>arose over every issue imaginable: charismatic gifts, interpretation
>of prophecy, the proper way to wor****p, communion, Church government,
>disciple****p, discipline in the Church, morality, accountability,
>evangelism, social action, the relation****p of faith and works, the
>role of women, and e***enism. The list is endless. In fact any issue
>at all could-and often did-cause Christians to part ways. The fruit of
>this sectarian spirit has been the creation of literally thousands of
>independent churches and denominations. As I myself became
>increasingly sectarian, my radicalism intensified, and I came to
>believe that all churches were unbiblical: to become a member of any
>church was to compromise the Faith. For me, "church" meant "the Bible,
>God, and me." This hostility towards the churches fit in well with my
>Jewish background. I naturally distrusted all churches because I felt
>they had betrayed the teachings of Christ by having participated in or
>passively ignored the persecution of the Jews throughout history. But
>the more sectarian I became-to the point of being obnoxious and
>antisocial-the more I began to realize that something was seriously
>wrong with my approach to Christianity. My spiritual life wasn't
>working. Clearly, my privately held beliefs in the Bible and what it
>taught were leading me away from love and community with my fellow
>Christians, and therefore away from Christ. As Saint John the
>Evangelist wrote, "He who does not love his brother whom he has seen,
>how can he love God whom he has not seen?" (1 John 4:20). This
>division and hostility were not what had drawn me to Christ. And I
>knew the answer was not to deny the Faith or reject the Scriptures.
>Something had to change. Maybe it was me. I turned to a study of the
>history of the Church and the New Testament, hoping to shed some light
>on what my attitude toward the Church and the Bible should be. The
>results were not at all what I expected.
>
>THE BIBLE OF THE APOSTLES
>My initial attitude was that whatever was good enough for the Apostles
>would be good enough for me. This is where I got my first surprise. As
>I mentioned previously, I knew that the Apostle Paul regarded
>Scripture as being inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16). But I had always
>assumed that the "Scripture" spoken of in this passage was the whole
>Bible-both the Old and New Testaments. In reality, there was no "New
>Testament" when this statement was made. Even the Old Testament was
>still in the process of formulation, for the Jews did not decide upon
>a definitive list or canon of Old Testament books until after the rise
>of Christianity. As I studied further, I discovered that the early
>Christians used a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the
>Septuagint. This translation, which was begun in Alexandria, Egypt, in
>the third century B.C., contained an expanded canon which included a
>number of the so-called "deuterocanonical" (or "apocryphal") books.
>Although there was some initial debate over these books, they were
>eventually received by Christians into the Old Testament canon. In
>reaction to the rise of Christianity, the Jews narrowed their canons
>and eventually excluded the deuterocanonical books-although they still
>regarded them as sacred. The modern Jewish canon was not rigidly fixed
>until the third century A.D. Interestingly, it is this later version
>of the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, rather than the canon of
>early Christianity, that is followed by most modern Protestants today.
>When the Apostles lived and wrote, there was no New Testament and no
>finalized Old Testament. The concept of "Scripture" was much less
>well-defined than I had envisioned.
>
>EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS
>The second big surprise came when I realized that the first complete
>listing of New Testament books as we have them today did not appear
>until over 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. (The
>first complete listing was given by St. Athanasius in his Paschal
>Letter in A.D. 367.) Imagine it! If the writing of the New Testament
>had been begun at the same time as the U.S. Constitution, we wouldn't
>see a final product until the year 2076! The four Gospels were written
>from thirty to sixty years after Jesus' death and resurrection. In the
>interim, the Church relied on oral tradition-the accounts of
>eyewitnesses-as well as scattered pre-gospel do***ents (such as those
>quoted in 1 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Timothy 2:11-13) and written tradition.
>Most churches only had parts of what was to become the New Testament.
>As the eyewitnesses of Christ's life and teachings began to die, the
>Apostles wrote as they were guided by the Holy Spirit, in order to
>preserve and solidify the scattered written and oral tradition.
>Because the Apostles expected Christ to return soon, it seems they did
>not have in mind that these gospel accounts and apostolic letters
>would in time be collected into a new Bible. During the first four
>centuries A.D. there was substantial disagreement over which books
>should be included in the canon of Scripture. The first person on
>record who tried to establish a New Testament canon was the
>second-century heretic, Marcion. He wanted the Church to reject its
>Jewish heritage, and therefore he dispensed with the Old Testament
>entirely. Marcion's canon included only one gospel, which he himself
>edited, and ten of Paul's epistles. Sad but true, the first attempted
>New Testament was heretical. Many scholars believe that it was partly
>in reaction to this distorted canon of Marcion that the early Church
>determined to create a clearly defined canon of its own. The
>destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, the breakup of the
>Jewish-Christian community there, and the threatened loss of
>continuity in the oral tradition probably also contributed to the
>sense of the urgent need for the Church to standardize the list of
>books Christians could rely on. During this period of the canon's
>evolution, as previously noted, most churches had only a few, if any,
>of the apostolic writings available to them. The books of the Bible
>had to be painstakingly copied by hand, at great expense of time and
>effort. Also, because most people were illiterate, they could only be
>read by a privileged few. The exposure of most Christians to the
>Scriptures was confined to what they heard in the churches-the Law and
>Prophets, the Psalms, and some of the Apostles' memoirs. The
>persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire and the existence of
>many do***ents of non-apostolic origin further complicated the matter.
>This was my third surprise. Somehow I had naively envisioned every
>home and parish having a complete Old and New Testament from the very
>inception of the Church! It was difficult for me to imagine a church
>surviving and prospering without a complete New Testament. Yet
>unquestionably they did. This may have been my first clue that there
>was more to the total life of the Church than just the written Word.
>
>THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO WHOM?
>Next, I was surprised to discover that many "gospels" besides those of
>the New Testament canon were circulating in the first and second
>centuries. These included the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the
>Gospel according to the Egyptians, and the Gospel according to Peter,
>to name just a few. The New Testament itself speaks of the existence
>of such accounts. Saint Luke's Gospel begins by saying, "Inasmuch as
>many [italics added] have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of
>those things which have been fulfilled among us . . . it seemed good
>to me also . . . to write to you an orderly account" (Luke 1:1, 3). At
>the time Luke wrote, Matthew and Mark were the only two canonical
>Gospels that had been written. In time, all but four Gospels were
>excluded from the New Testament canon. Yet in the early years of
>Christianity there was even a controversy over which of these four
>Gospels to use. Most of the Christians of Asia Minor used the Gospel
>of John rather than the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Based upon
>the Passion account contained in John, most Christians in Asia Minor
>celebrated Easter on a different day from those in Rome. Roman
>Christians resisted the Gospel of John and instead used the other
>Gospels. The Western Church for a time hesitated to use the Gospel of
>John because the Gnostic heretics made use of it along with their own
>"secret gospels." Another debate arose over the issue of whether there
>should be separate gospels or one single composite gospel account. In
>the second century, Tatian, who was Justin Martyr's student, published
>a single composite "harmonized" gospel called the Diatessaron. The
>Syrian Church used this composite gospel in the second, third, and
>fourth centuries; they did not accept all four Gospels until the fifth
>century. They also ignored for a time the Epistles of John, 2 Peter,
>and the Book of Revelation. To further complicate matters, the Church
>of Egypt, as reflected in the second-century New Testament canon of
>Clement of Alexandria, included the "gospels" of the Hebrews, the
>Egyptians, and Mattathias. In addition they held to be of apostolic
>origin the First Epistle of Clement (Bishop of Rome), the Epistle of
>Barnabas, the Preaching of Peter, the Revelation of Peter, the
>Didache, the Protevangelium of James, the Acts of John, the Acts of
>Paul, and The Shepherd of Hermas (which they held to be especially
>inspired). Irenaeus (second century), martyred Bishop of Lyons in
>Gaul, included the Revelation of Peter in his canon.
>
>OTHER CONTROVERSIAL BOOKS
>My favorite New Testament book, the Epistle to the Hebrews, was
>clearly excluded in the Western Church in a number of listings from
>the second, third, and fourth centuries. Primarily due to the
>influence of Augustine upon certain North African councils, the
>Epistle to the Hebrews was finally accepted in the West by the end of
>the fourth century. On the other hand, the Book of Revelation, also
>known as the Apocalypse, written by the Apostle John, was not accepted
>in the Eastern Church for several centuries. Among Eastern authorities
>who rejected this book were Dionysius of Alexandria (third century),
>Eusebius (third century), Cyril of Jerusalem (fourth century), the
>Council of Laodicea (fourth century), John Chrysostom (fourth
>century), Theodore of Mopsuesta (fourth century), and Theodoret (fifth
>century). In addition, the original Syriac and Armenian versions of
>the New Testament omitted this book. Many Greek New Testament
>manuscripts written before the ninth century do not contain the
>Apocalypse, and it is not used liturgically in the Eastern Church to
>this day. Athanasius sup****ted the inclusion of the Apocalypse, and it
>is due primarily to his influence that it was eventually received into
>the New Testament canon in the East. The early Church actually seems
>to have made an internal compromise on the Apocalypse and Hebrews. The
>East would have excluded the Apocalypse from the canon, while the West
>would have done without Hebrews. Simply put, each side agreed to
>accept the disputed book of the other. Interestingly, the
>sixteenth-century father of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther,
>held that the New Testament books should be "graded" and that some
>were more inspired than others (that there is a canon within the
>canon). Luther gave secondary rank to Hebrews, James, Jude, and
>Revelation, placing them at the end of his translation of the New
>Testament. Imagine-the man who gave us sola scriptura assumed the
>authority to edit the written Word of God!
>
>THE NEW TESTAMENT MATURES
>I was particularly interested in finding the oldest legitimate list of
>New Testament books. Some believe that the Muratorian Canon is the
>oldest, dating from the late second century. This canon excludes
>Hebrews, James, and the two Epistles of Peter, but includes the
>Apocalypse of Peter and the Wisdom of Solomon. It is not until A.D.
