Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy
It was my understanding of prophecy in the days when I attended seminary
that there is absolutely no mention of the United States of America in
the
Bible.
With one possible exception.
There is supposedly a reference in the Old Testament, I believe, to the
Great Eagle that swoops down onto the mountain and rescues the Jews
during
the Great Tribulation.
I have heard several opionions that this is a reference to a U.S.
intervention that rescues those Jews who manage to escape
Jerusalem/Israel
during the reign of The Anti-Christ.
I believe this is total speculation.
j
john_se...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob wrote:
> I've listened to a lot of prophecy on shortwave, and there is a
> recurring guest on "The Prophcy Club." This is what he says pertains
to
> the United States: (The first part applies to Israel)
>
> Eze 38:1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
>
> Eze 38:2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the
> chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,
>
> Eze 38:3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I [am] against
thee,
> O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:
>
> Eze 38:4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I
> will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of
> them clothed with all sorts [of armour, even] a great company [with]
> bucklers and ****elds, all of them handling swords:
>
> Eze 38:5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with
****eld
> and helmet:
>
> Eze 38:6 Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north
> quarters, and all his bands: [and] many people with thee.
>
> Eze 38:7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy
> company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
>
> Eze 38:8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years
> thou shalt come into the land [that is] brought back from the sword,
> [and is] gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel,
> which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the
> nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
>
> Eze 38:9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a
> cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with
> thee.
>
> ***This is where Gruver says United States comes into play, because the
> US does not have walled borders, and its people were gathered from all
> other nations***
>
> Eze 38:10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; It shall also come to pass, [that]
> at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think
> an evil thought:
>
> Eze 38:11 And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled
> villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of
> them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,
>
> Eze 38:12 To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon
> the desolate places [that are now] inhabited, and upon the people [that
> are] gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods,
> that dwell in the midst of the land.
>
> Eze 38:13 Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tar****sh, with all
the
> young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a
spoil?
> hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and
> gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?
>
> ***End of US interlude****
>
> Eze 38:14 Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say unto Gog, Thus saith
> the Lord GOD; In that day when my people of Israel dwelleth safely,
> shalt thou not know [it]?
>
> ***But wait, Gruver said this applied to the US. Any comments?***
***********************************************************
From: bj <jayw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Consciousness Created by God has a Memory of its Creation;
consciousness not Created by God has no memory, or awareness, of its
origins in reflex
Date: 1998/07/10
Message-ID: <6o60oo$cai@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <6mp9f6$i8n$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <01bda015$56704e80
$b0867dc2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3599692A.BE187EEF@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <magus-
ya02408000R3006982234550001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6nd768$fq0$2
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <359DB80D.85FFE47B@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6nmthn$9kc
$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <359f4a03.922190@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6o4l4t
$grm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <6o4teq$1gc$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: none
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: israel.lists.il-talk,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.consciousness
e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Not talking about conception, obviously.
obviously.j
> Genesis 2:7 is a Memory of
> the Creation, yes.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahj
have you ever heard of Divine Revelation? God dictated the narraative.
Moses, or whoever
wrote Genesis (we believe Moses wrote it) couldn't have "remembered" it,
because he wasn't
there when it happened. It was DICTATED by God, you fool!)
j
> This is what the story of Adam and Eve is all
> about. This Revelation was not conveyed in words but in a Memory.
> >
God's memory, not man's! (God knows all, remembers all. God is infinite.
Man is finite. You
see that, don't you?)j
> >If you indeed DO believe you have memories of your creation, and
you're not just
> >spoofing, I suggest therapy.
> >You might as well talk about your "past lives" that you remember.
> This is the second element of the Revelation of the "resurrection
> of the dead", yes; described metaphorically by Jesus as the 'angels
> in heaven' in his reply to the Sadducees.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahto get a good picture of what "the resurrection
of the dead:"
means, perhaps you should read the commentaries of the 2nd century and
1st century and 3rd
century disciples of the Apostles. They'll tell you EXACTLY what the
resurrection of the
dead means. It means simply that we will all die physically, but then we
will all be raised
again when He comes back. Some will be raised to their eternal reward
(Heaven). Others like
you, who pervert the truth, will be raised to Eternal DAMNATION (Hell)
You see that, don't you?
You are an Anti-Christ! We were warned about you!
You come in sheeps clothing, but you are a wolf, seeking to slaughter the
innocent.
God damn you!
j
>
>
> > Certainly people
> >have "memories" of past lives, but we also have evidence that
reincarnation is a total
> >crock. I.E., we know demons exist; we know Satan exists. The ability
of Satan and his
> >evil minions to slip in and out of the minds of the susceptible is
well do***ented.
> >The memories that are planted run the gamut from imagined contact with
aliens to
> >memories of past lives and memories of molestations and rapes that
never occurred.
>
> You are accusing Jesus of having been possessed by demons; but don't
> let that stop you.
no. I didn't say that. And i didn't suggest it. Jesus was possessed by
the Spirit of God,
not the Spirit of Satan! Jesus never mentinoned past lives. He said he
had lived forever
like His Father. To equate that with reincarnation or demon possession
makes you the worst
of demons = Satan!And I hereby rebuke you in the name of Jesus of
Nazareth, Satan!
j
> >
> >(Get a grip!) There is help.
>
> Not from metaphysical pagan philosophy there isn't; and that is what
> you have swallowed hook line and sinker.
>
> > >
> >> >Except that they are arguing the point on the basis of belief
rather
> >> >than Knowledge;
> >
> >not true. Any believe should be able to tell you the things/events
that led him/her to
> >a saving knowledge of the Christ.On the remote chance that you haven't
heard, "You
> >tell me to show you and you'll believe." I tell you, believe and you
will see."
>
> As Christian theology has turned the Teaching of Jesus upside down,
> your understanding of the relation****p of Knowledge to belief is
> competely upside down.
oh, really? And you alone have all the correct answers? Satan!Christian
teaching/theology
dates all the way back to the time of Christ. There is an unmistakable,
unbroken
teaching/tradition. 6 of the original 7 churches that Paul founded are
still there, still
open, still thriving. Don't you DARE tell theem they've been twisting the
words/teaching of
the Master for 2,000 years. In fact, I've been to one of the churches
Paul founded in
Turkey.
It is still there. It is still opening its doors for worhip every Sunday.
j
The
> Moses and Jesus and Mohammed spoke of the
> Knowledge they received through Revelation; belief or disbelief in
> that follows.
> >
> >I have numerous times experienced personally converting a doubter who
just could not
> >believe certain things. After I talked them into taking the step of
believing and
> >letting the doubts take care of themselves, the doubts eva****ated, as
Scripture
> >promises they will.
>
> My, my, my; how HUMBLE we are today.
You're not humble. And I am not bragging. I am giving you irrefutable
fact. When you have
no answer, you stoop to insults.You are Satan!
j
>
>
> Giving Knowledge is not within the purview of ANY person.
I have received knowledge through my personal study. We can all do that.
What we CANNOT do
is "give" or "receive" "knowledge" that is contrary to Holy Writ = The
Bible.
> Knowledge
> is received directly through Revelation. Remember Jesus reply to
> Peter when he said that Jesus was 'the son of the Living God. This
> Peter received not from Jesus but from the Father.
>
> >
> >> in other words, on the basis of merely hearsay, in
> >> >which case the conditioning process and the ego involvement in that
> >> >conditioning process attains priority over ANY Knowledge.
it can't contradict Holy Writ, which is the final word.j
> >
> >In other words, you call all believers mindless morons who believe
whatever they're
> >told. Well, pal, I'll match education and IQ against any atheist in
this NG. I have a
> >few homework asignments to complete to attain 2 Masters degrees, which
I attended
> >school for simultaneously. I haven't had a pastor yet who didn't have
half a dozen
> >doctorates.
>
> Goody, goody, goody, goody, gumdrops. How many Ph.D.s did Jesus
> or Moses or Isaiah have.
your point?My point is that it takes years of intensive study (3 years
for the Apostles) to
attain the knowledge in any semblance of order that Jesus and the
Apostles left us.
Jesus, being God, had perfect knowledge, you MORON. He didn't need
seminary, tho we have
every reason to believe he attended seminary anyway. When he was called
"Rabbi", that meant
that he had gone to rabbinical school and earned his diploma like every
other rabbi.
We Christian theologians today consider the 3 years Jesus walked among
his Apostles the
most intense Seminary experience ever. And the Apostles had their
students, and those
students sat at the feet of the Apostles learning for years. When they
had acquired
sufficient knowledge, they became the teachers. And so on, for the past
2,000 years today.
Until we have seminaries all over the world, teaching the same teachings
Jesus handed down
THROUGH HIS 12 Apostles originally. And we have MANY ways of testing the
teachings, so
that if anyone errs, we can catch them at it.
And YOU are way off!
j
>
>
> > Christians aren't stupid.
