman Catholic and Heretic
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <390707AE.5733ADF5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615933340
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956761927 207.224.254.68 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
10:12:07 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:12:07 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
David!
You claim to have a corner on the Bible and truth.
But you never answered my question which I put to you in e-mail,
Are you born again?
Jesus Himself said that we must be born again to enter God's Kingdom.
"No one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again."
John 3:3
Are you born again? I'd love to read your explanation of why Roman
Catholics are not required to be born again. Everyone else is.
And you justify Catholics kneeling before statues by the flimsy excuse
"Well, Protestants kneel before their Bibles and pray. Isn't that
wor****pping idols?"
The Bible isn't an idol. And nowhere in the Bible does God prohibit
using a Bible while praying.
But the 10 Commandments are VERY specific in prohibiting statues (graven
images) either of man or beast in church.
"You shall not make for yourself an idol *in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." I dare
say, Mary and the 'saints" qualify to be "anything in heaven above or on
the earth..."
Since the RCC pagan religion breaks the laws of God openly, it's
obviously okay with you and other Roman Catholics because they're RCC
pagans. You are a hypocrite! And the truth of God is not in you!
We are not to pray to Mary because the Bible quotes Jesus as saying that
there is ONE MEDIATOR/INTERCESSOR between God and man, and that ONE
MEDIATOR/INTERCESSOR is Jesus, not Mary and not any "Saint".. Yet you
openly admit that you and other Catholics pray to Mary and the "saints"
(every believer in Jesus Christ is a "saint" by the way) to "intercede"
for you.
When you "cannonize" "Saints", you turn them into gods who you consider
worthy of being prayed to "to intercede for us." That is heresy! Men can
not make people into gods.
Every time I ask a Roman Catholic why they would need Mary or a Saint to
pray for them, I hear, "Well, I figure some of my sins are so bad that
Jesus wouldn't listen." That is heresy. If Jesus loved you enough to die
in your place, your lusting after your neighbor's wife, or even your
screwing your neighbor's wife when her husband isn't home, isn't going
to put you on Jesus' "brown list". Remember when the Jews brought to
Jesus the woman who had been caught in the very act of adultery? She had
been caught having intercourse with a man whom she wasn't married to. In
Christ's day, that offense was punishable by death. Jesus was totally
within His rights to demand that she be stoned immediatley. He didn't!
He released her!
Can you sin so terribly that you must pray to Mary? Never!
And when you pray to Mary, you make her into a god. She is not a god.
She is not part of the Trinity, above the Son in authority. That is
heresy, and it is pagan.
And you, who give the RCC pagan religion every excuse in the world for
openly breaking God's laws, are a hypocrite!
Any child can tell you the difference between a Bible and a statue! If
you can't tell the difference, you have no brain.
But there you go, again and again, blindly defending the Roman Catholic
pagan religion, while you also blindy comdemn born again Christians who
aren't Catholic.
I rebuke you in the name of Jesus!
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: What historical evidence validates the resurrection of
Christ?
Date: 2000/04/26
Message-ID: <390715F8.92DDEE61@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615955802
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <39042896.122200077@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <2VwM4.3801
$Hc7.113666@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FreeSpeech-2304002058170001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956765584 207.224.254.68 (Wed, 26 Apr 2000
11:13:04 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 11:13:04 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Right, pferd!
So why believe and go to Heaven, when you can *not* believe, and go to
Hell?
Makes sense to me!
And, besides, believing is such a crock! I mean who wants rewards, both
in this life and in the life to come? I mean, Christians are happy, we
are fulfilled, we get gifts, we enjoy *** without guilt, we have
children and enjoy them totally, we are law-abiding citizens, we gon't
tattoo ourselves from head to foot, we don't get our noses and lips and
eyes pierced, as do the Satan worshppers! We Christians are such a drag!
Why have faith when you can have *no* faith? Why believe in God when you
can believe in..... nothing...
Praise God!
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> In article <2VwM4.3801$Hc7.113...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, "Kurt L."
> <ibkurtis[no spam]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > BY FAITH THROUGH GRACE...
> > Exchangedlife <nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:39042896.122200077@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > What historical evidence validates the resurrection of Christ?
>
> Regretably none at all.
