🚀 go-pugleaf

Griz wrote:
> That's one.  How about:
>
> 2. Chuck Swindoll

Well, Watergate *did* change society for the better ;)

> 3. James Dobson

I doubt condeming cartoon characters as homosexual agendas qualifies
changing society for the better.

lawrence

Mark T wrote:
> "(: Lawrence Meckan :)" wrote:
>
> >> 2. Chuck Swindoll
> >
> > Well, Watergate *did* change society for the better ;)
>
>
> Wrong Chucky ... that was Chucky Colson.
>
> Why do Americans call their kids after vomit????

I always get those two Chuck's mixed up.. :-S

lawrence

Rowland said:

>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>>
>>
>
>Billy Graham
>
>--
>                                                               *
>Shalom!   Rowland Croucher

That's one.  How about:

2. Chuck Swindoll
3. James Dobson
4. William Lane Craig

Plus, Jesus Christ was quite on about returning to fundamental principles of
faith, observing commandments, and opposing secularism.

Does that make 5?

Yours in Christ,

Griz

Rowland Croucher wrote:
> "Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
> news:4202b27d$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...


> <> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Then I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,
He being about to judge the living and dead at His appearance and His kingdom:
preach the Word, be urgent in season, out of season, convict, warn,
encourage with all long-suffering and teaching. For a time will be when they will
not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own lusts, they will heap up
to themselves teachers tickling the ear; and they will turn away the ear from
the truth and will be turned aside to myths.
But you be clear-minded in all, suffer hardship, do the work of an evangelist,
fully carry out your ministry. For I am already being poured out, and the time
of my release is here. (2 Timothy 4:1-6)
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><


God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 02:05:46 +0100, "~ vera ~"
<verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote:

>Rowland Croucher wrote:
>> "Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
>> news:4202b27d$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>
>> <> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
>Then I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,
>He being about to judge the living and dead at His appearance and His kingdom:
>preach the Word, be urgent in season, out of season, convict, warn,
>encourage with all long-suffering and teaching. For a time will be when they will
>not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own lusts, they will heap up
>to themselves teachers tickling the ear; and they will turn away the ear from
>the truth and will be turned aside to myths.
>But you be clear-minded in all, suffer hardship, do the work of an evangelist,
>fully carry out your ministry. For I am already being poured out, and the time
>of my release is here. (2 Timothy 4:1-6)
><>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
>
>
>God bless you,
>
>~ vera ~

Yet... another Bible with a Copyright (MKJV).

"The MKJV Bible and the LITV Bible appear by special permission and
may not be used in any derivative work without the express written
permission of the copyright holder, Jay P. Green. Information
concerning the MKJV and LITV Bibles can be obtained from Sovereign
Grace Publishers and Christian Literature World."

Imagine that... "God's Word" has a copyright.

Fortunately, God's REAL "Word" is not just a mistranslated book.


Zombie 1:5-7

In the beginning God created a brain. And then God looked at the brain
and said it was good. Then God created both the left and the right
ears. And God looked at those two ears and said it was good. Then God
connected those ears to the brain.

Zombie 21:2

And it came to pass that Man could no longer hear God's voice. It was
in those days that Man decided to record God's words in a book.

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 14:24:55 +1100, "Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17>
wrote:

Snip Mark's satire piece--from a site that is like Mad Magaziine sort
of)


>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>Pastor Exposes Perverted Little Cartoon Character


Don't Worry, Be Happy
Bobby Mcferrin
(Miscellaneous Movie Songs Compilation)

Here is a little song I wrote
You might want to sing it note for note
Don't worry be happy
In every life we have some trouble
When you worry you make it double
Don't worry, be happy...

Ain't got no place to lay your head
Somebody came and took your bed
Don't worry, be happy
The land lord say your rent is late
He may have to litigate
Don't worry, be happy
Look at me I am happy
Don't worry, be happy
Here I give you my phone number
When you worry, call me
I make you happy
Don't worry, be happy
Ain't got no cash, ain't got no style
Ain't got no girl to make you smile
But don't worry be happy
Cause when you worry
Your face will frown
And that will bring everybody down
So don't worry, be happy (now)...

There is this little song I wrote
I hope you learn it note for note
Like good little children
Don't worry, be happy
Listen to what I say
In your life expect some trouble
But when you worry
You make it double
Don't worry, be happy...
Don't worry don't do it, be happy
Put a smile on your face
Don't bring everybody down like this
Don't worry, it will soon pass
Whatever it is
Don't worry, be happy

Rowland Croucher wrote:
> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
> news:1105mem9mvl6m69@corp.supernews.com...
>> Rowland said:
>>
>>>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the
>>>> Better
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Billy Graham
>>>
>>> --
>>>                                                               *
>>> Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
>>
>> That's one.  How about:
>>
>> 2. Chuck Swindoll
>> 3. James Dobson
>> 4. William Lane Craig
>>
>> Plus, Jesus Christ was quite on about returning to fundamental
>> principles of
>> faith, observing commandments, and opposing secularism.
>>
>> Does that make 5?
>>
>> Yours in Christ,
>>
>> Griz
>
> Jesus was not a fundamentalist.

No, he was the fundamental base of Christianity Himself in person.


God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

"Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
news:4202abed@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>
>
> 1. ... um ... er ...  ah  ...


Billy Graham

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"Rowland Croucher" wrote:

>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>> 1. ... um ... er ...  ah  ...
>
> Billy Graham


24 more to go ....

2. .... er ... um ... ah ...

"Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
news:4202b27d$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Rowland Croucher" wrote:
>
>>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>>> 1. ... um ... er ...  ah  ...
>>
>> Billy Graham
>
>
> 24 more to go ....
>
> 2. .... er ... um ... ah ...


Thousands of *intelligent* (I'm not referring to the others:-)
cross-cultural missionaries who live in sometimes deplorable conditions to
bring the Good News and medical help to people in traditional cultures

(and yes yes yes who sometimes - mostly in the past - also brought notions
of Western ideology which they didn't need to add to the mix)

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"~ vera ~" wrote:

...Bible Verse Vomit ....


I puke everytime you, Griz, Chucky or Franky poo give a Bible Verse Vomit.

Can you warn people with "Bible Verse Vomit Included" in such posts?

Griz wrote:
> Rowland said:
>
> >> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the
Better
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Billy Graham
> >
> >--
> >                                                               *
> >Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
>
> That's one.  How about:
>
> 2. Chuck Swindoll
> 3. James Dobson
> 4. William Lane Craig
>
> Plus, Jesus Christ was quite on about returning to fundamental
principles of
> faith, observing commandments, and opposing secularism.

