Conference yukon::christian_v7

>not because Digital disallows discussing it

It is my understanding that Digital _did_ disallow the discussion of
this topic in this conference.

/john

   Note 2 contains the guidelines for this conference, the basis for this
   conference, and the beliefs of this conference.  Note 2.3 presents the
   process for resolving conflict within the conference, note 2.4 states
   the reason for not discussing the "taboo" topic as the basenote author
   states it.

   As noted in .4, there are other conferences on the network which have
   different guidlines and discussions of that topic take place frequently
   there-in.

   As noted in .1 of this topic, the moderators have been contacted by personn-
   el regarding the stance of this conference and notes which escaped the
   notice of the moderators which were in conflict with DIGITAL policy and
   were requested to remove them.


   The basenote author is invited to take this up with the moderators as 
   suggested in 2.3.



   Jim Henderson
   Co-Mod Christian.

    Your last question in .0 speaks volumes.

	/john, 2.4 does not say that Digital is the cause for this topic not
being discussed, it says the conference is. I do question the validity of .4
though. 


Glen

 Glen,

 Please see .2 in this topic.




 Jim Co-Mod

>How do participants feel about have certain topics forbidden for them?
>Or are we all perfectly happy with mindless conformity?

Oh, goody!  Group therapy!  

"Mrs. Wigglesworth, let's start with you."

"Well, I'm not sure I feel much at all.  You see I'm a mindless conformist."

"That's great.  Let it all out.  But first, let's hear from Mr. Carson."

"I'm not a mindless conformist, and I don't like anything being
forbidden for me, just like everyone else doesn't like it."

"Wait, I wasn't finished."

"Mrs. Wigglesworth, it is no longer your turn.  please conform 
to the rules."

"But..."

"And how do you feel about all of this, Ms. Jackson?"

"I'm perfectly happy with mindless conformity?"

"Oh? and why is that?"

"Well, because after I studied the matter, I realized that it was an
appropriate response, so I don't have to revisit the same old crap about
whether it should be brought up again."

"I want to be heard here!"

"What do you want to say, Mrs. Wigglesworth?"

"I just want to say, that I don't feel much at all.  You see I'm a mindless 
conformist."

"That's nice, Mrs. Wigglesworth. I believe we have heard you and the point
you've tried to make.  Now, let's move on."

"But..."

"But what!?|

"But you haven't address my issue of not feeling much at all.  You see I'm
a mindless conformist."

"Yes, Mrs. Wigglesworth.  And how does that make you feel?"

"Well, actually, I'm not quite certain, but I can tell you without question
that I don't feel much at all.  You see I'm a mindless conformist."

Walter Barnett wrote an article or sermon on a taboo topic which was so full 
of utter rubbish, so full of holes, so full of twisting scripture, and worse,
discounting the other scripture (to have it both ways), arguing from a
faulty premise, etc, etc, etc, that it can be only best described as 
scratching itchy ears.  The scholarship is bogus and presumptious.
But it is dumbfounding to any reader with 2 cents worth of scholastic
integrity for its blatant agenda-laden thesis.  I know I came away
incredulous are paragraph after paragraph of special interest propoganda,
seeking to soothe the disheartened by preaching a way to Christ while
retaining a sinful lifestyle.  This person does well to prove that axiom
that anything may be "proven" with scriptural support - just as anyone can
point to the moon and write a thesis as to why it is green cheese.  The 
"proof texts" are often distorted, and many other scripture texts are virtually
negated.  It is an easy thing to prove you are not a sinner by redefining
"ambiguous" scripture about the sin, and cutting out (or discounting as
irrelevant) those pieces which are unabiguous.

MM

      re: -1
    
      Did he talk about the cross much?

    Could someone send me mail on what this is all about?

    .9
    
    It's called rivalry... 

    well that's a CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE for ya ;-)

    Those who demand acceptance and tolerance of their (can I write it?)
    lifestyles consistently are totally intolerance of any who dare to
    even question, let alone disagree on any related issue.  And this 
    intolerance impacts my freedom of speech in this private notes file.  
    Like it, no.  Abide by it, yes.  Expect it, yes, and it will get worse, 
    God forbid since we are in enough trouble, as a society.  
    
    But, God is in control and is subject to no earthly kingdom or earthy 
    force.  And the most important attribute we must have is true Christian
    love toward all people.
    
    
    
     

	Mark, that note you wrote, priceless. Non-conformist and all. Just
where do you get this crap?

| Those who demand acceptance and tolerance of their (can I write it?) 
| lifestyles consistently are totally intolerance of any who dare to
| even question, let alone disagree on any related issue.  

	I guess it depends on how you phrase what you say will have the biggest
impact on what happens. If one were to say, "You're kind is going to Hell for
<insert perceived sin>!", then you probably won't get any tolerance from the
perceived sinner. Using words like depraved, etc, will also get one into
trouble. I've had many a conversation with people about various perceived sins
people commit, and with a lot of them no arguments ever happen because of how
they present themselves. Oh, they still perceive there to be a sin happening,
but they can discuss the issues and not use a holier than though, you're going
to Hell, you're depraved, you're whatever attitude. This will work for MOST
people, but it will not work for all. 

| And this intolerance impacts my freedom of speech in this private notes file.

	To be honest, this is not a private notesfile. This is a Digital
notesfile. But while yer talkin about freedom of speech, aren't we limited in
what we can say in here? The Bible is inerrant. Anything said to contradict
this is set hidden. I guess if free speech is in favor of what you want, it is
ok then.



Glen

    and on and on and on and on and on....even when particulars can't be
    mentioned.  8^)

>impact on what happens. If one were to say, "You're kind is going to Hell for
                                              ^^^^^^
    
    Watch it, buddy!
    
    Mike (Member of the "Your/You're" Police)
    

    Re: Freedom of Speech 
    
    So who initially complained about the negative use of certain terms in here
    for the moderators to receive the caution that translated into the
    current policy?
    
    Re: crap
    
    this is where it comes from...
    
          ####   #  ###########            ##        ###########       
      ####    ####    ####     ###         ###         ####     ###    
     ###        ##    ####      ###       #####        ####      ###   
    ####         #    ####      ###       # ###        ####      ###   
    ####              ####     ###       #   ###       ####     ###    
    ####              #########          #   ###       #########       
    ####              ####   ###        #########      ####            
    ####              ####    ###       #    ####      ####            
     ###        ##    ####    ####     #      ####     ####            
      ###     ##      ####    ####     #      ####     ####            
         #####      ########   ##### #####   ####### ########          

    This file is FREEWARE.  Use and distribute it far and wide.  Design
    Copyright (c) 1993 by Northern Spy Software.

  Please take the 4 letter words to some other conference.





 Jim Co Mod

    love is a four letter word.

| <<< Note 507.15 by FRETZ::HEISER "ugadanodawonumadja" >>>



| >impact on what happens. If one were to say, "You're kind is going to Hell for

| Watch it, buddy!

| Mike (Member of the "Your/You're" Police)

	Sorry Mike! I promise I will never do it again! :-)


Glen

| <<< Note 507.18 by POLAR::RICHARDSON "Sick in balanced sort of way" >>>


| love is a four letter word.


	Like Jim said..... 

    regarding note .13
    
    My concern on this entire matter is that we, as a society, are quickly
    losing the basic freedom, freedom of speech.  Now to even raise questions
    on issues of public policy, i.e. preferencial treatment, is to be a 
    phobe, a racist, a hateful person.   
    
    
     
      
    
      
    
       
    

    !  <<< Note 507.17 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>





  ! Please XXXX the 4 letter words to XXXX other conference.
    
    
    ! XXXX is a XXXX letter XXXX
    
    4 Letter XXXX police.
    
    -PDM
    

| <<< Note 507.21 by NWD002::JOLMAMA "smoke on the chess board" >>>



| My concern on this entire matter is that we, as a society, are quickly
| losing the basic freedom, freedom of speech.  Now to even raise questions
| on issues of public policy, i.e. preferencial treatment, is to be a
| phobe, a racist, a hateful person.


	I guess if preferencial treatment were to be the case, you'd have a
point. But it is not the case in all matters. Remember, one can raise questions
without being any of the things you listed above, but some could be a part of
or all or the things you listed. The same scenerio applies to the accuser. They
may say someone is X or Y, but it does not mean that what they said is true.