>
> But there are an awful lot of perfectly rational explanations of the
> events recorded in the Gospels
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: The Struggle With Masturbation
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064A97.8C511C43@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615717871
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <17XM4.2146$eI5.388816@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <yI_M4.2890$oj.27810
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956713557 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:45:57 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:45:57 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
To follow up on Jennifer's POV, first of all, I have to wonder, among
adults,
why she is "uncomfortable with the subject"? However, I would take her
advice a
step further. Don't just "decide" whether M is a sin or not. Educate
yourself
about what the Bible says about it (nothing) and what other Christian
writers
say about it. There are those who oppose it ,and those who favor it for
we
un-married. And, contrary to Jennifer's POV that perhaps you should "just
get
married", that is not the easiest thing to do. I myself am not presently
qualified to even seek a wife, for personal reasons I need not divulge
(no, I am
not homo***ual). My issues have more to do with money (lack of it) and
other
things I will not go into here.
However, one thing I have heard from multiple pastors (theologians/Bible
scholars with Dr. in front of their names) is that where God is silent,
it's
because He's leaving it up to us.
Hope this helps.
john weaterly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usher wrote:
> "RHW5000" <kandy5...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:17XM4.2146$eI5.388816@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > I have struggled with controlling my urge to masturbate for
10
> > years, but I'm still trying to discipline myself to overcome it.
With
> Gods
> > help and through devoted prayer, He will one day take this temptation
out
> of
> > my body.
> > I wonder, though, why the Bible stays so slient it. Do you
> think
> > perhaps that it implies masturbation as an alternative to fornication
> since
> > the later is explicited forbidden.
> >
> > Any Help would be wonderful.
>
> I am hesitant to respond to such a message. Not a subject I am
particularly
> comfortable with. First, you have to settle for yourself the question,
is
> it sin? If you think it is sin, then it is sin for you, whether God
would
> otherwise see it that way, or not. That is, if you believe you are
sinning,
> you are sinning. But, one can make something a sin, which is not. Is
this
> a sin? I don't know. Paul did say, "It is better to marry than to
burn."
> Perhaps you should be seeking a wife. But, as I said, first ask
yourself if
> this is sin, and then, based on that, seek God's help. Don't let the
Devil
> make you feel guilty about something that is not wrong.
>
> --
> Jennifer Usher
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: The Struggle With Masturbation
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064B76.1D9907B8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615718861
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <17XM4.2146$eI5.388816@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FY2N4.695$r21.31881
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956713779 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:49:39 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:49:39 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Excellent response, Vernon.
However, I must disagree in part. Our human frailties and insecurities
often
get in the way of our reason. Don't jump to blame human frailities on the
Devil
every time. I am not saying he will not use anything he can get his slimy
hands
on to neutralize us. I *am* saying that there are many things we do to
ourselves with no help from the Evil one.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
O wrote:
> RHW5000 <kandy5...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:17XM4.2146$eI5.388816@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Dear Everyone,
> > I have struggled with controlling my urge to masturbate for
10
> > years, but I'm still trying to discipline myself to overcome it.
With
> Gods
> > help and through devoted prayer, He will one day take this temptation
out
> of
> > my body.
> > I wonder, though, why the Bible stays so slient it. Do you
> think
> > perhaps that it implies masturbation as an alternative to fornication
> since
> > the later is explicited forbidden.
> >
> > Any Help would be wonderful.
> >
> > God Bless Everyone!
> >
> > :)
> > RHW5000
> >
>
> Satan loves to accuse.
>
> If the bible doesn't accuse, it is from Satan
>
> Keep Satan out of your life.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39065002.4CF0DAA1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615723818
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<8dh6ci$8i7$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <stcpfssvaffdiv9onp4037rlq1f0uvetph@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956714943 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:09:03 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:09:03 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
And, to address your second point, which I forgot to do in my previous
post, yes,
we trinitarians *are* born-again Christians, just as are Methodists, and
Presbyterians, and Lutherans.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Rev. Steve Winter" wrote:
> "Russell McDade" <rmcd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly and wrote:
>
> >
> >Rev. Steve Winter wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >
> >Dear Rev. S. Winter, could you please explain the
> >following verse;
> >
> >Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man,
> >no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father.
> >
> >From the above verse I understand that God the Father
> >has some knowledge that God the Son does or didn't have.
> >Therefore I reason that there is 2 entities referred to in the
> >above verse.
>
> First of all, thank you for honestly affirming your polytheism.
> I wish more trinitarians were honest about their polytheism.