Hi Griz,
While I do not disagree with what you are saying in regards to Jesus
Christ, it appears to me that he was more liberal in thinking (for his
day) than the Pharisees.  Matthew 12:8-14 and 23:23-32 is where I get
that impression.

I think the words liberal and fundamentalist take on slightly different
meanings when they are used to label a group of people in a negative
light.

Ninure Saunders wrote:
>
> The issue is  if the people were influential, not whether their
influence
> was good.
>
> And sadly...the most influential are necessarily influencing for the
> advancement of the Gospel and/or the Kingdom of God.
>
> I am still waiting for the "loudest" and best known Evangelicals in
the
> USA to unequivocally condemn the use of torture, or demeaning of
> prisoners.....

Keep waiting.  According to most Christians, W is a man of God.

"Griz" wrote:

>>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>
> How about:
>
> 2. Chuck Swindoll
> 3. James Dobson
> 4. William Lane Craig


Changed society for the BETTER not for the WORSE ... and must be living
(even if they smell like they're dead)!

There are plenty of living fundamentalists that have changed society for the
worse!  You have named three of them.

"Saint Zombie" wrote:

>>~ vera ~
> Yet... another Bible with a Copyright (MKJV).
> "The MKJV Bible and the LITV Bible appear by special permission and
> may not be used in any derivative work without the express written
> permission of the copyright holder, Jay P. Green. Information
> concerning the MKJV and LITV Bibles can be obtained from Sovereign
> Grace Publishers and Christian Literature World."
> Imagine that... "God's Word" has a copyright.


Who is making all the $$$ from the copyright?????


> Fortunately, God's REAL "Word" is not just a mistranslated book.

That would be the Logos.


> Zombie 1:5-7
>
> In the beginning God created a brain. And then God looked at the brain
> and said it was good. Then God created both the left and the right
> ears. And God looked at those two ears and said it was good. Then God
> connected those ears to the brain.
>
> Zombie 21:2
>
> And it came to pass that Man could no longer hear God's voice. It was
> in those days that Man decided to record God's words in a book.


Amen, Aman and Awomyn!

"(: Lawrence Meckan :)" wrote:

>> 2. Chuck Swindoll
>
> Well, Watergate *did* change society for the better ;)


Wrong Chucky ... that was Chucky Colson.

Why do Americans call their kids after vomit????


>> 3. James Dobson
>
> I doubt condeming cartoon characters as homosexual agendas qualifies
> changing society for the better.


January 2005 - Two years after Landover's initial research below, True
ChristiansT at Focus on the Family finally issue a worldwide action alert on
Sponge Bob Square Pants!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pastor Exposes Perverted Little Cartoon Character

Action Alert!

Freehold, Iowa (April 2003) -   Complete shock filled the Landover Baptist
main sanctuary last Sunday as Pastor Deacon Fred revealed in graphic detail,
decadent hidden sexual messages in the popular cartoon series, Sponge Bob,
Square PantsT.  Mrs. Ida Denkins, who was seated in the first pew, fainted
in the middle of the presentation and had to be rushed to Landover Baptist
Hospital.   Church usher, Bob Halburg, had an immediate reaction to the
slide show that went straight to his stomach. He vomited so forcefully that
pieces of his steaming breakfast were sprayed across nearly 15 pews.  All
total, at least two-dozen church members became physically ill after being
exposed to the disgusting garbage that Hollywood is pumping into our
children's heads.

"I found out about this disgusting little yellow cartoon character, quite by
accident," said Pastor Deacon Fred.  "I was laying on the couch with my
grandson, and must have fallen asleep, so he was unmonitored in front of the
television set.  When I woke up, my head had leaned back over the side of
the couch.  My neck was craned in such a way that I was looking at the
television set upside down.  I reacted immediately to what I saw there, and
was able to flip over and grab my grandson by his hair and fling him across
the room, thankfully, knocking him unconscious long enough for me to get to
the remote control and switch back to Fox news, where they were showing
Godly footage of our Christian troops blowing up ignorant Arabiacs.  I have
no idea how much mental damage my grandson suffered while he was exposed to
that cartoon show while I was asleep, but I'll tell you what, I won't
hesitate to sue the bastards that put this junk on TV if we find out
anything happened to my grandson!"

Pastor explained to the congregation that he ordered a team of Creation
Scientists, led by Dr. Jonathan Edwards, to spare no expense on opening up a
full investigation into the lewd cartoon character, Sponge Bob, Square
PantsT.  "I ordered our Christian team not to stop their investigation until
they pulled out every single lewd, disgusting, sexual reference in the
cartoon," said Pastor.

The two-hour slide presentation seen on Sunday morning was the result of an
investigation that lasted nearly six months.  The full findings of that
investigation cannot be revealed on this public web site, since there is
currently a pending lawsuit between the Landover Baptist Church and the
Nickelodeon Channel.  We can however, say that most of what we found is too
shocking for words. Innocent little Christian children might be reading this
article and they should not be exposed to the decadent smut of Sponge Bob,
Square PantsT, anymore than they already have been.

"From what we've found," says Dr. Edwards, "is that we have what appears to
be a little yellow sponge who talks like a pervert. When you turn it upside
down, there are two unmistakable testicles and a semi-erect penis hanging
from its face. Thank Jesus that children are not watching this program
standing on their heads, or we'd all be in trouble."  Dr. Edwards also
revealed that the entire cartoon series has houses, plants, animals, and
demon-like creatures (most of which are shaped like sex organs) floating
around, talking nonsense.  "One purple penis shaped creature even moans and
giggles uncontrollably whenever he sees one of his 'pals,' like he is
secretly masturbating himself to them." Click here to listen, if you don't
believe it!

"As True ChristiansT, what we find most frightening is that for the most
part, the majority of sex organs we've found in the cartoon, can only be
seen upside down," continued Dr. Edwards.  We played several sound tracks
for the show backwards as well, and it's all demon talk."  True ChristiansT
know that one of Satan's favorite ways of communicating to his followers is
to do things backwards, and upside down. "We know this from our studies of
Satanism, but we had no idea that it was being used in the media -
especially in children's cartoons."