>200-about 170 years after the death and resurrection of Christ-that we
>first see the term "New Testament" used, by Tertullian. Origen, who
>lived in the third century, is often considered to be the first
>systematic theologian (though he was often systematically wrong). He
>questioned the authenticity of 2 Peter and 2 John. He also tells us,
>based on his extensive travels, that there were churches which refused
>to use 2 Timothy because the epistle speaks of a "secret" writing-the
>Book of Jannes and Jambres, derived from Jewish oral tradition (see 2
>Timothy 3:8). The Book of Jude was also considered suspect by some
>because it includes a quotation from the apocryphal book, The
>Assumption of Moses, also derived from Jewish oral tradition (see Jude
>9). Moving into the fourth century, I discovered that Eusebius, Bishop
>of Caesarea and the "Father of Church History," lists as disputed
>books James, Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John. The Revelation of John
>he totally rejects. Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete New
>Testament manuscript we have today, was discovered in the Orthodox
>Christian monastery of Saint Catherine on Mount Sinai. It is dated as
>being from the fourth century and it contains all of the books we have
>in the modern New Testament, but also includes Barnabas and The
>Shepherd of Hermas. During the fourth century, Emperor Constantine was
>frustrated by the controversy between Christians and Arians concerning
>the divinity of Christ. Because the New Testament had not yet been
>clearly defined, he pressed for a clearer defining and closing of the
>New Testament canon, in order to help resolve the conflict and bring
>religious unity to his divided Empire. However, as late as the fifth
>century the Codex Alexandrinus included 1 and 2 Clement, indicating
>that the disputes over the canon were still not everywhere firmly
>resolved.
>
>WHO DECIDED?
>With the passage of time the Church discerned which writings were
>truly apostolic and which were not. It was a prolonged struggle,
>taking place over several centuries. As part of the process of
>discernment, the Church met together several times in council. These
>various Church councils confronted a variety of issues, among which
>was the canon of Scripture. It is im****tant to note that the purpose
>of these councils was to discern and confirm what was already
>generally accepted within the Church at large. The councils did not
>legislate the canon so much as set forth what had become self-evident
>truth and practice within the churches of God. The councils sought to
>proclaim the common mind of the Church and to reflect the unanimity of
>faith, practice, and tradition as it already existed in the local
>churches represented. The councils provide us with specific records in
>which the Church spoke clearly and in unison as to what constitutes
>Scripture. Among the many councils that met during the first four
>centuries, two are particularly im****tant in this context:
>(1) The Council of Laodicea met in Asia Minor about A.D. 363. This is
>the first council which clearly listed the canonical books of the
>present Old and New Testaments, with the exception of the Apocalypse
>of Saint John. The Laodicean council stated that only the canonical
>books it listed should be read in church. Its decisions were widely
>accepted in the Eastern Church.
>(2) The third Council of Carthage met in North Africa about A.D. 397.
>This council, attended by Augustine, provided a full list of the
>canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. The twenty-seven
>books of the present-day New Testament were accepted as canonical. The
>council also held that these books should be read in the church as
>Divine Scripture to the exclusion of all others. This Council was
>widely accepted as authoritative in the West.
>
>THE BUBBLE BURSTS
>As I delved deeper into my study of the history of the New Testament,
>I saw my previous misconceptions being demolished one by one. I
>understood now what should have been obvious all along: that the New
>Testament consisted of twenty-seven separate do***ents which, while
>certainly inspired by God nothing could shake me in that
>conviction-had been written and compiled by human beings. It was also
>clear that this work had not been accomplished by individuals working
>in isolation, but by the collective effort of all Christians
>everywhere-the Body of Christ, the Church. This realization forced me
>to deal with two more issues that my earlier prejudices had led me to
>avoid: (1) the propriety and necessity of human involvement in the
>writing of Scripture; and (2) the authority of the Church.
>
>HUMAN AND DIVINE
>Deeply committed, like many evangelicals, to belief in the inspiration
>of Scripture, I had understood the New Testament to be God's Word
>only, and not man's. I supposed the Apostles were told by God exactly
>what to write, much as a secretary takes down what is being dictated,
>without providing any personal contribution. Ultimately, my
>understanding of the inspiration of Scripture was clarified by the
>teaching of the Church regarding the Person of Christ. The Incarnate
>Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, is not only God but also man.
>Christ is a single Person with two natures-divine and human. To
>de-emphasize Christ's humanity leads to heresy. The ancient Church
>taught that the Incarnate Word was fully human-in fact, as human as it
>is possible to be-and yet without sin. In His humanity, the Incarnate
>Word was born, grew, and matured into manhood. I came to realize that
>this view of the Incarnate Word of God, the Logos, Jesus Christ,
>paralleled the early Christian view of the written Word of God, the
>Bible. The written Word of God reflects not only the divine thought,
>but a human contribution as well. The Word of God conveys truth to us
>as written by men, conveying the thoughts, personalities, and even
>limitations and weaknesses of the writers-inspired by God, to be sure.
>This means that the human element in the Bible is not overwhelmed so
>as to be lost in the ocean of the divine. It became clearer to me that
>as Christ Himself was born, grew, and matured, so also did the written
>Word of God, the Bible. It did not come down whole-plop-from heaven,
>but was of human origin as well as divine. The Apostles did not merely
>inscribe the Scriptures as would a robot or a zombie, but freely
>cooperated with the will of God through the inspiration of the Holy
>Spirit.
>
>A QUESTION OF AUTHORITY
>The second issue I had to grapple with was even more difficult for
>me-the issue of Church authority. It was clear from my study that the
>Church had, in fact, determined which books composed the Scriptures;
>but still I wrestled mightily with the thought that the Church had
>been given this authority. Ultimately, it came down to a single issue.
>I already believed with all my heart that God spoke authoritatively
>through His written Word. The written Word of God is concrete and
>tangible. I can touch the Bible and read it. But for some strange
>reason, I was reluctant to believe the same things about the Body of
>Christ, the Church-that she was visible and tangible, located
>physically on earth in history. The Church to me was essentially
>"mystical" and intangible, not identifiable with any specific earthly
>assembly. This view permitted me to see each Christian as being a
>church unto himself. How convenient this is, especially when doctrinal
>or personal problems arise! Yet this view did not agree with the
>reality of what the Church was understood to be in the apostolic era.
>The New Testament is about real churches, not ethereal ones. Could I
>now accept the fact that God spoke authoritatively, not only through
>the Bible, but through His Church as well-the very Church which had
>produced, protected, and actively preserved the Scriptures I held so
>dear?
>
>THE CHURCH OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
>In the view of the earliest Christians, God spoke His Word not only to
>but through His Body, the Church. It was within His Body, the Church,
>that the Word was confirmed and established. Without question, the
>Scriptures were looked upon by early Christians as God's active
>revelation of Himself to the world. At the same time, the Church was
>understood as the household of God, "having been built on the
>foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being
>the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted
>together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord" (Ephesians 2:20, 21).
>God has His Word, but He also has His Body. The New Testament says:
>(1) "Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually" (1
>Corinthians 12:27; compare Romans 12:5). (2) "He [Christ] is the head
>of the body, the church" (Colossians 1:18). (3) "And He [the Father]
>put all things under His [the Son's] feet, and gave Him to be head
>overall things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him
>who fills all in all" (Ephesians 1:22, 23). In early times there was
>no organic separation between Bible and Church, as we so often find
>today. The Body without the Word is without message, but the Word
>without the Body is without foundation. As Paul writes, the Body is
>"the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1
>Timothy 3:15). The Church is the Living Body of the Incarnate Lord.
>The Apostle does not say that the New Testament is the pillar and
>ground of the truth. The Church is the pillar and foundation of the
>truth because the New Testament was built upon her life in God. In
>short, she wrote it! She is an integral part of the gospel message,
>and it is within the Church that the New Testament was written and
>preserved.
>
>THE WORD OF GOD IN ORAL TRADITION
>The Apostle Paul exhorts us, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold
>the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle"
>(2 Thessalonians 2:15). This verse was one that I had not highlighted
>because it used two phrases I didn't like: "hold the traditions" and
>"by word [of mouth]." These two phrases conflicted with my
>understanding of biblical authority. But then I began to understand:
>the same God who speaks to us through His written Word, the Bible,
>spoke also through the Apostles of Christ as they taught and preached
>in person. The Scriptures themselves teach in this passage (and
>others) that this oral tradition is what we are to keep! Written and
>oral tradition are not in conflict, but are parts of one whole. This
>explains why the Fathers teach that he who does not have the Church as
>his Mother does not have God as his Father. In coming to this
>realization, I concluded that I had grossly overreacted in rejecting
>oral Holy Tradition. In my hostility toward Jewish oral tradition,
>which rejected Christ, I had rejected Christian oral Holy Tradition,
>which expresses the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church. And I had
>rejected the idea that this Tradition enables us properly and fully to
>understand the Bible. Let me illustrate this point with an experience
>I had recently. I decided to build a shed behind my house. In
>preparation, I studied a book on carpentry that has "everything" in
>it. It's full of pictures and diagrams, enough so that "even a kid
>could follow its instructions." It explains itself, I was told. But,
>simple as it claimed to be, the more I read it, the more questions I
>had and the more confused I became. Disgusted at not being able to
>understand something that seemed so simple, I came to the conclusion
>that the book needed interpretation. Without help, I just couldn't put
>it into practice. What I needed was someone with expertise who could
>explain the manual to me. Fortunately, I had a friend who was able to
>show me how the project should be completed. He knows because of oral
>tradition. An experienced carpenter taught him, and he in turn taught
>me. Written and oral tradition together got the job done.
>
>WHICH CAME FIRST?