Glen

>	I guess if preferencial treatment were to be the case, you'd have a
>point.

Then he has a point.

To use a term applied in another conference, this seems to be a juggernaut
in society today.

A juggernaut which will not be stopped until judgment day.

/john

�               <<< Note 507.19 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>
Glen,

Did you mean "I've read you're note, and your so right....!" ? 
								;-)
									&

| <<< Note 507.24 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>

| >	I guess if preferencial treatment were to be the case, you'd have a
| >point.

| Then he has a point.

	Actually, no.


Glen

| <<< Note 507.26 by ICTHUS::YUILLE "Thou God seest me" >>>



| Did you mean "I've read you're note, and your so right....!" ?



	NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!  If I said that I would probably get a ticket!
Your just trying to get me into trouble. I know about you're type! :-)


Glen

>| >	I guess if preferencial treatment were to be the case, you'd have a
>| >point.
>
>| Then he has a point.
>
>	Actually, no.


Actually, yes.  (Isaiah 5:20)

| <<< Note 507.29 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>



| Actually, yes.  (Isaiah 5:20)


	Mark, I don't carry a Bible with me, so if you wouldn't mind posting it
that would be great.


Glen

    Isa. 5:20 -> "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put
    darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet,
    and sweet for bitter!"
    
    	BD�

I thought I used enough to have you know it by memory!  My mistake.  Sorry.
And thanks, Barry, for posting it.

| <<< Note 507.31 by DYPSS1::DYSERT "Barry - Custom Software Development" >>>

| Isa. 5:20 -> "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put
| darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet,
| and sweet for bitter!"

	Thanks Barry, I appreciate it. Mark, after reading this I fail to see
where your .29 is proved. Can you run it by me again?


Glen

>Can you run it by me again?

No.

	Then how can ya say there is a point?


Glen

	Ahhhhh so ya can't! Thanks Mark!

    ...keeps going and going and going and going....

>	Ahhhhh so ya can't! Thanks Mark!

Wrong (again).  I won't.

	Greg, the tabboo subject is talked about in other religious conferences
WITHOUT any problems. The same type of replies that were in this file were also
in the other, yet there one can talk about it, here one can't.


Glen

	Greg, DEC did not really put it's foot down, as it is talked about
elsewhere. The mods did that.....

    .43
    
    Glen you speak as one who has knowledge as a moderator.  Your absolute
    statement is absolutely incorrect. 
    
    :-)  Nice try though.
    

| <<< Note 507.44 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| Glen you speak as one who has knowledge as a moderator.  Your absolute
| statement is absolutely incorrect.

	Actually, I do not believe I am incorrect. The memo Ron Glover sent out
to the world said one thing, then the mods closed down the topic. Other
conferences got the same memo, but kept the discussions opened. Now it was
stated that because of what the memo said, the topic was shut down. If this was
really the case, why have other religious based conferences kept the discussion
going?


Glen

	I will say this Greg, ya got a way with wordz.... :-)  That analogy was
great! I hadn't heard of anyone going to personel from "that" special interest
group, and things like that are usually talked about at great deals in other
conferences. So it is possible maybe an individual may have gone, but it was
not a group and that was not the reason(s) listed for closing a certain topic. 



Glen

	Laugh? :-)

	SCREAM! Greg! That was soooo funny! Thanks for bringing a smile to my
face! :-)


Glen

    A recent issue of "Charisma" (June I think) had a great article on
    those struggling with this taboo and how Christians should deal with
    helping/witnessing to them.  The article also provided many
    mini-interviews with those who Christ has healed out of that lifestyle
    and several places (around the country) where people can go to get
    help/counseling.  A definite recommended reading whether you're
    searching for help or looking for how to help others.
    
    Mike

    Mike,
    
    More (highly) recommended reading on the subject is:
    
    	"<unmentionality>:  An Open Door?" by Colin Cook
    
    Steve

	And let us not forget those who have been cured of this er...
lifestyle, who have come forward to say that they never were "cured".

    Romans 6,7,8 is great for any battles you have with the flesh and how
    they can be overcome by the Spirit.  However, it's far from an easy
    battle when the flesh is involved.  Prayer, Study, and Tenacity are
    key.  
    
    Mike

    	re .25
    
    	Hey!  That was ME!  (And I took some heat for it too.)

    This also applies to another life-controlling problem - overeating and
    being overweight.  It may be time for some of us (talking to myself as
    well) to try the Holy Spirit diet and have our minds and habits
    renewed.
    
    Mike

    re: Mike
    
    agreed.  I recently quit smoking after being convicted for quite
    some time and finally agreeing to relinquish control and 
    stop giving in to temptation and it has been quite easy.
    Now I have to do the same with regards to overeating!
    
    Pam

 AMEN!

 Uh..my AMEN was to Mike's note...




 Jim off to read Romans 5-9...





 

    Heard an interesting stat the other day:  6 of the last 10 largest
    earthquakes this country has experienced came within 1 week of a major
    pro-abortion and/or alternate lifestyle pride day parade.  The last
    major earthquake (last year) in L.A. came the morning of a alternate 
    lifestyle pride day celebration.  The quake was felt here in Phoenix
    and as far away as Idaho.
    
    As for the pro-abortion rallies, consider these verses:
    
    Genesis 4:10-11  "And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy 
    brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.  And now art thou cursed 
    from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood 
    from thy hand;"
    
    Ezekiel 36:18  Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that 
    they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had 
    polluted it:
    
    Ezekiel 38:22  And I will plead against him with pestilence and with 
    blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many 
    people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, 
    and brimstone.
    
    America was a blessed nation for decades, until we kicked God out of
    our schools (1963) and passed Roe vs. Wade (1973).  If you look at all
    the evils of society on a graph, you'll see a drastic increase in all
    of them starting in 1963.  It appears God is punishing the country for
    its bad decisions.  Violent crime, divorce, STD's, teenage pregnancies
    all started escalating in 1963.  Divorce was actually on a downward
    trend before 1963!  Poverty levels started escalating in 1973.
    
    How do we get back?  It starts 2 Chronicles 7:14:
    
    "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and
     pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear 
     from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."
    
    Unfortunately, this may never happen since the Bible is silent on the
    U.S. in the prophetic books.  Either there will be a mass revival or
    mass destruction.
    
    The choice comes down to this:
    
    1. Psalm 33:12  Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the 
       people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.
    
    2. Psalm 9:17  The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations 
       that forget God.
    
    pardon the ramblings,
    Mike

	Mike, wasn't the earthquake in LA during the week? They don't have
alternate lifestyle parades during the week... :-)


Glen

    No it was on a Saturday night (at least the one I'm referring to).
    
    BTW - another interesting statistic that I'm completely baffled by is
    that 1 out of every 6 abortions is done by a person that claims to be a
    Christian.

 Hey, Bill Clinton claims that the Bible supports abortion!




Jim

| <<< Note 507.66 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>



| Hey, Bill Clinton claims that the Bible supports abortion!


	Jim, how did he manage to do that?

    re: .67
    
    Simple - he read the Bible through his own pre-existing filters and let
    his view interpret Scripture; as opposed to letting Scripture interpret
    his view.
    
    Happens frequently to most everyone at one (and sometimes many) point(s) 
    in life - still doesn't make it right....
    
    Steve

 took the words right outta my mouth, Steve..






Jim

    Well, I saw them just sitting there and thought, "Hey - those words are
    just hanging around in Jim's mouth....better take them right outta
    there and put them in the file".
    
    No need to thank me, really  &*}

    Even with your filters engaged, I still don't understand how you can
    miss something that's in plain black & white.  

    	It's why we have a "taboo topic".

| <<< Note 507.72 by TRLIAN::POLAND >>>


| Its called self deception.


	Gee, with this way of thinking I guess anyone that believes in anything
differently than you must be seen as a self deceptor, right? I mean, you do
agree that this is something Clinton could actually believe, don't you? If not,
then I think I know where the self deception comes from....


Glen

 He (Clinton) may indeed believe it..however, there is no place in the 
 Bible, where God advocates the murder of the unborn.  Read Psalm 139
 sometime and see how God feels about the unborn.

 There are many who twist the Bible to say what it does not.



Jim

    re: .74
    
    Glen,
    
    You may not see it, but you're arguing with yourself now.
    