"Is it okay for a person to take off their pants and walk around upside down
so that his penis and testicles look like his nose and eyes?  NO!  So why
should we allow a cartoon character to do the same thing while standing
right side up?  It's ludicrous!" said Pastor Deacon Fred.  "There is no
doubt that we need to put a stop to this so-called, Sponge Bob, and his
Square Penis.  If we don't, we'll soon be coming home to houses full of
children, stripped of their clothes, hand walking around the living room
spitting gibberish! We've already got our lawyers preparing a lawsuit."

from http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0403/spongebob.html

"Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
news:1105mem9mvl6m69@corp.supernews.com...
> Rowland said:
>
>>> The 25 Living Fundamentalists Who Have Changed Society for the Better
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Billy Graham
>>
>>--
>>                                                               *
>>Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
>
> That's one.  How about:
>
> 2. Chuck Swindoll
> 3. James Dobson
> 4. William Lane Craig
>
> Plus, Jesus Christ was quite on about returning to fundamental principles
> of
> faith, observing commandments, and opposing secularism.
>
> Does that make 5?
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Griz

Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm

I'd give a pass grade to Chucks Swindoll and Colson. Attending the church in
Orange County when Chuck preached was a memorable experience. And 'Born
Again' was a minor evangelical classic. I like Colson's concern for
prisoners (greater than his love for his grandmother apparently :-)

Don't know the Craig guy.

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"Rowland Croucher" wrote:

> Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
> http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm

Their fundamentalist descendents do the same to other Christians.

#################################################
... quoting from James Barr's book "Fundamentalism" on the three
distinguishing features of the Fundamentalist '... an assurance that those
who do not share their religious viewpoint are not really true Christians at
all.' - Peter Cameron "Heretic" (Doubleday; Sydney: 1994) p. 178
#################################################


> I like Colson's concern for prisoners

This is the highlight of Colson's life.


> Don't know the Craig guy.


William Lane Craig http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/

A hit with the Lee Strobel and Campus Crusade mob but of no real
impoortance.
He has debated notable worthies like John Dominic Crossan and Antony Flew.

"(: Lawrence Meckan :)" wrote:

>> >> 2. Chuck Swindoll
>> > Well, Watergate *did* change society for the better ;)
>> Wrong Chucky ... that was Chucky Colson.
>>
>> Why do Americans call their kids after vomit????
>
> I always get those two Chuck's mixed up.. :-S


Yep!  Chuck and vomit are the same thing in Oz - Chunder, throw up, spew,
drive the porcelain bus, kerbside quiche, pavement pizza, liquid laugh,
rainbow sneeze, technicolour yawn.

Rowland said:

>Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
>http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm

We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my definition
from the dictionary; and oftentimes other defintions of "fundamentalist" are
self-serving and said with a sneer.
The Jews who had applied all manner of over-ritualization to create
illusions of righteousness that only they could live up to, were FAR from
interested in just the basics.

And the basics were all that Jesus taught.

Yours in Christ,

Griz

In article <1107486689.036177.85610@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "(:
Lawrence Meckan :)" <lmeckan@yahoo.com> wrote:

-Griz wrote:
-> That's one.  How about:
->
-> 2. Chuck Swindoll
-
-Well, Watergate *did* change society for the better ;)
-
-> 3. James Dobson
-
-I doubt condeming cartoon characters as homosexual agendas qualifies
-changing society for the better.
-
-lawrence

The issueis  if the people were influential, not whether their influence
was good.

And sadly...the most influential are necessarily influencing for the
advancement of the Gospel and/or the Kingfom of God.

I  am still waiting for the  "loudest" and best known Evangelicals in the
USA to unequivically(sp) condemn the use of torture, or demeaning of
prisoners.....

Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian

The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk

Take my polls
http://ninure.100megsfree5.com

My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org

The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org

To send e-mail, remove nohate from address

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 23:22:42 +0100, "~ vera ~"
<verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote:

>Rowland Croucher wrote:
>> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
>> news:1107nts80a1t452@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Rowland said:
>>>
>>>> Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
>>>> http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm
>>>
>>> We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my
>>> definition
>>> from the dictionary;
>>
>> Giz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly
>> person who can speak into your life? You come across often as
>> high-and-holier-than-others when you really should have exercised a
>> little more humility/wisdom...
>>
>> And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for
>> several years in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary
>> definitions' of the words I choose? I would have thought, anyway,
>> that secular dictionaries aren't as good in the definitions of
>> theological terms as the theologians (in my case, I generally - but
>> not invariably - choose evangelical theologians).
>>
>>> and oftentimes other defintions of "fundamentalist" are
>>> self-serving
>>
>> How self-serving? I'm not interested in anything other than the
>> truth...
>>
>>> and said with a sneer.
>>
>> I've been critical of - and praised - fundamentalist, evangelical, and
>> liberal thinking on various issues...
>>
>>> The Jews who had applied all manner of over-ritualization to create
>>> illusions of righteousness that only they could live up to, were FAR
>>> from interested in just the basics.
>>
>> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two
>> broad areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>>
>>> And the basics were all that Jesus taught.
>>
>> And the fundamentalists/Pharisees often missed the point: they still
>> do.
>>>
>>> Yours in Christ,
>>>
>>> Griz
>
>
>--
>> <> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
>Then I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,
>He being about to judge the living and dead at His appearance and His
>kingdom:
>preach the Word, be urgent in season, out of season, convict, warn,
>encourage with all long-suffering and teaching. For a time will be when
>they will
>not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own lusts, they will
>heap up
>to themselves teachers tickling the ear; and they will turn away the ear
>from
>the truth and will be turned aside to myths.
>But you be clear-minded in all, suffer hardship, do the work of an
>evangelist,
>fully carry out your ministry. For I am already being poured out, and
>the time
>of my release is here. (2 Timothy 4:1-6)
><>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
>
>God bless you,
>
>~ vera ~


2 Timothy 4  NIV

   1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the
living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I
give you this charge: 2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out
of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and
careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when men will not put up
with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will
gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their
itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the
truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all
situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge
all the duties of your ministry.

   6 For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the
time has come for my departure.


2 Timothy 4  KJV

   1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ,
who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his
kingdom;

   2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.

   3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;
but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers,
having itching ears;

   4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be
turned unto fables.

   5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of
an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

   6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is
at hand.

Matt






--

 http://www.alt-Christianlife.com  New improved
originally made for Alt.Christnet.Christianlife Newsgroup but has expanded to include many othe posters from many NGs

Christian Site with Chat and Forum as well as a Bible study page and Daily Quiz
Art Page, we now offer free Advance Bible search for your personal web site.
Christain Flash Movies
More Christian Art  and web builders' tools.