>
> If they believe that Christianity is a summation of the Revelations
> Jesus received, OR that Mohammed was NOT Elijah and John the Baptist
> 'raised from the dead' they are.
the teachings of Mohammed confirm that he was not Elijah or John the
Baptist. We don't need
to look any further than comparing Mohammed's teachings to The Bible. As
I said, the Bible
is the final word. Mohammed's violated God's Words, and so he can't be
called a prophet of
the God of the Bible. He CAN qualify to be a prophet of Mohammed, but
then, who cares? We
wor****p the True, Living God. Jesus lives. Mohammed is dead.j
> >
> >Jim Lovell, the astronaut, was a Christian and a Creationist. The
world famous
> >Clinical Psychologist, Dr. Jim Dobson, is a scientist of the human
mind. He is also an
> >outspoken Christian and Creationist. I ahve worked with scientists at
Boeing,
> >Microsoft, and other scientific institutions. I have encountered MANY
scientists who
> >are Christians. Atheism isn't a measure of how bright you are. Neither
is Christianty.
>
> Most of these Christians are pagan metaphysical philosophers in
> sheeps clothing.
> >
and you're full of doggy doo doo. You can't judge Colonel Irwin ( I
noticed I said Jim
Lovell. I meant Jim Irwin. Jim Lovell may be a Christian but I have no
personal knowledge
of that.) And notice, everybody, when I nail this idiot with facts, he
backs off and calls
names. Any of you can go to a Christian bookstore and read Jim Irwin's
personal testimony
and judge for yourselves.
j
> >
> >
> >We all come to our beliefs on the basis of personal experience. We all
examine and
> >re-examine our lives, assumptions, beliefs, and the things we know. Or
we should. The
> >Christian merely has a wider frame of reference than the non-believer,
since the
> >Christian--unlike the non-believer-- excludes no information.
>
> Except the Revelations in the Koran,
excuse me? I don't not read the Koran. It ain't Revelation. I read it. I
don't consider it
Holy Writ.j
> the statements of Jesus
> concering John the Baptist,
oh, and what are they?are you claiming that Jesus wrote stuff we don't
know about? Jesus
didn't talk about John the Baptist because, in the Divine sceme of
things, John didn't
matter. Who mattered was Jesus.
b.s.
j
>
> the Prophecy of Malachi concerning
> the return of Elijah, and Jesus reply to the Sadducees.
>
> >Our arguments aren't heresay.
>
> Who told you to say this?
>
I can speak for myself. I have ears, eyes, and a mouth. But the truth in
me comes from
God's throne, as did Christ and many other of God's prophets. Not that
I'm intending to say
that Jesus was merely a prophet. He was/is Deity in Human form.j
> >> >The world is more of an illusion that is the Revelation of the
> >> >"resurrection of the dead"--see the Treatise on the Resurrection in
> >> >the Nag Hammadi Codices.
not interested. There were many such false do***ents in Jesus' day. I
don't remember if
Jesus himself referred to the false writings. I certainly referred to
"many false teachers"
who walk among us, seeking to lead astray those who will wander", as you
have. Paul
repeatedly warned us in the Bible, in those books we call the Epistles,
you know, Romans,
Colossians, Corinthians, to be aware of the false teachers, such as
yourself.j
> >
> >Why don't YOU check out the 1st and 2nd and 3rd century A.D.
commentaries written by
> >the students of Paul and Timothy
>
> Paul had NO understanding of the Doctrine of the "resurrection of the
> dead".
Paul not only understood it, he rebuked those false teachers who taught
it. Paul, if there
was a 1st pope, was it.It was Paul who opened the 1st 7 churches.
History, Satan, history!
How dare you rebuke Paul?
j
> This is why the Nag Hammadi Codices had to be hidden. THIS
> is why there is a Prophecy in Daniel 12:9 that the words 'will remain
> secret and sealed until the time of the End.'
>
> >screw you, David Suiter!
>
> A genuinely 'brilliant' retort.
I have exposed you as Satan, David. What more is there to say? You will
have your
followers. But you won't decieve anyone who wants the truth on MY watch!j
>
>
> Mi cha el (Daniel 12:1, Sura 2:98 of the Koran, Column XVII of 1QM)
***********************************************************************
From: bj <jayw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Is Steve Winters for real?
Date: 1998/07/11
Message-ID: <6o96hf$ij0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <35996A36.27C3555C@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <XJxn1.4939$r73.4213498
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <35A02542.2075062D@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <sIGo1.7219$r73.6265400
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: Brent Batson <bats...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: none
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups:
alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.religion.christ
ian,alt.christnet
Brent Batson wrote:
> Fredericka wrote in message <35A02542.20750...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>...
> >Brent Batson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> As for charges of 'tritheism" being lodged against Trinitarians,
this is
> >> nothing new, as two of the biggest problem faced by early
"Apologists"
> for
> >> Trinitarianism were, to quote Otto W. Heick, a Trinitarian
historian, in
> A
> >> History of Christian Thought, page 146, "(1) How could the Church
escape
> >> from subordinationism, i.e. from viewing Christ as a kind of 'second
God'
> >> (heteros theos)? (2) How could the Trinity of special persons
> >> (hypostasianism) be maintained without sacrificing Christian
monotheism?"
> >> Many throughout the centuries, and now, have found the Trinitarian
> solution
> >> unsatisfactory in answering these problems.
> >
I try to not jump into ridiculous debate about meaningless issues. But
when
basic tenets of Christianity are bandied about by those who just don't
know, I
must jump in.Trinitarianism doesn't represent 3 gods. And we really come
up
short when we try to discuss infinite God with our finite reasoning. The
world
doesn't fit into a shoe box, much as some would like to put it there.
These are the basic facts regarding The Holy Trinity, or the concept that
One
God exists in 3 persons.:
(recognize the futility of trying to discuss divine mystery--and there
are
those- in human terms)
1. We have references in the Bible to the 3 main characteristics of God:
a. he is Omnipotent. for the many who may not understand, that means
God is
All powerful.
b. he is Omniscient. " "
" All knowing.
c. he is Omnipresent. "
" " Everywhere present
(you
can't go anywhere in the Universe that God isn't.)
now the stupid debate begins, as the cultists and other non-believers
say,
nowhere do you see Jesus or the Holy Spirit referred to as all 3.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. But, if you accept the basic premise that Only God
is
Omnipotent. Only God is Omnipresent. Only God is Omniscient, then you
show that
either Jesus or the Holy Spirit has either of these 3 characteristics,
then
Jesus = God the Father, Jesus = The Holy Spirit.
We have Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, not as 3 gods, but as 3 persons in
1
Godhead. Don't ask me for an explanation of that. I can't give it to you.
Jesus told someone (I forget who) , If you have seen me, you have seen my
Father. The Father and I are one.
No one will debate that God is Omniscient. Peter, in a discussion with
Jesus,
where Jesus asked him the 3rd time, Peter do you love me? Peter
responded, "Lord
(God), you KNOW all things. You KNOW that I love you."
If Jesus accepted Peter's statement that HE knew all things, He was
acknowledging Peter's statement that He/Jesus was God in flesh.
Now we turn to The Holy Spirit. Jesus told us He was leaving so that The
Holy
Spirit could come. We don't understand all the implcations of that
remark. What
we DO understand is His following statement. "I send the Holy Spirit. He
will
teach you ALL things.": These are words Jesus used for Him self. Meaning,
the
Holy Spirit is equal to Jesus. If the Holy Spirit KNOWS all things, He is
Omniscient, one of God's attributes. The Holy Spirit is therefore, God in
Spirit.
Is that clear enough.?????
Don't try to reason through it. Either you accept it or you don't.
Saying that's not possible is to challenge the Divine nature, which I
recommend
you don't do.
There are going to be mysteries. We can't comprehend God. We don't have a
big
enough brain or enough wisdom.
It show no more than our super egos that we even try.
j
> >So here again, the 'Oneness' cult wishes it known that, a.) it's
> >shameful how I slander them by noting they rant and rave ab
no. We trinitarians don't believe in 3 gods. Actually the correct term
for the
belief in the equality of Jesus/God/Holy Spirit defies a term. One that
was
popular in seminary was that we were "Tri-Unitarian", meaning 3 beings
who
were/are somehow one God.We don't understand it. But the Bible says all 3
are
the same. We accept that as a myster. Period.
j
> I have neither accused you of slandering me regarding the fact that
> Trinitarianism lends itself to tritheism, nor have I accused all
> Trinitarians of embracing tritheism. As you point out, regarding
Justin
> Martyr, some Trinitarians make more distinction than others between the
> Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
true. And many elders/scholars are STILL wrestling with this mystery.