    In .67 you ask how he could "manage" finding support for abortion in
    the Bible, then in .74, you support him by giving him the leeway to
    honestly believe it (in spite of "managing" to find Biblical support
    for it, etc. etc. etc.).
    
    If the Bible is correct, nothing you or I say to the contrary will
    change the facts; and likewise, if it is incorrect, nothing you or I
    say will change the facts.
    
    Rather than "play the odds", do all the "what ifs", debate in a circle,
    etc. etc., the real issue is knowing the Truth.
    
    His Name is Yeshua.
    
    
    
    Steve
   

    GS>If not, then I think I know where the self deception comes from....
    
    BP>Where?  Was this statement an attempt at degredation of my character?
    BP>Let me make you aware that I am fully well capable of degrading my own
    BP>character without any help.
    
    :-)  Bob, I can relate to your statement. :-)

| <<< Note 507.76 by POWDML::SMCCONNELL "Next year, in Jerusalem!" >>>



| You may not see it, but you're arguing with yourself now. In .67 you ask how 
| he could "manage" finding support for abortion in the Bible, then in .74, you 
| support him by giving him the leeway to honestly believe it (in spite of 
| "managing" to find Biblical support for it, etc. etc. etc.).

	Steve, I think we have some things crossed here. I asked JIM
origionally how he managed to come up with that conclusion, in hopes
that maybe Jim heard something on tv that stated his reasoning. Of
course he did not answer it. :-) [sorry, couldn't resist]  There is
a MAJOR difference between how he came to this conclusion, and if the
conclusion he came to is something he believes in. The first part, how
he came to the conclusion is all I really wanted to know. BUT, when 
the other part was brought up by another noter, that was a totally
different issue. The two only relate to each other because both
involve Clinton. But one is about how he came to a conclusion, the
other is about a noter thinking he fooled himself, when the possibility
that he actually believes what he said exists (and is likely to be the
answer). Can you see the differences?

| If the Bible is correct, nothing you or I say to the contrary will change the 
| facts; and likewise, if it is incorrect, nothing you or I say will change the 
| facts.

	Steve, God knows EXACTLY what each and every verse means, how it was
implied, without any error. We as humans can not seriously make that claim. So
we may interpret something to mean one thing, while it could mean another. This
really puts the Bible in a position of only being truth as the person who is
doing the interpreting, doesn't it?



Glen

| <<< Note 507.77 by TRLIAN::POLAND >>>



| I was responding to the implied question below in an attempt to clarify 
| understanding by associating a name to the ability to see one thing and 
| believe something else.

	Yeah, you are projecting what YOU think he saw to his own meaning. I
stand by my origional note on self deception.



Glen

RE:               <<< Note 507.79 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	Steve, I think we have some things crossed here. I asked JIM
>origionally how he managed to come up with that conclusion, in hopes
>that maybe Jim heard something on tv that stated his reasoning. Of
>course he did not answer it. :-) [sorry, couldn't resist]  There is


It certainly seemed to me that you were wondering how Bill came to that
conclusion..nonetheless, I came to that conclusion having heard Bill
make such a statement on one of his appearances before an august body of
concerned citizens on MTV.




>| If the Bible is correct, nothing you or I say to the contrary will change the 
>| facts; and likewise, if it is incorrect, nothing you or I say will change the 
>| facts.

>	Steve, God knows EXACTLY what each and every verse means, how it was
>implied, without any error. We as humans can not seriously make that claim. So
>we may interpret something to mean one thing, while it could mean another. This
>really puts the Bible in a position of only being truth as the person who is
>doing the interpreting, doesn't it?


God did not leave us to grope in the dark and "guess" what something means.
He left us with His Holy Spirit to guide us...see 1Cor 2:14



Jim

>God did not leave us to grope in the dark and "guess" what something means.
>He left us with His Holy Spirit to guide us...see 1Cor 2:14
    
    Amen, Jim!  "My sheep know me and hear my voice..."  You may have heard
    before that the Bible is a spiritually discerned book.  The Holy Spirit
    is *REQUIRED* to discern it.  When that happens, the words come alive
    and leap off the pages and you literally can't get enough of it.  It is
    how you grow as a Christian - reading God's Word.  It is how God speaks
    to you.  There's no getting around that.
    
    As for Clinton, he's the only self-proclaimed Southern Baptist I know
    of that believes the things he does.  It's not their official church
    stance, and their church's spokesperson and even Clinton's pastor don't 
    even believe as Clinton does.  
    
    Clinton's true colors have come out long ago - he's a chameleon.  He
    tries to be everything to everyone.  He says a lot of things, but
    doesn't walk the talk.  There is no fruit of the Holy Spirit coming
    from home.
    
    Mike

| <<< Note 507.81 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>



| It certainly seemed to me that you were wondering how Bill came to that
| conclusion..nonetheless, I came to that conclusion having heard Bill
| make such a statement on one of his appearances before an august body of
| concerned citizens on MTV.

	Were you watching Bevis & Butthead Jim? :-)  Actually, I was wondering
why, and have stated that. The self deception issue is one that is totally
different than the one we have been discussing.

| God did not leave us to grope in the dark and "guess" what something means.
| He left us with His Holy Spirit to guide us...see 1Cor 2:14

	Jim, can you tell me what each and every verse means? If you could, or
found someone who could, would all agree with them? If they all would not
agree, then who is right/wrong? Only God can possibly know.


Glen

    >we may interpret something to mean one thing, while it could mean another. 
    >This really puts the Bible in a position of only being truth as the person
    >who is doing the interpreting, doesn't it?
    
    1) One can go to the Bible with a pre-conceived conclusion, and try to use
    the bible to prove their case.  Or, 2) one can go to the bible with an
    open mind and heart, asking God to speak to them through His word.  3) One
    can go to the word and study specific verses, without reading and
    understanding the context that they are being written in.  Or, 4) one can
    read large passages of scripture at a time to understand the whole
    message (Then when they study specific verses, they can know what the
    verse is pertaining to).
    
    The Word of God is Truth - Period.  We may not always understand the
    Truth, because of we have not done #2 & 4 above.  We may not understand
    the Truth because we are not His children and it has not become reality in
    our lives (1 Cor 1:18,23;2:14).  When it does become real to us, the
    truth will us set free.
    
    The bible stresses a high value on human life.  God desires to know
    each of us intimately.  It says that we are "fearfully and wonderfully"
    made; that He "formed us in the womb" (Ps 139:13-16; Is 44:2,24).  I
    think where people were coming from is if a person comes before the
    Lord through His word with no pre-conceived prejudices, they won't be able 
    to support a pro-abortion stance.  If one comes with the answer already
    determined in their mind, they may be able to pick and choose verses,
    taken out of context, that might tend to support their case.
    
    One is deceived with they are not watchful of then enemy or when they
    are seeking their own desires, not when they are coming to the word
    with an open heart in order to know Christ.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing

RE:               <<< Note 507.83 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	Were you watching Bevis & Butthead Jim? :-)  Actually, I was wondering


   No, just Bill.



>	Jim, can you tell me what each and every verse means? If you could, or
>found someone who could, would all agree with them? If they all would not
>agree, then who is right/wrong? Only God can possibly know.


 Bing's note  in .84 is how I would answer this note..I read the Word of God
 and let it speak to me, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  



Jim

| <<< Note 507.84 by ODIXIE::HUNT >>>



| We may not understand the Truth because we are not His children and it has 
| not become reality in our lives (1 Cor 1:18,23;2:14).  When it does become 
| real to us, the truth will us set free.

	This is what I was getting at Bing. I will say you do have a way with
words. The Truth will always set us free. But only God will ever be able to
know the whole Truth, as I do not believe humans are capable of even coming
close.

| I think where people were coming from is if a person comes before the Lord 
| through His word with no pre-conceived prejudices, they won't be able to 
| support a pro-abortion stance.  

	Hmmmm.... does anybody have the Scripture that Clinton used to say the
Bible supports abortions? If you could type it in, that would be great, as I do
not have a Bible here at work. I am pro-life, so I'd like to see what it says.

| If one comes with the answer already determined in their mind, they may be 
| able to pick and choose verses, taken out of context, that might tend to 
| support their case.

	I've seen this done! :-)  But couldn't the same be said for those who
are pro-life? That they go in with a preconceived notion?