>
> To address your question, Jesus has a dual nature. For example
> do you believe that the burning bush was omnipresent just because
> the omnipresent Jesus was in the bush?
>
> In this study I will attempt to explain how the son could pray to the
> father and still not be two separate gods (or persons). The key to
> understanding this is understanding "flesh" and "spirit":......
> Here, we see that God the Father of the old testament does NOT have
> flesh and bone (so consider also "The Right Hand" does not mean a big
> ole arm)..See, God is a Spirit and a spirit hath NOT flesh and bone.
> Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me,
> and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
> John 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that wor****p him must wor****p
> [him] in spirit and in truth....
>
> Also notice the im****tance of TRUTH in wor****ping God, We MUST know WHO
> we are wor****pping! God of the old testament came to earth in human
> form, he did NOT have blood to shed for anyone; sooooo he took on a
> human body and came to his people:......
>
> John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
> II Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the
> world unto himself, not imputing their tresp***** unto them; and hath
> committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
>
> In other words God came in the form of Christ, not a "second person" or
> "Jehovah Jr.", but God HIMSELF in a human body..the Lord of Glory
> himself....
>
> I Corinthians 2:8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had
> they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
>
> God did not send anyone else to "do the dirty work"; HE CAME HIMSELF
> and took on a life and then gave up that life for us!!
>
> I John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love [of God], because he laid down
> his life for us...."
>
> God himself in a human body, but even then the Spirit of God was
greater
> than the flesh of God..even God had to keep his flesh in subjection to
> his Spirit..It was not the flesh body of God that did the miracles, but
> rather the Spirit that was in the body...and, in the garden it was
flesh
> praying to Spirit (not one god praying to another)
>
> John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
> in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the
> Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
> John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne
witness
> of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
>
> (The Father IN the son=The Spirit in the flesh)
>
> Matthew 13:17 {For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and
> righteous [men] have desired to see [those things] which ye see, and
> have not seen [them]; and to hear [those things] which ye hear, and
have
> not heard [them].}
> Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed
> them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my
> beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
> Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, [saying], Thou art
> my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
> II Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory,
> when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is
> my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
>
> (Notice "IN WHOM" in each verse, the Father (spirit) was IN the son
(flesh)).
>
> John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and
> yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the
> Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?
> John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
in
> me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the
> Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.....
>
> Jesus Christ, Jehovah God in the flesh....Why is this so im****tant?!?
>
> Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, {The first of all the commandments
> [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:}
>
> Not three lords, not "three separate persons", ONE GOD: JESUS!!.....
>
> Rev. sTeve Winter
> --
> Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
> http://www.onenessapostolic.org
for Bible studies (text and audio)
> Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <390650DF.A62C41D6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615724844
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<22apfsc2sfgn764m5j2ecmea4t192dbb2p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956715167 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:12:47 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:12:47 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.presby
terian,misc.education.home-
school.christian,alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.
pentecostal
Thank you, Lucifer!
I don't like the name you use, but i must agree with your POV. Steve
Winter is VERY small minded, in that he refuses to believe what he
doesn't understand. We trinitarians believe in the tri-une God
(Father/Son/Holy Spirit) because the Bible mentions all three
multiple times, and calls all three God. Just because the small-minded
Steve Winter can't understand the mystery of God being 3
names/ministries, he rejects the mystery of God, preferring a god who is
small enough to put in the box Steve Winter has prepared for him.
Doesn't make it so!
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 00:14:16 -0400 in
> alt.religion.christian.pentecostal, Rev. Steve Winter
> <steve.win...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ingested a large dose of a controlled
> substance and decided to share with us the following:
>
> >"justin" <jus...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly and wrote:
> >
> >> My brother I don't mean to agrue but i must ask in how you
believe who
> >>was the Lord Jesus talking to when he said "My God, My God why has
thou
> >>forsaken me."
> >
> >Who did you think it was? Some of you trinity cultists are really
silly.
>
> No sillier than you.
>
> I note that you failed to answer the question. How typical of you.
>
> >
> >>and to whom did he pray in the garden and why did he always
> >>refer heaven as his father's house and not his own, why did he say he
would
> >>sit at the right hand of his father? I don't mean to offend anyone
but you
> >>qoute from the old testment before the Lord Jesus came to earth and
there
> >>was none to sit by the father.