Nobody I
have talked to in my 50 years claims to have a final answer. It is a
MYSTERY.j
> I am just stating that Trinitarianism, try as it may through inventing
it's
> own lexicon, (how strange you accuse Oneness believers of this, it's
not we
> who have invented such non-biblical phrases as "Trinity,"
> "co-substantiality", "eternally begotten," "God the Son," "God the Holy
> Ghost," "true God of true God," etc.), has not succeeded in explaining,
nor
> even preserving, the nature of the Godhead as revealed in scripture,
which
> stresses with utmost im****tance God's being one.
we coin terms and phrases to try to meet the ever present demand of the
non-believers like yourselves who constantly challenge us to explain the
unexplainable mysteries of God.j
Perhaps when He returns, he will explain it satisfactorily. But, byh
then, of
course, the veil will have been pulled away, and all mysteries will
supposedly
be revealed, as I seem to recall. My post 2nd coming theology is a little
rusty
at the moment. I have focused my studies the past 30 years on Apologetics
and
End times matters.
j
>
>
> > In
> >fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is the *solution* to the problem of
> >'three gods', not the problem to be solved. The word 'trinity' means
> >'three-in-one'.
correct.j
>
>
> Of course, it was Tertullian who coined the phrase "trinitas" as no
word in
> the bible sufficiently described the confused mystery philosophy
Tertullian
> applied to the Godhead in his theology, (but then, why would the Bible
have
> a word that accurately described a system so foreign from any concepts
> presented therein?).
just because a popular word emerged for the system of Deity we call
Christianity
that wasn't used in Bibilcal times, doesn't mean we must discredit it.
Chrsitmas
nor Easter was celebrated by the 1st Century christians, that I am awre
of it.
That doesn't mean we can't enjoy those festivities now. We are FREE in
Christ."I
did not come to enslave you. I came to set you free!"
j
> His "improvements" on the previous errors of the
> "Post-Apostolic Fathers" involved such convoluted, illogical, and
> self-contradictory statements as: "Everywhere I hold one substance in
three
> cohering...
again, attempts by man to explain the mysteries of God. Not necessarily
advisable, but certainly understandable as the world clamors to this very
day
for an explanation of God/Father, God/Son, God/Holy Spirit, as evidenced
by this
very post.j
> All are of one, by unity of substance; while the mystery of the
> dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a
> Trinity..."
again, a man's attempt to answer a questoin that has no ready answer. An
imperfect attempt to solve a mystery; and answer an age-old
puzzle.:Define God.
j
> you ask impossible questions of people who try to answer the best they
can.
> Then when the answer doesn't make sense to you, or it falls apart
because it's
> not a perfect answer to a divine MYSTERY that has dumbfounded the best
minds
> of the age, you laugh. If you don't want an answer, imperfect tho it
be, DONT
> ASK THE QUESTION!
> Some "solution," Fredericka, when it comes down to being "still
> guarded" "mystery" of how self-contradictory terms can have meaning,
how
> three can be separate and yet be one! It's kinda like saying, if you
don't
> believe me, just ask me!
no. it's not like that at all.Just to occupy a little space here, and not
that
you're going to accept it, (I'm personally convinced that you aren't
looking for
an answer. You're enjoying the debate too much. And Jesus forbad us to
debate.
He told us, "Don't cast your pearls (of understanding, wisdom, learning,
love)
before the swine." (That's you)
> we have water. At room temperature, it's wet liquid. Get it hot enough
and it
> boils into steam. Is the steam not water I guess not, according to you.
It
> doesnt' look like water. Get the water cold enough, however, and it
becomes
> solid and cold. I guess that cold, solid stuff isn't water either, from
your
> pserspective.
j
>
>
>
>
> > Some of the earliest Christian apolgists, like Justin
> >Martyr, have more 'threeness' than is good for them, and could use a
> >little bit more 'oneness'.
yes. various attempts at explanations were made over the centuries. Some
less
perfect thanothers. None perfect, because, we again, are trying to define
a
mystery for those who could frankly care less. And here I quit trying.
Because
you aren't worthy. I don't cast my pearls before swine. I TRY to be
obedient.
> Of course, *none* of the early Christian
> >writers was a modalist monarchian; that viewpoint is completely
unknown
> >prior to the late second/early third century.
yep, and as with any movement, as time went by, error began to creep in
to the
true faith, as "believers" refused to surreder their traditions to
Christ. And
the disciples of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th and 5th and 6th centuries made the
mistake
of saying, "well, I suppose it wouldn't hurt if we did that for the
____'s"
(whatever the pagan "new believer happened to be)
>
>
> It just amazes me how you and many other Trinitarians can continue to
speak
> of "early Christians" and the "Early Church" and so seldom be referring
to
> the Early Church recorded in the Bible!
amenj
> The writers of the Bible were most
> certainly Oneness in their view of God,
whoops. before I take this any farther, you better redefine Oneness. The
Bible
clearly states, (see above) that all 3, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are
God and
that they are Co-Equal, Co-Existent, and Co-Eternal.As long as God has
existed,
He's been 3, no matter how you slice it. There was ALWAYS a Father,
ALWAYS a
Son, and ALWAYS a Holy Spirit.
> and your Trinitarian view was only
> "revealed" to "the Church" little by little over the next few hundred
years,
it was only understood later. Just as Jesus told the Jews "destroy this
temple
and in 3 days I will rebuild it."the writer's comment--I believe Mark, I
don't
recall--was to the effect, years later, when he was writing this account,
after
the Resurrection, the jews asked Him, "it took our fathers (I think 200
years)??
to build this temple, and you will rebuild it in 3 days?" preposterious!
Then
the writer goes on to say, "But the temple He was referting to was HIS
BODY!"
This was not a boast to rebuild the temple. Jesus used the remark about
the
temple to prophesy that He would be murdered, lie in the grave 3 days,
and raise
again the 3rd day. The point here is that, when the writer, *'ll say
mark, heard
Jeuss say that, he had no clue what Jesdus was talking about, tho he
redmembered
Jesus saying that at the time.
When Jesus rose again in 3 days, Mark, said, "Oh,, that was what the Lord
meant
when he said that."
It's called "Progressive Revelation." It took some of us several hundred
years
to figure out the true nature of the Trinity, or I call it Tri-Unity.
j
> (even the original Nicene Creed of 325 A.D. is seldom quoted today
without
> additions made in 381 A.D., at the Council of Constantinople, and even
later
> years).
again, this is called "progressive revelation". Some things God reveals
instantly, as our parents tell us some things immediately. Some things we
have
to wait for, as "I'll tell you about that when you're a little older,
son, a
little more mature." Ouir parents do that to us. It's okay. We get ticked
off
when God does it to us. Why? He's our Heavenly Father. He has that right.
Have
you ever heard of "The need to know, the right to know?"And the general
would
say, "You woulldnt understand if I told you."
God says the same thing.
And I must leave this and go. I have a date with my wife.
j
*************************************************************************
*****************
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.islam,
alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.atheism
Message-ID: <08is1732
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Post Road Mailer for OS/2 (Green Edition Ver 3.0)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 18:17:31 CST
From: walksalone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: "John W" (was Re: Republicans Outraged)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 0-1pool158-43.nas11.atlanta1.ga.us.da.qwest.net
X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 1062976446 65.146.158.43 (7 Sep 2003 18:14:06
-0500)
Lines: 81
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.146.158.43
** Reply to note from Don <calldonREMOVE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mon, 08 Sep 2003
18:11:56 GMT
> On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 09:57:08 -0500,
> walksalone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >Reply to note from John W <john_weatherly47@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 8 Sep 2003
08:13:54
> >GMT
> >> On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:18:31 -0500, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> wrote:
> >> >Al Klein <rukbat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> thought hard and said:
> >> >>>You cannot buy the U S Supreme Court
> >> >>Unless your name is Bush and you were once vice president of this
> >> >>country.
> >> >Oh, please do shut the **** up with your partisan bull****. Bush
won,
> >> >all right? Can you stand one more year of him?
> >> Can you remember you're cross-posting in a Christian group and clean
> >No Jezzie, it is you who are crossposting & blaming others for it. You
> >see, the headers say this was posted from a xian group, & being you
claim
> >sovereignty over all matters xian, that makes you the cross poster, as
> >usual. Per your norm, you have been cross posting to alt altheism for
some
> >time now, & are to ignorant to even pay attention. It is real easy to
> >cure, just trim the headers. Agent makes that easy to do, even you can
do
> >it if you follow the instructions.
> >> it up? Or must you show your total lack of couth EVERYWHERE?
> >Bout the only way to get your attention long enough to do anything
with it
> >apparently, why.
> >> John W
> >A cross posting queen of internet who is unable to remain in al
religion
> >christian baptist. I am sure the baptists enjoy the extra unwanted
news
> >messages, so I shan't repair your error.
> >walkslaone who is not surprised that jezzie can't figure out which pot
it
> >is trying to stir this time.
> A "D.C. brat" who fought in WWII and VietNam from California and
> Seattle or something?!? Ohhh...
Worse than that I fear, but I suspect it is incocennt of the WWII charge,
it did imply service
in Desert Storm though.
It claims to have started live in SC, to white parents [implied, no
evidence], adopted by black
parents at its own request, gifted student [actual claim] Pepperdine & 2
[minimum] un-named
seminarys.