Glen

RE:               <<< Note 507.86 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	Hmmmm.... does anybody have the Scripture that Clinton used to say the
>Bible supports abortions? If you could type it in, that would be great, as I do
>not have a Bible here at work. I am pro-life, so I'd like to see what it says.


I don't have it, and I don't believe he quoted one (because there isn't one).
But given the audience, I'm sure they took what the President of the US (or
her husband) as being an authority and are convinced the Bible supports it.


Jim

    re: .86
    
    Glen - humans who are not yet dead to the old nature don't understand
    truth.  Humans who've "reconciled themselves dead to sin and alive in
    Him" *have* the "mind of Messiah", they *have* "the Counsellor, who
    leads into all truth", they *have* "Messiah living in them", they *are*
    "the Temple of the Holy Spirit", etc. etc. etc.
    
    Moreover, Truth alone doesn't set one free; obedience to the Truth is
    what sets one free.  Truth exists and yet many remain in bondage.  Why? 
    Because they do not yeild to the Truth, they are not obedient to the
    Truth, and sadly, they live their lives in a complete lie.
    
    Steve

    >words. The Truth will always set us free. But only God will ever be able to
    >know the whole Truth, as I do not believe humans are capable of
    >even coming close.
    
    I agree that we only have as much Truth as God has revealed to us.
    One day I will know Him, even as He knows me.
    
    1Co  13:12 For now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to
    face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am
    known.
    
    We are also told that those who know Him will know the Truth as they
    abide in Him and continue in His word.
    
    Joh  8:31-32 Then said Jesus to those Jews who believed on him, If
    ye continue in my word, ye are my disciples indeed; And ye shall know 
    the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
    
    We are told that as His children that we will know the Truth.  What is
    the truth?  Or WHO is the TRUTH? (John 14:6 Jesus said, I am the way,
    the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father, but through me).  
    Growing in Christ is a process.  Phil. 1:6 says that He who began a
    good work in us will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.  We need
    to continue to come before the Lord with open hearts and minds,
    allowing Him to reveal Himself to us through His Word.  If we allow our
    minds to be renewed by His truth, we WILL be set free.  No one has an
    EXCLUSIVE on understanding God in all His fullness, our minds are too 
    finite.  The Truth that God HAS revealed to us and the Living Truth
    that dwells within His children, will set us free, however.  There are
    some things that God says very plainly in His word.  Once God has
    spoken to me in His word about these things, I shouldn't waver around
    in unbelief, or be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.  As we,
    as children of God, continue to abide in Christ and in His written
    word, we will get to know Him more.
    
    >I've seen this done! :-)  But couldn't the same be said for those who
    >are pro-life? That they go in with a preconceived notion?
    
    ANYONE can come before the Lord with a preconceived stance on an issue. 
    There are times in my life when I felt a certain way about something,
    that the Lord offended my mind.  I had to change the way that I thought
    about something (usually drawn from my culture, something that I heard,
    etc).  Once the Lord has revealed something to us, after coming before
    him with an open heart, it brings life, however.  Don't take a pro-life
    stance simply because someone told you it was right.  Pray and ask God 
    about it and get into His word and allow Christ to speak to our hearts.
    
    >I will say you do have a way with words.
    
    Thanks, I only try to allow Christ to live through me and say the words
    that He would have me to say.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing  
    
        

>               <<< Note 507.86 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>

>       Hmmmm.... does anybody have the Scripture that Clinton used to say the
>Bible supports abortions? If you could type it in, that would be great, as I do
>not have a Bible here at work. I am pro-life, so I'd like to see what it says.

    Glen, here is my understanding of how Clinton came to support abortion,
    based on an article about Clinton's "faith" in Time magazine.

    Clinton came to be very good friends with a pastor at a church he
    attended and sought his assistance in trying to determine a position on
    abortion.  Upon study and discussion with this pastor they looked at
    Genesis 2:7

        "the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and
        breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became
        a living being." NIV

    They interpret this as meaning that until a baby is born and
    breathing on its own it is not a "living being" and therefore it is
    not murder to abort the baby.  I don't recall if the article stated
    that he believes that the baby must be "born" or if fully functioning
    lungs are sufficient to fulfill the "breath of life" in scripture.

    I hope this helps in understanding Clinton's position.

    My position on this line of thinking:

    Although the baby (fetus, whatever you prefer to call it) is not
    breathing on its own, there is still blood and oxygen (via the blood)
    being transferred to the baby via the umbilical cord.  That blood and
    oxygen is being distributed to that developing body just as it will
    be after the baby is born.

    My understanding is that oxygen is the one thing that we all must
    have to continue living.  If we lose the flow of oxygen to our brain,
    the brain can no longer function.  If the brain ceases to function,
    the remaining parts of our body can no longer function and we die.
    Since scripture explicitly states that God breathed into Adam the
    "breath of life" and that he became a "living being" it is clear to
    me that this life supporting breath is what is necessary for life.

    What happens if the umbilical cord is pinched while in the womb?  The
    baby ceases to grow and develop does it not?  Is it not true that
    this life giving oxygen is being provided to the baby via the blood
    flow through the umbilical cord?  Is it not true that something that
    is growing is alive?  If the growth ceases, is not that once living
    object now dead?  Therefore, in my opinion, anything that is done to
    abort or interfere with this growth process is murder because if not
    interfered with, the baby would continue to develop and grow within
    the mother's womb and would ultimately be born into this world.  Once
    aborted, that once living being no longer lives and is deprived of
    its ability to continue to grow and be born.

    Heck, just try to tamper with the nest of an eagle and see what
    happens to you.  There are those who would argue that because the
    eagle is an endangered species, it must be protected.  I agree that
    they should be given protection.  But isn't the life of a baby yet to
    be born even more precious?  Will it not have an intellect far
    superior to an eagle?  Why is it that the life of an unborn human
    being is granted inferior protection than that of an eagle?

    These are my opinions and mine alone.  If they offend anyone, I
    apologize.  If they are flawed, please discuss the flaws so that I
    might have the opportunity to see this from a different viewpoint.
    I hope that I have explained myself well enough for you to
    understand.  Sometimes (manytimes!) I don't.

    Ron

    .86
    
>But only God will ever be able to
>know the whole Truth, as I do not believe humans are capable of even coming
>close.
    
    	Assuming that humans aren't capable of knowing the Truth, are
    	we then to throw out attempts to find the Truth?  Do we all just
    	decide what is Truth for ourselves?  Do we create our own 
    	individual gods and assocaited moralities?
    
    	Having said that, I want to make it clear that I reject the
    	notion that humans are incapable of knowing the Truth.

RE:               <<< Note 507.86 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	This is what I was getting at Bing. I will say you do have a way with
>words. The Truth will always set us free. But only God will ever be able to
>know the whole Truth, as I do not believe humans are capable of even coming
>close.


Again, I ask...are we just left to guess?  One day we'll stand before God
and He'll say, "Sorry, Pal..you guessed wrong?"  Or, do you think that maybe..
just maybe that He left us with what He wanted us to know, in the Bible?
Do you understand that your denial of the Truth of the Word of God actually
proves to support its credibility?



Jim

>    >I've seen this done! :-)  But couldn't the same be said for those who
>    >are pro-life? That they go in with a preconceived notion?
>    
>    ANYONE can come before the Lord with a preconceived stance on an issue. 
>    There are times in my life when I felt a certain way about something,
>    that the Lord offended my mind.  I had to change the way that I thought
    
    Christ wants you to come to Him as you are.  His Holy Spirit will speak
    to you about the "cleanup" process.

>    Genesis 2:7
>
>        "the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and
>        breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became
>        a living being." NIV
    
    The "breath of life" that God breathed into man is the soul.  Has
    nothing to do with the physical body.  Too bad he didn't check the
    original Hebrew instead of taking it out of context.

| <<< Note 507.88 by POWDML::SMCCONNELL "Next year, in Jerusalem!" >>>



| Glen - humans who are not yet dead to the old nature don't understand truth.  
| Humans who've "reconciled themselves dead to sin and alive in Him" *have* the 
| "mind of Messiah", they *have* "the Counsellor, who leads into all truth", 
| they *have* "Messiah living in them", they *are* "the Temple of the Holy 
| Spirit", etc. etc. etc.