> >
> >In this post I will attempt to explain how the son could pray to the
> >father and still not be two separate gods (or persons). The key to
> >understanding this is understanding "flesh" and "spirit":......
>
> <snip>
>
> The same ol' "Dichotomy between flesh and spirit" argument even though
> this has been discredited time on end. There is no evidence--even
> implicit evidence--that suggests that such a dichotomy exists.
>
> Either Jesus was wholly God or he was not.
>
> Your problem--and the problem with all modalists--is that you assume
> that since a thing is incomprehensible it is therefore false. Lay
> your ego and arrogance aside for once.
>
> You will never understand the nature of the existence of God. Such a
> being defies all existence by definition. You've succeeded only in
> constructing a box that has no hope of holding God.
>
> -----
> LJ
>
> "Aw, boy. Crying isn't going to get your dog back. Unless your tears
smell like dog food. So you can sit here eating can after can of dog
food until your tears smell enough like dog food to get your dog back, or
you can do something about it." --Homer Simpson
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39065122.5C28D8CD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615725079
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<22apfsc2sfgn764m5j2ecmea4t192dbb2p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fdabef.14450358@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fcdf6f.333188919@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956715230 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:13:50 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:13:50 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.presby
terian,misc.education.home-
school.christian,alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.
pentecostal
Glenn, you are a liar, and an anti-Christ!
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Glenn (Christian Mystic)" wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:40:53 GMT, mbas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mark Bassett)
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:28:43 -0700, Lucifer Jones
> ><luciferjo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >>Either Jesus was wholly God or he was not.
> >
> >Jesus is both God and Man.
>
> On what do you base this ?
>
> >Hard to understand? No one has EVER understood that with their human
> >capacity. God alone can reveal the mystery of godliness to the mind
and
> >heart.
> >Ask Him, he will...
>
> I did, He says Jesus is His son, much as we are His sons and
> daughters.
>
> >-mwb
>
> Glenn (Christian Mystic)
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <390651A3.7150F7BE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615725750
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<22apfsc2sfgn764m5j2ecmea4t192dbb2p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fdabef.14450358@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fcdf6f.333188919@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fd161d.41636678@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956715359 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:15:59 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:15:59 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.presby
terian,misc.education.home-
school.christian,alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.
pentecostal
John chapter 1 says The Word was with God, and the Word was God, and He
(Word)
became flesh (Christ/God/Son0.
Genesis 1 says God/Father, and also mentions God/Holy Spirit.
If we have God/Father, God/Son, and God/Holy Spirit, we have One God, 3
ministries.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bassett wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 22:21:20 GMT, g...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Glenn (Christian
Mystic))
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:40:53 GMT, mbas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mark Bassett)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:28:43 -0700, Lucifer Jones
> >><luciferjo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Either Jesus was wholly God or he was not.
> >>
> >>Jesus is both God and Man.
> >
> >On what do you base this ?
>
> The Bible.
> >
> >>Hard to understand? No one has EVER understood that with their human
> >>capacity. God alone can reveal the mystery of godliness to the mind
and
> >>heart.
> >>Ask Him, he will...
> >
> >I did, He says Jesus is His son, much as we are His sons and
> >daughters.
>
> You are talking to someone other than God.
>
> -mwb
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Creationism and its prevalence in the US
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <390645AF.5EE10854@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615711935
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <956536727.11351.0.nnrp-08.c1eded33@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3903AC0F.345644B3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956712301 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:25:01 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:25:01 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian-
teen,alt.religion.christian.methodist,alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.pentecosta
l,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Blade:
We Christians don't debate the facts of science. The facts of science
don't change
whether you are a Christian/creationist or an atheist scientist. (By the
way, I
have known quite a few scientists who are Christians.) The place we
Christians and
you atheists differ is the *interpretation* of the facts, not the facts
themselves. Evolution is a theory based on certain facts, ignoring others
that
don't fit the evolution model. Creation is also a theory (to continue the
discussion) based on certain facts.But Christians, unlike atheists, don't
ignore
"those facts that don't sup****t our POV" because there are not.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Real God!" wrote:
> Blade wrote:
>
> > just wondered over to the new scientist web site and what do I find
but a
> > rather good article on Creationism's popularity and prevalence almost
> > exclusively in the US and not really in any other western country
> > (essentially Europe). I suggest every one go and have a look at
> > http://www.newscientist.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns22352
I don't
know
> > how long it will be up for, but its interesting non the less. It also
eludes
> > to the destruction of the teaching of science in science cl***** by
> > creationists and the active encouragement of children to not look at
things
> > critically when it comes to evolution but instead disbelief it as
flawed and
> > inaccurate as a representation of reality. I had no idea just how
backward
> > the US education system was becoming, very disturbing. Glad I'm safe
in the
> > UK where American employers looking for scientists with a real
education now
> > look to and are willing to pay lots of money to ;)
> >
> > --
> > Blade ICQ#27537648
> >
> > Comparing religion to science is like comparing a molehill to a
mountain!