Christian Site for all Christians and those not Chistian YET!!!!

remove "nospams" from emails

George Bush

David Roman said:

>> Plus, Jesus Christ was quite on about returning to fundamental
>>principles of
>> faith, observing commandments, and opposing secularism.

>Hi Griz,
>While I do not disagree with what you are saying in regards to Jesus
>Christ, it appears to me that he was more liberal in thinking (for his
>day) than the Pharisees.  Matthew 12:8-14 and 23:23-32 is where I get
>that impression.

It is possible that Jesus appeared so "liberal thinking" because the
Pharisees had departed the Truth for paths of 'righteousness by ritual' long
ago.  My pov is that Jesus was simply returning to the fundamentals of how
humans are to relate to God Almighty.

>I think the words liberal and fundamentalist take on slightly different
>meanings when they are used to label a group of people in a negative
>light.

Such labels can and often are, used as vehicles of scorn.  It is regrettable
that in these forums, we are denied such things as the inflection of a
person's voice and visual cues when they mouth such labels upon others.  I
would suggest that in the absence of such clues, careful discerment of the
fruits of the person offering such labels upon others, is essential.  We
need to remember however that such discerment is not for the purpose of
judging or condemning others.
That will happen in due course, and at the hands of their own words and
actions.

Yours in Christ,

Griz

Rowland said:

>> We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my
>> definition
>> from the dictionary;
>
>Giz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly
person
>who can speak into your life? You come across often as
>high-and-holier-than-others when you really should have exercised a little
>more humility/wisdom...

I do, thank you.
And how about you?  I know how hard it can be for pastors finding peers who
will not be cowed by title or diploma or accolades.  While we are at
different levels of growth, we are all on the same road in Christ.

>And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for several
years
>in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary definitions' of the
words
>I choose? I would have thought, anyway, that secular dictionaries aren't as
>good in the definitions of theological terms as the theologians (in my
case,
>I generally - but not invariably - choose evangelical theologians).

No personal shot was intended.  There are times when you do seem to be
leaning more to orthodox definitions of funamentalism, than the dictionary
definition.  Sometimes even in our fundamentals, we need to get back to the
fundamentals!

>> and oftentimes other defintions of "fundamentalist" are
>> self-serving
>
>How self-serving? I'm not interested in anything other than the truth...
>

The word "fundamentalist" used on the group of late, generally appears to be
used more as a blunt object against others (or entire groups of 'others') to
the glory of the self than a simple label indicating a desire to return to
the fundamentals when it comes to faith.  I'm not suggesting you are doing
this.  Only that it is a definite trend on the group of late.

<snip a bit>
>
>Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two broad
>areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).

I am personally of the opinion that Jesus Christ very adequately distilled
the fundamentals of law and doctrine down into their most basic form.
Paul's epistles are extremely valuable in this regard as well.
Now in the above usage Rowland, is the term "Fundamentalism" used to refer
to a particular religious entity . . . or simply in reference to those who
seek to look back to the very fundamentals of faith?

Yours in Christ,

Griz

Rowland Croucher wrote:
> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
> news:1107nts80a1t452@corp.supernews.com...
>> Rowland said:
>>
>>> Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
>>> http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm
>>
>> We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my
>> definition
>> from the dictionary;
>
> Giz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly
> person who can speak into your life? You come across often as
> high-and-holier-than-others when you really should have exercised a
> little more humility/wisdom...
>
> And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for
> several years in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary
> definitions' of the words I choose? I would have thought, anyway,
> that secular dictionaries aren't as good in the definitions of
> theological terms as the theologians (in my case, I generally - but
> not invariably - choose evangelical theologians).
>
>> and oftentimes other defintions of "fundamentalist" are
>> self-serving
>
> How self-serving? I'm not interested in anything other than the
> truth...
>
>> and said with a sneer.
>
> I've been critical of - and praised - fundamentalist, evangelical, and
> liberal thinking on various issues...
>
>> The Jews who had applied all manner of over-ritualization to create
>> illusions of righteousness that only they could live up to, were FAR
>> from interested in just the basics.
>
> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two
> broad areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>
>> And the basics were all that Jesus taught.
>
> And the fundamentalists/Pharisees often missed the point: they still
> do.
>>
>> Yours in Christ,
>>
>> Griz


--
> <> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Then I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,
He being about to judge the living and dead at His appearance and His
kingdom:
preach the Word, be urgent in season, out of season, convict, warn,
encourage with all long-suffering and teaching. For a time will be when
they will
not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own lusts, they will
heap up
to themselves teachers tickling the ear; and they will turn away the ear
from
the truth and will be turned aside to myths.
But you be clear-minded in all, suffer hardship, do the work of an
evangelist,
fully carry out your ministry. For I am already being poured out, and
the time
of my release is here. (2 Timothy 4:1-6)
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

Rowland Croucher wrote:
> "Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
> news:4203f6ed$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> "Rowland Croucher" wrote:
>>
>>> Griz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and
>>> godly person who can speak into your life?
>>
>> Probably not because "intelligent and wise" are worldly and of the
>> devil according to Griz.
>>
>>> You come across often as  high-and-holier-than-others
>>
>> That's Griz's pious demons manifesting again.
>>
>>> And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for
>>> several years in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary
>>> definitions' of the words I choose?
>>
>> Of course!  Teachers like you and I do not have Faultry Grizian
>> Discernment which makes Griz wiser than all his teachers.  Psalm
>> 119:99: I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy
>> testimonies are my meditation.
>>
>>> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two
>>> broad areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>>
>> Yep!
>
>
> However, Mark, we too shouldn't get too righteous either...
>
> Although Griz has taken upon himself (with the encouragement of a few
> others) the mantle of holier-than-thou-dispenser-of-wisdom here, and
> rarely seems to be willing to admit he's changed his mind on
> something, or, until pressed, confess he is wrong (have you noticed
> how when corrected about whether the Bible is into 'attacking others'
> he weaseled out of confessing he was mistaken?), I believe his
> motives are sincere.
>
> There is a spiritual and emotional vacuum in the lives of many who
> come here, and the kind of Bible-based encouragement he and others
> seek to give is well-meaning, and I think, mostly God-honouring
> (though sometimes 'preachy' :-)
>
> He doesn't seem to understand that I'm not attacking Fundamentalists
> - I know many very godly Fundamentalists - but I *am* attacking, as
> Jesus did, a flawed system of relating to God and others in terms of
> legalism ('if you *behave* differently to the way God has shown me/us
> is right you're outside his will') and dogma ('unless you conform to
> this doctrinal system you're to vaying degrees a heretic').