	Steve, I guess if we go by what you wrote above, all those preachers
who were found out to have done some major sinning since they had been saved
never gave up their old nature. But people were supposed to believe the message
they were saying all that time. Sounds to me like if you are perfect, you have
the Truth, but seeing we are all sinners, we can't possibly have all of it, and
can only have the truth of others, and not the whole Truth from God. 

| Moreover, Truth alone doesn't set one free; obedience to the Truth is what 
| sets one free. Truth exists and yet many remain in bondage. Why? Because they 
| do not yeild to the Truth, they are not obedient to the Truth, 

	Steve, can you honestly say that what you believe to be the Truth is
going to be backed up by every single Christian on every single part? How about
just within your own denomination? If Truth can not accurately be defined by
humans (which is what I believe), than how can anyone but God Himself clear up
this mess?

| and sadly, they live their lives in a complete lie.

	Been there, hated it.


Glen

| <<< Note 507.89 by ODIXIE::HUNT >>>



| I agree that we only have as much Truth as God has revealed to us.

	It goes further than that though Bing. I do not believe all that we
think is the Truth, actually is just that. And for the same reasons that I
listed before, because we are human. 

| We need to continue to come before the Lord with open hearts and minds,
| allowing Him to reveal Himself to us through His Word.  

	While I agree that a lot can be revealed through the use of the Bible,
I also believe that much more is used to get His message out to us.

| If we allow our minds to be renewed by His truth, we WILL be set free. No one 
| has an EXCLUSIVE on understanding God in all His fullness, our minds are too
| finite.  

	This is EXACTLY what I have been saying. The only thing added to it is
our humaness can make it so what we believe is the Truth, may not actually be
that.

| ANYONE can come before the Lord with a preconceived stance on an issue.

	Then can you see why they too may feel you are out reading the Bible
with preconceived notions? 



Glen

| <<< Note 507.90 by AMWS06::THELLEN "Ron Thellen, DTN 522-2952" >>>



| "the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his
| nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." NIV

| They interpret this as meaning that until a baby is born and breathing on its 
| own it is not a "living being" and therefore it is not murder to abort the 
| baby. I don't recall if the article stated that he believes that the baby 
| must be "born" or if fully functioning lungs are sufficient to fulfill the 
| "breath of life" in scripture.

	Ron, thanks for posting that. I appreciate it. I do see why he would
think the way he did now. I can be read that way, and if you think about it, he
went to a pastor to help him find the answer about abortion. Just like anyone
of us might do. The statement is easily read that way, and when someone who you
believe to be a helper of God also thinks that, then it helps clear up even
more. It may not be as cut and dry as some have made it sound that he went in
with preconceived notions.

| My understanding is that oxygen is the one thing that we all must have to 
| continue living. If we lose the flow of oxygen to our brain, the brain can no
| longer function. If the brain ceases to function, the remaining parts of our 
| body can no longer function and we die.

	This makes perfect sense too. But let me ask you something. If a woman
has a miscarriage, what are all the causes for it? Do they just deal with
oxygen or do they deal with a lot of other things? When Adam was put on this
earth, he could breathe. If a 6 week old baby is put on this earth, they can
not breathe. I can see the pro-choice stance, and it makes perfect sense, as in
how anyone could come to the conclusion that they are talking about the life 
not being able to exist outside the womb, therefor it is not yet a life. But I 
can not agree with a lot of the reasons why they would want to abort, which
does not seem to have a lot to do with living/dieing, but as an easy way out.



Glen

| <<< Note 507.91 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "decolores!" >>>


| Assuming that humans aren't capable of knowing the Truth, are we then to throw
| out attempts to find the Truth?  

	No, we should always be searching for the Truth. But I don't think we
should be saying we have found the Truth while others have not. THAT, in no
way, can be a proven fact. Why? Because we are just humans who in no way can
have, or even understand the whole Truth.

| Do we all just decide what is Truth for ourselves?  

	Aren't we doing that now Joe? You know your Truth will not equal
anothers. There will be differences. One is right, and one is wrong, or maybe
both are wrong. ONLY God Himself can possibly know for sure.

| Do we create our own individual gods and assocaited moralities?

	Look at all the ways God is looked at by Christians. Look at the
different denominations that see him a little differently than each other. 
While some of these denominations you may consider unChristian, but only
based on your VERSION of Truth. 



Glen

| <<< Note 507.92 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>




| Again, I ask...are we just left to guess?  One day we'll stand before God
| and He'll say, "Sorry, Pal..you guessed wrong?"  Or, do you think that maybe..
| just maybe that He left us with what He wanted us to know, in the Bible?

	Gee Jim, do you think you will know the whole Truth before you die? I
doubt anyone of us will. Does that mean you will not get into Heaven? You are
one to believe that things may not have been revealed to us yet. Now either you
feel that by the time everyone dies they will have had the total Truth revealed
to them, or that possibly, just possibly, what is important most is that you
believe in Jesus, and you strived to be like Him as much as possible, and that
you continuously seeked the Truth. 

| Do you understand that your denial of the Truth of the Word of God actually
| proves to support its credibility?

	In this file I am not saying anything of the sort! It would get set
hidden! :-) The Truth goes further than anything written down. (imho)


Glen

    >   >I've seen this done! :-)  But couldn't the same be said for those who
    >   >are pro-life? That they go in with a preconceived notion?
    >    
    >   ANYONE can come before the Lord with a preconceived stance on an issue. 
    >   There are times in my life when I felt a certain way about something,
    >    that the Lord offended my mind.  I had to change the way that I thought
        
    |   Christ wants you to come to Him as you are.  His Holy Spirit will speak
    |   to you about the "cleanup" process.
    
    Mike, I absolutely agree with you that Christ is the one who does the
    "clean up" work.  I've also heard it said that "the only ones who will
    receive God's grace are those who know they need it".  What I was trying 
    to say is that we should have a "teachable spirit".  As we abide in Christ,
    I believe that He gives us this kind of heart (The Holy Spirit is the
    only one who can give me this kind of "teachable spirit").  Its also 
    possible to come before the Lord in a prideful sort of way (to be seen by 
    men).  Many times the Lord first has to break us of our pride, before we 
    will receive what He would have for us.  I'm not talking about "getting my 
    life straight before  I come before the Lord".  The bible says for us to 
    come boldly and confidently before the throne in our time of need. 
     
    Our discussion was on how do we discern Truth who can know truth.  We can 
    come with an attitude of "show me the scriptures that back up my
    existing viewpoint" or we can come with a humble ATTITUDE.  It may go 
    something like, "Lord, my human eyes can't see all that You would
    want me to understand.  Lord I pray that you would enlighten the eyes
    of my heart to understand all that You want me to receive from Your
    Word".  The words don't matter, but a dependant spirit does.
    
    The Lord can certainly break through any barriers we put up when we
    come before Him.  It's much easier, however, if I am desiring to 
    understand His Truth, regardless of whether it may offend a
    pre-conceived idea I may have.  All revelation comes through the Holy
    Spirit.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing
    

    Mike (.94)
    
    I know we're preaching (mostly) to the choir here, but to just add to
    what you said, it isn't even necessary to go to the Hebrew on this verse -
    the English is perfectly clear. Moreover, it demonstrates what kinds of
    ridiculous "interpretations" one can come up with when one doesn't
    stick to the sound principles of interpretation...
    
>    Genesis 2:7
>
>        "the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and
>        breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became
>        a living being." NIV
    
    Violation #1: Using the exceptional to determine the normative. This is
    clearly a one-time-only special event (God's creation of Adam from the
    dust of the ground). After He created Adam and Eve, God empowered them
    to perpetuate the human race themselves. Appealing to the exceptional
    case and trying to derive some norm is a no-no.
    
    Violation #2: Using narrative literature as a basis for doctrine. Moses
    is simply telling a story of how Adam was created. He is not trying to
    teach us when life begins. Not understanding how to treat the different
    literary styles results in some big mistakes.
    
    Violation #3: Inconsistent application of the interpretation. If he
    were consistent he'd recognize that a "man" was formed and into him was
    breathed the breath of life. To follow the pathological reasoning
    consistently we should insist that it's ok to kill any person before
    manhood. Sorry ladies & children - you're an endangered species.
    Actually, I suppose we should even go so far as to insist that God
    Himself breathe the life into each one who is worthy of living, as well
    as requiring that the ones deserving of life be created from the dust
    of the ground - outside of Eden.
    