Then drafted before schooling [68], into the USAF, since corrected under
duress. Rejected by
the Navy, enlisted after draft notice recieved. [claim, no evidence
provided].
Known **** author, known wife/domestic violence record [claimed], known
felony rap sheet
[implied], known falsehood spinner. & I haven't even touched on the
aliases.
Personally saved by Billy G. [not Kenny G., different fantasy that] at
the age of five, implied
***ual abuse by both ***es before a teen, implied long history of ***ual
abuse, claimed
mental problems from the age of ten, & since reduced to the age of five.
Implied full service
in USAF, no pre-mature dischage. Oh, it it says it has made over 250k a
year, though there
is no mention of the IRS knowing anything about that. Let's see, the
missing churches, the
known lies about combat duty, oh yes, privey to top secret information
from a nucular
scientest [not named & presumed dead], implied friend****p with many
creationists, & at least
one instance of holding a photocopy of a ****tion of a dead sea scroll.
IIRC, he named that
book, but again, provided no evience for a bogus claim.
All in all, a nasty piece of work that seems to have the desire of being
the alpha male in
arcb. He can't make it though, Vern can whizz higher on the phone pole
than that mental
midget ever could. Hell, you could set down & whizz higher than jezebeth
during its prime.
> D*
> Qualem blennum!
walksalone who suspects that jezebeth doesn't have the mental problems it
tries to hide
behind, but is simply a body in search of a life & doomed to failure.
***********************************************************************
something:52845 alt.religion.christian.baptist:593186
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:324680 alt.religion.christian.boston-
church:86949
X-Abuse-Re****t: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<8bed4c4b29a1f6651b0f886cb2c25363@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Path: sn-us!sn-xit-05!sn-xit-09supernews.com!sjc1.usenetserver.com!
chi1.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!
newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!hub1.meganetnews.com!hydra.nntpserver.com!
nntpserver.com!news.teranews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:08:37 GMT
Lines: 62
From: walksalone <spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: jw was Re: But who understands the Bible? (was: But who
understands the Bible?)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.boston-church
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: wslksalone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<bb4dcba0.0404250623.3d181441@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<hSWic.51555$bl.15312@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <zFYic.3874$OU.166338
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <86es80tmt6s17k487vumhv2fa75fbtq8bi@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Followup-To: alt.religion.christian.baptist
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0632-2, 08/10/2006), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 03:42:18 -0700, jw wrote:
> Path: news.netfront.net!HSNX.atgi.net!newshosting.com!
nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!
not-for-mail
> From: jw <"john_weatherly47<no">
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.boston-church
> Subject: Re: But who understands the Bible?
> Message-ID: <86es80tmt6s17k487vumhv2fa75fbtq8bi@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> References: <bb4dcba0.0404250623.3d181441@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<hSWic.51555$bl.15312@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <zFYic.3874$OU.166338
@[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: 33
> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 03:42:18 -0700
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.5.187.199
> X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1083062199 67.5.187.199 (Tue, 27 Apr 2004
05:36:39 CDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 05:36:39 CDT
> Xref: news.netfront.net alt.religion.christian:527319
alt.religion.christian.20-something:13686
alt.religion.christian.baptist:314040
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:147995 alt.religion.christian.boston-
church:6957
>
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 20:24:59 -0400, "Stephen Bayzik"
> <stephen.bayzik@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> john w replied
>>"Family Man" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:hSWic.51555$bl.15312@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>> > If the Bible was the product of human thinking, it would read just
>>> > like all the other so-called great literature of the world.
>>
>>> The christian bible was written by man. It's full of contradictions,
hate,
>>> perversion, cruelty and horrific fictional stories.
>>
>>Is that not a part of the historical legacy of man himself?
>>
>>> It's no wonder no decent person wants to read that filth.
>>
>>If you have a box with a gift in it. Someone tells you it is a pony.
Like a
>>child you stick your hand in it to find the pony; alas you must feel
the
>>manure while seeking for the pony.
>>
>>Not that I'm buying the rather foolish ideas of "sin" as given the
western
>>world by St. Augustine, but the world is neither populated by just
deceitful
>>people and ideas but noble people and ideas as well.
>
> Interesting take. Thanks.
> However, sin is real, as described by the Bible. I am not certain
Only for bleaters, & maybe Islamic's. Don't know their dogma, can't say.
> what Augustine said that you are objecting to. Mind clarifying?
Can't read then, or have you lost your library card. After all, you never
discuss anything, so why should anyone do your homework for you.
BTW, its a biut hard to believe anyone that made it through the first
quarter in any seminary would not know what Auggie said. But then, you
are
jw, & you imply much & show nothing.
> jw
walksalone who is not surprised that jw would want others to give him
information he can't find or understand on his own.
From: John W <john_weathe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religio
n.christian-teen
Subject: Re: Pictures of a 525 AD Church (as claimed by John W)???
Message-ID: <3scdjvs6see4o07kpkqtt12ng3iv55c3o1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <27eaec6.0308091632.1ecdc654@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<p37bjv0sinsgmhjp7uhb5frvdtfpmsjmgg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <bh4a86$tm0gn$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3iocjv42q8q31t2oof2q7ooni7525ekslh@[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: 51
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: 10 Aug 2003 21:11:52 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: supernews.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!news-
out.superfeed.net!propagator2-maxim!feed-maxim.newsfeeds.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 11:20:18 -0400, larry4...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>Just curious.
>John, how long ago was this you saw this church? You don't have to be
>exact.
>
>Reason I ask, is because, is it possible, they may have moved it. Or
>maybe rebuilt the church, leaving the cornerstone or foundation in
>tact?
>
>Just wondering,
>Larry
I've had that thought myself.
I was there during Viet Nam, 1967 to 1968.
And I saw one of the pictures in which there are half-a-dozen building
on the side of the road right about where the church should be. I may
even see a corner of the building. It wouldn't be any bigger than a
small one-family house.
If two or three houses had been built to each side of that church,
that might have confused Andrew. Of course it doesn't help that he
didn't believe any church was there, so he didn't go to any pains
whatever to "investigate".
I still say it might very well be out the BACK gate. I'm trying to
remember, but I'm not getting the memories I want.
And of course, Andrew decided that the proof was that the church was
at Alconbury; I never said that. I merely said "check Alconbury
first."
At ANY rate, I'm about to prove Andrew a liar. I'm checking with other
sources, including the military.
God bless, Larry,
John W
(John the Baptist)
10 "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,
and knowledge of the Holy one is understanding.
Prov 9:10
NIV
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><>
<>
From: Jon W <jon_we...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Help--My husband is a cross dresser
Message-ID: <3skv9v43s27bu5svs2idqf02e1jlpsj29i@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <mtGma.88707$It5.23872@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <T1Kma.210
$VM2.134@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <hins9v0vhk3v5pljhv5q3b358gp0o4k76j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vbgt9vk7lo0uagbl3et0ra1gkfji6r724j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <GHAna.5213$X44.2554
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <vjCna.116952$It5.110532@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <QNCna.5240
$X44.2612@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <0v0u9v0eaagdut9fl4bofd0ofm4eu29fsm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<6c3e085efdd32ec7b3c837d34b56ce16@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<sj4u9vgm3ah3l97pn6a4f0a8j304q1jor4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<fbe02acc820c5cafeda0e790fe28f0b0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 118
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 03:31:11 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.3.65.125
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1050664270 67.3.65.125 (Fri, 18 Apr 2003
06:11:10 CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 06:11:10 CDT
On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:35:52 GMT, ujb <u...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>John W wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:02:53 GMT, ujb <u...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >John W wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:57:09 -0700, "vernonoj"
>> >> <vern...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Vicki" <vicp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >news:vjCna.116952$It5.110532@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "vernonoj" <vern...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:GHAna.5213$X44.2554@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Don" <calldonREM...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:vbgt9vk7lo0uagbl3et0ra1gkfji6r724j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:59:29 -0700, John W
>> >> >> > > <john_weatherl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > >Yet we know from Anita Bryant's history that homo*** is
curable. Not
>> >> >> > > >that she was/is homo***ual. But she was one of the leaders
of the
>> >> >> > > >Genesis project.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > John, there are probably far more "straight" men who enjoy
gay *** (or
>> >> >> > > did when they were in high school) than there will ever be
gay men who
>> >> >> > > are "cured."
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > And I don't know WHERE you got your ideas about good ole
Anita Bryant.
>> >> >> > > For several years, she has had a musical director who is as
gay as a
>> >> >> > > goose. Doesn't seem to bother her now! He is a great
musician.
>> >> >> > > Seems like she would want to get HIM "cured!
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Don't you think so?
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > D*
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Well now you've done it.
>> >> >> > That's the last straw.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > This is going to be re****ted to PETA.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > What did a goose ever do to you?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> :-) You made me fall out of my chair I
>> >> >> was laughing so hard.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Only lately have I see any humor in this group.