You have lost the base of Christianity, Sir. Nothing is left...

> But as I've said before to you, my brother, I believe you've
> faithfully 'fought the fight' and can retire any time you like, with
> dignity.

That is the best joke of 2003-2005.

But we all know that you love to joke, Sir.

Where is the dignity in Mark Tindall's farting?

> The demons are as much - or more - in your past as in the
> ignorances or conflicts here, n'est-ce pas? But don't lose your
> integrity, or humor, or ability/desire to correct stupidities
> wherever you see them. Those ministries should continue but without
> aiming darts/arrows at particular people eh?

Should continue?

http://tinyurl.com/6moqu

This should continue?

Yes, Sir, we all know you are at war with Christians. "Ministry"?

Another funny joke, Sir. Ha, ha, ha!


God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

Rowland Croucher wrote:
> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
> news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
>> Rowland said:
> <>
>>> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two
>>> broad areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>>
>> I am personally of the opinion that Jesus Christ very adequately
>> distilled the fundamentals of law and doctrine down into their most
>> basic form. Paul's epistles are extremely valuable in this regard as
>> well.
>> Now in the above usage Rowland, is the term "Fundamentalism" used to
>> refer to a particular religious entity . . . or simply in reference
>> to those who seek to look back to the very fundamentals of faith?
>>
>> Yours in Christ,
>>
>> Griz
>
> I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:

Sir, you can place the texts here, if you please, for all to read them
without having to click the link to your website.

I am sure you will soon learn how to copy and paste.

You are spamming, and I do not write it for the first time.

Stop it, please.


God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

"israel t" wrote:

> George Bush

"Changed society for the better" ... not for starting World War 3.

"Griz" wrote:

> We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my
> definition
> from

... Faulty Grizian Discernment and telekenesis ("Spiritual Discernment is
the ability to see what spirit is moving")


> illusions of righteousness

That would be like Griz's asceticism ... and that of Thomas A Kempis


> Yours in Christ,

Your pious demons are manifesting again, Griz.

"Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
news:1107nts80a1t452@corp.supernews.com...
> Rowland said:
>
>>Jesus was not a fundamentalist. He got done in by them - see
>>http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13113.htm
>
> We are probably applying different definitions Rowland.  I get my
> definition
> from the dictionary;

Giz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly person
who can speak into your life? You come across often as
high-and-holier-than-others when you really should have exercised a little
more humility/wisdom...

And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for several years
in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary definitions' of the words
I choose? I would have thought, anyway, that secular dictionaries aren't as
good in the definitions of theological terms as the theologians (in my case,
I generally - but not invariably - choose evangelical theologians).

> and oftentimes other defintions of "fundamentalist" are
> self-serving

How self-serving? I'm not interested in anything other than the truth...

> and said with a sneer.

I've been critical of - and praised - fundamentalist, evangelical, and
liberal thinking on various issues...

> The Jews who had applied all manner of over-ritualization to create
> illusions of righteousness that only they could live up to, were FAR from
> interested in just the basics.

Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two broad
areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).

> And the basics were all that Jesus taught.

And the fundamentalists/Pharisees often missed the point: they still do.
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Griz
--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"Rowland Croucher" wrote:

> Giz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly
> person who can speak into your life?

Probably not because "intelligent and wise" are worldly and of the devil
according to Griz.


> You come across often as  high-and-holier-than-others

That's Griz's pious demons manifesting again.


> And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for several
> years in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary definitions' of
> the words I choose?

Of course!  Teachers like you and I do not have Faultry Grizian Discernment
which makes Griz wiser than all his teachers.  Psalm 119:99: I have more
understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.


> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two broad
> areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).

Yep!

Fundamentalists have the following unfortunate features:

- a distrust and fear of freedom
- a belief in the importance of authority and in controlling what people
believe
- a corre­sponding preference for obedience rather than love
- a desire to give people what they want rather than the truth
- a refusal to allow themselves to be in the least disconcerted when
confronted with the true nature of their fundamentalist religion
- a readiness to persecute and exclude anyone who is of a different
persuasion.

They prefer authority, obedience, and conformity over freedom, truth, and
dissent.

Rowland said:

>> Now in the above usage Rowland, is the term "Fundamentalism" used to
refer
>> to a particular religious entity . . . or simply in reference to those
who
>> seek to look back to the very fundamentals of faith?
>>
>> Yours in Christ,
>>
>> Griz
>
>I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>
>http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13969.htm

Hi Rowland.

I've read your article.  I still find it interesting that the Legalism
represented by the religious leaders of Jesus' day, would in any way be
associated with Fundamentalism (not the frequently mis-applied group label,
but the dictionary/encyclopedia definition).  Jesus was all about the
fundamentals of relationship between God and Man -- distilling them into two
simple commands.  The religious leaders of the day were all about inserting
as many rituals and ceremonies as possible, creating a burden of performance
that few if any could bear.  They violently rejected the notion that  ALL
the Law and Prophets could be summed up in two simple commands!  How could
they possibly hold onto their aura of 'complicated righteousness by works',
when Jesus distilled everything into two simple requirements!  They
crucified Jesus because His stating of the basic fundamentals, clashed
violently with their complicated constructs of rites and observances by
which they believed they were deemed righteous.

You close by saying "Who are the fundamentalists who'd crucify this Jesus
today?".
I would suggest that this is not only a misunderstanding of what actually
happened in Jesus' times, but also a gross misapplication of a term; with
great potential for being mistaken as attempted marginalization an entire
population of believers.  It wasn't those who were interested in the
fundamentals of relationship with God who crucified Jesus in the first place
but rather, those who were interested in their own over-complicated
constructs as a way by which they might 'earn' their righteousness (or at
it's most banal, simply prove their righteousness over others).

It remains that fundamentalism (seeking the basic fundamentals of
relationship with God) has a very bad rap these days . . . mainly at the
hands of those who are seeking over-complicated constructs by which to test
their righteousness over others.  Which actually, is the same group that
lined up to kill Jesus the first time around.

