> 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: another Easter question
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064107.102C4079@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615706299
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <FreeSpeech-2304002056080001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <2M0N4.486
$r21.25102@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FreeSpeech-2604000938080001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956711109 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:05:09 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:05:09 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Why are you in here?
If you look, you are in a newgroup labeled, Christian.baptist.
We *can* do***ent the Bible, both by the Dead Sea Scrolls and by the
commentaries of the 1st century, 2nd century, and early 3rd century
historians
(disciples of the apostles).
To say 'they fabricated" is absurd and ignores the evidence that the Jews
were
the keepers of the history and of the prophets. If anything they wrote
was found
to be untrue, whether a lie or merely a mistake, the author of the book
was
executed and his book burned.
Why don't you go someplace like alt.atheism, and leave the Christians be?
You
*truly* aren't going to convert anybody.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> In article <2M0N4.486$r21.25...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, "Vernon O"
> <vern...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > pferdelieber <FreeSpe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:FreeSpeech-2304002056080001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Since crucifixion was the punishment for sedition, it is highly
unlikely
> > > the two others crucfied with Jesus were thieves.
> > >
> >
> >
> > It is highly unlikely that you have a clue what you are talking
about.
> > A.K.A. see above statement.
>
> Interesting response - but not very helpful
>
> You see there is a great deal that does point towards who the real
Jesus
> was - but Christians have a hard time handling it because it conflicts
> with the fantasy they have been brought up to wor****p.
>
> I know personally how gut wrenching realisation in these matters can
be. I
> was brought up in this fantasy and had to come to terms with reality
> myself in my mid to late teens when the conflict between what I was
> supposed to "believe" and what was "bleeding obvious" - as Basil Fawlty
> puts it, became mentally tortuous.
>
> Matters such as the question of the "thieves" would be side issues
except
> that they do point to the ideological nature of the Gospels and away
from
> the (stupid) superstition that they are "God inspired" or the "Word"
of
> God, as fundamentalists would have it to pump up their ludicrous
pomposity
> and dwindling authority.
>
> I think it is worth while trying to come closer to the truth - if
possible
> - if only because the erroneous pagan doctrine of Paulism has long been
at
> the moral core of Western Society.
>
> And it is failing us - as it has so frequently so done in the past.
>
> The Paulist fabrication contains within it seeds of major problems such
as
> irrationality, prejudice against differing views through anathamising,
> abhorrence of analytical thinking and reasoning, hatred of "the other"
and
> antisemitism.
>
> The Bible speaks of overthrowing the idols - the greatest of all -
Paulism
> still stands.
>
> And christianity will not survive much longer if it cannot distance
itself
> from an archaic pagan interpretation of Jesus of Nazareth
>
> Basically Vern you are comfortable in your delusion - that in actual
fact
> is OK by me.
>
> But don't attack those of us who would rather stir ourselves from our
own
> complacency and ask the question "what really happened?"
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Bible Translations
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064CC6.69402B7F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615720256
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <39004E80.2BE821D0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3900DE9D.FF11A782@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3900E9A8.16056E6A@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39011AFA.618A79DB@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FY9M4.28589
$WF.1198513@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390300e8$0$12813
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8e17dk$jl$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39043E49.CF09C6A3
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39044849.BF6FC6EE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956714115 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:55:15 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:55:15 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.bible,alt.christnet.bible,alt.relig
ion.apologetics,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt.christnet.calvini
st,alt.religion.christian.baptist
Well said, Data!
I for another one, can't comprehend how so many "alternatives" arose to
God except what He Himself has said, "since they refuse to believe the
truth, I sent them an infinite number of lies to believe, and they did."
I am paraphrasing, here, folks.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DataRat wrote:
> "It is amazing to me that people
> would prefer that some alien
> race created us"
>
> Evolution, space aliens, pagan
> deities, reality-is-a-dream...
> ANYTHING but the God of the
> Bible !
>
> There being no theory too
> outlandish, too implausible,
> that it can not be accepted
> in place of Special Creation
> by the Lord of Hosts.
>
> Another proof for the Doctrine
> of Total Inability. Men are
> "slaves to sin" ( Romans 6:6
> & 15, John 8:34 NASB, NIV,
> cf 2 Peter 2:19, Hebrews 2:15 )
>
> The DataRat
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Witnessing
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <390643CF.2B1B820C@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615709761
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <76b4c5$nhh$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<49g6gscu5mu5ljmq5kmc4a8ci6hcr37jei@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956711821 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:17:01 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:17:01 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Mr. Steve W:
You keep calling true Chrsitianity a cult. You, Steve, are the mindless
cultist.
Just because the concept of God the Father, God the Son, and God the
Spirit is
bigger than your puny brain and so you can't understand it, doesn't mean
it
isn't true.
Genesis 1 tells us that There is God the Father and God the Spirit ("the
Spirit
of God moved over the face of the water...") and John chapter 1 says The
Word
was with God, and the Word was God and He became flesh.
Any way you wish to consider those paasages, they tell us that there is
God the
Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Accept it. Why must you
continue
to debate the reality of God. And if you look at the title of the news
group,
this is Christian.baptist. which means that those people to whom you are
fuming
about trinitarianism are trinitarians.
Go someplace else and get a life! You are the anti-Christ cultist, pal.
Not we
trinitarians! You are wasting your time here!
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Rev. Steve Winter" wrote:
> <soulwin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly and wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Witnessing in the 20th Century
> >
> > Dan Corner
> >
> >Soul winning is a very im****tant and serious aspect of true
Christianity.
>
> It is also very im****tant to trinity cults and other Satanic
counterfeits
> of true Christianity.
>
> Matthew 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for
> ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made,
> ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
>
> There is only one God and He is ONE person, not three, and his name is
> Jesus. Sadly, there are many who are not wor****ping the Jesus of the
> Bible, who, according to the scripture IS the everlasting Father. These
> poor souls are wor****ping a figment of carnal human imagination, a man
> made "Jesus", that is a separate person from God, or just merely a part
> of God. In their vain imagination they mold their "Jesus" to fit their
> personal concepts, they manufacture a fable of a "Jesus" that will just
> overlook unrepented sins and just take any and everything into heaven.
>
> They confuse emotional titillations with spiritual activity...They
> prefer dewey eyed fables over the Word of God.
>
> An idol need not be a manmade "icon" or statue; a mental concept can
> also be an idol god, just as much as a statue of a golden calf. It has
> always been the carnal nature to manufacture a god that fit rather than
> measuring up to a true Godly standard.
>
> A person wor****ping the catholic trinity, might as well wor****p rocks,
> or goats, or dogs or trees; they are basing their religion on a figment
> of human imagination, rather than the God of the Bible.
>
> Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of
Jacob are
> not consumed.
>
> Isaiah 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from
the
> west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none
else.
>
> Isaiah 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel
> together:
> who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from
> that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a
just
> God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
>
> Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see
> him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth
> shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
>
> (Notice it says HIM not THEM)...
>
> Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending,
saith
> the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
>
> (Jesus IS the Almighty)....
>
> Isaiah 43:11 I, [even] I, [am] the LORD; and beside me [there is] no
> saviour.
>
> (God came to earth to be the saviour)....
>
> Isaiah 45:21 Tell ye, and bring [them] near; yea, let them take counsel
> together: who hath declared this from ancient time? [who] hath told it
> from that time? [have] not I the LORD? and [there is] no God else
beside
> me; a just God and a Saviour; [there is] none beside me.
>
> (Trinity says there are three persons here)...
>
> Hosea 13:4 Yet I [am] the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou
> shalt know no god but me: for [there is] no saviour beside me.
>
> (God is the only savior)....
>
> 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?
>
> (Of course Jesus IS the Father, come to be the saviour)...
>
> Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
>
> ("Which faith are you?" ever heard that?)...
>
> Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
>
> (Jesus has always been Alpha and Omega)...
>
> Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
> government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
> Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The
> Prince of Peace.
>
> (This says that the child to be born is The Mighty God)
>
> 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: The Struggle With Masturbation
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064966.1C56A6D8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615716461
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <17XM4.2146$eI5.388816@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956713256 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:40:56 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:40:56 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
There are two schools on this subject. There is the Calvinist, which says
that
anything that is not specifically okayed in black and white in the Bible
is
prohibited. Masturbation is cited as one example of this. "It isn't
natural" is
another POV of the Calvinists.
Then there is the Martin Luther school, which says that anything that is
not
specifically prohibited in black and white in the Bible is okay. Like,
God
really does give us choices. When He silent, it means that He doesn't
care. He
gives us freedom. As Dr. Luther pointed out, Jesus said "I came, not to
enslave
you, but to set you free.:
I happen to be a follower of Luther on this point.
To analyze this issue just a bit more, we aren't told that masturbation
is okay,
but we aren't .told it isn't, either.