>What confronted me at this point was the bottom line question: Which
>came first, the Church or the New Testament? I knew that the Incarnate
>Word of God, Jesus Christ, had called the Apostles, who in turn formed
>the nucleus of the Christian Church. I knew that the Eternal Word of
>God therefore preceded the Church and gave birth to the Church. When
>the Church heard the Incarnate Word of God and committed His Word to
>writing, she thereby participated with God in giving birth to the
>written Word, the New Testament. Thus it was the Church which gave
>birth to and preceded the New Testament. To the question, "Which came
>first, the Church or the New Testament?" the answer, both biblically
>and historically, is crystal clear. Someone might protest, "Does it
>really make any difference which came first? After all, the Bible
>contains everything that we need for salvation." The Bible is adequate
>for salvation in the sense that it contains the foundational material
>needed to establish us on the correct path. On the other hand, it is
>wrong to consider the Bible as being self-sufficient and
>self-interpreting. The Bible is meant to be read and understood by the
>illumination of God's Holy Spirit within the life of the Church. Did
>not the Lord Himself tell His disciples, just prior to His
>crucifixion, "When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide
>you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but
>whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come"
>(John 16:13)? He also said, "I will build My church, and the gates of
>Hades shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). Our Lord did not
>leave us with only a book to guide us. He left us with His Church. The
>Holy Spirit within the Church teaches us, and His teaching complements
>Scripture. How foolish to believe that God's full illumination ceased
>after the New Testament books were written and did not resume until
>the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, or-to take this
>argument to its logical conclusion-until the very moment when 1,
>myself, started reading the Bible. Either the Holy Spirit was in the
>Church throughout the centuries following the New Testament period,
>leading, teaching, and illuminating her in her understanding of the
>gospel message, or the Church has been left a spiritual orphan, with
>individual Christians independently interpreting-and often
>"authoritatively" teaching the same Scripture in radically different
>ways. Such chaos cannot be the will of God, "for God is not the author
>of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33).
>
>A TIME TO DECIDE
>At this point in my studies, I felt I had to make a decision. If the
>Church was not just a tangent or a sidelight to the Scripture, but
>rather an active participant in its development and preservation, then
>it was time to reconcile my differences with her and abandon my
>prejudices. Rather than trying to judge the Church according to my
>modem preconceptions about what the Bible was saying, I needed to
>humble myself and come into union with the Church that produced the
>New Testament, and let her guide me into a proper understanding of
>Holy Scripture. After carefully exploring various church bodies, I
>finally realized that, contrary to the beliefs of many modern
>Christians, the Church which produced the Bible is not dead. The
>Orthodox Church today has direct and clear historical continuity with
>the Church of the Apostles, and it preserves intact both the
>Scriptures and the Holy Tradition which enables us to interpret them
>properly. Once I understood this, I converted to Orthodoxy and began
>to experience the fullness of Christianity in a way I never had
>before. Though he may have coined the slogan, the fact is that Luther
>himself did not practice sola scriptura. If he had, he'd have tossed
>out the Creeds and spent less time writing commentaries. The phrase
>came about as a result of the reformers' struggles against the added
>human traditions of Romanism. Understandably, they wanted to be sure
>their faith was accurate according to New Testament standards. But to
>isolate the Scriptures from the Church, to deny 1500 years of history,
>is something the slogan sola scriptura and the Protestant
>Reformers-Luther, Calvin, and later Wesley-never intended to do. To
>those who try to stand dogmatically on sola scriptura, in the process
>rejecting the Church which not only produced the New Testament, but
>also, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, identified those books
>which compose the New Testament, I would say this: Study the history
>of the early Church and the development of the New Testament canon.
>Use source do***ents where possible. (It is amazing how some of the
>most "conservative" Bible scholars of the evangelical community turn
>into cynical and rationalistic liberals when discussing early Church
>history!) Examine for yourself what happened to God's people after the
>twenty-eighth chapter of the Book of Acts. You will find a list of
>helpful sources at the end of this booklet. If you examine the data
>and look with objectivity at what occurred in those early days, I
>think you will discover what I discovered. The life and work of God's
>Church did not grind to a halt after the first century and start up
>again in the sixteenth. If it had, we would not possess the New
>Testament books which are so dear to every Christian believer. The
>separation of Church and Bible which is so prevalent in much of
>today's Christian world is a modern phenomenon. Early Christians made
>no such artificial distinctions. Once you have examined the data, I
>would encourage you to find out more about the historic Church which
>produced the New Testament, preserved it, and selected those books
>which would be part of its canon. Every Christian owes it to himself
>or herself to discover the Orthodox Christian Church and to understand
>its vital role in proclaiming God's Word to our own generation.
>
>SUGGESTED READING
>
>Bruce, F.F., The Canon of Scripture, Downers Grove, Illinois:
>InterVarsity Press, 1988.
>
>Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book
>House, 1990.
>
>Farmer, William R. & Farkasfalvy, Denis, The Formation of the New
>Testament Canon: An E***enical Approach, New York: Paulist Press,
>1983.
>
>Gamble, Harry Y., The New Testament Canon: Its Making and Meaning,
>Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.
>
>Kesich, Veselin, The Gospel Image of Christ, Crestwood, New York: St.
>Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1992.
>
>Metzger, Bruce Manning, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin,
>Development, and Significance, New York: Oxford University Press,
>1987.
>
>Meyendorff, John, Living Tradition, Crestwood, New York: St.
>Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1978.
>
>
>
>
>Histories of Christianity generally give some information on the
>formation of the Canon, although they are not likely to discuss its
>relevance to the authority and interpretation of Scripture.
>
>Used by permission. Copyright--Conciliar Press
*************************************************************************
******
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.christnet.evangelical,alt.religion.christ
ian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.roman
-catholic,alt.freemasonry
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Virtual Access Open Source http://www.virtual-access.org/
Message-ID: <VA.00001127.2974c5ef@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Why the Increase in Occultism?
From: Ed King <a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Reply-To: a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Pine.GSO.4.58.0407241942350.22249@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<pjg6g0tk2hjn7sfl51s90s04at43qidihn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vct1h0ptf17v4baaibeuogt52cno5mfm5r@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<9ot1h0d60j4ds486t13fkd646r4qt6csd6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<Pine.GSO.4.58.0408040956570.16999@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<eju2h017e6bkoo7dht0j2g73kmr19ulvh0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<Pine.GSO.4.58.0408041815190.13486@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<iudhh0hmc4lr5hh9l8u0jlf62nei6k36of@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <pintaguinness-
1208041110520001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1o81i0p8nt46gpdc5jgq0bcaj573qgnlni@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Lines: 101
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:47:13 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.192.70.9
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net 1092696433 216.192.70.9 (Mon,
16 Aug 2004 15:47:13 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:47:13 PDT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
In article <1o81i0p8nt46gpdc5jgq0bcaj573qgn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, J w <john_w
wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:10:52 +1100, pintaguinn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (Silver Blaze) wrote:
> copyright 2004 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
> group)
> >In article <iudhh0hmc4lr5hh9l8u0jlf62nei6k3...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, j w
> ><johnweatherly<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> You merely prove that those of you who simply refuse to believe the
> >> Truth will settle for any lie.
> >>
> >>
> >> jw
> >>
> > Like your war record
>
> What would you like to ask me about my military record, Ozzie? I have
> been very open about my military time. I have told you stuff that's
> none of your business.
>
> >
> >mobile churches
>
> Lie. I never said any church was mobile. When someone snickered and
> said "maybe the churches moved," I simply conceded that such an idea
> was unheard of.
>
> Leave it to Ozzie to lie like the rug he is.
>
> >
> >Ephesus as Smyrna(Izmir)
>
> IF you had bothered to read my latest post about this, and the post of
> the content of the Izmir, Turkey official Tourist page, that
> information is posted CLEARLY.
>
> Once again, you are not one who seeks proof. You are a stalker,
> attacking here and there, and when I'm done with you, you are going
> away.
>
> >
> >Your educational status
>
> As even SL found out by going to the CSUN site, I am an alumnus
> whether you like it or not. You also obviously haven't checked with
> Fuller Seminary. You prefer to lie than to get the truth.
>
> You're another Elaine or Jim Agar.
>
> >
> >your bipolar diagnosis
>
> What is YOUR diagnosis, psychotic demoniac?
>
> And one final thought, cockroach, what business of yours is ANY of
> this?
>
> Butt out!!
>
> jw
He was explaining to me some things about you, Mr. Weatherly.
I was curious why we hadn't heard from you as to just exactly WHERE in
the DeMolay ritual you were required to "bow to the East" as you
claimed. You stated it was done, if I remember correctly, during prayers
and yet, everyone to the (symbolic) East of the Altar would have been
facing West - while those in the North would be facing South and those
in the South facing North. It's been that way since DeMolay was founded
in 1919 so I'm particularly curious as to just exactly what ritual it
was you used.
It also seemed just a bit disingenuous when you claimed you saw your
"first ****d woman" at a DeMolay conclave and yet, when pushed for
facts, got a bit snitty and claimed that you hadn't _really_ written
that.
I do hope you'll clarify for us just exactly when it was during your
DeMolay ritual that this happened since, obviously, it caused you some
great hatred for Freemasonry. It's odd since - by all rights - it could
NOT have happened and we are left to conclude that either you're
incredibly stupid OR you're lying. Which is it, Mr. Weatherly?
Your bi-polar problems and the theft of goods SURELY hasn't robbed your
mind of the memory too, has it?
Can you let us know where in the ritual this occured - or would you like
to admit now that your entire diatribe cross-posted to alt.freemasonry
was like the rest of those made by the 'Liars for Jesus'....???
Ed King
*************************************************************************
****
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <ag1eovopan9louut523k6v07e5a6qaft5k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <36h1ovkhir5apffti87ssefv85re54uk94@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <blqlc2$f6mut$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <camelraces-0610031503370001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bls2k8$ess48$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3F85EAC3.5F391887@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <hnkdovgptmq2iird1o38igj778f2a7f2d7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 83
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 10 Oct 2003 19:19:19 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:42:06 -0500, Doc Watson
<nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 23:10:28 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done
>went and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet
>News'FROUPS:
>
>>Scout Lady wrote:
>>
>>> Good show Phar Lap. You managed to imply that ***ual abuse among the
>>> mentally ill is just fantasy even though we know the underlying cause
of
>>> mental illness in many people is actually due to ***ual abuse. Then
you go
>>> on to attempt to take away John's dignity because he is disabled and
unable
>>> to sup****t himself as if he had a choice in deciding whether to
suffer from
>>> mental illness or not. But wait.....that's not disgusting enough, in
another
>>> post you then proceed to tell him that you are helping him by abusing
him,
>>> evidently he is going to learn a lesson about being abusive towards
others
>>> if others respond abusively toward him. Finally, you close that post
with
>>> calling him an awful person and a personal failure.