    Violation #4: Disregarding the balance of Scripture. Even if you didn't
    recognize the other violations, the rest of the Bible makes it
    perfectly clear that God values life, and that He considers people
    "alive" early in the gestation period (indeed, I would say back to the
    point of conception).
    
    There are probably other violations (again, without even going to the
    Hebrew), but I think the point's been made. It reinforces what most
    folks have already said in this string: if you approach Scripture with
    a pre-conceived notion instead of letting the Spirit teach you,
    comparing Scripture with Scripture, etc., you'll likely come away
    pretty messed up. There are other examples of how people have done this
    to justify their own pet beliefs.
    
    	BD�

    Even if I didn't know the Truth, I see all the changed lives around me. 
    I see the evidence of the Truth.
    
    Also, the Bible is the only holy book with a built-in self-validating
    feature.  This self-validating feature proves it is Truth.  The feature
    is called prophecy.  The Islamic Koran doesn't have it.  The Hindu Veda
    doesn't have it.  The Book of Mormon doesn't have it.  The Bible has
    seen hundreds of its prophecies literally fulfilled.  
    
    There's no way you can rationally deny its Truth.

    Thanks for entering that Barry!

    Glen,
    
    Just a couple of comments to your notes:
    
   >who were found out to have done some major sinning since they had been saved
   >never gave up their old nature.
    
    Dying to the old NATURE, does not mean that someone can't CHOOSE to live
    according to their FLESH (learned patterns for getting our needs met
    apart from God), versus living according to the Spirit (read Romans 7).  
    Before a person comes to know Christ they are powerless to overcome Sin.  
    They inherited a Sin nature as a result of being born.  When they are born 
    of the spirit, the old self is crucified with Christ and Christ comes
    to dwell in them (Gal 2:20, Rom 6:6).  As a believer we have a Choice
    to live according to our new righteous nature (CONSIDERING ourselves
    dead to sin, but ALIVE to God) or to live to meet our fleshy desires in
    our own way.  In your example, the "fallen" Pastors may understand the
    Truth, but may not be experiencing its Freedom, because they are
    living according to their flesh, rather than abiding in Christ.
    
    >While I agree that a lot can be revealed through the use of the Bible,
    >I also believe that much more is used to get His message out to us.   
    
    The Holy Spirit of God dwells in His children and will reveal Himself
    to them.  The Holy Spirit will NEVER contradict His Word, however.  It
    is the plumbline upon which our faith is based.
    
    >This is EXACTLY what I have been saying. The only thing added to it is
    >our humaness can make it so what we believe is the Truth, may not actually
    >be that.
    
    Is what we believe to be the Truth based upon our seeking to know
    Christ through the scriptures, or is it based on our environment,
    culture, upbringing, natural experiences, etc.?  Christ reveals Truth
    as we abide in Him ("You shall know the Truth", this is Christ's
    statement to us).
    
    >Look at all the ways God is looked at by Christians. Look at the
    >different denominations that see him a little differently than each
    >other.  While some of these denominations you may consider
    unChristian, but only based on your VERSION of Truth.
    
    
    Most of the time, these different denominations were established over
    issues that aren't the basic elements of Christianity.  I participate
    in a Christian ministry that goes across denomination lines.  There is
    more love among the members of this ministry than just about anywhere I
    have seen.  To give you an example, an upcoming men's weekend will have
    31 different churchs represented (of all different denominations).  My
    version of the Truth is not based upon putting God in my little box,
    its based on the Bible.  Jesus said that He was the Way, the Truth, and
    the Life and that no one comes to know God, but THROUGH Him.  The only
    unChristian denominations are those who try to take away from the deity
    of Christ or to try to add other elements in to say that He alone is
    not enough.  
    
    Love in Christ 
    
    

RE:               <<< Note 507.99 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>





>| Again, I ask...are we just left to guess?  One day we'll stand before God
>| and He'll say, "Sorry, Pal..you guessed wrong?"  Or, do you think that maybe..
>| just maybe that He left us with what He wanted us to know, in the Bible?

>	Gee Jim, do you think you will know the whole Truth before you die? I
>doubt anyone of us will. Does that mean you will not get into Heaven? You are
>one to believe that things may not have been revealed to us yet. Now either you


I know enough truth as revealed in the Word of God to know that without Jesus
Christ as revealed in His Word, I am doomed to an eternity in Hell (Romans 
3:23, 6:23). Based on that, and my acceptance of Christ's death on my behalf
I am going to Heaven.

How much truth do you know?


>feel that by the time everyone dies they will have had the total Truth revealed
>to them, or that possibly, just possibly, what is important most is that you
>believe in Jesus, and you strived to be like Him as much as possible, and that
>you continuously seeked the Truth. 
                  ^^^^^^           

Seeked?

Satan believes in Jesus too..simple belief is not enough, but you've heard that
before.  That's the truth you haven't learned yet.



Jim

| <<< Note 507.102 by FRETZ::HEISER "Maranatha!" >>>


| -< most unique book in the world >-

	I'll say. It's the only thing on this planet that uses itself as it's
proof.


Glen

| <<< Note 507.104 by ODIXIE::HUNT >>>



| Dying to the old NATURE, does not mean that someone can't CHOOSE to live
| according to their FLESH (learned patterns for getting our needs met
| apart from God), versus living according to the Spirit (read Romans 7).
| Before a person comes to know Christ they are powerless to overcome Sin.
| They inherited a Sin nature as a result of being born.  When they are born
| of the spirit, the old self is crucified with Christ and Christ comes
| to dwell in them (Gal 2:20, Rom 6:6).  As a believer we have a Choice
| to live according to our new righteous nature (CONSIDERING ourselves
| dead to sin, but ALIVE to God) or to live to meet our fleshy desires in
| our own way.  In your example, the "fallen" Pastors may understand the
| Truth, but may not be experiencing its Freedom, because they are
| living according to their flesh, rather than abiding in Christ.

	Bing, what is the difference between a Christian who can see what is
wrong but does it anyway, and someone who has not found God but does the same
thing? Both chose the wrong thing to do. Maybe it needs clarifying, but it
sounds like if one is powerless to overcome sin, and one is able to but
doesn't, the latter is worse off than the former.

| >While I agree that a lot can be revealed through the use of the Bible,
| >I also believe that much more is used to get His message out to us.

| The Holy Spirit of God dwells in His children and will reveal Himself
| to them.  The Holy Spirit will NEVER contradict His Word, however.  It
| is the plumbline upon which our faith is based.

	I won't address that here.

| >This is EXACTLY what I have been saying. The only thing added to it is
| >our humaness can make it so what we believe is the Truth, may not actually
| >be that.

| Is what we believe to be the Truth based upon our seeking to know
| Christ through the scriptures, or is it based on our environment,
| culture, upbringing, natural experiences, etc.?  Christ reveals Truth
| as we abide in Him ("You shall know the Truth", this is Christ's
| statement to us).

	Actually, what I was trying to say was we may think we have the Truth
about <insert subject>, but we may actually be wrong.

| >Look at all the ways God is looked at by Christians. Look at the
| >different denominations that see him a little differently than each
| >other.  While some of these denominations you may consider
| unChristian, but only based on your VERSION of Truth.


| Most of the time, these different denominations were established over
| issues that aren't the basic elements of Christianity.  I participate
| in a Christian ministry that goes across denomination lines.  There is
| more love among the members of this ministry than just about anywhere I
| have seen.  To give you an example, an upcoming men's weekend will have
| 31 different churchs represented (of all different denominations).  My
| version of the Truth is not based upon putting God in my little box,
| its based on the Bible.  

	But haven't you just put God in a little box? To me He is EVERYTHING,
EVERYWHERE. He is confinded to NOTHING! 

	BTW, would there be parts of Christianity that would see your church as
a fallen one? If so, how could that be if you are all Christians and you all
know the Truth?


Glen

RE:               <<< Note 507.106 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>



>| -< most unique book in the world >-

>	I'll say. It's the only thing on this planet that uses itself as it's
>proof.



And you are aware of the basis/premis of this conference.  This is a conference
where we accept the Bible as the Word of God.  That you don't accept it as 
such is certainly your choice.  However, you are reminded of the basis of
this conference and what we are here to discuss.