On the other hand, from the Calvinist point of view, we aren't told that
cars
are okay, so we may not drive cars. The New England sect (the name
escapes me)
eschew cars, and we think that's funny! If we can't do anything that is
not in
black and white, then we also can't use computers, and I must rebuke you
for
being on one now! How dare you! We also can't use phones, becuase there
is no
mention of phones in the Bible, either.
So even if you were allowed to use a computer (which you aren't), you
wouldn't
be able to hook up to the internet, because phones aren't allowed.
I hope by now you get my drift. The issue of masturbation falls into the
same
category with cars, phones, and computers.
If you let people restrict you according to other people's hangups, you
will
*always* be able to find people who will *gladly* tell you what to do If
God
didn't say "no", why let people do it for Him?
If you are married, then masturbation becomes an issue between your mate
and
yourself. However, what is wrong with 1. masturbating together or 2.
masturbating each other? I wouldn't encourage anyone to masturbate
instead of
*** with their mate, but that's another subject. Speaking of married ***,
there
are also plenty of people who are willing to also dictate what *** acts
are
appropriate within marriage, too. I've actually heard some absurd people
condemn
oral ***, which we find in the Song of Solomon, if you know what you're
reading.
I hope this helps.
In Christ,
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> 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
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: <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: out of body
Date: 2000/04/25
Message-ID: <39064266.780DE6A6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 615707951
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8dv3v8$thl$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FreeSpeech-2604000919160001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956711459 63.225.165.117 (Tue, 25 Apr 2000
20:10:59 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:10:59 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Hey! Pf, you know you are accompli****ng so much in here with your
mindless,
atheistic, skeptic crap!
Why don't you take your crap elsewhere? We aren't interested!
john weatherly
pferdelieber wrote:
> In article <8dv3v8$th...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Bookman
> <the_book...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> SNIP>
> > An interesting fact that I would like to mention at this point is
that
> > about 22 years ago I remember seeing a film where these doctors
weighed
> > a person that was dying and after that person had died (see
> > http://www.artbell.org/duncan.html
), hours later that body became
> > lighter for no apparent reason. The reason that I remembered that
fact
> > was that just recently(March 2000) I met a nurse who is studying for
> > her masters in nursing and she also mentioned that it was a
do***ented
> > fact that the body loses weight hours after death and the reason for
> > this is still a bit of a mystery. My best guess for this mystery is
> > that it is due to the spirit leaving the body and that is something
> > that I and hundreds of others also do have first hand experience of.
> >
> > I see and hear on TV and read on the internet and in books about many
> > other people who have had similar near-death experiences as I have
had
> > and have met one person who related her vision that she had had to
me.
> > These out of body experiences should not be actively sought out after
> > as there is a very real danger of being deceived by these spirits
into
> > wor****pping the devil or in any case being turned away from God.
> > Relating from my own two experiences of my spirit leaving my body and
> > from what I've read on this matter this much I can tell you which is
if
> > your spirit leaves your body then anything you meet outside your body
> > is more than likely from the devil's kingdom especially if you find
> > yourself going into a dark tunnel first.
> >
> > As the first time I experienced a out of body experience I also
> > experienced an inner body experience straight after I know that these
> > two events were different from each other and this inner body
> > experience was an amazing experience in itself. This inner body
> > experience is where I saw Christ and these visions(including the one
> > related to me which I am certain is an inner body experience) have
been
> > written out for you below. ( If your wondering what it feels like to
> > have your spirit out of your body then the best way to explain it is
to
> > say it's very similar to asking what the difference is between being
> > clothed and not clothed-your still who you are but your just a bit
more
> > lighter. )
> >
> >SNIP
> >
> > I am still in a very dark tunnel, so dark and seemingly drowning in
> > despair. I knew a way out myself - taking things out of God's hands
and
> > into my own hands. Then God the Father spoke to me in the garden- "If
> > you do that, I'll have to rearrange the table settings. Take your
place
> > from the table reserved for the people of great faith, and place you
> > further down where the people of little faith sit. Wouldn't you
rather
> > sit with friends you know intimately around your table, than to have
Me
> > place you with complete strangers?
>
> These appear to me to be descriptions of the kind of disordered
thinking
> associated with Schizophrenia. Your doctor should be consulted
>
> Tell him what you feel you have been experiencing - it appears to be
> de-realisation and depersonalisation.
>
> Medication should fix it - Do it now
>
> There is a great deal of information on the net you can examine
privately
> >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Dave Hunt's "Woman Rides a Beast"
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903C186.69B2E876@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614845464
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <zane-2304001405350001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956547407 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:36:47 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:36:47 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Ummmm... I don't want to stick my neck out, here, but I've had similar
problems with Dave Hunt spouting. I confronted him myself, personally on
one
occasion when he spoke at my church. He mentioned that he considered
acupuncture "Satanic" since we "don't know how it works" (we didn't
then), and
its "origins are unknown" and, Dave believed, "steeped in
superstitution". I
countered "it works". Then I pointed out that I had just read a magazine
article written by a physician in China that do***ented his own life-long
research into acupuncture and how it actually works. Seems the ancient
Chinese
had a better grasp of human physiology than some modern
doctors/theologians/fakes (like Dave Hunt) would like to believe. He
said, to
me, "yea, but I still don't like where it came from. And that makes it
occult." I countered that just because he wasn't familiar with the source
of
acupuncture, that didn't make it intrinsically "occult", and that Dave
could /
should better educate himself before making such damaging pronouncements.
He
sputtered, "well, he'd look into that", but he "still thought it was
occult.
We still don't know how it works." I asked him when he had last taken an
aspirin. He said he'd taken some recently. I said, "Then you're
practicing the
occult, since we don't even now (back then, in the '70's) know how
aspirin
works.
Dave is very opinionated, and he makes statements he can't back up. If
you
have read much of his stuff, he tends to write to a certain audience. And
he
also rehashes, to sell books.
He hands out some good information, but he sells it. And he's making a
living
on it. Try to not take him too seriously. :) I can't tell you if he
misquoted,
if he gave the wrong page # in the article, or what. But I would not
bother to
try to do***ent, since he doesn't bother to do so, either.
john weatherly
Johnny Hartner wrote:
> One of the sources of this book is inaccurate and I can't reach anyone
at
> Dave Hunt Ministries to answer me on this. On page 124 Hunt states
that
> Pope Pius IX said that "...we [the Catholic Church] cannot recognize
the
> government of America until it drops the principles of the Reformation
and
> adopts the principles of The Roman Catholic Church." Now, Hunt says
this
> quote is from "Catholic World," Aug. 1871, pg. 755. I've checked the
> microfilm and it's not on this page. Anyone know where this quote
might
> actually be from or how to get a response from the Dave Hunt
Ministries?
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Jesus died on Wednesday
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903BA6B.C19CE29E@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614837910
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <D9AEF7248A2B0CDA.D422BAFFD1A8AACD.84D601E010109101
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390194F5.E43ECF3F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<7E8C4C34C74AB6B5.6783AD451B8E017B.F9A9B932F64BB33D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956545587 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:06:27 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:06:27 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Don wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2000 05:03:01 -0700, John Weatherly
> <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha
ha
> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
> >
> >That "stuff" below gave me quite a giggle.
> >You would re-write the Bible.
> >I predict that God will erase your name from the Book of Life!
>
> 1. I didn't re-write the Bible
sure, you did. I see nothing in scripture that says this particular
Thurday was
a "high day" or that this sabbath was the 2nd sabbath that week. You are
putting in detail to try to justify something you wish to believe. My
reference
to you being erased from the Book of Life is from Revelation.
>
> 2. You obviously believe in salvation by works
????? I see nothing in anything I said that indicates that I believe in
salvation by works. In fact, I do not. I believe in salvation by grace.
For by grace are you saved by faith. Eph. 2:5
>
> 3. Why do you think Jesus was crucified on Friday?
I am not so sure that we can calculate the day He was crucified going
forward.
But if we back up from Sunday, the day He rose, Sunday is day one,
Saturday is
day two, Friday is day 1. I am not nearly as concerned about what day He
died
as I am what day He rose. But which day either took place is less
im****tant to
me than THAT He rose.
And I laugh more over the quibbling than over days or dates.
I am glad to see that I irritated so many of you. IT DOESN'T MATTER,
FOLKS. It
matters that we wor****p the Risen Savior, not which day what happened.
>
> 4. Nevermind, you are an idiot.
Thanks. But it takes one to know one, right? ;)
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> D*
>
> >john weatherly
> >john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >Don wrote:
> >
> >> Just a few thoughts for your creative juices...
> >>
> >> Jesus was crucified on Wednesday. He was in the ground 72 hours.
The
> >> empty tomb was discovered in the Sunday morning darkness, before
> >> sunrise.
> >>
> >> There was a special day that week...Thursday, a "high day."
> >>
> >> John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that
> >> the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for
> >> that sabbath day was an high day) besought Pilate that their legs
> >> might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
> >>
> >> The sabbath day spoken about here was Thursday of that week, not the
> >> regular Saturday sabbath. There were two sabbaths that week.
> >>
> >> He was in the ground 3 days and 3 nights, seventy-two hours, from
> >> Thursday evening to Saturday evening.