>>>
>>> I think John is right Phar Lap, anyone that can be this downright
malicious
>>> and clueless is probably mentally ill himself. You claim to be sane,
John
>>> admits that he has a problem and he does apologize most of the time
when he
>>> realizes that his illness has caused him to behave quite poorly. What
you
>>> have written in the last day or so shows you to be an awful person
Phar Lap.
>>> Would attack a man in a wheelchair that is also on disability and
needs to
>>> obtain food from a foodbank to survive and call him a personal
failure?
>>> Would you dare go over to alt.recovery.catholicism and tell the folks
there
>>> that claiming to be ***ually abused is a common fantasy in those
suffering
>>> from mental illness? You know darn well the answer to both questions
is no,
>>> you sick piece of filth. (I decided to use the same words that you
chose to
>>> use against John......do unto others as you would have them do unto
>>> you.....).
>>>
>>> You are a sick man Phar Lap, go seek help for yourself and then
perhaps you
>>> might be able to help John. As it stands now, your self esteem must
be
>>> pretty low if John W can get to you like this. I'm a Catholic, yes,
John's
>>> words concerning the Pope were offensive, but I just consider the
source. It
>>> made me feel sorry for him rather than angry. So he calls you a
>>> demoniac......big deal. So he has different religious views than you
>>> do.......big deal. So he has created a god in his own image......we
all do
>>> to some extent, and you sir have created a god that is probably much
further
>>> from the mark than the one John has created. The sad thing is you can
see it
>>> in John yet you can't see it in yourself. You wrap up your own
intolerance
>>> and hatred in a pretty package of pseudo-intellectualism and think
that no
>>> one will notice what is under the wrapping. Alas, whereas most people
just
>>> yawn at your posts and roll their eyes, a mentally ill man can see
right
>>> through the paper and calls you on it. It drives you nuts because no
one is
>>> buying into your crappola thus John becomes a great scapegoat to vent
your
>>> frustration upon. A better educated and mentally stable opponent
would chew
>>> you up and spit you out and you know it.
>>>
>>> You ever watch a nature program? The predator looks for the weakest
to
>>> attack. A struggling doe, a struggling fish is most likely to be
preyed upon
>>> than one that can put up a good fight or run away. Have fun Phar Lap
but
>>> realize that many see you as nothing more than a roaring lion going
after a
>>> struggling lamb. Same mentality, nothing more or less.
>>
>>Kinda like looking into a mirror isn't it snout? For all your
screeching at
>>Phar-Lap you do exactly the same thing to others, especially Elaine.
You attack
>>her at every turn. You never miss a beat. Now go read you little rant
and
>>realize you are talking about yourself.
>>
>>CeCe
>>
>>---
>
>Oh well, CeCe--- while Cathy Hall attacks me, she is at least leaving
>someone else alone!!
>Attacking others just seems to 'make her day' doesn't it?
Pot kettle.
John W
*********************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <7h1eovgn580j5krmg8sr000cka5fcn1ujp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <g0c6ov0ifbcdh720ffaoj3eqj1l2gaf394@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <EMHgb.2981
$Ys.302275@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mhe7ovku1kdfidmgo8qg1l202435ptvbtv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F83C968.6BDE3FB8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<f7r7ov0oeusv54aa2k53jdoja2417o13su@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm0s1c$g7som$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <cju7ovkjir2h25j78su8ivvlupcusvio95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MOUgb.54227$vj2.47687@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <q0o8ovghg5qkrlunondikd3qhskjal3tju@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F85EACD.C985F3B2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<frkdovkgf60lctgieti6uj9tk5s50fum52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 28
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 10 Oct 2003 19:19:43 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!
news3.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:43:08 -0500, Doc Watson
<nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 23:10:38 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done
>went and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet
>News'FROUPS:
>
>>
>>You'll find, if you haven't already, that the snout is frequently
hysterical and
>>irrational.
>>
>>
>>CeCe
>
>
>Yet she makes it a point to tell everyone else who disagrees with her
>that THEY should seek help.....!! Sheesh!! :o)
Pot kettle.
*****************************************************************
From: John <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <q5rgov4tjtqdkfnsulsdq4om3nfkc0i4jb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <EMHgb.2981$Ys.302275@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mhe7ovku1kdfidmgo8qg1l202435ptvbtv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F83C968.6BDE3FB8
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <f7r7ov0oeusv54aa2k53jdoja2417o13su@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm0s1c$g7som
$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <cju7ovkjir2h25j78su8ivvlupcusvio95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MOUgb.54227$vj2.47687@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<q0o8ovghg5qkrlunondikd3qhskjal3tju@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F85EACD.C985F3B2
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <frkdovkgf60lctgieti6uj9tk5s50fum52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm771e$ji5m6
$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 55
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Oct 2003 20:50:13 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:50:29 -0400, "Scout Lady"
<huoauk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"Doc Watson" <nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:frkdovkgf60lctgieti6uj9tk5s50fum52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 23:10:38 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done
>> went and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet
>> News'FROUPS:
>>
>> >
>> >You'll find, if you haven't already, that the snout is frequently
>hysterical and
>> >irrational.
>> >
>> >
>> >CeCe
>>
>>
>> Yet she makes it a point to tell everyone else who disagrees with her
>> that THEY should seek help.....!! Sheesh!! :o)
>>
>Do***entation please. When have I told Deacon, Karen(Kay), Larry,
Falcon,
>John H, ujb, Christopher Robin, hey....wait a minute, it might be faster
to
>list who I said needs help.
>
>You
>cece
>Don
>Phar Lap
>John W
>
>You are simply lying again Elaine.
With all due respect, Cathy, you should be on your list of people who
need help.
IF we are lying about "Catholics" you lie a lot about non-Catholics.
John W
***********************************************************************
From: John <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <qargov027mh8tka571af2l9q0majec1euh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <36h1ovkhir5apffti87ssefv85re54uk94@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <blqlc2$f6mut$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <camelraces-0610031503370001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bls2k8$ess48$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3F85EAC3.5F391887@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <hnkdovgptmq2iird1o38igj778f2a7f2d7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F87162D.9B86A148@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 102
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Oct 2003 20:53:02 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:27:44 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>Doc Watson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 23:10:28 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done
>> went and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet
>> News'FROUPS:
>>
>> >Scout Lady wrote:
Hmmmmmmmmmm... I just realized that in all this time, I believe I've
written to / about CeCe a dozen times. I've never seen her reply.
She has me in her kill file.
Cool!
John W
>> >
>> >> Good show Phar Lap. You managed to imply that ***ual abuse among
the
>> >> mentally ill is just fantasy even though we know the underlying
cause of
>> >> mental illness in many people is actually due to ***ual abuse. Then
you go
>> >> on to attempt to take away John's dignity because he is disabled
and unable
>> >> to sup****t himself as if he had a choice in deciding whether to
suffer from
>> >> mental illness or not. But wait.....that's not disgusting enough,
in another
>> >> post you then proceed to tell him that you are helping him by
abusing him,
>> >> evidently he is going to learn a lesson about being abusive towards
others
>> >> if others respond abusively toward him. Finally, you close that
post with
>> >> calling him an awful person and a personal failure.
>> >>
>> >> I think John is right Phar Lap, anyone that can be this downright
malicious
>> >> and clueless is probably mentally ill himself. You claim to be
sane, John
>> >> admits that he has a problem and he does apologize most of the time
when he
>> >> realizes that his illness has caused him to behave quite poorly.
What you
>> >> have written in the last day or so shows you to be an awful person
Phar Lap.
>> >> Would attack a man in a wheelchair that is also on disability and
needs to
>> >> obtain food from a foodbank to survive and call him a personal
failure?
>> >> Would you dare go over to alt.recovery.catholicism and tell the
folks there
>> >> that claiming to be ***ually abused is a common fantasy in those
suffering
>> >> from mental illness? You know darn well the answer to both
questions is no,
>> >> you sick piece of filth. (I decided to use the same words that you
chose to
>> >> use against John......do unto others as you would have them do unto
>> >> you.....).
>> >>
>> >> You are a sick man Phar Lap, go seek help for yourself and then
perhaps you
>> >> might be able to help John. As it stands now, your self esteem must
be
>> >> pretty low if John W can get to you like this. I'm a Catholic, yes,
John's
>> >> words concerning the Pope were offensive, but I just consider the
source. It
>> >> made me feel sorry for him rather than angry. So he calls you a
>> >> demoniac......big deal. So he has different religious views than
you
>> >> do.......big deal. So he has created a god in his own image......we
all do
>> >> to some extent, and you sir have created a god that is probably
much further
>> >> from the mark than the one John has created. The sad thing is you
can see it
>> >> in John yet you can't see it in yourself. You wrap up your own
intolerance
>> >> and hatred in a pretty package of pseudo-intellectualism and think
that no
>> >> one will notice what is under the wrapping. Alas, whereas most
people just
>> >> yawn at your posts and roll their eyes, a mentally ill man can see
right
>> >> through the paper and calls you on it. It drives you nuts because
no one is
>> >> buying into your crappola thus John becomes a great scapegoat to
vent your
>> >> frustration upon. A better educated and mentally stable opponent
would chew
>> >> you up and spit you out and you know it.
>> >>
>> >> You ever watch a nature program? The predator looks for the weakest
to
>> >> attack. A struggling doe, a struggling fish is most likely to be
preyed upon
>> >> than one that can put up a good fight or run away. Have fun Phar
Lap but
>> >> realize that many see you as nothing more than a roaring lion going
after a
>> >> struggling lamb. Same mentality, nothing more or less.
>> >
>> >Kinda like looking into a mirror isn't it snout? For all your
screeching at
>> >Phar-Lap you do exactly the same thing to others, especially Elaine.