> >
> > Change .con to demon<dot>co<dot>uk to send mail.
>
> --
> The Real God!, thus spake: "IN GOD WE TRUST!"
>
> As with all Social Systems/Governments/Tribes/Kings ect...
>
> The government's, business's and religion's are one and the same.
>
> The US leader****p sup****ts religions because they make
>
> good workers, who make more ignorant children.
>
> The side effect is the workers must be kept ignorant,
>
> of who and how they are exploited.
>
> "IN GOD WE TRUST" is written on all US money, because,
> without the GOD thingy,
>
> worker/slaves would resist making their leaders $$ POWERFUL $$...
>
> The Real God! (The sinless one) I dont forgive nothing!
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~
> Wise men stare at the unknown, and boldly! asks, WHY?
> Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~
>
> --- THE PAST ---
> http://dir.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Religion/Faiths_and_Practices/
> http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/Full_Coverage/World/Religion_News/
>
> ---- THE FUTURE ----
> http://www.transhumanism.com/
> (-C-I-S-)-Crystal-Information-Soulutions-(-C-I-S-)
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Creationism and its prevalence in the US
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <3906464A.6702791F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615712645
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <956536727.11351.0.nnrp-08.c1eded33@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3903AC0F.345644B3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8e16cu$jtn$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956712455 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:27:35 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:27:35 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian-
teen,alt.religion.christian.methodist,alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.pentecosta
l,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Oh, please! And the moon really is made of green cheese, too, right? Von
Daniken
was proved to be a quack *years* ago in case you hadn't heard. You really
should
ad the excellent book "Crash Go The Chariots" to your library, on the
shelf
above your copy of "Chariots of the Gods".
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"forum.wanadoo.fr" wrote:
> Several thousand years ago, all life on earth was created
scientifically by
> an advanced alien civilization. They created us by complete mastery of
> Genetic Engineering and DNA ' In their own image' as described in the
Bible.
> They are the ELOHIM, word from the Hebrew Bible which was wrongly
translated
> by God, as Elohim is a plural in Hebrew (singular ELOHA) and means
literally
> ' Those who came from the sky'. They decided to leave us progress alone
and
> sent prophets at various times to help us out and leave traces of their
> creation. Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, ... 40 in all were all
contacted
> persons whom they gave advanced knowledge to show us how to love each
others
> until we reach the age of science, where we could understand it all.
They
> are at the origin of all the main religions.
> In 1945, after the Hiro****ma bomb, we entered the era of the
Apocalypse
> (Revelation in greek) and they decided to sent the last messenger, the
one
> announced by all religions.Today we are advanced enough scientifically
to
> finally understand the truth about our origins, without mystification,
but
> rational understanding rather than believing. The 13th of December
1973,
> they encountered a french journalist, Claude Vorilhon, which they named
Raël
> (which means messenger of the Elohim), and asked him to spread this
message
> around the world and build an embassy in Jerusalem to welcome them
soon.
> http://www.rael.org
>
> "The Real God!" <Real...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> a écrit dans le message news:
> 3903AC0F.34564...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Blade wrote:
> >
> > > just wondered over to the new scientist web site and what do I find
but
> a
> > > rather good article on Creationism's popularity and prevalence
almost
> > > exclusively in the US and not really in any other western country
> > > (essentially Europe). I suggest every one go and have a look at
> > > http://www.newscientist.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns22352
I
don't
> know
> > > how long it will be up for, but its interesting non the less. It
also
> eludes
> > > to the destruction of the teaching of science in science cl***** by
> > > creationists and the active encouragement of children to not look
at
> things
> > > critically when it comes to evolution but instead disbelief it as
flawed
> and
> > > inaccurate as a representation of reality. I had no idea just how
> backward
> > > the US education system was becoming, very disturbing. Glad I'm
safe in
> the
> > > UK where American employers looking for scientists with a real
education
> now
> > > look to and are willing to pay lots of money to ;)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Blade ICQ#27537648
> > >
> > > Comparing religion to science is like comparing a molehill to a
> mountain!