> >>
> >> Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the
whale's
> >> belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the
> >> heart of the earth.
> >>
> >> He left the tomb on Saturday evening. The empty tomb was discovered
> >> BEFORE the sun arose on Sunday.
> >>
> >> John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early,
when
> >> it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away
> >> from the sepulchre.
> >>
> >> The tomb was ALREADY empty.
> >>
> >> Matt 26:61 And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the
temple
> >> of God, and to build it in three days.
> >>
> >> Matt 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while
he
> >> was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
> >>
> >> Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must
suffer
> >> many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief
priests,
> >> and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
> >>
> >> John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple,
and
> >> in three days I will raise it up.
> >>
> >> The idea of "good Friday" and "Maundy Thursday" are more based in
> >> tradition than scripture.
> >>
> >> D*
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Jesus died on Wednesday
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903BAE4.365C1826@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614838308
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <D9AEF7248A2B0CDA.D422BAFFD1A8AACD.84D601E010109101
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390194F5.E43ECF3F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<7E8C4C34C74AB6B5.6783AD451B8E017B.F9A9B932F64BB33D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sQlM4.291$2J4.21231@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956545706 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:08:26 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:08:26 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Vernon O wrote:
> Don <calldonREM...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:7E8C4C34C74AB6B5.6783AD451B8E017B.F9A9B932F64BB33D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2000 05:03:01 -0700, John Weatherly
> > <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
oh. And what did I say that brought you to that brilliant deduction. In
fact, I
have been reading and studying the Bible since I can remember. Over 40
years at
last count.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> Which probably why he believes what he does and has never read the
bible.
>
> >
> > D*
> >
> >
> > >john weatherly
> > >john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >Don wrote:
> > >
> > >> Just a few thoughts for your creative juices...
> > >>
> > >> Jesus was crucified on Wednesday. He was in the ground 72 hours.
The
> > >> empty tomb was discovered in the Sunday morning darkness, before
> > >> sunrise.
> > >>
> > >> There was a special day that week...Thursday, a "high day."
> > >>
> > >> John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation,
that
> > >> the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day,
(for
> > >> that sabbath day was an high day) besought Pilate that their legs
> > >> might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
> > >>
> > >> The sabbath day spoken about here was Thursday of that week, not
the
> > >> regular Saturday sabbath. There were two sabbaths that week.
> > >>
> > >> He was in the ground 3 days and 3 nights, seventy-two hours, from
> > >> Thursday evening to Saturday evening.
> > >>
> > >> Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the
whale's
> > >> belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in
the
> > >> heart of the earth.
> > >>
> > >> He left the tomb on Saturday evening. The empty tomb was
discovered
> > >> BEFORE the sun arose on Sunday.
> > >>
> > >> John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early,
when
> > >> it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken
away
> > >> from the sepulchre.
> > >>
> > >> The tomb was ALREADY empty.
> > >>
> > >> Matt 26:61 And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the
temple
> > >> of God, and to build it in three days.
> > >>
> > >> Matt 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while
he
> > >> was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
> > >>
> > >> Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must
suffer
> > >> many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief
priests,
> > >> and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
> > >>
> > >> John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple,
and
> > >> in three days I will raise it up.
> > >>
> > >> The idea of "good Friday" and "Maundy Thursday" are more based in
> > >> tradition than scripture.
> > >>
> > >> D*
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Jesus died on Wednesday
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903BF31.3B5F67CD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614842895
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <D9AEF7248A2B0CDA.D422BAFFD1A8AACD.84D601E010109101
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <FWlM4.301$2J4.21572@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <2cfbddb9.d2649055
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956546807 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:26:47 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:26:47 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
You're reading in things that aren't stated.
There isn't a word in Mark 16:1 that speaks of two prepratation days and
2
sabbaths.
There isn't a word in Luke 23:56 about there being 2 preparation days or
two
sabbaths. Luke 23:56 only mentions one Sabbath. And the fact that the
women
prepared their ointments and spices for the proper preparation of Jesus'
body in
the tomb has nothing to do with "Preparation Day" that preceeds Sabbath.
You are
TRULY stretching scripture to sup****t your preconceptions.
john weatherly
rstrats wrote:
> Mark 16:1 and Luke 23:56 sup****t the contention that there were
> 2 Preparation Days and 2 Sabbaths during the crucifixion week.
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com
The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Identifying marks of a Christian.
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903C562.1EE9FFC8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614849098
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <8dub48$pp1$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956548395 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:53:15 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:53:15 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
I certainly agree with most of your points, with some notable exceptions.
I am
sorry I can't necesarily give you all the scriptural references (I don't
have my
10 Bibles with me these days), but I can give you the principles, and
perhaps
you can do some more study/research.
1. Real Christians study/live by the Word.
no fault here, except, even Paul said he was chief of sinners. We must
allow for
man's humanity. And you are suggesting that you live perfectly by the
Word. I
don't believe you. So you would set a standard that you, yourself can't
keep.
This is called legalism. God came to earth in human form and died in our
place
because we can't do it by ourselves. We are now under a state of grace,
where
God's love fills in in our lives where we don't/can't measure up. Sounds
like
you might make a better lawyer than Christian. However, my lawyer is
Christ, who
the Bible says is ever interceding on our behalf with the Father. In
other
words, God the Father sees us sin, and He gets angry, and Satan is there
at the
throne, pointing out our sin, and asking God for our blood. And then
Jesus pipes
in, "Well, Dad, I can't let you hurt John Weatherly!" And the Father
says, "Why
not?!!!" And Jesus says, "Well, Dad, he's one of mine." And the Devil
scowls,
and the Father says, "Ok! Good enough!"
I totally agree with #2. I don't believe any Christian who calls himself
one can
NOT read and study the Word.
However! :) I believe in salvation by faith, period. Not salvation by
faith plus
works. And since reading and studying are two works, I can't accept them
as
required for salvation. I mean, the thief on the cross didn't have a
chance to
read OR study the Bible. Yet Jesus promised him his place in Heaven.
#3 again, requires that we demonstrate our love for each other. I
understand
that Ted Bundy, the mass murderer, accepted Christ/professed that he did,
before
he died. He didn't get much op****tunity to "demonstrate his love for
anyone
else", but I believe that if he found Christ with a sincere heart, on
death row,
that he is now in Heaven, as Christ promised. There are those out there
who
refuse to believe that Ted Bundy could be saved after murdering all those
women.
I believe that's for God to decide. It's His Heaven. And we are His,not
our own.
I could go on, but I think you have probably gotten the idea.
You might also want to check out C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. I refer
you to
this author/book because the man was a true genius who came to a
knowledge of
Christ from a position of intellectual atheism.
And Mere Christianity is a classic treatise on the subject of the basic
requirements for being a Christian.
In Christ,
john weatherly
John Allen wrote:
> The Identifying Marks of Christians.
> What are the identifying marks of Christians? Read on and let me know
what
> you think?
>
> 1/ Real Christians not only study God's Word but also live their lives
by
> means of it. As James says they become doers of the Word.
> *** Rbi8 James 1:22-25 ***
> 22 However, become doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving
> yourselves with false reasoning. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the
word,
> and not a doer, this one is like a man looking at his natural face in a
> mirror. 24 For he looks at himself, and off he goes and immediately
forgets
> what sort of man he is. 25 But he who peers into the perfect law that
> belongs to freedom and who persists in [it], this [man], because he has
> become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, will be happy
in his
> doing [it].
>
> 2/ Real Christians study God's Word. How can we become a doer of God's
Word
> if we do not know what the Word is? If we really are Christians we will
> imitate the Bereans and study God's so that we can see what he requires
of
> us.
> *** Rbi8 Acts 17:10-12 ***
> 10 Immediately by night the brothers sent both Paul and Silas out to
> Be·roe'a, and these, upon arriving, went into the synagogue of the
Jews. 11
> Now the latter were more noble-minded than those in Thes·sa·lo·ni'ca,
for
> they received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully
> examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so. 12
> Therefore many of them became believers, and so did not a few of the
> reputable Greek women and of the men."
>
> 3/ Real Christians are identified by the love they have for each other.
We
> cannot be selective. We need to apply Jesus' following words to people
of
> all races and colours. If the country where we live were at war with
another
> country we would display our love for our Christian brothers by
refusing to
> fight in the war against them.
> *** Rbi8 John 13:34-35 ***
> 35 By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love
among
> yourselves."
>
> 4/ Real Christians have love for their neighbours. This is something
that
> Jesus taught.
> *** Rbi8 Matthew 19:19 ***
> 19 Honor [your] father and [your] mother, and, You must love your
neighbor
> as yourself."
> Notice what Jesus taught? We must love our neighbour as ourselves. If
we
> have this love then we would not rip off our neighbour, exploit them.
We
> would treat them in way that we would want to be treated ourselves. Who
are
> our neighbours? Everyone. If you do not know whom your neighbour is
then
> study Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan. If we have love for our
> neighbour the we do not steal his land. We do not treat him we
contempt.