You attack
>> >her at every turn. You never miss a beat. Now go read you little rant
and
>> >realize you are talking about yourself.
>> >
>> >CeCe
>> >
>> >---
>>
>> Oh well, CeCe--- while Cathy Hall attacks me, she is at least leaving
>> someone else alone!!
>> Attacking others just seems to 'make her day' doesn't it?
>
>She sure seems to enjoy it. I guess it's all she has. Good of you to
give her a
>crumb Elaine. :-)
>
>CeCe
>
>---
>
>I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use.
>
>--Galileo Galilei
*************************************************************************
***
From: John <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <hergovss0egtjhd973u76drbigbpbj784h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <bm0s1c$g7som$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ct08ovc50jgt3b7nbbhbc5hi16boqbln4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm12rp$gu80k$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0eo8ov03cce8scl24krvpv65cais5alfr2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<bm2451$hotee$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<9bu9ovcgemqr1f3i1u1m3l4m8kj3650prh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm4opn$itq7j$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <702cov8k95q4jvumrnm2r7cgd4d61jki7c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3F871728.DAE3368A@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <nccgov46e891g057niq2529779enpmmq1v@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 56
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Oct 2003 20:57:38 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:38:30 -0500, Doc Watson
<nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:31:55 GMT, CeCe <c_c_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done
>went and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet
>News'FROUPS:
>
>>
>>Snout does exactly the same thing!! First she threatens to call
people's
>>employers and say what, I don't know. (she's pathetic, isn't she?) Then
she
>>claims she was only 'teasing'. She's got a really weird sense of what
>>constitutes teasing.
>>
>>
>>CeCe
>
>
>I can and WILL vouch for that.
>She threatened to call the College of Nurses about me, for a totally
>unsubstantiated false claim.
>
>Mind you,they would have laughed her off the planet, but the idle
>threat was still there.
>
>I guess Cathy Hall has such a need for personal power struggles, that
>she feels superior in making threats.
>
>Sure is a strange world she lives in......
I have threatened the same thing, Elaine, for your ongoing abuse of
the mentally ill in this group, including me.
And I am not trying to impress anyone but you with the need for you to
clean up your act and start behaving like a Christian.
However, your ongoing comments are insensitive, calloused, cruel at
times, indifferent, even sadistic towards people who have told you
they are mentally ill (me) and those whom you should calculate are
mentally ill due to their behavior, like "Dore".
I will be collecting the information slowly. Now that my computer
seems to be stable. (3 hard drive swaps in 4 months).
You still have time to repent, but I'll be forwarding the offensive
e-mail anyway. Unless I die, I'm going to forward it.
John W
***************************************************************
From: John <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <7orgov4m1hsg7ol17ervgp3rofklbv6bs7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <cju7ovkjir2h25j78su8ivvlupcusvio95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm12rp$gu80k$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <dnn8ovc5hhigharscpk7m0or54lrl7512f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm2450$hotee$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<hft9ov04a0jgmg84ja83eg5ijj1eu4sm5k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm4opo$itq7j$3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <m6scovgh4p4cjmna7qevolus8iafs7srhk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3F8673AD.3C2948D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <a3vdov4qsf6uug8c50ugkn75lpt3r3fg4g@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F870FB0.8458CA33@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<2qcgov0mkm0cpua816l3sgfcbso0qqnp88@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 83
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Oct 2003 21:01:00 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:51:39 -0500, Doc Watson
<nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:59:44 -0400, ujb <u...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done went
>and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet News'FROUPS:
>
>>It's all an act, JohnW is nothing but a con man, and a non
>>Baptist in the Baptist group looking for unfortunates like that
>>Pege lady who he can use, and I'd think abuse. I'm not fooled by
>>the fiddling grasshopper and his stories!
>>
>>With that said, he is fun to have around if for no other reason
>>than a good laugh.
>>ujb
>
>I wonder if you even realize how many people are laughing at YOU, Jim
>Agar?
>
>You live to incite arguments.
>You love to falsely accuse.
>You are no Christian, but you plague Christian groups.
>You sit on the fence, agreeing with whomever you think is 'winning' at
>the time, ALL THE WHILE proving what a mentally unstable, totally
>insecure individual YOU are yourself.
>
>I noticed in another post a while back that John said he was receiving
>help.
>
>That's more than YOU are doing.
>
>All you are doing is riding him every chance you get.
>Call that CHRISTIAN, Jim Agar?
>
>You call him 'the scrambles one'...
>Call that CHRISTIAN, Jim Agar?
>
>You make claims about John's livelihood and living accommodations that
>you have NEVER proven, in your hopes of making him appear like a
>helpless, useless, unwanted person.
>Call that CHRISTIAN, Jim Agar?
>
>He and I don't see eye to eye on many thing.
>
>In fact, I returned him to the kill file this morning, because he
>still insists 'I owe him an apology' for things I never did.
>
>I won't apologize for things I didn't do.. but I ALSO won't constantly
>plague him like you do.
>
>I refuse to make false accusations like you are doing against him, me,
>and others here........
>
>I simply killfiled him to avoid further arguments.
>
>Why don't you do likewise.
>
>Hell no- you would far rather keep trying to push his buttons,
>wouldn't you?
>Call that CHRISTIAN, Jim Agar?
>
>I will not put you back into the killfile for the present time, Jim
>Agar- but will continue to monitor your behavior here towards John and
>others, and respond ACCORDINGLY.
>
>B
Thanks for your VERY limited sup****t, Elaine. However, Jim has proven
himself psychotic, or demonic, like others in here.
And when the appropriate time comes, (I get it all downloaded and
sorted), I will be forwarding the sadistic e-mails of this internet
criminal.
John W
******************************************************************
From: John <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <s9vgovgblm019q4d8st24vhu4lt64jlane@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <f7r7ov0oeusv54aa2k53jdoja2417o13su@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm0s1c$g7som$1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <cju7ovkjir2h25j78su8ivvlupcusvio95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MOUgb.54227$vj2.47687@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<q0o8ovghg5qkrlunondikd3qhskjal3tju@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F85EACD.C985F3B2
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <frkdovkgf60lctgieti6uj9tk5s50fum52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm771e$ji5m6
$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F873905.4A29517F@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<a4cgov84vk4h1qvsp2vbgb6q7t6seant9c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<7ccgov06fse4h1t3valkrefhl8epakn535@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 41
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Oct 2003 22:00:22 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:38:47 -0400, larry4355@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:35:05 -0500, Doc Watson
><nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 18:56:05 -0400, ujb <u...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> done went
>>and wrote as Gospel Truth in these here little old Usenet News'FROUPS:
>>
>>>
>>>Poor ujb will take all the help he can get, he never pass on the
>>>freebie's!
>>>ujb
>>
>>Well well, if it ain't 'sweet, sweet ujie', aka JIM AGAR.
>>Hi there, you phony piece of proverbial flotsam.
>>
>>I forgot to place your name into the killfile once I got Agent
>>working. But hey, why bother now?
>>Your jig is up, boy.
>>
>>Time to pay the fiddler.
>>
>>I am neither EASY, nor CHEAP.
>>Be on your guard.
>
>You know, I was going to respond to this. Had it all typed out.
>And just before I hit the send button, I thought, why lower myself to
>that standard. So I deleted it all.
Some learn faster than others. Good for you! Some NEVER learn.
John W
*********************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <oqd9ovcmjuprka6b63pvonot2befh4j6fh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <1Fmgb.33754$6C4.26720@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <camelraces-0710031409140001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bltskm$g2gkk$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <eAzgb.52962$vj2.15616@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<g0c6ov0ifbcdh720ffaoj3eqj1l2gaf394@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <EMHgb.2981$Ys.302275
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mhe7ovku1kdfidmgo8qg1l202435ptvbtv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3F83C968.6BDE3FB8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <f7r7ov0oeusv54aa2k53jdoja2417o13su@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm0s1c$g7som$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ct08ovc50jgt3b7nbbhbc5hi16boqbln4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 59
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 9 Oct 2003 01:19:23 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 07:47:25 -0500, Don
<calldonREMOV...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 07:22:06 -0400, "Scout Lady"
><huoauk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>Tell us all how a therapist can stop anyone from posting to the
internet
>>Don. Especially someone who is not institutionalized and is not
breaking the
>>law.
>>
>>Nope, its proof that you don't realize that therapists can not take
away
>>anyone's rights. In order to stop John from posting a court order would
have
>>to be given......and the chances of that are zero to none.
>
>In my other post to you, I started to close the post by writing,
>"Stand back, the accusations and name calling is about to begin."
>
>What do ya know...the name-calling started almost as soon as I posted
>to you! Ya see, schizophrenics are actors. They can certainly fool
>most people at least some of the time. A few nice, calm, posts, with
>some religious talk and some "spiritual encouragement" followed
>immediately by...
>
>-These yokels just like to talk brutish.
>-They are sadists (psychotic) yokels
>-they try and inflict all the emotional/psychic pain they can.
>
>THEN it gets personal...
>
>-you are a self-evident sadist!
>-you are psychotic. At least.
>-further proof that you are psychotic.
>-You may even be a candidate for possession.
>
>And that sweet, Godly language was from only ONE post!
>
>I don't think the therapist is being told the complete truth!
>
>What do ya think, Scouttie Girl?
The question YOU keep avoiding, Donnie the sadist, is what you tell
YOUR therapist?
John W
*************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Hi! Guys and Gals. Elaine< I love you! Only Buddies Read
NEW Business Opp
Message-ID: <dsd9ov0a14afva49pg64u01evtd650cebe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <bltskm$g2gkk$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <eAzgb.52962
$vj2.15616@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <g0c6ov0ifbcdh720ffaoj3eqj1l2gaf394@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<EMHgb.2981$Ys.302275@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mhe7ovku1kdfidmgo8qg1l202435ptvbtv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3F83C968.6BDE3FB8
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <f7r7ov0oeusv54aa2k53jdoja2417o13su@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm0s1c$g7som
$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <ct08ovc50jgt3b7nbbhbc5hi16boqbln4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bm12rp$gu80k$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 69
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 9 Oct 2003 01:20:47 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: supernews.com!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!
news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:09:52 -0400, "Scout Lady"
<huoauk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"Don" <calldonREMOV...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:ct08ovc50jgt3b7nbbhbc5hi16boqbln4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 07:22:06 -0400, "Scout Lady"
>> <huoauk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >Tell us all how a therapist can stop anyone from posting to the
internet
>> >Don. Especially someone who is not institutionalized and is not
breaking
>the
>> >law.