Yours in Christ,

Griz

"Mark T" <mark'sgospel@chapter17> wrote in message
news:4203f6ed$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Rowland Croucher" wrote:
>
>> Griz do you have a spiritual director - an intelligent, wise and godly
>> person who can speak into your life?
>
> Probably not because "intelligent and wise" are worldly and of the devil
> according to Griz.
>
>> You come across often as  high-and-holier-than-others
>
> That's Griz's pious demons manifesting again.
>
>> And you're suggesting that I - who taught English language for several
>> years in high school and college - don't use 'dictionary definitions' of
>> the words I choose?
>
> Of course!  Teachers like you and I do not have Faultry Grizian
> Discernment which makes Griz wiser than all his teachers.  Psalm 119:99: I
> have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my
> meditation.
>
>> Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two broad
>> areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>
> Yep!


However, Mark, we too shouldn't get too righteous either...

Although Griz has taken upon himself (with the encouragement of a few
others) the mantle of holier-than-thou-dispenser-of-wisdom here, and rarely
seems to be willing to admit he's changed his mind on something, or, until
pressed, confess he is wrong (have you noticed how when corrected about
whether the Bible is into 'attacking others' he weaseled out of confessing
he was mistaken?), I believe his motives are sincere.

There is a spiritual and emotional vacuum in the lives of many who come
here, and the kind of Bible-based encouragement he and others seek to give
is well-meaning, and I think, mostly God-honouring (though sometimes
'preachy' :-)

He doesn't seem to understand that I'm not attacking Fundamentalists - I
know many very godly Fundamentalists - but I *am* attacking, as Jesus did, a
flawed system of relating to God and others in terms of legalism ('if you
*behave* differently to the way God has shown me/us is right you're outside
his will') and dogma ('unless you conform to this doctrinal system you're to
vaying degrees a heretic').

But as I've said before to you, my brother, I believe you've faithfully
'fought the fight' and can retire any time you like, with dignity. The
demons are as much - or more - in your past as in the ignorances or
conflicts here, n'est-ce pas? But don't lose your integrity, or humor, or
ability/desire to correct stupidities wherever you see them. Those
ministries should continue but without aiming darts/arrows at particular
people eh?

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"Rowland Croucher" wrote:

> Although Griz has taken upon himself (with the encouragement of a few
> others) the mantle of holier-than-thou-dispenser-of-wisdom here, and
> rarely seems to be willing to admit he's changed his mind on something,
> or, until pressed, confess he is wrong (have you noticed how when
> corrected about whether the Bible is into 'attacking others' he weaseled
> out of confessing he was mistaken?), I believe his motives are sincere.

Tomas de Torquemada also had sincere motives.  That didn't help his victims.
He was never held accountable for his actions and died peacefully in his
sleep thinking he had done a wonderful job for God in murdering thousands of
innnocent people in a mini-holocaust for the purity of his faith.


> But as I've said before to you, my brother, I believe you've faithfully
> 'fought the fight' and can retire any time you like, with dignity.

In other words, back off.  Talk plainly.

Possibly. Perhaps. Maybe.


> The demons are as much - or more - in your past as in the ignorances or
> conflicts here, n'est-ce pas?

I am feeling better than I ever have in the last decade.  A catharsis in my
art has helped.  I am combining novel, music and artwork in one huge
colossus.


> But don't lose your integrity, or humor, or ability/desire to correct
> stupidities wherever you see them. Those ministries should continue but
> without aiming darts/arrows at particular people eh?

Sometimes specific people need to be targeted.  Am I making life difficult
for Griz?  Yep!  Without some type of pressure he will remain in his ascetic
piety forever ... and dupe a few sheeple along the way.  Let no-one think
that the Fuehrer will ever arise from his ashes.  Will and Ariel Durant 'The
Lessons of History' is still a book that Griz should read.  Griz has good
qualities that will only be discovered when he gets his head out of his
arse.  His greatest enemy may turn out to be his greatest help.

"~ vera ~" wrote:

> Where is the dignity in Mark Tindall's farting?

My farts have more substance than all your posts.

Griz wrote:
> Such labels can and often are, used as vehicles of scorn.  It is regrettable
> that in these forums, we are denied such things as the inflection of a
> person's voice and visual cues when they mouth such labels upon others.  I
> would suggest that in the absence of such clues, careful discerment of the
> fruits of the person offering such labels upon others, is essential.  We
> need to remember however that such discerment is not for the purpose of
> judging or condemning others.
> That will happen in due course, and at the hands of their own words and
> actions.

IOW, "monitoring"..

If all you do is monitor other people, how can you grow yourself ?

lawrence

"Griz" wrote:

> Jesus was simply returning to the fundamentals of how
> humans are to relate to God Almighty.

Correct!  Jesus gave two fundamentals ....

Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with all your
heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the FIRST and
GREATEST COMMANDMENT. And the SECOND is like it: 'Love your neighbor as
yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these TWO COMMANDMENTS." -
Matthew 22:37-40

One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing
that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the
COMMANDMENTS, which is the MOST IMPORTANT?" "The MOST IMPORTANT ONE,"
answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God (GOD NOT THE
MESSIAH) the Lord is  one. Love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with
all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all
your strength.' (Mark12:28-30)

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying,
"Teacher, WHAT SHALL I DO TO INHERIT ETERNAL LIFE?"
He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" And he
answered, "You shall love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with all
your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all
your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."  And he said to him, "You have
answered right; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE." (Luke 10:25-28)

These are repeated THREE TIMES.  They are in each of the synoptic
gospels. The commandments do not mention anything about the finite
human Jesus of Nazareth, The Messiah ...or about being born again ... or
about Christians following any of the man made "fundamentals" ... or about
Christians having to believe in the bible ... or about Christians having to
be fundamentalist.



> careful discerment of the fruits of the person

...as applied to Griz ....

THE SPIRIT & FRUIT OF GRIZ

Griz's spirit and fruit has been:

- his subjective assumption that he has the gift of discernment
- his subjective assumption that he is a leader
- his subjective assumption that he has ministry on the newsgroups
- his subjective assumption that he is called by God to implement his cult
- his subjective assumption that his cult's guidelines for the
unmoderated newsgroup ACC were "God given"
- his subjective assumption that Christians should all agree with his
asceticism and fundamentalist belief otherwise they are not reallt
Christians.
- his subjective assumption that diversity is not part of God's kingdom
- his insipid tone of pious superiority to all other Christians as though
they do
not also have access to God
- his demonising of other Christians

Griz listened to the wrong demonic spirit in his vision for ACC which was
not of God.