> > >
> > > Change .con to demon<dot>co<dot>uk to send mail.
> >
> > --
> > The Real God!, thus spake: "IN GOD WE TRUST!"
> >
> > As with all Social Systems/Governments/Tribes/Kings ect...
> >
> > The government's, business's and religion's are one and the same.
> >
> > The US leader****p sup****ts religions because they make
> >
> > good workers, who make more ignorant children.
> >
> > The side effect is the workers must be kept ignorant,
> >
> > of who and how they are exploited.
> >
> > "IN GOD WE TRUST" is written on all US money, because,
> > without the GOD thingy,
> >
> > worker/slaves would resist making their leaders $$ POWERFUL $$...
> >
> > The Real God! (The sinless one) I dont forgive nothing!
> > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~
> > Wise men stare at the unknown, and boldly! asks, WHY?
> > Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
> > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~
> >
> > --- THE PAST ---
> >
http://dir.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Religion/Faiths_and_Practices/
> >
http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/Full_Coverage/World/Religion_News/
> >
> > ---- THE FUTURE ----
> > http://www.transhumanism.com/
> > (-C-I-S-)-Crystal-Information-Soulutions-(-C-I-S-)
> >
> >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064F90.F78EB059@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615723386
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<8dh6ci$8i7$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <stcpfssvaffdiv9onp4037rlq1f0uvetph@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956714830 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:07:10 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:07:10 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Quit referring to trinitarians as polytheistic. Just because you don't
understand
trinitarianism (and you *don't*) doesn't mean that we are polytheistic
(we're
*not*) Again, and again, and again, and again, the trinity aspect of God
is one
of the mysteries of the Bible. The Bible says God is called Father in
Genesis.
The Bible also says God is called the Holy Spirit right there in Genesis.
John's
gospel, first chapter, says The Word was with God, and the Word was God,
and the
Word became flesh (Christ Jesus). All three, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
(*whatever* you wish to call them) are God. Three names, three different
ministries (Father/Judge, Son/Savior, Spirit/Teacher-Indweller), one God.
And if you deny the "trinity" which name/ministry of God are you denying?
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Rev. Steve Winter" wrote:
> "Russell McDade" <rmcd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly and wrote:
>
> >
> >Rev. Steve Winter wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >
> >Dear Rev. S. Winter, could you please explain the
> >following verse;
> >
> >Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man,
> >no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father.
> >
> >From the above verse I understand that God the Father
> >has some knowledge that God the Son does or didn't have.
> >Therefore I reason that there is 2 entities referred to in the
> >above verse.
>
> First of all, thank you for honestly affirming your polytheism.
> I wish more trinitarians were honest about their polytheism.
>
> To address your question, Jesus has a dual nature. For example
> do you believe that the burning bush was omnipresent just because
> the omnipresent Jesus was in the bush?
>
> In this study I will attempt to explain how the son could pray to the
> father and still not be two separate gods (or persons). The key to
> understanding this is understanding "flesh" and "spirit":......
> Here, we see that God the Father of the old testament does NOT have
> flesh and bone (so consider also "The Right Hand" does not mean a big
> ole arm)..See, God is a Spirit and a spirit hath NOT flesh and bone.
> Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me,
> and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
> John 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that wor****p him must wor****p
> [him] in spirit and in truth....
>
> Also notice the im****tance of TRUTH in wor****ping God, We MUST know WHO
> we are wor****pping! God of the old testament came to earth in human
> form, he did NOT have blood to shed for anyone; sooooo he took on a
> human body and came to his people:......
>
> John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
> II Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the
> world unto himself, not imputing their tresp***** unto them; and hath
> committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
>
> In other words God came in the form of Christ, not a "second person" or
> "Jehovah Jr.", but God HIMSELF in a human body..the Lord of Glory
> himself....
>
> I Corinthians 2:8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had
> they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
>
> God did not send anyone else to "do the dirty work"; HE CAME HIMSELF
> and took on a life and then gave up that life for us!!
>
> I John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love [of God], because he laid down
> his life for us...."