>> >
>> >Nope, its proof that you don't realize that therapists can not take
away
>> >anyone's rights. In order to stop John from posting a court order
would
>have
>> >to be given......and the chances of that are zero to none.
>>
>> In my other post to you, I started to close the post by writing,
>> "Stand back, the accusations and name calling is about to begin."
>>
>> What do ya know...the name-calling started almost as soon as I posted
>> to you! Ya see, schizophrenics are actors. They can certainly fool
>> most people at least some of the time. A few nice, calm, posts, with
>> some religious talk and some "spiritual encouragement" followed
>> immediately by...
>>
>> -These yokels just like to talk brutish.
>> -They are sadists (psychotic) yokels
>> -they try and inflict all the emotional/psychic pain they can.
>>
>> THEN it gets personal...
>>
>> -you are a self-evident sadist!
>> -you are psychotic. At least.
>> -further proof that you are psychotic.
>> -You may even be a candidate for possession.
>>
>> And that sweet, Godly language was from only ONE post!
>>
>> I don't think the therapist is being told the complete truth!
>>
>> What do ya think, Scouttie Girl?
>>
>I think you are a hypocrite Don. I do agree with John insofar as him
calling
>you a sadist. You are more abusive than John is.
Thanks. At least when I use hurtful words, it's not normally intended.
And I've told Phar Lap and some others, when they stop hounding me
with daily, post to post evil words, I'll stop fighting back.
John W
************************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: John W: What did you go to school for? (by ROCK)
Message-ID: <cs6qmv0o10j7bgqrej3lm09b86cn0du34t@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <b0thmv8jtm1t3670abec3thlsmsmjnkae8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Melbournecup-
1809031106290001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5r8kmv8jhafutg3vms8rlo45e35330mld5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Melbournecup-
1909031358220001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news1.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 36
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 21 Sep 2003 03:20:30 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-05!sn-xit-08supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:58:22 +1100, Melbourne...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
( Phar
Lap) wrote:
As I've begun to say to the other trolls, Watch your back!
John W
>In article <5r8kmv8jhafutg3vms8rlo45e35330m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, John W
><john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>> Suggest whatever you like, make it into a sandwich with plenty of
>> mayo, and then stick it in your ear.
>>
>>
>>
>> John W
>
>I presume you learnt the above in your "seminary studies"
>
>Seminary student Ptah!
>
>I think not
>
>+
>
>PLONK!
******************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: John W: What did you go to school for? (by ROCK)
Message-ID: <6csvmvsenm34347kpjug83emtgj41rc2fv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <b0thmv8jtm1t3670abec3thlsmsmjnkae8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Melbournecup-
1809031106290001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5r8kmv8jhafutg3vms8rlo45e35330mld5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Melbournecup-
1909031358220001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<cs6qmv0o10j7bgqrej3lm09b86cn0du34t@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <camelraces-2309030845120001
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 42
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 23 Sep 2003 07:11:09 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: supernews.com!feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!
news2.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:45:12 +1100, camelra...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(
*Phar Lap*) wrote:
Like I said, demonic numb nuts: watch your back!
Some very angry person you've pissed off one too many times with your
"cuteness", who doesn't have my self respect or self-restraint is
going to hurt you. And I'll clap LOUDLY for a month or two.
John W
>In article <cs6qmv0o10j7bgqrej3lm09b86cn0du...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, John W
><john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> As I've begun to say to the other trolls, Watch your back!
>
>
>first the idiotic assertions
>
>then the lies
>
>then the pity-me's
>
>then the anger
>
>then the vicious defamation
>
>then the sulks
>
>Now the THREATS
>
>Why don't you just get some medical help for schizophrenia. Then we can
>all start being nice to each other! Maybe someone might even kiss your
>gun.
*************************************************************************
*****
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Cigarettes...the smoking gun?
Message-ID: <i3gmmv4j1gpmoriu7n3nt2spi8lgq0bde3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <C-kingtruth.tx8w0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 25
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 19 Sep 2003 17:45:28 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-05!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:30:04 GMT, C-kingtruth
<C-kingtruth.tx...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>Do Southern Baptist Churches make it a regular practice to kick youth
>out of their church for smoking?
>
>A long time ago this happened to me and it took me a long time to get
>over it. I was out of fellow****p with christians and I blamed it all
>on Baptists. Now...I would like to know if this sort of thing still
>happens to youth in the church today.
Did you TRULY place more value on tobacco than you placed on God?
John W
**************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Cigarettes...the smoking gun?
Message-ID: <45gmmvgii2k3h1tmedhroe33nairv2iin8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <C-kingtruth.tx8w0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 38
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 19 Sep 2003 17:47:59 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:30:04 GMT, C-kingtruth
<C-kingtruth.tx...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>Do Southern Baptist Churches make it a regular practice to kick youth
>out of their church for smoking?
>
>A long time ago this happened to me and it took me a long time to get
>over it. I was out of fellow****p with christians and I blamed it all
>on Baptists. Now...I would like to know if this sort of thing still
>happens to youth in the church today.
I cannot directly answer you. My dad used to walk out the door of the
church, walk 10 feet, then stop and light up.
My mom got on him several times about it, unfortunately in front of a
whole car full of kids (no no). He'd always ask, "What's wrong with
smoking at church? Does ANYONE at church NOT know that I smoke?"
He figured that if he was going to smoke, it didn't matter who saw him
at it or where or when.
Sad. Paul said, "if you MUST sin, do it privately, so you don't offend
others."
John W
*************************************************************************
**********
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Cigarettes...the smoking gun?
Message-ID: <g9gmmvo5eqvfuflhj5jqvc21ios324ldd9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <C-kingtruth.tx8w0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5832ef2e0e56926cdfbc88994868f566@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<9nhjmvclg40spqt096scq3pv6qgnpbq9qo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 49
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 19 Sep 2003 17:48:37 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: supernews.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!63.218.45.10.MISMATCH!
newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!news-out.superfeed.net!
propagator2-maxim!feed-maxim.newsfeeds.com!feed.uncensored-news.com!
news2.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:53:44 -0400, Stephanie Poindexter
<stephanie26...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>It would depend on what they were smoking ...
And some things you might light up are less harmful than tobacco.
John W
*********************************************************************
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.politics.homose
xuality,alt.rasap
Subject: Re: HOW I LOVE THE NUTTY PROFESSOR, LET ME *** THE WAYS
Message-ID: <440ikvkqiapt9bv1i0us1uotits2bjrdb2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <3F48F736.3934A06D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 24
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 24 Aug 2003 18:05:39 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!
news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!
news2.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 17:55:54 GMT, Richard Weed <DickW...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>They don't call him the "Nutty Professor" for nothing, he found
>ways to shoot his nuts in me in ways I could not have dreamed of,
>he definitely is a professor of love. After he was done using my
>body like a piece of love meat, I spent an hour farting *** bubbles,
>that filled the air with love.
>
>Come back to me my love, the one with the big Nuttys.
>
>Kiss Kiss.
>
Stop posting this trash to Christian groups, demon!
John W
>
*************************************************************************
Path: newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!
feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.reli
gion.christian.boston-church
Subject: Re: Christina Aguilera **** 6073
Message-ID: <40eqnv4dviil0kn6c8gl1bc56vbfsra3kf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <MV_eb.12663$E95.2178093@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 17
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 01:49:39 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.3.90.181
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1065170201 67.3.90.181 (Fri, 03 Oct 2003
03:36:41 CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 03:36:41 CDT
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 19:22:20 GMT, oeh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>Christina Aguilera poseing topless
>
>http://home.attbi.com/~charly.mack/ChristinaAguilera.scr
>
>gqycfpqmevbgdelffosfyfeyovlcsfwzfecsmkmimcnbxhxknscrtcyptczijimpovyidjdb
morezrsycjfcbquhbkrhyvdf
Why are you advertising this? In here? Besides, I can show YOU a
picture of Christine having ***!
(joke)
*****************************************************************
From: John <john_weatherly<nospam>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: back on other computer
Message-ID: <q12vovksh1vpc1etnr7e9m8rsgr3of54q3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <j4rtovo5et2pc5bsdb3oc5ap5feg7qg67d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 17
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 17 Oct 2003 06:12:55 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-
news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:08:23 -0400, Doc.Watson.nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>just checking to see if it works :O)
SHAME on you for sup****ting the pagan demoniacs and turning your back
on fellow Christians!
Apostate!
John W
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
*************************************************************************
****
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.christnet.public
Subject: Re: Computer Experts...I need your advise!
Message-ID: <p93bguo3uq7ef77d8kn3p71sh29jh8f1mo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <3D0556D5.135C7A83@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3D055752.97E7D6AA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Lines: 89
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send only the header of the
offending post, DO NOT attach any file.
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:45:18 +0100
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04supernews.com!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!
nntp.itservices.ubc.ca!cyclone.bc.net!torn!enews.sgi.com!news-
out.spamkiller.net!propagator2-la!propagator-la!feed1.uncensored-
news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
What you need to do, like it or not, is to format your hard disk and
re-install everything in the proper order.
That means first install Windows and all its upgrades that you have.
Then install your upgrade of IE (6), and then install the other
software (MS Works) etc.
And HOW ON EARTH did you "delete several programs"???
You perhaps should think about getting some lessons in
using/programming your computer?
John Weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:50:10 -0700, PawPaw Donald
<rob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>sorry....IP should have be IE Internet Explorer.....sorry.
>
>PawPaw Donald wrote:
>
>> I know these may not be the proper place to post this, however, I know
a
>> lot of you on these groups
>> are somewhat of experts on operations of home computers. I posted to
>> several help groups, but have not
>> gotten anything that can help me. Microsoft has not responded, yet.