Griz listened to the wrong demonic spirit in his "call" to ascetic
fundamentalist "ministry" in the newsgroups.

Griz's demonic discernment was faulty when he alienated many Christians whom
he did not agree with.

Griz keeps demonically rambling on inanely about flesh and demons but uses
his own flesh and manisfests his own demons daily in silly little demonic
posts condoning his horrid actions of the past which include lies about the
adult Aussie Christian artist, woz whom Griz removed from his ISP.

Griz has demonstrated:

- a distrust and fear of freedom
- a belief in the importance of authority and in controlling what people
believe
- a corre­sponding preference for obedience rather than love
- a desire to give people what they want rather than the truth
- a refusal to allow himself to be in the least disconcerted when
confronted with the true nature of his fundamentalist ascetic religion
- a readiness to persecute and exclude anyone who is of a different
persuasion.

Griz prefers authority, obedience, and conformity over freedom, truth, and
dissent.

Key Characteristics of the Griz cult are [adapted from Joanne Ruhland
1995]:

- Content Which Is Authoritarian
- Indoctrinates / clones
- Unquestioning obedience / Leaders do not discuss questions
- Love and loyalty are the bottom line
- Indoctrination /Leaders' conclusions must be accepted.
- Emphasis on uniformity
-  Elitist / accepts SOME Christians
- Hidden agenda
-  Manipulates
- Leaders "lord" it over the flock
- Results in conformity, rigidity
- Allows one avenue of service ... serving their group
- Individual is responsible to leaders
- Leaders tell individual what God's will is
-  Analytical thinking hindered
-   Simplistic approach to life
-  Pick your own bible verse to lead you / Choices must conform to leaders'
dictates, leaders' approval

"(: Lawrence Meckan :)" wrote:

> Griz wrote:
>> That will happen in due course, and at the hands of their own words and
>> actions.
>
> IOW, "monitoring"..
> If all you do is monitor other people, how can you grow yourself ?


Griz grow???!!!!!

Only around his stomach!!!!


#################################################
My Testimony at
http://www.alt-christianlife.com/testimonials/mark_tindall.htm

***********************************************************

'As rare as a Fundamentalist who loves his enemy.

#################################################
... quoting from James Barr's book "Fundamentalism" on the three
distinguishing features of the Fundamentalist '... an assurance that those
who do not share their religious viewpoint are not really true Christians at
all.' - Peter Cameron "Heretic" (Doubleday; Sydney: 1994) p. 178
#################################################

"Griz" wrote:

>>You come across often as
>>high-and-holier-than-others when you really should have exercised a little
>>more humility/wisdom...
>
> I do

Yep!


> There are times when you do seem to be
> leaning more to orthodox definitions of funamentalism, than the dictionary
> definition.  Sometimes even in our fundamentals, we need to get back to
> the
> fundamentals!

Like those two fundamentals given by the Christ ....

Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with all your
heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the FIRST and
GREATEST COMMANDMENT. And the SECOND is like it: 'Love your neighbor as
yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these TWO COMMANDMENTS." -
Matthew 22:37-40

One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing
that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the
COMMANDMENTS, which is the MOST IMPORTANT?" "The MOST IMPORTANT ONE,"
answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God (GOD NOT THE
MESSIAH) the Lord is  one. Love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with
all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all
your strength.' (Mark12:28-30)

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying,
"Teacher, WHAT SHALL I DO TO INHERIT ETERNAL LIFE?"
He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" And he
answered, "You shall love the Lord your God (GOD NOT THE MESSIAH) with all
your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all
your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."  And he said to him, "You have
answered right; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE." (Luke 10:25-28)

These are repeated THREE TIMES.  They are in each of the synoptic
gospels. The commandments do not mention anything about the finite
human Jesus of Nazareth, The Messiah ...or about being born again ... or
about Christians following any of the man made "fundamentals" ... or about
Christians having to believe in the bible ... or about Christians having to
be fundamentalist.


> The word "fundamentalist" used on the group of late, generally appears to
> be
> used more as a blunt object against others (or entire groups of 'others')
> to
> the glory of the self than a simple label indicating a desire to return to
> the fundamentals when it comes to faith.

But fundamentalists DON'T return to the two fundamentals that the Christ
gave.  Fundamentalists have their own their man made fundamentals and IGNORE
THE TWO FUNDAMENTALS OF THE CHRIST.


> I am personally of the opinion that Jesus Christ very adequately distilled
> the fundamentals of law and doctrine down into their most basic form.
> Paul's epistles are extremely valuable in this regard as well.

In the bible Paul advocates slavery.  Do you advocate slavery?


> Yours in Christ,

Your pious fundamentalist demons are manifesting again, Griz.

"Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
> Rowland said:
<>
>>Fundamentalism, classically and universally, has problems with two broad
>>areas - law (legalism) and doctrine (dogma).
>
> I am personally of the opinion that Jesus Christ very adequately distilled
> the fundamentals of law and doctrine down into their most basic form.
> Paul's epistles are extremely valuable in this regard as well.
> Now in the above usage Rowland, is the term "Fundamentalism" used to refer
> to a particular religious entity . . . or simply in reference to those who
> seek to look back to the very fundamentals of faith?
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Griz

I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13969.htm

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"~ vera ~" <verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
news:36j2cnF516066U1@individual.net...
> Rowland Croucher wrote:
>> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
>> news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Rowland said:
>> I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>
> Sir, you can place the texts here, if you please, for all to read them
> without having to click the link to your website.

I don't like to read long posts on this NG as it takes up bandwith.
I prefere a link so that if i am iterested i go look at it when i have more
time to do so.

>
> I am sure you will soon learn how to copy and paste.
>
> You are spamming, and I do not write it for the first time.
> Stop it, please.
>

Spam is the unwanted bulk emailing to private email address'.
not a coment pointing you to a review. you also direct people
to your web page with every post that you send. which I have been
to and had a look at. I have also been to Rowlands. I have found that
both sites have some good infomatition on them. there is also
infomatition on both sites that I disagree with. But I find this is
good as it enables me to look at all sides of the story. that way I am
able to know where a person is coming from in regards to there
faith. over the years that I have been a Christian (32+) I have
not found a church group that has it 100% correct. many that
are close but still not 100%. Usualy the ones that say that they
are 100% I find are quite often the furthest away from that
figure. eg the TV evagerlists Tammy and ???? Baker. I have
also found that so many church groups preach false dactrines.
eg Prosperity Doctrine, If you give all your money and live acording
to his decrees He will give you 10x back. When Paul tells Timothy in
1 Tim 6:3-10
If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to
the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching,
he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest
in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife,
malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of
corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that
godliness is a means to financial gain.
But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing
into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food
and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get
rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful
desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of
money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money,
have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
(NIV)

The newest one of these false doctrine is the mother god one. which is
strate out of paginisum. there are a groing number of church groups
taking this doctrine on. (even the mormons).

what is a Christian? Acts 11:19 tels us that "The disciples were called
Christians first at Antioch." (it was an insulte) So a Christian is a
disciple
of Jesus. Anyone that denies Jesus can not be a Christian. Jesus himself
said. "he that denies me I will denie before my Father."