> This is what the Europeans did to the rest of the world.
>
> 4/ Real Christians love their enemies. This is something that Jesus
taught.
> If all people claimed to be Christians practiced this then many of the
world
> 's problems would disappear. For example Northern Ireland.
> *** Rbi8 Matthew 5:43-48 ***
> 43 "YOU heard that it was said, 'You must love your neighbor and hate
your
> enemy.' 44 However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to
pray
> for those persecuting YOU; 45 that YOU may prove yourselves sons of
YOUR
> Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked
people
> and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous. 46
For if
> YOU love those loving YOU, what reward do YOU have? Are not also the
tax
> collectors doing the same thing? 47 And if YOU greet YOUR brothers
only,
> what extraordinary thing are YOU doing? Are not also the people of the
> nations doing the same thing? 48 YOU must accordingly be perfect, as
YOUR
> heavenly Father is perfect."
> How far should we go with our love for our enemies? Look at what the
apostle
> Paul wrote.
> *** Rbi8 Romans 12:17-21 ***
> 17 Return evil for evil to no one. Provide fine things in the sight of
all
> men. 18 If possible, as far as it depends upon YOU, be peaceable with
all
> men. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the
wrath; for
> it is written: "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says Jehovah." 20 But,
"if
> your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to
> drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals upon his head." 21
Do not
> let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil
with the
> good."
>
> 5/ Real Christians look after their families. Christians would not
produce a
> whole lot of illegitimate children and not look after them. In fact
> Christian should not commit fornication or adultery. Real Christians
not
> only look after their children but also their aged parents. The Apostle
Paul
> said this about people who do not take care of their family.
> *** Rbi8 1 Timothy 5:7-8 ***
> 8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and
> especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned
the
> faith and is worse than a person without faith."
>
> 6/ Real Christians are no part of the world. They do not have anything
to do
> with politics. Jesus taught us that the whole world is in the power of
the
> wicked one. Satan is like a puppet master who controls the corrupt
> politicians. Jesus stated the following.
> *** Rbi8 John 15:17-19 ***
> 17 "These things I command YOU, that YOU love one another. 18 If the
world
> hates YOU, YOU know that it has hated me before it hated YOU. 19 If YOU
were
> part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now
because
> YOU are no part of the world, but I have chosen YOU out of the world,
on
> this account the world hates YOU."
>
> 7/ Real Christians obey God first.
> *** Rbi8 Acts 5:28-29 ***
> " 29 In answer Peter and the [other] apostles said: "We must obey God
as
> ruler rather than men."
> What do we do when the laws of men conflict with the laws of God? Jesus
was
> given the same problem. Notice the way that he solved it?
> *** Rbi8 Matthew 22:15-22 ***
> 15 Then the Pharisees went their way and took counsel together in order
to
> trap him in his speech. 16 So they dispatched to him their disciples,
> together with party followers of Herod, saying: "Teacher, we know you
are
> truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and you do not care for
anybody,
> for you do not look upon men's outward appearance. 17 Tell us,
therefore,
> What do you think? Is it lawful to pay head tax to Caesar or not?" 18
But
> Jesus, knowing their wickedness, said: "Why do YOU put me to the test,
> hypocrites? 19 Show me the head tax coin." They brought him a de·nar'i·
us.
> 20 And he said to them: "Whose image and inscription is this?" 21 They
said:
> "Caesar's." Then he said to them: "Pay back, therefore, Caesar's things
to
> Caesar, but God's things to God." 22 Well, when they heard [that], they
> marveled, and leaving him they went off."
> Christians the laws of men provided that they do no conflict with the
law of
> God.
>
> 8/ Real Christians do not engage in warfare. This must be obvious from
other
> things that have been mentioned. Read what Jesus said to the apostle
Peter.
> *** Rbi8 Matthew 26:51-52 ***
> 52 Then Jesus said to him: "Return your sword to its place, for all
those
> who take the sword will perish by the sword."
> It is well known that the early Christians refused to engage in
warfare.
> This is one of the reasons why they were persecuted. If a soldier
became a
> Christian he quite being a soldier.
>
> 9/ Real Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.
They
> believe in the words of the apostle Paul when he wrote.
> *** Rbi8 2 Timothy 3:16-17 ***
> 16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for
> reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in
righteousness,
> 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for
every
> good work."
>
> John
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Jesus died on Wednesday
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903BBBE.EE80D9F0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614839166
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <D9AEF7248A2B0CDA.D422BAFFD1A8AACD.84D601E010109101
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390194F5.E43ECF3F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <DSiM4.1948$Qn1.625743
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956545924 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
22:12:04 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:12:04 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Jennifer Usher wrote:
> "John Weatherly" <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:390194F5.E43ECF3F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > That "stuff" below gave me quite a giggle.
> > You would re-write the Bible.
> > I predict that God will erase your name from the Book of Life!
>
> So, according to you, believing Christ died on a Friday is a
requirement for
> salvation? I certainly hope that is not what you are trusting in, even
> remotely.
>
> --
> Jennifer Usher
I didn't say that, Jennifer. I was predicting this person's fate based on
his
desire to re-write scripture. I personally don't care either what day
Jesus
died, or which day He rose. I believe smarter people with better
resources could
and have calculated which day Jesus died. The im****tant fact to be sure
of is
that He rose on Sunday (the 1st day of the week in that day). And I only
say
that day is im****tant because that's when the account of His resurrection
says
the resurrection took place, and I believe it's VERY im****tant to take
the Bible
literally whenever possible. I don't believe we mortals should or have
the right
to re-interpret clear scripture.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: IS GOD THE AUTHOR OF CONFUSION?
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903CAAA.68ECF389@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614854655
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8dueme$8ds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <28963198.9d36d3e8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956549744 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
23:15:44 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 23:15:44 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.christnet.bible,alt.bible,alt.religion
..christian.calvary-chapel
Well, we can certainly do***ent the Old Testament just by going to the
Jews. The
orthodox have been the custodians of the Old Testament for well over
3,000
years.
We do***ent the New Testament by internal evidences, and by external
evidences.
Among the internal evidences for the New Testament are its referencse to
places,
dates, and people whom we can do***ent elsewhere. Events are described in
detail
that took place in such real places as Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Athens, and
Rome.
That is a tipoff to the real historicity of those events. Dates are given
in
reference to rulers whom we know existed, such as local governors, the
Caesars,
and at least one Pharoah. The external evidence at times matches the
internal
evidences, as described above. External evidence also includes the
commentaries
and histories left behind by the early church historians / apostles.
I think the non-believers and skeptics too often laugh when they should
be
studying. Too many, like Lobotomy (he calls himself Libertarius), only
read
stuff that sup****ts their own corrupt POV. Then they/he call themselves
"educated". Reading only that which sup****ts your own corrupt POV is not
education; it's brainwa****ng.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I don't think God is so much the author of confusion, as it is we,
> ourselves, and our many varied kinds of interpretation of scripture.
> Eric.
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com
The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: another Easter question
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903CFC7.DCE19029@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614859689
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <FreeSpeech-2304002056080001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956551053 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
23:37:33 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 23:37:33 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Actually, we DO have 1st century do***ents that verify/authenticate the
texts/Bibles we currently have. Every translation of the Bible we have
since
the New International Version has been derived from the 1st century
do***ents
unearthed at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls).
So while your theory is interesting, it isn't factual. And we Christians
aren't nearly as mindless, as sheepy, or as unread as you might wish to
believe. If you don't wish to believe in Christ/Christianity/the Bible,
you
may certainly not believe, and I will not cry for you. However, don't
believe
for a moment that you are somehow on some intellectual high ground. You
aren't.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Since crucifixion was the punishment for sedition, it is highly
unlikely
> the two others crucfied with Jesus were thieves.
>
Don't believe, but don't re-write the Bible to suit yourself. Instead,
you
might want to check the Pe****a translation, the first century Bible,
which
most pseudo-scholar/skeptics don'teven know about. Lobotomy has laughed
at it,
but his scholar****p is dubious, since he is a hard-core skeptic, and
quite
possibly demon-possessed. It is doubtful that Lobotomy is open enough to
give
any serious consideration to pro-Bible scholar****p. I have confronted him
on
that issue before, and he lamely claims "there isn't any". Well, I
personally
have known roughly a dozen Bible scholars in my lifetime who read the
Hebrew,
Greek, and Aramic ****tions of the Bible fluently. One of my professors in
seminary was Dr. Butrus Abdul-Malik, an Egyptian Christian member of one
of
the original 7 churches (the churches the Epistles were written to), and
he
read a unique Bible he invented, which consisted of a Hebrew Old
Testament
bound to a Greek New Testament. He didn't bother with a translation. And
I've
known several scholars who were involved in the translation of the
ancient
(1st century) manuscripts into the modern translations we use today.
>
> It is far more likely they were Zealots or Nazarenes - members of the
> revolutionary groups that sought to liberate Judea from Roman
occupation.