>> >> >> We need more of that in here.
>> >> >> I was beginning to think
>> >> >> it was populated only by sour and dour
>> >> >> people.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> :-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Actually it's almost all humor. Some know it. Some don't.
>> >> >
>> >> >The legalists are the straightmen. Hmm. I wonder are there any
gay
>> >> >legalists?
>> >> >
>> >> There are certainly "straightmen" who are "legalists", but I for
one
>> >> merely came in here to be sure the Bible was being interpreted
>> >> "correctly" or at least to be sure my POV was being represented.
>> >>
>> >> >If Dean Martin was a straight man, what was Jerry Lewis?
>> >> >
>> >> >There are a couple of iconoclasts here that have a lot of fun.
>> >>
>> >> If some would quit assaulting others we could ALL have fun.
However,
>> >> ujb and Phar and some others come in here MERELY to stir up all the
>> >> trouble they can manage. I somehow can't laugh that off!
>> >>
>> >> John W
>> >> >
>> >
>> >Scrambled One do I see a reference to ujb? :)
>> >
>> >You have no idea why I'm here, and you have nothing to do with with
it.
>> >With that said, I do enjoy watching your sick and twisted attempts at
>> >acting normal. I enjoy watching how some try and use you as a charity
of
>> >their benevolence with fainting interest in your stories. Only in a
>> >Christian group I feel you have even the slightest chance interacting
>> >with humans without the use of drugs, booze or money to buy their
>> >companion****p. I love your stories about how life dealt you a poor
hand,
>> >I love how you cried about being replaced by a just a woman. You are
so
>> >much fun watching!
>> >
>> >ujb
>>
>> How Christian of you!
>>
>
>Not Christian, not un-Christian, the poor, the sick, the scrambled will
>always be with us, so I wanted you to know your poor scrambled "ME"
>stories are being seen.
>
>ujb
My point, oh brainless one, is your behavior on this group is HARDLY
christian, particularly your making VERY MEAN fun of those with
problems beyond their control
But why am I responding to you? You are a TOTAL waste of time. Plus,
you are DANGEROUSLY psychotic. I bet you chuckle every time you hear
about a child being murdered or molested.
John WFrom: John W <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: Bible Understanding
Message-ID: <3sv9001m28a6ea4v5c2rfa9ncii4ai15k1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <btd6vs$5v1kj$3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3FFA2BEA.4BDA92B5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <TcqKb.761487$Fm2.722111@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<97kmvv4d9g3ac1laboe2j868k7p7epqq5l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<c0lmvvk2qo5hm8fcgorrp3cuc29io8sfg2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3FFB6B0C.D1DDA8BD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <d7rmvv8la6k075b2osovficf61k6r2tm1a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <iu2pvvoiml307k1nnrt8qmr0hh7mhu43d8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<8h3pvv4dsm57vrfhq9qvo2q7ghh900limp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <794Lb.103311$pY.3893
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3ffcf0f8$1$jnyxfnybar$mr2ice@[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
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 128
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: 14 Jan 2004 08:38:03 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-
news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 23:56:08 -0600,
walksal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>In <794Lb.103311$pY.3893@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, on 01/07/2004
> at 08:30 PM, "Iconoclast" <i...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
>
>
>>"John Hennekes" <johnhenne...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:8h3pvv4dsm57vrfhq9qvo2q7ghh900limp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> The truth is that the military trained you how to kill, and the
skills
>>> taught in basic or boot camp was to eventually prepare you for war.
>>> War isn't a peace movement. You either kill or you get killed.
>>>
>>> You are a military-trained killer, and that's a fact. Trying to make
>>> everyone believe that the military doesn't train killers is stupid
and
>>> dumb.
>>> >
>
>>I don't know if you are out to beat JohnW at stupidity or what.
>
>Apparently you are though.
>
>>Basic or boot training does no such thing and anyone who says so is
>>stupid, a complete ass and has been indoctrinated by some trash school
or
>>an even more stupid trash bin for a mommy.
>
>Or never saw military servbive in the US armed forced durring the
>ssixties.
>
>>The only thing one learns in basic (boot) training is "possibly" how to
>>dislike a drill sergeant.
>
>Really, then I never learned the most im****tant thing my Platoon [drill
>Sgts came later for the US Army] which was how to survive if I ever
>screwed up & found myself in combat. No bayonet training, no re-
arrangiong
>another humans body with the steel butt plate of a M-1 Garand, no using
>the garrotte, no learning the best ways to kill somneone silently are
from
>behinbd? I never learened any of that according to you. No, I was
taught
>nowhere near the entire book of combat, but I was tauight enough that I
>could figure a 50/50 chance of returning from a comabat zone if it got
up
>close & personal. Bout the only regret I really had was after Nam, I
could
>not find SSGT. [E-5} Bailey & say thanks. He did his job well, I came
>home. So it appears that as usual, your view from your *Ivvory Tower of
>Vern* is distorted due to the great distance it is from reality.
>
>>THEN most go on to some technical training.
>
>Indeed, & for some, that is Infantry. Which definitely exrtends ther
crash
>course of how to lill for God, The Flahg & Mom's Apple Pie. A phrase I
>heard for my first three years before my Commander & First Sgt. informed
>me that there was a better way for a married man to sup****t a wife &
kids
>than the Infantry. I agreed & left the infantry behind & joined the
>Ordnance Corp. The times were not as interesting, the excitement & oh
****
>oh dear level were almost mundane, but, the odds favored me coming home
>with no artificial holes in my body. It worked. BTW, suppoisedly all US
>MArines are combat troops first, techies last. Truth of the matter is,
>that all armed forces are just that when the enemy is in your wire, or
>camp.
>
>& that Vernon is part of the reason All Military Forces Worldwide teach
>basic death & destruction to their personel.
>
>>For your dimwitted information, the reason we lost the battle of Inchon
>>is that more than eighty percent of the "soldiers" (Marines) did not
>>shoot back to kill even when under threat of death.
>
>You were there? I didn't know that., my condolences. Did you ever wonder
>if they had anythiong left to shoot with, & Inchon, being a ****t with a
>very high tide, is not the easisest to re-supply. Or, did you read a
>booklet titiled
>*What I did for the holidays at Inchon*.
>If you were there [not iompossible], then my condolences.
>If you were not, then you really don't know what you are talking about &
>that is no surprise either.
You, crawls, don't know what you are talking about USUALLY; that
hasn't stopped YOU from imposing YOUR POV as if it's the only one that
matters.
And as I said to John Hennekes, not all of us got full military combat
training. All I got was very basic rifle training. Back then, I could
field strip an M-16 with the best, and I was a marksman. Big deal! The
targets don't move!
When SEVERAL of us asked why we weren't being given combat training,
we were told in the Air Force it wasn't necessary, and during the war,
there wasn't time.
Johnson ordered the first combat troops in while I was in boot camp.
John W
>
>>Also for your little brain to wrap around, the best soldiers as far as
>>"war" and "combat" is concerning are Christians. Why? Because death
is
>>a passage not some animal instinct of avoidance.
>
>Really, I didn't know that, nor do I know it now. The man that is
praying
>for *Their god to save them* is a worthless **** in combat., especially
>the up close & personal variety as found in the Infanry or other comabat
>arms in any military force. They are not all a Sgt. York. The majority
>that make combat arms soon leave the myth behind if they dance with the
>elephant much. Some of them retreat from reality & never return. Some
>retain their path. Like any other segmnent of a society, the military
has
>a purpose, & it is to fight wars as directed to by its political
leaders.
>& like any other segmnent of societty, it will train its work force in
how
>to get the job done. I am no longer familiar with the ratio of sup****t
>troops to grunts/diggders/et all, but I do recall numbers like 14:1
being
>slung around. Those 14 could fight if necessaary, & some indeed had to.
>
>>ALSO if one has a "killer" instinct they usually don't make it to
combat
>>training and also seldom last in the service.
>
>I take it your career was not military service then. Can't blame you,
its
>not for everyone, & hopefully someday, it won't be for anyone on the
good
>space ****p earth.
>
>walksalone who knows damn sight well that the US military does teach new
>personel, male & female, the basics of how to make some poor bastard die
>for his country, & the principle works to date.
Web Images Groups News more »
alt.religion.christian.baptist > One man and one woman. There is not any
other
way acceptable before the Lord God. - View Parsed
Show only message text
From: John W <joh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: One man and one woman. There is not any other way
acceptable before the Lord God.
Message-ID: <3tetgv4plgadm4f4d68s1t7kt75n1ga84u@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <3F0DA0B6.4050303@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<bibsgvg4pjj6ii2uvditnt2fuo94mru32u@[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: 128
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 Jul 2003 13:34:53 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $9.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-news.com!news1.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 03:36:46 GMT, Don <calldonREM...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:21:58 -0600, Deacon
><A_Serv...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>Here we have the Word concerning *** and marriage. The only place ***
>>is acceptable is within the institution of marriage.