>> If any of you can help, please do! I would appreciate it so much.
>>
>> In Christ,
>>
>> Robert D. Taylor
>>
>> I am having a serious problem ( I consider it serious) with internet
>> Explorer.
>>
>> I was using IP6 and had no problem until recently I had to put my
>> recovery disk in to recover some programs that I
>> accidentally deleted. I did not reformat, just reverted back to the
way
>>
>> my PC was when I purchased it.
>> When this happen, Internet Explorer was returned to IP4.
>> When I started reloading and installing my software, I started
>> downloading MSWorks 6.0 ( which I had upgraded to prior to
>> this incident) Works had 5.5 IP in it and when it started downloading
>> and upgrading it put a crash on my PC. I could not
>> start windows at all. It had a notice that came up stating: Explorer
>> has caused an error in browseu i dll.
>> I was not able to come up in regular mode or in safe mode. I had to
put
>>
>> recovery disk in again and get pc on the line.
>>
>> I can not install MSWorks because I am afraid it will do it again.
>> Because of the older version of IP (4.0) I can not install all of
>> Office 2000, because I am sure it will crash again if I try to
upgrade.
>> When I open IP, there is a error window that comes up and states an
>> internet explorer script error?
>>
>> I need help, Please! Should I delete Internet Explorer out of my
>> programs and re-install IP 6.0??
>>
>> Robert D. Taylor
>> --
>> Isaiah 46:18
>> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> there is none else.
>>
>> --
>> Isaiah 46:18
>> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> there is none else.
>>
>> --
>> Isaiah 46:18
>> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> there is none else.
*************************************************************
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.christnet.public
Subject: Re: Computer Experts...I need your advise!
Message-ID: <l49dgu41disr32qje9tgo9n1m2br681vno@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <3D0556D5.135C7A83@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3D055752.97E7D6AA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <p93bguo3uq7ef77d8kn3p71sh29jh8f1mo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3D05C1ED.C6A5FFEA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Lines: 129
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send only the header of the
offending post, DO NOT attach any file.
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 12 Jun 2002 02:36:38 +0100
Path: supernews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed1.uncensored-news.com!
news.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
You seem to have ptached your immediate problem Congrats. However, to
be safe, you' ve just scrambled your system, then allowed software to
repair it. I would advise you to back everything up with a CD-RW and
FORMAT.
My humble opinion. You don't know whether it's fixed or not. If you
format the hard drive and start fresh, you DO KNOW that it's fixed.
John Weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:25:01 -0700, PawPaw Donald
<rob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Thanks John for that advise.....
>
>Actually, I upgraded to a couple programs, that were no better than the
ones that came
>with the PC and it got rid of the program. For instance: HP DVD
player. etc.
>
>Today, I done some research and found that the DLL was either missing or
corrupt. I
>think this happened due to a virus that got in about a year ago, and I
had to put in
>recovery disk then.
>Instead of taking the IE 4.0 out of the computer, I installed IE 6.0 and
it is working
>fine. Installed MSWorks, and Office 2000 and about to get it fine
tuned.
>
>Actually, I do need more computer training, and I think it is evident
that I am
>getting it the hard way. By experience!
>Nevertheless, thanks for your rewarding advise.
>
>><>...rdtaylor
>
>
>John Weatherly wrote:
>
>> What you need to do, like it or not, is to format your hard disk and
>> re-install everything in the proper order.
>>
>> That means first install Windows and all its upgrades that you have.
>> Then install your upgrade of IE (6), and then install the other
>> software (MS Works) etc.
>>
>> And HOW ON EARTH did you "delete several programs"???
>>
>> You perhaps should think about getting some lessons in
>> using/programming your computer?
>>
>> John Weatherly
>> john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:50:10 -0700, PawPaw Donald
>> <rob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >sorry....IP should have be IE Internet Explorer.....sorry.
>> >
>> >PawPaw Donald wrote:
>> >
>> >> I know these may not be the proper place to post this, however, I
know a
>> >> lot of you on these groups
>> >> are somewhat of experts on operations of home computers. I posted
to
>> >> several help groups, but have not
>> >> gotten anything that can help me. Microsoft has not responded,
yet.
>> >> If any of you can help, please do! I would appreciate it so much.
>> >>
>> >> In Christ,
>> >>
>> >> Robert D. Taylor
>> >>
>> >> I am having a serious problem ( I consider it serious) with
internet
>> >> Explorer.
>> >>
>> >> I was using IP6 and had no problem until recently I had to put my
>> >> recovery disk in to recover some programs that I
>> >> accidentally deleted. I did not reformat, just reverted back to
the way
>> >>
>> >> my PC was when I purchased it.
>> >> When this happen, Internet Explorer was returned to IP4.
>> >> When I started reloading and installing my software, I started
>> >> downloading MSWorks 6.0 ( which I had upgraded to prior to
>> >> this incident) Works had 5.5 IP in it and when it started
downloading
>> >> and upgrading it put a crash on my PC. I could not
>> >> start windows at all. It had a notice that came up stating:
Explorer
>> >> has caused an error in browseu i dll.
>> >> I was not able to come up in regular mode or in safe mode. I had
to put
>> >>
>> >> recovery disk in again and get pc on the line.
>> >>
>> >> I can not install MSWorks because I am afraid it will do it again.
>> >> Because of the older version of IP (4.0) I can not install all of
>> >> Office 2000, because I am sure it will crash again if I try to
upgrade.
>> >> When I open IP, there is a error window that comes up and states an
>> >> internet explorer script error?
>> >>
>> >> I need help, Please! Should I delete Internet Explorer out of my
>> >> programs and re-install IP 6.0??
>> >>
>> >> Robert D. Taylor
>> >> --
>> >> Isaiah 46:18
>> >> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> >> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> >> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> >> there is none else.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Isaiah 46:18
>> >> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> >> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> >> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> >> there is none else.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Isaiah 46:18
>> >> For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself
>> >> that formed the earth and made it; hath established it, he created
>> >> it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and
>> >> there is none else.
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
>> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><>
<><><>
*********************************************************************
From: John Weatherly <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.christnet.public
Subject: Re: Computer Experts...I need your advise!
Message-ID: <0b9dgu46v3knkttcmgcllso2m42t58ck65@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <3D0556D5.135C7A83@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3D055752.97E7D6AA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <p93bguo3uq7ef77d8kn3p71sh29jh8f1mo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3D05C1ED.C6A5FFEA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3d064aa3.583865312
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Lines: 134
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send only the header of the
offending post, DO NOT attach any file.
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 12 Jun 2002 02:42:33 +0100
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-08supernews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
feed1.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
Thanks for the suggestion about saving/backing up the registry. Unless
you backup/restore as a weekly chore, your files are probably useless.
By the time you realize you're in trouble, you're offline.
The trick is to know how to format and start from scratch. If you hve
all your data backed up and you merely have to reload your software,
doing this guarantees that your computer is going to be in precision
working order again once you have everything put back together.
In fact, I give you an extra tip. If I have to go as far as
formatting, I will always take the extra step of f-disking. Reason
being, there are a few exotic "diseases" the hard disk will pick up
that won't be obliterated by a meager little "format". In this case,
that extra 30 minutes spent f-disking BEFORE formatting will bring you
back up GUARANTEED!
If we keep these fancy calculators running up to snuff, they can
actually be helpful every once in a while.
Just a tip, and you don't have to tell everyone you know.
John Weatherly
john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tue, 11 Jun 2002 19:09:21 GMT, bigfootatsw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Huldah)
wrote:
>On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:25:01 -0700, PawPaw Donald
><rob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>Thanks John for that advise.....
>>
>>Actually, I upgraded to a couple programs, that were no better than the
ones that came
>>with the PC and it got rid of the program. For instance: HP DVD
player. etc.
>>
>>Today, I done some research and found that the DLL was either missing
or corrupt. I
>>think this happened due to a virus that got in about a year ago, and I
had to put in
>>recovery disk then.
>>Instead of taking the IE 4.0 out of the computer, I installed IE 6.0
and it is working
>>fine. Installed MSWorks, and Office 2000 and about to get it fine
tuned.
>>
>>Actually, I do need more computer training, and I think it is evident
that I am
>>getting it the hard way. By experience!
>>Nevertheless, thanks for your rewarding advise.
>
>Robert, I'm glad it all worked out. I, too, have managed to mess up
>the operating system, then after I reinstalled it from the
>manufacturer's CD found the registry was wiped out. So I had to
>rummage around the house digging up the CD's my programs came on and
>reinstall them all. To keep that from happening again I purchased
>McAfee Utilities; another similar program is Norton Utilities. You
>can save the registry, so the next time that happens you can restore
>it with a few clicks. At least that's the theory!
>
>>><>...rdtaylor
>>
>>John Weatherly wrote:
>>
>>> What you need to do, like it or not, is to format your hard disk and
>>> re-install everything in the proper order.
>>>
>>> That means first install Windows and all its upgrades that you have.
>>> Then install your upgrade of IE (6), and then install the other
>>> software (MS Works) etc.
>>>
>>> And HOW ON EARTH did you "delete several programs"???
>>>
>>> You perhaps should think about getting some lessons in
>>> using/programming your computer?
>>>
>>> John Weatherly
>>> john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:50:10 -0700, PawPaw Donald
>>> <rob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>> >sorry....IP should have be IE Internet Explorer.....sorry.
>>> >
>>> >PawPaw Donald wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I know these may not be the proper place to post this, however, I
know a
>>> >> lot of you on these groups
>>> >> are somewhat of experts on operations of home computers. I posted
to
>>> >> several help groups, but have not
>>> >> gotten anything that can help me. Microsoft has not responded,
yet.
>>> >> If any of you can help, please do! I would appreciate it so much.
>>> >>
>>> >> In Christ,
>>> >>
>>> >> Robert D. Taylor
>>> >>
>>> >> I am having a serious problem ( I consider it serious) with
internet
>>> >> Explorer.