What makes you think either one was a Jew? But perhaps. Just as likely,
they
were non-believing gentiles.
>
>
> Jesus's execution was not an end in itself but rather part of a pattern
of
> crucifying Zealots and especially their leaders in order to terrorise
the
> Jewish population into submission.
It was both. He was put to death in the Roman manner because the Romans
and
the Jews were tired of Him, and the op****tunity arose to get rid of Him.
He
was also put to death in the Roman manner to discourage others from doing
what
He was doing.
>
> Jesus a few days earlier entered Jerusalem riding an ass, in the manner
of
> entry expected of the liberating Messiah - a fact that could hardly
have
> been lost on the crowds filling Jerusalem for the festival of Passover.
Correct. See? We *can* agree, when you don't re-write.
>
>
> He also launched a raid on the temple mount. Furthermore he was a
friend
> of individual zealots
I don't know where you got that. Actually, the Bible records two
occasions
when He invaded the Temple. They're known in Christianity as "Cleansing
the
Temple" and many don't realize that He did that twice. He began His
minstry by
cleansing the temple, and He did it again towards the end of His
ministry.
>
>
> Jesus, who clearly was claimed to be of the line of King David, was
> executed as the "King of The Jews"
Correct. This was one of the titles that was painted on the board above
his
head.
>
>
> The later written accounts have been adjusted from the original events
to
> alter the interpretation and impact of these events and this was done
> during the time of Paul of Tarsus.
There is no do***entation for this statement whatever. Please quote
sources.
We have sources that indicate the historicity of the Bible.
>
>
> Paul sought to embrace these events with his synthesis of paganism and
> gnosticism that came to be regarded as the "true" account and
> interpretation. Paulism became modern Christianity.
In fact, all through his epistles, Paul refutes both paganism and
gnosticism.
He continually reiterates Christ's preaching, and he even went to Athens
to
debate the philosophers of his day, refuting paganism and gnosticism in
the
presence of Socrates, apparently.
>
>
> But who really was the man that the Romans killed?
The Romans executed Jesus. We know that as historical fact, both from the
Christian sources, and from the non-Christian, such as Josephus (tho I am
not
certain that Josephus himself referred to the crucifixion; I believe he
did)
>
>
> And why aren't we allowed to recognise him as who he truly was instead
as
> remembering him as part of a superstitious fantasy?
We Christians aren't the fanciful ones. We have do***entation for our
faith.
The history of Christianity, all the way back to the 1st century, when
Christ
founded His church in Jerusalem, is do***ented by His followers. In fact,
the
life/death/resurrection of Christ is one of the most do***ented events in
the
last 2,000 years. Before you argue this point, compare the do***entation
of
*any* other ancient event with this one.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Lest we Forget Jesus of Nazareth
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: IS GOD THE AUTHOR OF CONFUSION?
Date: 2000/04/23
Message-ID: <3903C8AE.A8C7D8A2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614852665
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8dueme$8ds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8duglb$ad5$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3902F72F.828266AD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39039623.4BD9EFE2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956549236 63.225.166.210 (Sun, 23 Apr 2000
23:07:16 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 23:07:16 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.bible,alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion
..christian.calvary-
chapel,talk.religion.misc,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet
Ah! Hi, there, Lobotomy!
We don't know who wrote Acts, and I don't engage in such speculations as
why
Acts appears to contradict itself or other passages. I know others who
would
probably be very good at that task, but I admit that I am not one of
them.
However, we certainly have other books we *can* trust, such as the
epistles
and the gospels. And there are cetainly histories and commentaries that
we can
refer to which back up the entire Bible. I can't comment more
specifically on
that since I no longer have my library.
That one is not able to give exact quotes or "name names" doesn't mean
we're
making things up, Lobotomy!
And I ask again, if you hate Christianity and the Bible so much, why do
you
waste time in here? I'll tell you why. Because your father, Satan, pushes
you
into trying to cause strife. Surely, you could find something more
productive
to do than attack Christians.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> >
> > d.pet...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >
> > > It is thought by some that Acts is a fictionalised account of the
> > > spread of Christianity, possibly written by Papias of Hierapolis
about
> > > 140 ad. There are no surviving biblical texts before 145 ad (a
small
> > > fragment of the Gospel of John).
> >
> > The Gospels and Epistles are freely quoted by the apostolic fathers
from
> > 90 AD on.
>
> ===>NAME those "apostolic fathers", if you can. Or
> admit you are just making things
> up.
>
> Libertarius
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: evidence that sup****ts King Solomon ?
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <39019284.37672CB@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614275264
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <39010b11.7004420@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956404293 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
06:51:33 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:51:33 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Check at
1. your local Christian bookstore
you will find numerous non-Biblical sources at the local Christian
bookstore, presuming it's a good one.
2. your local non-Roman seminary
all you'll get from the local Roman seminary is the Roman slant, which
is very tainted with "we are the only church" dung.
3. Amazon.com
having worked there, they pride themselves on a policy of "if it
exists, we'll find it."
NOTE: that is not an endoresement of any kind for Amazon.com. What
they
re good at is books. What they are not so good at is people.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Hi. I'm doing a paper for a college history course. Is there
> non-Biblical evidence that sup****ts the existence of King Solomon.
> Since this is a history course (composed of Jews, Christians, and
> Muslims, etc.) I cannot just accept the Biblical account on faith with
> regards to this paper.
>
> Are there historical re****ts of Solomon's Temple? Archeological
> evidence? Recommended sources? Thanks.
>
> Tim
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: 13th deciple?
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <390198FD.CF471A7F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614281746
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <_c8M4.8061$4W3.107412@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956405951 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:19:11 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:19:11 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel
Ummmmm... I thought Benny was the reinacrnation of Jesus.
(just kidding) Actually, Benny claims to be a reincarnation of another
charismatic phony by the name of Kathryn Kuhlman.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Is Benny Hinn the 13th deciple?
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Jesus died on Wednesday
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <390194F5.E43ECF3F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614277646
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <D9AEF7248A2B0CDA.D422BAFFD1A8AACD.84D601E010109101
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956404919 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:01:59 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:01:59 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
That "stuff" below gave me quite a giggle.
You would re-write the Bible.
I predict that God will erase your name from the Book of Life!
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Just a few thoughts for your creative juices...
>
> Jesus was crucified on Wednesday. He was in the ground 72 hours. The
> empty tomb was discovered in the Sunday morning darkness, before
> sunrise.
>
> There was a special day that week...Thursday, a "high day."
>
> John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that
> the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for
> that sabbath day was an high day) besought Pilate that their legs
> might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
>
> The sabbath day spoken about here was Thursday of that week, not the
> regular Saturday sabbath. There were two sabbaths that week.
>
> He was in the ground 3 days and 3 nights, seventy-two hours, from
> Thursday evening to Saturday evening.
>
> Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's
> belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the
> heart of the earth.
>
> He left the tomb on Saturday evening. The empty tomb was discovered
> BEFORE the sun arose on Sunday.
>
> John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when
> it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away
> from the sepulchre.
>
> The tomb was ALREADY empty.
>
> Matt 26:61 And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple
> of God, and to build it in three days.
>
> Matt 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he
> was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
>
> Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer
> many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests,
> and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
>
> John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and
> in three days I will raise it up.
>
> The idea of "good Friday" and "Maundy Thursday" are more based in
> tradition than scripture.
>
> D*
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Sultan of Spam Returns (was Re: NewChristianArtist)
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <39019882.DDE50A4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614280645
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <20000417204402.27073.00002181@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3900EE7E.8B1E7A12@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390100b0.30686617@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956405830 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:17:10 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:17:10 CDT
Newsgroups: rec.music.christian,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.fan.bob-larson
I am sorry to see that someone in this news nroup who professes that he
is a
Christian would openly state that he likes John Denver. I attended a
John Denver
concert when I lived in California. He set a long poem to music. The poem
was
basically a very long explanation of all the problems he had with
Christianity.
The jist was, "Some come to God via Jesus, others come to God some other
way. And
the Christians should not tell us that we have to come to God through
Jesus.
That's a turnoff!"
McGovern wrote:
> And what makes it "inspirational?" Are people actually inspired by it,
> or is it just a product slepped w/ the "inspirational" label so
> teary-eyed charismatics will send in their credit card numbers?
>
> BTW - say what you will, I like John Denver. :)
>
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2000 18:12:47 -0600, Range...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> >Raric wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I'm new tothis group, and was advised by a producer for
crosswalk.com to
> >> post some info about my new CDs and where you can take a listen to
my
> >> inspirational songs.
> >
> <snip>
> >
> >> A little John Denver is thrown in there too.
> >
> > No comment necessary. :P
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Memorial of Jesus death
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <39019E4F.29263585@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614284389
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <14889-38F9F738-17@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956407317 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:41:57 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:41:57 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.episcopal
Why do you phonies come into a Christian news group?
Repent and be saved!