>
>So you are saying:
>1) You never have a nocturnal emission?
>2) You never have masturbated?
>
>>The only marriage
>>which is acceptable is one between a man and a woman. There is no
other
>>interpretation which is acceptable for the passages given.
>
>Actually, the passage in Genesis and Matthew both say "a man SHALL
>leave... and be joined..." The implication is that a man MUST do it.
>The passage does not say, "If a man wants to, then he MAY leave his
>father...and be joined..."
>
>In other words, the option to remain single is not there.
You're reading in. I doubt seriously if you'd find that same meaning
were you to read it in the Greek or Hebrew, and put it into context
with other verses. Typicality,. you grab a proof text merely to try to
embarrass Christians.
That again makes you anti-Christ and anti=scripture.
But to answer you more closely on this one point, your POV cannot be
correct on the face of it, and I suspect you are again attempting mind
games, which you should really stop doing. You're not half as smart
nor 1/4 as clever as you believe.
Paul told us that it was better to remain single, but that that advice
only applied to those who had been given that gift. He re-iteraetd the
position Christ had already stated. This shoots a hole in the bucket
of those who believe Paul and Jesus were in conflict. They were not.
Jesus had 3 1/2 years to teach us the essentials. He then took off and
left us the Holy Spirit to finish the job through the New Testament
authors such as Matthew, Mark, and Paul.
They did NOT contradict Christ, they had 40 years to elaborate.
John W
>
>>Genesis 2:24
>>
>>24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to
>>his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
>>
>>
>>NKJV
>>
>>Matthew 19:5
>> 5 and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother
>>and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
>>NKJV
>
>There is no option to be single.
>
>>1 Corinthians 7:1-7
>>It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
>
>Well, you have just exposed every Christian leader as a sinner!
>
>>2 Nevertheless, because of
>>***ual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman
>>have her own husband.
>
>Again, "let EACH MAN..." The option to remain single is not
>available.
>
>>7 For I wish that all men
>>were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in
>>this manner and another in that.
>
>So Paul says something contradictory to Matthew and Genesis.
>
>>The only thing Paul says of not being married here is that he would
wish
>>that all men (and women) would be like himself, single and celibate.
>>This passage does not detract or disagree with the previous passages
nor
>>the one to come.
>
>Sure it does, literally.
>
>>This language is capable but of one interpretation.
>
>Yes, being single is AGAINST the will of God. Remember, "For this
>reason SHALL A MAN LEAVE...and CLING..."
>
>>There is no other way. One man and one woman shall become one flesh.
>
>To remain single is not an option.
>
>>One man and one woman shall marry and be joined in the marriage bed
>>through ***ual intercourse. This is the only way acceptable to God and
>>is a gift from God.
>
>Amen...and to remain single is not an option.
>
>> Believe as you will, but God is
>>quite clear and all other is simply sin.
>
>If "God is quite clear and all other is simply sin," then please tell
>us how many one-eyed, one-handed people attend your church!
>
>Which is the smallest seed?
>
>D*
>
>
>
>
>
>Don's Piano Radio...ALL DON, ALL THE TIME!
>http://www.donspiano.com
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><>
<>
Web Images Groups News more »
alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel > If a man carries a Bible
everywhere he
goes - View Parsed
Show only message text
Path: sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!news-
out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!
not-for-mail
From: John W <joh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.east-
orthodox,alt.religion.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.pente
costal,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.last-
days,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.rel
Subject: Re: If a man carries a Bible everywhere he goes
Message-ID: <3ttjbvkeru9dhhsvoi5pddublmlkod5b9a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <chifbvs8ourt1sq2e6ab3dm7vasf85b585@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3eb7cb44.1461551@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qslfbv4cqsh0a5bp4dqh067j1mcfjm7lbu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <b98le1$gok56$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <67Rta.8305
$kV3.1826310@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1jtfbvciotboj8d94e5rbilarb5b6dup5n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fmTta.10923$kV3.2183858
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <m0igbv05jua71teshkmo49vuga65ld0ja9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<zI7ua.6811$AG6.591058@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 178
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 23:24:22 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.3.91.83
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1052374883 67.3.91.83 (Thu, 08 May 2003 01:21:23
CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 01:21:23 CDT
On Wed, 07 May 2003 13:18:23 GMT, "Mark Bassett"
<mbasset@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"John W" <joh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:m0igbv05jua71teshkmo49vuga65ld0ja9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Now that I remember you as the Oneness pretender who lied to me, our
>> interaction is finished.
>
>You mean I offered you a free copy of a debate VCD *before* I found that
you
>were using the internet for ****ograpy. Yes, thats right.
Since you bothered to respond, you are a liar. You gave me no
"preconditions" for sending me the tape. You merely offered to send
it. That makes you both a liar AND renegger. And you have not read any
of my writing, so don't make comments about things you know nothing
about, like God.
Take your Oneness pretender phoniness and your open hypocrisy and be
gone!
John W
>
>> John W
>>
>> On Tue, 06 May 2003 18:42:19 GMT, "Mark Bassett"
>> <mbasset@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"John W" <joh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:1jtfbvciotboj8d94e5rbilarb5b6dup5n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Tue, 06 May 2003 16:09:38 GMT, "Mark Bassett"
>> >> <mbasset@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Victor Schnapt_" <schn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >news:b98le1$gok56$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> "John W" <joh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:qslfbv4cqsh0a5bp4dqh067j1mcfjm7lbu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> > On Tue, 06 May 2003 14:51:12 GMT, pilg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(A
>> >> >> > Believer) wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > >On Tue, 06 May 2003 10:44:19 -0400, gryb wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >>If a man carries a Bible everywhere he goes
>> >> >> > >>_______________________________________
>> >> >> > >>
>> >> >> > >>That does not make him a Christian.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >It probably is a sign he is a hypocrite.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >Matt. 6:5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the
>> >*hypocrites*
>> >> >> > >are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in
the
>> >> >> > >corners of the streets, *that they may be seen of men*.
Verily I
>say
>> >> >> > >unto you, They have their reward.
>> >> >> > >6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and
when
>thou
>> >> >> > >hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret;
and
>thy
>> >> >> > >Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >A Believer
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Is there any reason, in the 21st century some still feel
compelled
>to
>> >> >> > quote a 500 year old Bible written in an archaic language?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > John W
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is there some reason some feel compelled to denounce this still
>quite
>> >> >> understandable and faithful translation?
>> >> >
>> >> >One might not renounce the cake, but can discourage it's
consumption
>by
>> >> >listing various indilectable ingredients.
>> >> >
>> >> >One cannot renounce the Word of God, so he therefore renounces the
>words
>> >it
>> >> >is written with.
>> >> >
>> >> Don't speak for me. I renounce NOTHING. Mine was a simple question.
>> >> Why some still use the King James which is a 500 year old Bible
>> >> INSTEAD of (NOT along with) more modern translations?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >Of course a tremendous number of people read and use the KJV
today,
>quite
>> >> >well.
>> >>
>> >> And a TREMENDOUS number of people do NOT.
>> >>
>> >> Then someone will come and say "But it has been superceded, or
>> >> >improved".
>> >>
>> >> Certainly it is logical that we who are of the 20th and 21st
centuries
>> >> would find MODERN American more easy to read and comprehend than a
500
>> >> year old book written in Elizabethan English.
>> >>
>> >> Sorry I asked. Those of you who continue to falsely wor****p the
King
>> >> James Bible aren't open to other POVs.
>> >>
>> >> Yes? When? Oddly enough, only 40 years ago, the percentage of
>> >> >people using the KJV was far greater (meaning that many, many more
>people
>> >> >were using the language which no one had yet told them was
"archaic".
>> >>
>> >> Look around. "Only 40 years ago" would have been 1960, and
President
>> >> John F. Kennedy was still alive, and there WAS no more modern
>> >> translation than the King James Bible.
>> >>
>> >> Now we have DOZENS of other translations. Why do you cling so
>> >> tenaciously to an ANCIENT Bible?
>> >> THAT was the question.
>> >>
>> >> Has the English language evolved enormously since then?
>> >>
>> >> The English AND the American laguages have BOTH evolved ENORMOUSLY
>> >> since then, yes, with the advent of the Fax machine, the cell
phone,
>> >> the Personal Computer, and Satellite TV.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >One of the most laughable aspects of this "issue" arises when we
>compare
>> >the
>> >> >NJKV to the KJV. I would dare say that NKJV has MORE dif****ult and
>> >obscure
>> >> >words than KJV. Anyone who actually reads it is going to quickly
come
>to
>> >the
>> >> >same conclusion.
>> >>
>> >> What conclusion is that? ARe you another of those KJVOnly cultists?
>> >>
>> >> Then I'm sorry I bothered you!
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >However, we do make a little room for the pundits and their claims
of
>> >> >sophisitication. After all, the same spirit that drives the
scorner
>and
>> >> >blasphemer, makes a more dainty arguement for those who want to
claim
>> >> >Christianianity, for whatever reason.