Jim Co Mod.

| <<< Note 507.105 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>



| I know enough truth as revealed in the Word of God to know that without Jesus
| Christ as revealed in His Word, I am doomed to an eternity in Hell (Romans
| 3:23, 6:23). Based on that, and my acceptance of Christ's death on my behalf
| I am going to Heaven.

	Jim, acceptance of Christ is what I believe to be important. How one
learns about Him does not matter. Otherwise, if someone talked to another who
had not heard of Jesus/God about how they have helped them in their lives, how
they led them to help others, and the person decided later that (s)he too
wanted to know God/Jesus, would they need a Bible for this or would They help
this person out anyway? If the person never obtained a Bible, but had faith,
would this person get into Heaven? If the answer is yes, then FAITH is where it
is important.

| >feel that by the time everyone dies they will have had the total Truth revealed
| >to them, or that possibly, just possibly, what is important most is that you
| >believe in Jesus, and you strived to be like Him as much as possible, and that
| >you continuously seeked the Truth.
| ^^^^^^

| Seeked?

	Yeah, as seeing we're talking about the time of death, it would be past
tense. 



Glen

 
 1 Corinthians 2:14

    	.95
    
>	Steve, I guess if we go by what you wrote above, all those preachers
>who were found out to have done some major sinning since they had been saved
>never gave up their old nature. But people were supposed to believe the message
>they were saying all that time. Sounds to me like if you are perfect, you have
>the Truth, but seeing we are all sinners, we can't possibly have all of it, and
>can only have the truth of others, and not the whole Truth from God. 
    
    	Knowing the Truth and living it are two different things.  Even
    	more, if a man sins, does it suddenly invalidate the Truth in him?
    	Does it make a fallen preacher's teaching suddenly wrong because
    	he fell?  (It could very well be argued that he was a hypocrite,
    	I do not deny that, but was his preaching before the fall incorrect
    	becasue he fell?)
    
    	*YOU* cannot have the Truth from God, because you refuse to
    	accept it.  Nothing more.

>	Steve, can you honestly say that what you believe to be the Truth is
>going to be backed up by every single Christian on every single part? 
    
    	First of all, what exactly is "every single Christian"?  Are you
    	also including those "christians" who call themselves Christian
    	but reject basic Christian tenets?  If so, then you are personally
    	fulfilling your claim.

>	Look at all the ways God is looked at by Christians. Look at the
>different denominations that see him a little differently than each other. 
>While some of these denominations you may consider unChristian, but only
>based on your VERSION of Truth. 

	Relativism in action.  Thanks for your input.

    Glen,
    
    Do you already have the answers to the questions you have brought up,
    or are you seeking with an open mind to find the answer?  I don't know
    if going back and forth is going to solve anything.  I'll try to
    provide answers to the questions you've brought up as best as I am
    able, but it just may be that you and I disagree and leave it up to God to
    do the convincing.
    
    >thing? Both chose the wrong thing to do. Maybe it needs clarifying, but 
    >it sounds like if one is powerless to overcome sin, and one is able to but
    >doesn't, the latter is worse off than the former.
     
    It will probably FEEL that way to the pastor.  The Pastor is certainly
    not going to be experiencing the joy Christ has for him, apart from an
    abiding relationship in Christ (read my note 4.84 for a personal
    example of how living in the flesh brings bondage).  At the same time,
    Jesus offers all of us His free gift of saving grace.  If we have by
    faith received Him, then the penalty for our sin has already been paid
    for and we have enternal life (not just an extension of earthly life,
    but eternal life begins the moment we receive Christ [John 10:10]).
    
    >But haven't you just put God in a little box? To me He is EVERYTHING,
    >EVERYWHERE. He is confinded to NOTHING! 
    
    God has given the written word to us as a revelation of who He is. 
    My relationship to God has the scripture as its foundation.  I am not
    making God fit into my view of the world based on the circumstances around 
    me or based on my own preferences.  God has told us a lot about Himself
    in His word.  I am simply believing that God is who He says He is.  For 
    instance, Jesus claimed to be the one and only way to God.  If I say a 
    Muslim knows God, then I am calling Jesus a liar.
    
    For me, putting God in a box is defining Him based solely on my
    experiences (ie I lose my job, or a child dies therefore God must not
    be a God of love).  The God of the bible is much larger than my feeble
    mind can comprehend.  In some cases I simply must trust Him.
    
    >BTW, would there be parts of Christianity that would see your church as
    >a fallen one? If so, how could that be if you are all Christians and you 
    >all know the Truth?
    
    Many people can claim to know Him.  In the end Christ says that He will
    say to many of them, "depart from me for I never knew you".  I think
    we've covered this road in note 533.  Love for other Christians should
    not be bound by denomination boundaries.
    
    Love in Him,
    
    Bing
    

    a couple more verses I wanted to reference:
    
    John 8:12
    Eph 5:2
    1 John 1:6-7
    3 John 1:4
    Rev 21:24
    
    What is important for me is to Abide in Christ and to walk in the Truth
    and the Light that He has given me for today.
    
    Bing

    Glen
    
    re: preacher's who've sinned
    
    
    a) "What is that to you?  Take up your cross and follow Me."
    
    b) "He must increase, I must decrease..."
    
    c) Keep your focus on man and you'll continually be disappointed.  Put
    your focus where it belongs.
    
    You've written volumes here in response to some very simple notions. 
    The responses you're giving confirm your own argument against you - and
    I'm sure that's hard to hear, but that's the way it appears to me.
    
    Example - you rail against the preacher who sins, yet you claim to be a
    Christian who practices something unmentionable in this conference and
    prohibited by the Bible.  But aren't adultery and flock-fleecing
    condemned in the Bible?  How can you rail against them for doing the
    very thing you do?  "Oh - they must not be Christians" you assume. 
    Very well, Glen - what are you?
    
    Steve

    	.97
    
>	I do see why he would
>think the way he did now. I can be read that way, and if you think about it, he
>went to a pastor to help him find the answer about abortion. Just like anyone
>of us might do. The statement is easily read that way, and when someone who you
>believe to be a helper of God also thinks that, then it helps clear up even
>more. 
    
    	What is the scripture passage intended for priests that effectively
    	says "Woe to you shepherds who lead my sheep astray."  I thought it
    	was somewhere in Kings...
    
    	Anybody can find a clergyman who will support his position.

    Jeremiah 23 is good for false prophets that lead God's people astray.

    	That might very well be what I was thinking of!

| <<< Note 507.111 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "decolores!" >>>



| Knowing the Truth and living it are two different things.  Even more, if a 
| man sins, does it suddenly invalidate the Truth in him? Does it make a fallen 
| preacher's teaching suddenly wrong because he fell? (It could very well be 
| argued that he was a hypocrite, I do not deny that, but was his preaching 
| before the fall incorrect becasue he fell?)

	Good points Joe. I believe Steve said something to the effect that
someone with Christ knows the Truth, but someone who has not found Him stumbles
in sin, or something like that. I think we all stumble in sin (as does Steve),
but I think because of our human minds, there is no way we can know the whole
Truth about Jesus. If you think differently, then list the entire Truth about
Jesus and let's see. 

	Now, whether or not the preacher is viewed as a hypocrite does not mean
that the message was invalid. It very well could be. But it COULD also be that
his message was false. One can be saved and still give false messages. He may
not believe that it is false, but in reality it could be. Do you see this
point?

| *YOU* cannot have the Truth from God, because you refuse to accept it.  
| Nothing more.

	I'm glad *YOU* know so much about what I can and can't have from God.
But please don't be too upset if I let Him decide that for me, ok?

| >	Steve, can you honestly say that what you believe to be the Truth is
| >going to be backed up by every single Christian on every single part?

| First of all, what exactly is "every single Christian"?  Are you also 
| including those "christians" who call themselves Christian but reject basic 
| Christian tenets?  

	Actually, if you had read the note entirely, you would have seen I said
people who he considered Christian, people of his denomination, other
denominations. I then added in something like, "not to mention those who do not
bellieve in God or those of different religions". 



Glen

| <<< Note 507.115 by POWDML::SMCCONNELL "Next year, in Jerusalem!" >>>



| Example - you rail against the preacher who sins, yet you claim to be a
| Christian who practices something unmentionable in this conference and
| prohibited by the Bible.  