>
> God himself in a human body, but even then the Spirit of God was
greater
> than the flesh of God..even God had to keep his flesh in subjection to
> his Spirit..It was not the flesh body of God that did the miracles, but
> rather the Spirit that was in the body...and, in the garden it was
flesh
> praying to Spirit (not one god praying to another)
>
> John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
> in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the
> Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
> John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne
witness
> of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
>
> (The Father IN the son=The Spirit in the flesh)
>
> Matthew 13:17 {For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and
> righteous [men] have desired to see [those things] which ye see, and
> have not seen [them]; and to hear [those things] which ye hear, and
have
> not heard [them].}
> Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed
> them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my
> beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
> Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, [saying], Thou art
> my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
> II Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory,
> when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is
> my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
>
> (Notice "IN WHOM" in each verse, the Father (spirit) was IN the son
(flesh)).
>
> John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and
> yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the
> Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?
> John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
in
> me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the
> Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.....
>
> Jesus Christ, Jehovah God in the flesh....Why is this so im****tant?!?
>
> Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, {The first of all the commandments
> [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:}
>
> Not three lords, not "three separate persons", ONE GOD: JESUS!!.....
>
> Rev. sTeve Winter
> --
> Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
> http://www.onenessapostolic.org
for Bible studies (text and audio)
> Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Are trinitarians really "christian"?
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <390651A3.7150F7BE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615725750
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c2lnfsgs47i162jjsmpq9ch2e0fhgsoc9h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fbd9bb$0
$12124@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d4onfso8vmmucs1ht169rf2am8afb7qhp2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<22apfsc2sfgn764m5j2ecmea4t192dbb2p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fdabef.14450358@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fcdf6f.333188919@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fd161d.41636678@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956715359 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
21:15:59 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:15:59 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.public,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.presby
terian,misc.education.home-
school.christian,alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.
pentecostal
John chapter 1 says The Word was with God, and the Word was God, and He
(Word)
became flesh (Christ/God/Son0.
Genesis 1 says God/Father, and also mentions God/Holy Spirit.
If we have God/Father, God/Son, and God/Holy Spirit, we have One God, 3
ministries.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bassett wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 22:21:20 GMT, g...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Glenn (Christian
Mystic))
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:40:53 GMT, mbas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mark Bassett)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:28:43 -0700, Lucifer Jones
> >><luciferjo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Either Jesus was wholly God or he was not.
> >>
> >>Jesus is both God and Man.
> >
> >On what do you base this ?
>
> The Bible.
> >
> >>Hard to understand? No one has EVER understood that with their human
> >>capacity. God alone can reveal the mystery of godliness to the mind
and
> >>heart.
> >>Ask Him, he will...
> >
> >I did, He says Jesus is His son, much as we are His sons and
> >daughters.
>
> You are talking to someone other than God.
>
> -mwb
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Creationism and its prevalence in the US
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <3906464A.6702791F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615712645
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <956536727.11351.0.nnrp-08.c1eded33@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3903AC0F.345644B3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8e16cu$jtn$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956712455 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:27:35 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:27:35 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian-
teen,alt.religion.christian.methodist,alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.pentecosta
l,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Oh, please! And the moon really is made of green cheese, too, right? Von
Daniken
was proved to be a quack *years* ago in case you hadn't heard. You really
should
ad the excellent book "Crash Go The Chariots" to your library, on the
shelf
above your copy of "Chariots of the Gods".
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"forum.wanadoo.fr" wrote:
> Several thousand years ago, all life on earth was created
scientifically by
> an advanced alien civilization. They created us by complete mastery of
> Genetic Engineering and DNA ' In their own image' as described in the
Bible.
> They are the ELOHIM, word from the Hebrew Bible which was wrongly
translated
> by God, as Elohim is a plural in Hebrew (singular ELOHA) and means
literally
> ' Those who came from the sky'. They decided to leave us progress alone
and
> sent prophets at various times to help us out and leave traces of their
> creation. Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, ... 40 in all were all
contacted
> persons whom they gave advanced knowledge to show us how to love each
others
> until we reach the age of science, where we could understand it all.
They
> are at the origin of all the main religions.
> In 1945, after the Hiro****ma bomb, we entered the era of the
Apocalypse
> (Revelation in greek) and they decided to sent the last messenger, the
one
> announced by all religions.Today we are advanced enough scientifically
to
> finally understand the truth about our origins, without mystification,
but
> rational understanding rather than believing. The 13th of December
1973,
|