>>> >>
>>> >> I was using IP6 and had no problem until recently I had to put my
>>> >> recovery disk in to recover some programs that I
>>> >> accidentally deleted. I did not reformat, just reverted back to
the way
>>> >>
>>> >> my PC was when I purchased it.
>>> >> When this happen, Internet Explorer was returned to IP4.
>>> >> When I started reloading and installing my software, I started
>>> >> downloading MSWorks 6.0 ( which I had upgraded to prior to
>>> >> this incident) Works had 5.5 IP in it and when it started
downloading
>>> >> and upgrading it put a crash on my PC. I could not
>>> >> start windows at all. It had a notice that came up stating:
Explorer
>>> >> has caused an error in browseu i dll.
>>> >> I was not able to come up in regular mode or in safe mode. I had
to put
>>> >>
>>> >> recovery disk in again and get pc on the line.
>>> >>
>>> >> I can not install MSWorks because I am afraid it will do it again.
>>> >> Because of the older version of IP (4.0) I can not install all of
>>> >> Office 2000, because I am sure it will crash again if I try to
upgrade.
>>> >> When I open IP, there is a error window that comes up and states
an
>>> >> internet explorer script error?
>>> >>
>>> >> I need help, Please! Should I delete Internet Explorer out of my
>>> >> programs and re-install IP 6.0??
>>> >>
>>> >> Robert D. Taylor
>
>---
>Huldah
>
>The Bible versus the 'Oneness' Pentecostals:
>New easy-to-remember URL!: http://www.thriceholy.org
*************************************************************************
*****
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.prayer,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.pentecostal,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.charismatic
Subject: Re: Tithing
Message-ID: <707nkvcpg1qqesngpp6bb3jn9oktij94ib@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <fkqkkvk4f9i4nbtb8lorm68a82ll6oqtsh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vklb8hpg4lvt3e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <018mkv0ptl9kdhfegtaqp29mjcqlm09gip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bifjll$8ml98$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vkmmlnrtrtkr7a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bifn5d$8qc3q$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <vkmvdk6c0om897@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 42
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 26 Aug 2003 17:32:17 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 10:26:51 -0700, "Mike Bugal"
<hcm1NOS...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>"David Vestal" <someoggetridoft...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:bifn5d$8qc3q$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I don't mean to be rude, but did you have a point about the biblical
necessity
>> or lack thereof of tithing?
>>
>
>Simply put: New Testament model is steward****p... not tithing.
>
Not true.
Jesus taught tithing.
MT 23:23 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you
hypocrites!
You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and ***min. But you have
neglected the more im****tant matters of the law--justice, mercy and
faithfulness.
---> You should have practiced the latter, (mercy/justice) without
neglecting the former. (tithing) <---
24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
John W
>His and Yours,
>
>Mike Bugal
>Heartland Chapel Ministries
>http://www.heartlandchapel.org
*************************************************************************
**
From: John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.pente
costal,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.charismatic
Subject: Re: Tithing
Message-ID: <057nkvoghtveu3c2fqruhh9oqjatck3ahl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <fkqkkvk4f9i4nbtb8lorm68a82ll6oqtsh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vklb8hpg4lvt3e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <018mkv0ptl9kdhfegtaqp29mjcqlm09gip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <b5e12349.0308260630.1fb180b8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news2.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 149
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 26 Aug 2003 17:34:18 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: !sn-xit-08supernews.com!feed.uncensored-news.com!news2.uncensored-
news.com!news2.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On 26 Aug 2003 07:30:15 -0700, shaolinninji...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Sensei
Shaolin) wrote:
>John W <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message news:
<018mkv0ptl9kdhfegtaqp29mjcqlm09gip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>...
>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:42:57 -0700, "Fletis Humplebacker" <!> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Fred Young" <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fkqkkvk4f9i4nbtb8lorm68a82ll6oqtsh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> Tithing
>> >>
>> >> 1. Dealing with the pre-Mosaic occurrences. Twice before the Mosaic
>> >> law tithing is mentioned in the Bible as a system of taxation,
related
>> >> also to spiritual life. The first is where Abraham gave a tenth of
the
>> >> best part of the spoils to Melchizedek - Genesis 14:20; Hebrews
7:2,6.
>> >> The second was where Jacob, after his vision at Bethel, consecrated
>> >> ten per cent of his property to God if he returned home safely. Why
>> >> did he do that? Because Jacob was far from home, and home was the
>> >> place where he paid his taxes. So he said, "All right God, I'm
going
>> >> to bribe you to get me home. I'll pay my taxes now, instead of when
I
>> >> get home."
>> >>
>> >> 2. Definition. A tithe was ten per cent of Jewish income tax where
>> >> both the unbeliever and the believer paid. Abraham as a believer
>> >> became a citizen of Melchizedek's kingdom and that's why he paid
ten
>> >> per cent.
>> >>
>> >> 3. The categories of tithing in Israel. a) To the Levites went ten
per
>> >> cent for the maintenance and sustenance of the Levitical priesthood
-
>> >> Numbers 18:20-21, 24; Hebrews 7:5,9. This may seem to authorise a
>> >> national church. It does not. You must remember that in the
previous
>> >> dispensation it was the Levitical priesthood who handled all of the
>> >> national holidays. They offered all the sacrifices at every one of
the
>> >> special feasts as well as the feast of the trumpets, on the first
day
>> >> of each month. b) A tenth was to be used for the sacred feasts and
>> >> sacrifices - Deuteronomy 12:17-19; 14:22-27. Every third year there
>> >> was a third ten per cent taxation. This was for a charity tax for
the
>> >> poor of the land (This was not welfare, it was charity) -
Deuteronomy
>> >> 14:28,29.
>> >>
>> >> 4. Gospel references - Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42, are illustrative
of
>> >> references to tithing in the Gospels. Whenever you find a reference
to
>> >> tithing in the Gospels it illustrates the distortion of the law
>> >> through legalism. The references there all have to do with the
>> >> condemnation of legalism. The Talmud extension of the Mosaic law
>> >> distorted the entire concept of tithing. The Pharisees at the time
of
>> >> our Lord extended it to the minutest details of life not required
by
>> >> the Mosaic law.
>> >>
>> >> 5. Tithing is also mentioned in connection with an income tax
evasion
>> >> - Leviticus 27:30-34. This passage forbids the substituting of one
>> >> animal for another in the payment of tax. The penalty was one fifth
>> >> more of your income.
>> >>
>> >> 6. The perpetuation of the income tax principle is also mentioned
in
>> >> Matthew 22:17-21; Mark 12:13-17 - the concept that income tax is a
>> >> bona fide function.
>> >>
>> >> 7. Tithing is not a part of New Testament giving, it has nothing to
do
>> >> with the Church Age. In 1 Corinthians 16:1,2 tithing has never been
>> >> spiritual giving at all in the Church Age. The amount that you give
to
>> >> the local church is strictly between you and the Lord, it does not
>> >> have to be ten per cent, more or less. Giving is the expression of
>> >> wor****p of the royal priesthood and therefore is not related with
>> >> tithing, and never can be. Why? Because while the priesthood can
>> >> receive ten per cent it can never give ten per cent to anyone. The
>> >> royal priesthood is the highest of all priesthoods and as such it
>> >> never deals in ten per cent. 2 Corinthians chapters 8 & 9 has a
>> >> detailed dissertation on giving for the royal priesthood. Tithing
is
>> >> never mentioned as related to giving in this dispensation.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tithing is not spiritual giving in the Old Testament. Spiritual
giving
>> >> is limited to believers only and tithing was a ten per cent income
tax
>> >> under the Mosaic Law, Codex number three, which deals with the laws
of
>> >> divine establishment.
>> >>
>> >> Actually there were three ten per cent taxes under the ten percent
>> >> rule of income tax in the Mosaic Law. First there was the tithe or
ten
>> >> percent income tax for all Jewish citizens, believers and
unbelievers,
>> >> for the maintenance of the Levites - Numbers 18:21,24. The second
ten
>> >> per cent income tax from all Jewish citizens was to defray the cost
of
>> >> the feasts and sacrifices - Deuteronomy 14:22-24. And the third ten
>> >> per cent or tithe, income tax from all Jewish citizens, believers
and
>> >> unbelievers, was to be paid every third year for the relief of the
>> >> poor in the land - Deuteronomy 14:28,29 [charity and not
socialism].
>> >>
>> >> Remember that the tithe is defined in the scripture as a ten per
cent
>> >> income tax for the citizens of Israel only, both believers and
>> >> unbelievers. Because it included unbelievers and because it was a
tax
>> >> it is not regarded as spiritual giving, it is regarded as an
>> >> obligation called income tax. Spiritual giving is presented in the
>> >> Mosaic Law under one word - "offerings." Offerings were for
believers
>> >> only.
>> >>
>> >> In the time of apostasy in Israel the citizens, both the believers
and
>> >> unbelievers, failed to pay their taxes and believers were not
>> >> fulfilling their obligation in spiritual giving as well - cf.
Malachi
>> >> 3:8.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >When did tithes include money in the OT era?
>>
>> The point was, and is, if you are tithing 1/10th of your spices, why
>> would you NOT tithe your money and time?
>
>Because the commands on what to tithe, how to tithe, when to tithe,
>and who to tithe to are very specific. Deuteronomy 4:2 and Proverbs
>30:6 warns us about adding or taking away from the commands of the
>Lord. God commanded the tithe, and his commands never included money.
> To add money to the list would be adding to the commands of the Lord.
Jesus also modified law. And why would we tithe our produce and our
time and resources and talents and NOT our money? Why would you hold
back? Is God not worthy of your money?
John W
>
>> You are to tithe your resources.
>
>If in reference to the OT tithe commands, this would be accurate to an
>extent.
>
>> I know of churches today, rural churches, where the small farm farmers
>> cannot afford cash tithes, so they bring milk, cheese, eggs, and they
>> volunteer.
>
>This is a prime example of how the Israelites tithed! Most of the
>tithe requirements were agricultural products because the Israelites
>were commanded to EAT the tithe (Deut. 14).
>
>> They give a percentage / what they can afford to give, of
>> their resources, including their time and talents. What do you think
>> |