>> >>
>> >> It is blasphemy to say that the NIV or the NASB or the NET is NOT
the
>> >> Bible! THAT is the issue.
>> >>
>> >> I have NOT said that the King James isn't a Bible. I've said the
more
>> >> modern translations are easier to read and understand for MILLIONS.
>> >>
>> >> YOU are suggesting STRONGLY that the NIV, the NASB, the NET, and
>> >> other MODERN translations ARE NOT the Bible!
>> >>
>> >> THAT is heresy.
>> >
>> >Actually, I have said nothing of the sort - but I would entertain the
>> >question as to whether a paraphrase of the scripture must be called a
>Bible,
>> >simply because it says BIBLE on the cover?
>> >
>> >> Much like "Maverick Ministries" the "leader" of which
>> >> publshed a poem in this very newsgroup in which he said, "And I
spit
>> >> on the NIV." THAT is BLASPHEMY!
>> >
>> >John, try to keep your bad guys sorted out. I have no idea who this
is,
>and
>> >never said this, or implied it.
>> >
>> >Even so, I do not recommend the NIV because there are better
alternatives
>to
>> >losing meaning from the word of God.
>> >
>>
>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wed Nov 07 10:48:39 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!ctu-peer!news.nctu.edu.tw!newshub.sdsu.edu!
news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-02.inet.qwest.net!
news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 08:48:39 -0800
Message-ID: <rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 59
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 170ee3bc.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=>\`H;=M<HSfVjc>QWI\:mlF85SKJoGf>dN\2ARnNJ0;im=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>d_@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>Well what does that mean?
>
>Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>
>How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves you /
the
>church)
>
>I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different than
what
>many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without bragging is
that
>I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give your
life
>for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a single
man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
"because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
She was the kind who would discuss stuff TO DEATH. She'd then ask
for my opinion, and when I didn't go along with her plan, she'd
declare, "we need to discuss this more."
I started telling her, "no matter how many times we talk about this,
I'm never going to agree with you."
So she stopped discussing things, and she began to just do things
without asking me that involved both of us-- and MY money!
It's better to be single than to live with a contentious woman.
john w
>
>1. I tell her that I love her (out of the blue), sometimes interrupting
work
>she is doing. At LEAST once a week.
>2. I buy flowers for her when she least expects it, no birthday, no
>anniversary, no holiday.
>3. I will buy a pamphlet, folder of about twenty very short love poems
and
>leave one every morning on the table with her tea.
>4. I will tell her (Honestly) that she is the smartest / most
intelligent
>person I know.
>5. I will leave love e-mails regularly.
>
>Is that great? NO.
>But I can't believe husbands who don't do ANY.
>
>But we are newly weds, (only 38 years)
>
>Several members at churches have stated that they know for sure that if
they
>can get one of us to volunteer, they get two for one. "You two are one,
>inseparable" It's almost unreal.
>
>Am I bragging? NO. What I do is trivial.
>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wed Nov 07 19:15:43 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
08.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:15:43 -0800
Message-ID: <0lo4j3lib27cu6cof3lfpev0jijftjpho6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <meb4j396si0n2pf53hujueed1jaf3umtjn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 66
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: fd239b8a.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=fL1OB6\5n0?<[JfmfZ8760F85SKJoGf>4dnifKgm4e<5m=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>4nW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>453>C>TGiRO:
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:28:11 -0500, NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 15:04:15 -0500, John Henry <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
you / the
>>>>>> church)
>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
than what
>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
bragging is that
>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
your life
>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>>
>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>>
>>> Absolutely, John H------
>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
I see there are people who DON'T know me AT ALL who are still quite
eager to leap to judge me; people who don't appreciate being judged
themselves!
>>
>>john w missed Vernon's point altogether,
I didn't miss vern's point at all. I was making the point that there
are usually at least two sides.
I was presenting a "counter-point."
but I'm not surprised.
>>
>>(Oh, and we're gossiping!)
If you're talking about some third party who isn't involved in the
discussion (yep), and particularly if you're saying negative and
untrue things (yep), you're gossiping.
>
>
>Of course- or 'libeling' as johnnie might say!!!!!!!! :o)
^^^ Yep! You're gossiping and you're libeling.
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thu Nov 08 03:08:07 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
05.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:08:07 -0800
Message-ID: <0ek5j3dddt52t5qb7nfgbgmjict5m****f5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgtreh$8b0$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071107-0, 11/07/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 56
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: fdae40d9.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=_lbG_eRiQ=`cPMLdBoj1FdF85SKJoGf>dY5SNJ3L=6Fkm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>dnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>d65WnVEa43am
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:14:38 -0500, ujb <ujb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>John Henry wrote:
>> NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
>>>>>> you / the
>>>>>> church)
>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
>>>>>> than what
>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
bragging
>>>>>> is that
>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
>>>>>> your life
>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>>
>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>>
>>> Absolutely, John H------
>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>>
>> john w missed Vernon's point altogether, but I'm not surprised.
>>
>> (Oh, and we're gossiping!)
>
>How can it be gossip when "poor stupid" can read the posts
>and set the record straight? Poor stupid is just a blowhard
>retarded cry baby crying out for attention, so I oblige. 8-)
You're a pathological idiot, and a liar.
Oh, and speaking of liars, where's that $100,000 you promised me?
You told me, "Just ask."
>ujb
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:20:10 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
02.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:20:10 -0800
Message-ID: <qmj9j3df6gbi29akh9khc9d6isiassriq9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 77
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=GK7Tb_DY4XZbH<;Z;Vf:gVF85SKJoGf>TYWKnoUGn2]Zm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>TnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>T0njZ\WU^e1S
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>
>> >Well what does that mean?
>>
>> >Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>
>> >How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>> >It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
you / the
>> >church)
>>
>> >I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different than
what
>> >many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without bragging
is that
>> >I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give your
life
>> >for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>
>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a single
>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>
>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>
>Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>wonder both marriages failed!
You actually have NO idea why my two marriages ended. But not knowing
never stopped you from commenting!
You old, nagging woman!
>>
>> She was the kind who would discuss stuff TO DEATH. She'd then ask
>> for my opinion, and when I didn't go along with her plan, she'd
>> declare, "we need to discuss this more."
>>
>> I started telling her, "no matter how many times we talk about this,
>> I'm never going to agree with you."
>>
>> So she stopped discussing things, and she began to just do things
>> without asking me that involved both of us-- and MY money!
>>
>> It's better to be single than to live with a contentious woman.
>>
>> john w
>>
>>
>>
>> >1. I tell her that I love her (out of the blue), sometimes
interrupting work
>> >she is doing. At LEAST once a week.
>> >2. I buy flowers for her when she least expects it, no birthday, no
>> >anniversary, no holiday.
>> >3. I will buy a pamphlet, folder of about twenty very short love
poems and
>> >leave one every morning on the table with her tea.
>> >4. I will tell her (Honestly) that she is the smartest / most
intelligent
>> >person I know.
>> >5. I will leave love e-mails regularly.
>>
>> >Is that great? NO.
>> >But I can't believe husbands who don't do ANY.
>>
>> >But we are newly weds, (only 38 years)
>>
>> >Several members at churches have stated that they know for sure that
if they
>> >can get one of us to volunteer, they get two for one. "You two are
one,
>> >inseparable" It's almost unreal.
>>
>> >Am I bragging? NO. What I do is trivial.
>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:20:43 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!ctu-peer!news.nctu.edu.tw!news.glorb.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-04.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:20:43 -0800
Message-ID: <ioj9j3psihojuk1h07vkb2jr1kovqs8kev@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 47
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=GK7Tb_DY4Xjb0<:3^hoL:iF85SKJoGf>dYWKnoUGn2]jm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>dnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>d0njZ\WU^e1c
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:32:05 -0500, NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>
>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>
>>> >Well what does that mean?
>>>
>>> >Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>
>>> >How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>> >It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
you / the
>>> >church)
>>>
>>> >I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
than what
>>> >many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without bragging
is that
>>> >I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give your
life
>>> >for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>
>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a single
>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>
>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>
>>Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>wonder both marriages failed!
>>>
>
>Absolutely, John H------
> No wonder both women
You're gossiping!
And you don't know anything but hate, Elaine.
were intelligent to leave him.
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:21:44 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!ctu-peer!news.nctu.edu.tw!newshub.sdsu.edu!
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!
nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
05.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:21:44 -0800
Message-ID: <kpj9j39o8socearjlbuonq4ghldb18j4d4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 52
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=k3d8hLVD:?1E_?CVIGKch6F85SKJoGf>4YWKnoUGn2]:m=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>4nW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>40njZ\WU^e13
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 15:04:15 -0500, John Henry <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>
>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>
>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
you / the
>>>>> church)
>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
than what
>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without bragging
is that
>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
your life
>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>
>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>
>> Absolutely, John H------
>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>
>john w missed Vernon's point altogether,
You're gossiping, John H. You naggy old woman!