John 3:16, which you quote, says that "Whosoever believes on Him (the
Son,
not the watchtower socieity) shall not perish but shall have eternal
life."
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
J wrote:
> Jehovah's Witnesses warmly invite you to
> remember with them God's gift of his Son,
> Jesus Christ. This gift opened up the prospect
> of enjoying everlasting life on earth(Jn 3:16)
>
> This year the Memorial of Jesus' death will be
> observed after sundown on Wednesday, April
> 19. That date corresponds to Nisan 14 on the
> Bible's lunar calendar. Please check with
> Jehovah's Witnesses locally for the exact
> meeting place and time.
>
> "Upon the WATCHTOWER, O Jehovah, I am standing constantly by day, and
my
> guardpost I am stationed all the nights..." Isa 21:8
>
> http://community.webtv.net/OnTheWatchtower/Previewthelatest
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: What Christian Doctrine Looks Like!
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <390195CC.17DCF8BA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614279291
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <NsDL4.3330$i84.15653@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<20000420111207.18690.00002117@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <200420001214291050%
adamsfmmac@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39006ac6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8drjtn$6dg$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956405135 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:05:35 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:05:35 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.metho
dist,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
The meaning of "born of water" is not clear from the text you site. "Born
of
water" could just as easily refer to our human birty, since the "water"
that
breaks does resemble water.
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
's Disciple wrote:
> aml <durw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:39006ac6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >. It's amazing that you
> > question Dave being a Methodist, I've been wondering if you were even
> > Christian, muchless Methodist.
>
> They aren't. Just Hypocrites and profound Heretics.
>
> They aren't even baptised into Christ's saving name.
>
> They are not "buried with him in baptism" Col 2:12 (KJV)
> or "Born of water" [baptism by immersion] So such as Jesus states
"cannot
> enter the kingdom of God"John 3:5 (KJV)
>
> Just a completely useless 'tinkle of a sprinkle' when unbelieving tiny
babes
> in arms.
>
> The rest of their blatant heretical stance on a refusal to accept the
Lord's
> command on a women's "Silence in the church" is obvious to all.
>
> "God is not a God of confusion but a God of peace.
> As is true in all the churches of God's people, women should keep
quiet
> ["Keep silence". AV.] in the church meetings. They are not allowed to
speak,
> but they must YIELD to this rule as the LAW says.
> If they want to learn something, they should ask their own husbands at
home.
> It is SHAMEFUL for a woman to speak in the church meeting."
> [SPEAK: Strong's Greek No. 2980
> Greek word: laleo {lal-eh'-o}
> Part of Speech: v
> Vine's Word(s): Say, Speak, Talk, Tell, Utter
> Usage Notes:
> KJV - speak 244
> - say 15
> - tell 12
> - talk 11
> - PREACH 6
> - utter 4
> - misc 3
> - vr speak 1 [Total Count: 296]
> 1) to utter a voice or emit a sound
> 2) to speak
> 2a) to use the tongue or the faculty of speech
> 2b) to utter articulate sounds
> 3) to talk
> 4) to utter, tell
> 5) **To use words in order to declare one's mind and disclose one's
thoughts
> 5a) to speak]
>
> "Did God's teaching come from you? Or are you the only ones to whom it
has
> come?
> 37 Those who think they are prophets or spiritual persons should
understand
> that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command.
> 38 Those who ignore this will be ignored by God." 1 Cor 14:33-38 (NCV)
>
> Now they compound their arragant denial of God and his Word by making
such
> "silly women laden with sins" forbidden to SPEAK or **PREACH by
command, as
> 'Bishops' when the Scripture shows only men could qualify for
authority and
> service in the overseeing of the flock of God.
>
> "This is a true saying, If a MAN desire the office of a bishop, HE
desireth
> a good work.
> 2 A BISHOP then must be blameless, the HUSBAND one WIFE, vigilant,
sober, of
> good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
> 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but
patient,
> not a brawler, not covetous;
> 4 One that ruleth well HIS OWN HOUSE, having HIS children in subjection
with
> all gravity;
> 5 For if a MAN" [not Women] "know not how to rule HIS OWN house, how
shall
> HE take care
> of the church of God?
> 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride HE fall into the
> condemnation of the devil.
> 7 Moreover HE must have a good re****t of them which are without; lest
he
> fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
>
> 8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to
much
> wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
> 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
> 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of
a
> DEACON, being found blameless.
> 11 Even so must THEIR WIVES" [Not Their HUBANDS ] be grave, not
> slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
> 12 LET THE DEACONS be the HUSBANDS OF ONE WIFE, ruling their children
and
> their own houses well.
> 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to
> themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in
Christ
> Jesus. 1 Tim 3:1-13 (KJV)
>
> This brings them in contention with God's Word again. For the
Methodists
> have decided they know better then the truly spiritual gifted
Apostles.?
>
> Just more of their conceited blatant heretical arrogance.
>
> Now Homo'Sodomite "Fornicators" who "cannot enter the kingdom of God"
are
> re****ted as being ordained. What wonderful "fruits" they show as their
> "Blind lead the blind" in their predicable 'den of iniquity'
denomination.
>
> The mind boggles at their Laodicean complacency.
>
> Yet are such willing to humbly accept their unscriptual stance and
their
> corruption of the faith in both 'Doctrine & Practise' and repent and
"Do the
> first works" of the 1st Century churches....?
>
> Let's ask them?
>
> Sincerely Jeff...
> Christ's Disciple
> "He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and
> forsaketh them shall have mercy." Prov 28:13 (KJV)
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: The Sabbath is so beautiful
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <3901A0D4.729D34EC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614287653
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8dqudc$k6j$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <390150FB.321EA3F2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956407963 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:52:43 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:52:43 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.adventist
These notes are a true testimony to the truth of the old saying, "You
will see
what you want to see."
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> I found something interresting I would like to share.
>
> It is easy to pick fault at why most Christians meet on Sunday. Most
every
> SDA worth his weight in salt can do so. How
> about reversing the coin for just a few days and reading about the
Sabbath
> from the other side of the coin and seeing what others see when we keep
the
> Sabbath. Go to this Web site http://www.ask.com
and type in
"Sabbath"
> in the search line. Study everything you can find on the Sabbath for
> several days,
> but do not bother reading SDA material, because you already know what
you
> think now. After you
> read everything you can find from other points of view, maybe, just
maybe,
> you will see something for
> the first time -- That Jesus is the reality for the shadow of the
Sabbath.
> I detest the shadows, now
> that I can stand in the light of Jesus.
>
> P.S. Sunday is also just a shadow. Jesus is not a day -- He is
everyday.
>
> julie...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> > Happy Sabbath everybody. It is such a blessing to have this special
> > day set aside each week to rest from all our work and to spend
quality
> > time with our Father in Heaven and our brothers and sisters in
Christ.
> >
> > No matter what is on the agenda, God has made sure that we are to
leave
> > it there this day. We can leave all the cares of the world behind
and
> > simply rest physically and spiritually. The blessed Sabbath Day is
the
> > only day we can do both these things completely. Refresh yourselves
in
> > the Lord this Day my brothers and sisters.
> >
> > The Sabbath is so beautiful.
> >
> > May God Bless you all.
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: It's KJV-Only time !
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <3901937D.7EDC2C6D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614276668
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <39015A29.105110CD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956404543 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
06:55:43 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:55:43 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.calvinist,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt.bible,alt
..christnet.bible,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Usually, KJV adherents are non-educated, non-thinkers who follow
"charismatic" "leader****p" who are also non-educated, non-thinkers.
I actually had a charismatic "brother" many years ago who actually said
to me, "Of course, I read the KJV. If it was good enough for Peter and
Paul, it's good enough for me!"
john weatherly
The DataRat wrote:
> Well, The DataRat guess it's about
> time to revisit the KJV-Only controversy.
>
> KJV-Only loonies naively believe that
> the King James Version of the Bible is
> direct revelation from God, Himself.
>
> More moderate KJV-Only proponents
> hold that it's the most perfect translation
> of Scripture. And, that any variation
> from the King James text is de facto
> proof of error.
>
> BOTH views are wrong !
>
> ( More to follow )
>
> The DataRat
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Joseph of Nazareth
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <3901917E.DECD4109@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614275904
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3900F887.1AAB9ED4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956404032 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
06:47:12 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:47:12 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
This question has been discussed in church and seminary since I was a
child. Since the Bible doesn't tell us what happened to Joseph, we can
assume several things. First of all, I believe it is pretty clear that
every word of scripture is im****tant. If Joseph's whereabouts is not
clear, we can perhaps assume that his whereabouts weren't / aren't
im****tant to the substance of the Gospel. Perhaps Joseph died before
Jesus
began His ministry. We do know that he was considerably older than Mary.
john weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anderson wrote:
> Whatever happened to Joseph of Nazareth?
>
> He just seems to disappear.... surely he didn't abandon his family!!!!