	Steve, one, I don't practice anything, I am living the life that God
has given me. Two, something can be unmentionable in this conference, but it
does not mean that because it is unmentionable that it is wrong. Three, you
know my view on the Bible. I did put something in SOAPBOX before that had each
verse that delt with the unmentionable topic and just what I thought they
meant. If I find it I will mail it to you. I just checked my directory, hoping
I kept it, but I didn't. It's a lot of typing and I think if I search the
SOAPBOX listings, I'll find it. But that will explain my position on that part
of it.

| Very well, Glen - what are you?

	A Christian.



Glen

RE:               <<< Note 507.120 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>



> Three, you
>know my view on the Bible. 


Then why do you continue to participate in a conference which upholds the 
Bible as the authoritative Word of God, a belief you clearly do not hold.
This conference (read topic 2) does not invite disputes on the authority
of the Word of God.  It is very clearly stated that those who participate 
here believe that the Bible is the authoritative, inerrant Word of God, and
we are here to share in that belief.  Your continued harranging leaves one
only to believe that your purpose here is to antagonize.  Do you go into
the Red Sox conference and talk about the San Francisco 49ers?  Do you go
into the guitar conference and talk about oboes?  Do you go into the
fishing conference and talk about archery?

Fine, you do not believe the Bible to have any authority.  We know that..
why do you come in here and hound those of us who do?



Jim

| <<< Note 507.121 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Friend will you be ready?" >>>


| Then why do you continue to participate in a conference which upholds the
| Bible as the authoritative Word of God, a belief you clearly do not hold.

	Jim, why do you participate in CP? In SOAPBOX? All these places are is
somewhere to express ones views, beliefs, etc. Sometimes serious dialogue can
happen, sometimes people just have fun, and other time arguments happen. But I
do find the views of others in this, and other files, interesting. While I may
not always agree with the views, it does make good reading. Besides, I do like
to hear about others beliefs about God in here. Some are pretty far fetched 9as
many believe mine to be), and some really hit home. And others offer
interesting thought.

| Your continued harranging leaves one only to believe that your purpose here 
| is to antagonize.  

	Well, now you know the real reason why I am in here. 

| Fine, you do not believe the Bible to have any authority.  We know that..
| why do you come in here and hound those of us who do?

	Jim, if people ask questions, I will answer them honestly. I do not
delve into the taboo topic, and if I mention my view about the Bible, it is a
one line sentence that says, "you know my position on the Bible". I don't go
into it, I just state a fact. Is that really all that bad? 

Glen

RE:               <<< Note 507.122 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>



>| Then why do you continue to participate in a conference which upholds the
>| Bible as the authoritative Word of God, a belief you clearly do not hold.

>	Jim, why do you participate in CP? In SOAPBOX? All these places are is
>somewhere to express ones views, beliefs, etc. Sometimes serious dialogue can
>happen, sometimes people just have fun, and other time arguments happen. But I

 You'll note that my participation in CP and SOAPBOX for the last month or 2
 has been severely limited.  You'll also note that the guidelines for each
 conference invite/encourage discussion and do not specify certain beliefs as
 does this conference.



Jim

    re: .120
    
    Glen, you have no need to defend yourself, I'm not attacking you - I'm
    showing you how your argument against preachers who've sinned is an
    argument that, by your own definition, makes you a hypocrite.
    
    This is not my attack, Glen - this is your own logic.   Watch:
    
    Glen:  Preachers have sinned, they're hypocrites.  They're not
    Christians.
    
    To get to this point, you have to be able to define sin, and
    presumably, issues that have hit the news such as Swaggart's adulterous
    sins and Bakker's fleecing of the flock are the ones to which you
    refer.  Who's to say either of those acts is really sinful?  Well, of
    course, the Bible makes it pretty plain, wouldn't you agree?
    
    Steve: (working on the presumption above) Fine, the Bible identifies
    action "A" as sinful, you partake of action "A".  Since the Bible
    identifies adultery, stealing, and action "A" as sinful, and since
    you've claimed that preachers who've done the first two are hypocrites
    and non-Christian, what are you (as you claim the label Christian but
    proudly participate in action "A")?
    
    Glen:  I'm a Christian.
    
    We could carry this on for years (actually, we have).  But it's not
    going to get us anywhere.  Your own arguments condemn you and frankly,
    to think otherwise is to allow yourself to be swallowed by delusion.
    
    We've reached "that point" again (are you keeping track of how many
    times we've been here?).
    
    It's not my job to convince you of anything; just share the truth as I
    understand it.   There it is.
    
    Look to Him,
    
    
    
    Steve

	.119

>If you think differently, then list the entire Truth about
>Jesus and let's see. 
    
    	Another scavenger hunt?

>Do you see this point?
    
    	No.

>	I'm glad *YOU* know so much about what I can and can't have from God.
>But please don't be too upset if I let Him decide that for me, ok?
    
    	But you aren't letting Him decide.  You are deciding for yourself.

    >| -< most unique book in the world >-
    
    >I'll say. It's the only thing on this planet that uses itself as it's 
    >proof.
    
    Actually, its not one book at all, but 66 separate books that have been
    compiled in what we know as the bible today.  There was a space of 1500
    years (almost as long since Christ lived) between the OT and NT.  The
    Prophecies in the OT pointing to the coming of Christ were written by
    many different people who had no assoication with each other over many 
    years.  There is also much secular history which corroborates the
    events of the bible.
    
    The Jesus that the bible quotes and teaches about was either Lord, a
    Lunatic, or a Liar.  Many who call themselves Christians view Christ a
    a phrophet or a good man.  But Jesus said, "I am the WAY, the TRUTH,
    and the LIFE, NO ONE comes to the Father, but through ME".  He's either
    who He says He is, or He's not, there's no middle ground.
    
    Love in Christ,
    
    Bing

| <<< Note 507.124 by POWDML::SMCCONNELL "Next year, in Jerusalem!" >>>


| Glen, you have no need to defend yourself, I'm not attacking you - I'm showing
| you how your argument against preachers who've sinned is an argument that, by 
| your own definition, makes you a hypocrite.

	I had to laugh at this Steve. It's funny, I mention that they while
some may view them as hypocrites, that was not the important part, and I don't
believe I ever once said they were. Very good Steve. I'll have to commend you
on this one, to tie it in with me, as if I had said it. Nice....

| Glen:  Preachers have sinned, they're hypocrites.  They're not Christians.

	Show me where I have said this.....

| To get to this point, you have to be able to define sin, and presumably, 
| issues that have hit the news such as Swaggart's adulterous sins and Bakker's 
| fleecing of the flock are the ones to which you refer. Who's to say either of 
| those acts is really sinful?  Well, of course, the Bible makes it pretty plain
| wouldn't you agree?

	I'd love to comment on this Steve, but I can not. Suffice to say we see
things differently about many things.

| Steve: (working on the presumption above) Fine, the Bible identifies action 
| "A" as sinful, you partake of action "A". Since the Bible identifies adultery,
| stealing, and action "A" as sinful, and since you've claimed that preachers 
| who've done the first two are hypocrites

	Here is your first mistake.

| and non-Christian, what are you (as you claim the label Christian but proudly 
| participate in action "A")?

	Someone who has a different view than you on certain things.

| Glen:  I'm a Christian.

	Yes.

| We could carry this on for years (actually, we have).  But it's not
| going to get us anywhere.  Your own arguments condemn you and frankly,
| to think otherwise is to allow yourself to be swallowed by delusion.

	Steve, they actually do not. But I can not go into it, as it would only
get set hidden. So believe what you want, but in this case reality makes what
you said above false.


Glen

| <<< Note 507.125 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "decolores!" >>>

| >If you think differently, then list the entire Truth about Jesus and let's 
| >see.

| Another scavenger hunt?

	I guess if you call searching your brain for what you believe to be the
Truth a scavenger hunt, then you would be correct. If you do not view it in
this light, then no, it is not one. So are you gonna answer?

| >	I'm glad *YOU* know so much about what I can and can't have from God.
| >But please don't be too upset if I let Him decide that for me, ok?

| But you aren't letting Him decide.  You are deciding for yourself.

	Wrong again Joe.


Glen

 Glen and Joe...This is not SOAPBOX.  If the back and forth debate is
 going to continue, please take it to mail.




 Jim Co-Mod