And I didn't miss Vern's point. So you have lied AGAIN.
I made my own point, as counter-point.
You pathological liar!
but I'm not surprised.
>
>(Oh, and we're gossiping!)
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:23:06 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!
prodigy.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-05.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:06 -0800
Message-ID: <erj9j3dv69b8aci99t11bg0opmdv6lo1id@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <473228f8$0$9147
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 65
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=k3d8hLVD:?Q_kPe2K>EcVRF85SKJoGf>TYWKnoUGn2]Zm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>TnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>T0njZ\WU^e1S
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 14:08:22 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
>"John Henry" <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ loves
you
>>>>>> / the
>>>>>> church)
>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
than
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
bragging is
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
your
>>>>>> life
>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>>
>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>>
>>> Absolutely, John H------
>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>>
>> john w missed Vernon's point altogether, but I'm not surprised.
>
>You got that right.
You're gossiping, vern! Not terribly adult. Not terribly manly.
Not particularly Christian.
And you lied. I got your point. I offered a counter-point.
Of course, counter-point would sail right over your head.
Now, explain to me what about you is "Christian." I'd truly like to
know.
You disobey without even blinking.
1. gossip
2. lie
3. libel
>
>>
>> (Oh, and we're gossiping!)
>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:23:31 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!ctu-peer!news.nctu.edu.tw!news.glorb.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-02.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:31 -0800
Message-ID: <2uj9j3pa6h6967511ll5ugjth5ectf37hp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <473228f8$0$9147
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 54
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=Bj752Hl9bjd2Jc\a>Zl5WiF85SKJoGf>dYWKnoUGn2]jm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>dnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>d0njZ\WU^e1c
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0500, John Henry <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>Vernono O wrote:
>> "John Henry" <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the
author.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ
loves you
>>>>>>> / the
>>>>>>> church)
>>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
than
>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
bragging is
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
your
>>>>>>> life
>>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here, no
>>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>>> Absolutely, John H------
>>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>>> john w missed Vernon's point altogether, but I'm not surprised.
>>
>> You got that right.
>
>Scary, ain't it? :-)
Gossip! Liar!
>>
>>> (Oh, and we're gossiping!)
>>
>>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fri Nov 09 15:25:00 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!indigo.octanews.net!news-
out.octanews.net!teal.octanews.net!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
04.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:25:00 -0800
Message-ID: <1vj9j3dgq119kh823f4fue04dqbcvdbt3c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <472fa596$0$9158$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194463127.075643.158440
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <473228f8$0$9147
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <473293dc$0$9116
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 071109-0, 11/09/2007), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 69
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7c2c37f8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=Bj752Hl9bjD9<aiA=cai\MF85SKJoGf>DYWKnoUGn2]Jm=:Gl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>DnW^9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>D0njZ\WU^e1C
X-Complaints-To: news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 21:44:25 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
>"John Henry" <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Vernono O wrote:
>>> "John Henry" <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> NOspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhennekes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this
post
>>>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the
author.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>>>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>>>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>>>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ
loves
>>>>>>>> you / the
>>>>>>>> church)
>>>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly different
>>>>>>>> than what
>>>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
bragging
>>>>>>>> is that
>>>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done. Give
your
>>>>>>>> life
>>>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>>>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
single
>>>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my opinion
>>>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>>>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in here,
no
>>>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>>>>> Absolutely, John H------
>>>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>>>> john w missed Vernon's point altogether, but I'm not surprised.
>>>
>>> You got that right.
>>
>> Scary, ain't it? :-)
>>>
>>>> (Oh, and we're gossiping!)
>
>
>
>Watch this thread, like most degrade to nothing.
>
>Into nothing to do with loving one's wife.
True. You made a point, I made a counter-point (on topic, but a
branch).
Then you and Johnny Holier than thou and Elaine made it ALL ABOUT
John W and how awful he is!
Very Christian!
Of course, you LONG ago gave up any pretension of being "Christian",
didn't you?
>
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wed Nov 14 17:14:06 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-
08.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:14:06 -0800
Message-ID: <m80nj3dg11plhqhgcth1ktobphoi47fm1b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1194463127.075643.158440@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<473228f8$0$9147$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<473293dc$0$9116$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1vj9j3dgq119kh823f4fue04dqbcvdbt3c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194670304.828697.111990@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4735d64d$0$9139
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 96
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 52867cb8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=\iPNH0^]9cLL23>\1`GJ>OF85SKJoGf>Dkb<T>OR?eCOgRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:04:46 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
><henryjohn56@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:1194670304.828697.111990@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>On Nov 9, 4:25 pm, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 21:44:25 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"John Henry" <johnhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >news:fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> Vernono O wrote:
>> >>> "John Henry" <johnhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >>>news:fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>>> NOs...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> >>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhenne...
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of
this
>> >>>>>>> post
>> >>>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the
>> >>>>>>> author.
>>
>> >>>>>>>> Well what does that mean?
>> >>>>>>>> Am I the perfect or near perfect husband? Get real.
>> >>>>>>>> How is a husband to be the head of the house / marriage?
>> >>>>>>>> It states such VERY CLEAR in scripture. (Love her as Christ
>> >>>>>>>> loves
>> >>>>>>>> you / the
>> >>>>>>>> church)
>> >>>>>>>> I'll tell you what I do without bragging but seemingly
different
>> >>>>>>>> than what
>> >>>>>>>> many so called Christian men do. The reason I say without
>> >>>>>>>> bragging
>> >>>>>>>> is that
>> >>>>>>>> I cannot understand why such trivial things are not done.
Give
>> >>>>>>>> your
>> >>>>>>>> life
>> >>>>>>>> for your wife (implied in scripture) is trivial to what I do.
>> >>>>>>> And the "wife is to be subject to her husband" is why I am a
>> >>>>>>> single
>> >>>>>>> man today. Two ex-s who insisted that they would be in charge.
>>
>> >>>>>>> The second wife got to where she didn't even ask for my
opinion
>> >>>>>>> "because she KNEW we wouldn't agree."
>> >>>>>> Wait a second! Second wife? The way you talk to women in
here, no
>> >>>>>> wonder both marriages failed!
>> >>>>> Absolutely, John H------
>> >>>>> No wonder both women were intelligent to leave him.
>> >>>> john w missed Vernon's point altogether, but I'm not surprised.
>>
>> >>> You got that right.
>>
>> >> Scary, ain't it? :-)
>>
>> >>>> (Oh, and we're gossiping!)
>>
>> >Watch this thread, like most degrade to nothing.
>>
>> >Into nothing to do with loving one's wife.
>>
>> True. You made a point, I made a counter-point (on topic, but a
>> branch).
>>
>> Then you and Johnny Holier than thou and Elaine made it ALL ABOUT
>> John W and how awful he is!
>>
>> Very Christian!
>>
>> Of course, you LONG ago gave up any pretension of being "Christian",
>> didn't you?
>>
>>Obviously, you neither read your posts nor understand them.
>
>Anyone here love their wife?
>Any woman here know that their husband loves them?
>
Vern, I think you don't get it. I think you don't understand that
the other small-minded ones (much like you) would MUCH rather talk
about ME than about any other topic.
john w
From ???@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wed Nov 14 17:14:45 2007
Path: news.netfront.net!ctu-peer!news.nctu.edu.tw!news.glorb.com!
feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-06.inet.qwest.net!news.qwest.net!not-for-
mail
From: john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.baptist
Subject: Re: A wife is to be subject to her husband
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:14:45 -0800
Message-ID: <5a0nj3d13vndoh0knm3aujs4odfe7ld22n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <rtq3j3df60l99d4lppem6dkig4ldqockgu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1194463127.075643.158440@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<qj44j3t6ujm9c1eb9sptlkra0mn3nts06l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<473228f8$0$9147$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<473293dc$0$9116$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<1vj9j3dgq119kh823f4fue04dqbcvdbt3c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <1194670304.828697.111990@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4735d64d$0$9139
$882e0bbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <fh4m0p$h52$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 95
Organization: Qwest Communications Cor****ation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 52867cb8.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=\iPNH0^]9c<bL3S>^IbD76F85SKJoGf>4kb<T>OR?eC?gRiX5Ran0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
avast! (VPS 071119-0, 11/19/2007), Inbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
x-no-archive: yes
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:24:55 -0500, John Henry <johnhenry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
© 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>Vernono O wrote:
>> <henryjohn56@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:1194670304.828697.111990@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Nov 9, 4:25 pm, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 21:44:25 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of this post
>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> "John Henry" <johnhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>> news:fgtac1$dds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> Vernono O wrote:
>>>>>> "John Henry" <johnhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:fgt5o0$rda$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> NOs...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:18:47 -0800, JohnH <johnhenne...
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 7, 11:48 am, john w <johnw<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> x-no-archive: flatly ignored!
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:23:12 -0700, "Vernono O" <Here @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> © 2007 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no ****tion of
this
>>>>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>&g |