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: The Roman Church is the Beast
Date: 2000/04/22
Message-ID: <39019561.4619B078@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614278813
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <38f03b9f.1367687442@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BgeJ4.7619$IT6.33591
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38f59e33.56033980@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<8d5vjm0hor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8d7ptc$vns$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <delagee-
4CC6BA.21365414042000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <8dapl101uge@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<838ifskr97n2lt7dhvbqstecbk3k9p2454@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38FAD023.DBC6BFC3
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <ZKMK4.5595$qF4.535546@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<bkppfs0phuon27vo8vg0pok0hpiavlh0on@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<Pine.LNX.4.21.0004181646570.19538-100000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fd83f6.4550701@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0004210945550.18603-
100000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <39013d76.3851450@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956405028 63.225.165.251 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000
07:03:48 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 07:03:48 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.last-
days,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.east-
orthodox,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt.c
hristnet.christianlife,alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.baptist
Ephesians 2:20 says quite clearly that Jesus is the cornerstone of His
church. Peter
isn't mentioned.
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Townsend wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2000, "Theodore M. Seeber" wrote:
>
> Matthew 16:18
> >"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock
> >I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it.
>
> Michael Townsend :
> >In saying this, Jesus Christ was not referring in any way to the
superstitious
> >ungodly "roman-catholic" organisation.
>
> Ted Seeber :
> >Why not? Were you there? Did you read Christ's mind?
>
> We genuine Christians Can and Do and Have read the Mind of Christ, and
also the Mind
> of GOD the Father, and the Mind of the Spirit of GOD, and the minds of
all of
> Christ's inspired apostles, and the minds all of GOD's inspired
prophets.
> And these HolyThree and their inspired infalible apostles are unanimous
in the
> specific parameters and requirements for Christ's one true Church.
>
> The "roman-catholic"cult fails in many respects to comply with the
parameters and
> requirements for Christ's one true Church. Hence my original
statement.
>
> Tom Goodman :
> >Jesus didn't say to Peter, "You're the only ruler of this Church".
>
> Michael Townsend :
> >True. The Bible teaches that Christ is the Head of His Church.
> >[ for GOD's proof, refer to Ephesians 1 : 22 & 4 : 15, and Colossians
1 : 18 ]
>
> Ted Seeber :
> >That's Paul, not God. Paul is not a part of my trinity.
>
> It's interesting to see you publicly insist that apostle****p and
apostolicity have no
> authority in the Church.
> Thank you for confirming that the "roman-catholic" cult no longer
attaches any
> significance or im****tance to its former boasts to be "apostolic".
> It has of course been obvious for many centuries that "roman-
catholicism"'s claim to
> be "apostolic" was as fraudulent as its claim to be "holy".
>
> Ted Seeber :
> >That's Paul, not God.
>
> So you're telling us that for you, the entire New Testament is
redundant except for
> the words of Jesus.
> And using your pathetic "reasoning", all of the Old Testanent is also
redundant for
> you except for the words of GOD in Person.
>
> By this, you're implying that they who decided the canon of the Old and
New Testament
> Scriptures were misguided block-heads because they were deprived of
your "superior
> discernment" as to what is and is not authoritative in the Bible.
>
> Since in your considered view the teachings of GOD's prophets and
Christ's apostles
> are irrelevant, redundant and superfluous, your religious meetings
reduced in
> duration by deleting all readings of the New Testament epistles and
most of the
> readings from the Old Testament.
>
> You should also request the "pope" and his Vatican officially rescind
the "papal
> encyclical of Pius XII "Divino Afflante Spiritu" because now that
you've chopped
> almost all of the Bible, there's little point in urging the "roman-
catholic" serfs
> a.k.a. "laity" to waste their valuable time on what is to you a useless
artefact.
>
> Ted Seeber :
> >Sure looks like he said exactly that to me. What word didn't you
understand?
>
> Michael Townsend :
> >Your ignorance of GOD's Scriptures is sad to see.
>
> Ted Seeber :
> >And your lack of intelligence makes the rest of this letter not worth
replying to.
>
> Oh ?
> If you want to see an imbecile, look in your bathroom mirror, because
anyone who
> considers the Bible to be mostly redundant is either a Moron or has a
negative IQ.
> You decide which of these applies to you, the incomparable Monsignor
Ted Seeber.
>
> >On this day, the Feast of St. Circularius;
> >the patron saint of lost bicycles and motor scooters.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Eating meat.
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <3900F804.311E730@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614154189
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <1388ac9c.2b010e12@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956364736 63.225.165.131 (Fri, 21 Apr 2000
19:52:16 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 19:52:16 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
We don't see meat forbidden in the early Old Testament. We don't see it
mentioned that Adam/Eve were supposed to or not supposed to eat meat. I
have
always believed that since they were given the earth and its fruits to
subdue
and use, that includes meat. However, by the time the Levitical laws
appear,
they are told what animals they are permitted to eat, and which to avoid.
Also,
you are incorrect that "all meat contains blood". The prohibition of
"eating
blood" meant that the Israelis were supposed to kill the meat they were
going to
eat and then bleed it according to prescribed rituals and for specified
lenghts
of time. This bleeding or draining out of the animal's blood left the
animal
"bloodless" and fit for Israeli consumption. Many wondered why the
Israelis were
prohibited from blood until modern science discovered how many diseases
that are
fatal to humans are carried in blood. AIDS is one example. Syphilis is
another
one.
It was acceptable to eat properly bled meat by Leviticus. The Israelis
were
commanded to eat meat when Noah and his descendants came off the ark.
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> I was told recently that in the early bible, everyone was vegetarian.
> It was strictly forbidden to eat blood which would make you vegetarian
> since all meat contains blood. My questions are: Was there a time in
> the bible that it was forbidden to eat blood or meat? and If this is
> true, when did it become acceptable to eat meat?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> CMT
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com
The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Why I left the UPC
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <3900742A.DFEC1C29@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 613986093
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <38f2513b_5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38F892AB.5D1D917@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fca40f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fca686.13064830@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fccad9.1723713@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fecb68.22508279@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956331014 207.224.252.79 (Fri, 21 Apr 2000
10:30:14 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:30:14 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
1. Galatians tells us to correct those we find in scriptural error.
2. This post really cracks me up, since the one by Huldah just above this
one
states that many/most pentecostals/charismatics *do* believe in the
trinity.
john
Mark Bassett wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 20:53:24 GMT, hul...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Huldah) wrote:
>
> >>>I am wondering why you are trying to "Save" we apostolics. If you
think we
> >>>are wrong, then leave us be, quit trying to "convert" us. I don't
> >>>understand why you would come and try to stir up trouble in a
pentecostal
> >>>post anyways.
> >
> >Given that the overwhelming majority of Pentecostals believe in the
> >triune God of the Bible, what are *you* doing stirring up trouble in a
> >trinitarian newsgroup?
>
> Most Christians, according to every evaluation that I have ever seen,
regard
> the doctrine of the Trinity as an intellectual difficulty that they are
> supposed to accept according to their church, but believe that Jesus is
God
> Almighty, somehow, visiting mankind with His deity, and paying the
price of
> redemption with his own blood.
>
> Christianity is, by nature, Apostolic and Monotheistic AS OPPOSED TO
being
> "Trinitarian".
>
> The fact that your silly traditions have lived as long as they have
simply
> speaks of a tradition of forcing theological views on those who cannot
speak
> for themselves. Roman Catholicism, and later the state religions of
both
> Germany and England were both very good at that, being equipped with
the
> power of the sword and subpoena to eliminate all contest.
>
> -mwb
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Why I left the UPC
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <39007587.306B877F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 613987728
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <38f2513b_5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38F892AB.5D1D917@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fca40f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fca686.13064830@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38fccad9.1723713@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <2qmL4.3075
$aG.59212@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956331364 207.224.252.79 (Fri, 21 Apr 2000
10:36:04 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:36:04 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Well, hehehehehehehehe!
We are now in a debate over whether this is a oneness non-trinitarian
news group, or
whether it's actually a trinitarian news group. Someone suggested that
"we count heads".
That is ridiculous. This is a public forum. I have tried multiple times
to figure out who
is/are the majority in any news group. The truth is, the title of the
news group is more
an indication of what is being discussed within the group than of the
viewpoints of its
contributors.
And I have seen both trinitarians declaring themselves (us) to be the
majority in here,
and the Oneness (anti-trinitarian) folks claiming the same majority.
Frankly, I think that's kinda sad. Both believe they are the correct POV.
And at least
some in both groups condemn the others as "heretics".
john
Raymond wrote:
> "Huldah" <hul...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:38fccad9.1723713@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:29:40 GMT, mbas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mark
Bassett)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >>I am wondering why you are trying to "Save" we apostolics. If you
think we
> > >>are wrong, then leave us be, quit trying to "convert" us. I don't
> > >>understand why you would come and try to stir up trouble in a
pentecostal
> > >>post anyways.
> >
> > Given that the overwhelming majority of Pentecostals believe in the
> > triune God of the Bible, what are *you* doing stirring up trouble in
a
> > trinitarian newsgroup?
> >
> The problem is here in the NG you got more ONENESS then Trinitarians so
why do "you"
> stirring up trouble in a Oneness newsgroup? Check it out how many
here are for and
> how many against. Then since this is the Oneness/Trinitarian
newsgroup, everyone can
> stir up trouble, you do believe that, or at least you write like it.
>
> In the love of Jesus,
> Raymond
>
> ---
> > Huldah
> >
> > For the Bible truth about 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, see:
> > http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/homepage
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: The Bible is NOT God's word
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <3900F54E.81CAAA25@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 614152059
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8dpjp2$6n3$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956364043 63.225.165.131 (Fri, 21 Apr 2000
19:40:43 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 19:40:43 CDT
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt
..christnet.calvinist
I congratulate you on finding errors in the Bible. Now, I have a question
for you. In all the time yu spent looking for errors, did you find any
truths?
The overall message of Christianity/the Bible is salvation for fallen
man.
You have certainly showed us your fallen nature with this post. Have you
discovred the loving, Holy God who took human form to die in your place
to
provide you salavtion?
In His love,
john
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> It has been argued by theists that the Bible, as it stands, is the
> perfect and holy work of god. I hereby present my refutation of that
> statement.
>
> premise 1:
> 1) God is perfect
>
> Any "GOD" must be perfect if is he/she/it is to be all powerful. Having
> a flaw makes the being imperfect, thus a "god" is, by definition,
> perfect.
>
> premise 2:
> 2) A creation of God is perfect
>
> Anything created by a perfect being must, by definition, also be
> perfect. A perfect creator cannot put flaws into the design unless it
is
> on purpose. To create a holy work with intentional flaws is ridiculous
> to even consider the reasons for, so is presented as sub-premise 2:
>
> sub premises of 2:
> 2a) A perfect God would not intentionally create a flawed work to be
his
> "holy
> word".
> 2b) The Bible is the Christian "Holy Work" of God.
>
> premise 3:
> 3) There are errors in the Bible.
>
> noted errors (simple to find and collect)
> 1) David took -seven hundred- (2 Sam. 8:4)
> vs -seven thousand- (1 Chron. 18:4) horsemen from Hadadezer
> 2) Ahaziah was -22- (2 Kings 8:26),
> vs -42- (2 Chron. 22:2) years old when he began to reign
> 3) Jehoiachin was -18- (2 Kings 24:8)
> vs -8- (2 Chron. 36:9) years old when he began to reign
> 4) Jehoiachin reigned -3- months- (2 Kings 24:8)
> vs -3 months and 10 days- (2 Chron. 36:9);
> 5) There were in Israel -8000,000- (2 Sam. 24:9)
> vs -1,1000,000- (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword
> 6) There were -500,000- (2 Sam. 24:9)
> vs -470,000- (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword in Judah;
>
> According to premises 1, 2, and 3 the Bible is not perfect, and thus is
> not the direct work of God.
>
> Common Defenses
> 1) The numbers are translator errors or poor math on the part of the
> writers.
>
> -It makes no difference. If God created the Bible to be perfect and his
> true word, then he would have guided the hand of the translator to
> insure that his word remained true. The fact that there are errors, man
> made errors, sup****ts my claim.
>
> 2) The numbers are estimations, and different people make different
> estimations.
>
> -Again, it makes no difference. If God created the Bible, then he
should
> have been the one estimating. Besides, why would GOD need to estimate??
> God should KNOW how many men there were, or what year it was, or how
old
> someone was, since he/she/it is GOD. The fact that humans made the
> errors and wrote them into the Bible sup****ts my claim.
>
> 3) If 3 people witness a car crash, they will give three inaccurate
> statements, but they will be describing the same crash.
>
> -Again, you are inserting the flaws of man into the Bible. IF it is the
> work of GOD, then it must be inerrant. It cannot contain ANY flaws, or
> it is written by man and not by GOD, inspiration from God or not.
> Besides, 700 vs 7000 (error 1) is NOT possible under this defense. If
> you cannot distinguise 700 people from 7000, you need some other job
> besides Biblical Author.
>
> Assertions.
> ============
> Since the Bible is not perfect, it is therefore not the direct work of
a
> God.
>
> This leaves two options:
>
> 1) God dictated the Bible to his followers, who then put the errors in
> during transcription.
>
> 2) The Bible is solely the work of man, without divine intervention.
>
> Option 1 depends on heresay and conjecture. If Moses wrote the first 5
> books of the Old Testament, then we are relying on his inspiration from
> God, or (since the works are in the 3rd person) more likely his words
> put down by other scribes based on oral tradition and myth. Thus, the
> "true" word of God is moved back not one step (from God to the Bible to
> me) but several steps (from God to Moses (or whomever) to scribes
> (unknown number) to translators to the Bible to me). This is of no use
> to me since 1) I've recieved no personal insight from a divine creator
> and 2) There exist other such works with equal value in terms of
> tradition and myth (ie: the Koran).
>
> Option 2 rejects God as the driving force behind the Bible altogether,
> although this option is often debated by theists as being false and
> blasphemous. However, since option 1 seems improbable at best, it then
> puts the question forward: What exactly WAS God's influence on the
> Bible?
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Why I left the UPC
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <39007316.9F857707@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: 613983609
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <38f2513b_5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <38F892AB.5D1D917@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<38fca40f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 956330740 207.224.252.79 (Fri, 21 Apr 2000
10:25:40 CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:25:40 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
I've been asked several times, why do you come in here and post points of
view
different than ours?
1. Look around, Joe, this is a public area, whether you like it or not.
2. Read Galatians, in which Paul tells us to correct those we find in
error.
"Leaving you alone in what I perceive as your scriptural error isn't an
option.
I am to correct yoiu in love. "Would Jesus do this?" YES! Jesus was
*constantly*
correcting the Pharisees and the Saducees.
john
"Joe A. Stephens" wrote:
> I am wondering why you are trying to "Save" we apostolics. If you
think we
> are wrong, then leave us be, quit trying to "convert" us. I don't
> understand why you would come and try to stir up trouble in a
pentecostal
> post anyways. You have to ask yourself....would Jesus do this? WE are
to
> be Christ like.... Blessed is the peace keeper..for he shall see GOD.
You
> are making an otherwise peaceful post, very unpeaceful.
>
> God Bless you anways,
>
> Bro. Joe Stephens
> jas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:38F892AB.5D1D917@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Thank God!
> > There are some in here and some in the UPC who come to a REAL faith
in
> > Christ/God without all the totally unscriptural shenanigans of
> charismaticism.
> >
> > Yes, the event that took place at Pentecost WAS miraculous! But I
have yet
> to
> > talk to one single 'charismatic Christian" who truly gets the REAL
miracle
> that
> > happened at Pentecost. The charismatic understanding of the Pentecost
> miracle is
> > indeed shallow.
> >
> > I will pray that God continue to reveal Himself to you through His
Spirit!
> >
> > I have been a born-again believer for over 40 years now. And I, too,
was
> briefly
> > caught up in the charismatic madness.
> >
> > Let me know if you have any issues that you'd appreciate a long-time
Bible
> > student's POV on.
> >
> > In Christ,
> > john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Michael wrote:
> >
> > > I became a Christian in March 1998 by deciding to turn from my own
> worldly
> > > ways and take Jesus Christ as my personal savior. I was baptized by
> > > immersion in Jesus' name.
> > >
> > >
> > > Of course I realized that this was not speaking in tongues as
described
> in
> > > the Bible, and in fact I had received the Holy Spirit when I first
> believed.
> > > I also had some serious doubts about other major UPC doctrine -
that of
> > > Oneness vs. Trinity, and legalistic doctrine such as holiness
standards.
> > >
> > > Then in September of 1999 I just couldn't see how I could continue
under
> the
> > > increasingly obvious doctrinal errors. I had a few meetings with
my
> pastor
> > > in which I made sure I wasn't missing something. Indeed, when
directly
> asked
> > > if he really thought it was true that unless one spoke in tongues
they
> weren
> > > 't saved, my pastor tried to dodge my question, but the visiting
revival
> > > preacher sure didn't - laying open the obvious lie. That was it for
me,
> and
> > > with the Lord's blessing I left.
> > >
> > > And what a glorious plan he had in store, for later that month I
found a
> > > wonderful new (Trinitarian evangelical) church. During my first
visit
> there
> > > I sat down next to a beautiful woman whom I have since married - it
was
> so
> > > obvious that the Lord meant for us to be together that it was
joyously
> > > laughable. To top it all off, He also sent me piles of money so
that she
> > > could stay at home and take care of the needs of our family. What a
> glorious
> > > and awesome God - what a plan He had and has for me!
> > >
> > > I thank and praise God daily for my deliverance from the false UPC
> > > teachings. What a mighty God we serve!
> > >
> > > - Michael
> >
> > Praise God!
> > john
> >
> >
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Did Jesus die on a friday?
Date: 2000/04/21
Message-ID: <390054C5.DFBC8680@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
|