Who are Christians? Paul in Romans 10:9-11 tells us "That if you confess
with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God
raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart
that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you
confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in
him will never be put to shame."[a]
[a] Isaiah 28:16 (NIV).

So there are many on this NG that are Christians but do not show
the fruits of the Spirit very well. there are also some that claim to
be Christians but denie Jesus as Lord. so they are not due to
Romans 10:9-11.

I find it hard to talk on NG's as you can not get to know a
person very well. as Griz has said that you do not get to see
their body language. I think a lot of people on this group
would speek a little differant in person.

One of the things that we must try to do is to try to live
in peace with everyone as Paul tells us in Romans 12:17-21
? Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is
right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it
depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take
revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for
it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," [a] says
the Lord. On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." [b]
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
[a] Deut. 32:35
[b] Prov. 25:21,22

One saying that I do not like is "what WOULD Jesus do"
I would prefere people to say "what DID Jesus do" as we
what he did written for us in the Bible.

>
> God bless you,
>
> ~ vera ~

God Bless

Smiley

Smiley wrote:
> "~ vera ~" <verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
> news:36j2cnF516066U1@individual.net...
>> Rowland Croucher wrote:
>>> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> Rowland said:
>>> I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>>
>> Sir, you can place the texts here, if you please, for all to read
>> them without having to click the link to your website.
>
> I don't like to read long posts on this NG as it takes up bandwith.
> I prefere a link so that if i am iterested i go look at it when i
> have more time to do so.

You don't like them? Poor one. But you can write a long post to me, and
you do not ask me if I like it or not.

I did not talk with you here, by the way. Or did you spam as well?

>> I am sure you will soon learn how to copy and paste.
>>
>> You are spamming, and I do not write it for the first time.
>> Stop it, please.
>>
>
> Spam is the unwanted bulk emailing to private email address'.

Not only, Smiley. Spam can be in the newsgroups as well. Spam is not
what you have in your sig - this is allowed up to a certain amount.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spam

> not a coment pointing you to a review. you also direct people
> to your web page with every post that you send. which I have been
> to and had a look at. I have also been to Rowlands. I have found that
> both sites have some good infomatition on them. there is also
> infomatition on both sites that I disagree with. But I find this is
> good as it enables me to look at all sides of the story. that way I am
> able to know where a person is coming from in regards to there
> faith. over the years that I have been a Christian (32+) I have
> not found a church group that has it 100% correct. many that
> are close but still not 100%. Usualy the ones that say that they
> are 100% I find are quite often the furthest away from that
> figure. eg the TV evagerlists Tammy and ???? Baker. I have
> also found that so many church groups preach false dactrines.
> eg Prosperity Doctrine, If you give all your money and live acording
> to his decrees He will give you 10x back. When Paul tells Timothy in
> 1 Tim 6:3-10
> If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to
> the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching,
> he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest
> in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife,
> malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of
> corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that
> godliness is a means to financial gain.
> But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing
> into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food
> and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get
> rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful
> desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of
> money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money,
> have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
> (NIV)
>
> The newest one of these false doctrine is the mother god one. which is
> strate out of paginisum. there are a groing number of church groups
> taking this doctrine on. (even the mormons).
>
> what is a Christian? Acts 11:19 tels us that "The disciples were
> called Christians first at Antioch." (it was an insulte) So a
> Christian is a disciple
> of Jesus. Anyone that denies Jesus can not be a Christian. Jesus
> himself said. "he that denies me I will denie before my Father."
>
> Who are Christians? Paul in Romans 10:9-11 tells us "That if you
> confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart
> that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with
> your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your
> mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone
> who trusts in
> him will never be put to shame."[a]
> [a] Isaiah 28:16 (NIV).
>
> So there are many on this NG that are Christians but do not show
> the fruits of the Spirit very well. there are also some that claim to
> be Christians but denie Jesus as Lord. so they are not due to
> Romans 10:9-11.

All these verses you have quoted mean the same. Like when you define
what a car is, you can say:

- A car is a vehicle.
or
- A car has four wheels.
or
-
There must be a driver in a car to drive it.
or
A car has a roof.
or
...

All these sentences describe what a car is.

Well, but is everything that has a roof a car?

> I find it hard to talk on NG's as you can not get to know a
> person very well. as Griz has said that you do not get to see
> their body language. I think a lot of people on this group
> would speek a little differant in person.

A lot, but not me.

> One of the things that we must try to do is to try to live
> in peace with everyone as Paul tells us in Romans 12:17-21
> ? Do not repay anyone evil for evil.

Why do you not tell that to others? I am not spamming - they are.

> Be careful to do what is
> right in the eyes of everybody.

Oh dear me - no! I cannot do what is right in the eyes of everybody. How
terrible that would be! I am a Christian, and I am only looking what is
right in the eyes of God!

You people in Oz are really badly informed. Are you sure there are
Bibles in Oz? LOL

Where have you got that from? It reminds me of Kant, not of Jesus
Christ. He said: "Love God and your neighbour."

> If it is possible, as far as it
> depends on you, live at peace with everyone.

So true. Now go and tell it to them. Okay?

> Do not take
> revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for
> it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," [a] says
> the Lord. On the contrary:
> "If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
> if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
> In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." [b]
> Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
> [a] Deut. 32:35
> [b] Prov. 25:21,22

So true. I am sure you are doing this in your life.

Why are you telling this to me? I do not take any "revenge". What
"revenge" and for what?

I can understand your taste is different from mine - you like links more
than texts. Okay, but allow me that I do not like spam at all.

> One saying that I do not like is "what WOULD Jesus do"
> I would prefere people to say "what DID Jesus do" as we
> what he did written for us in the Bible.

Okay now I know what you like and what you do not like.

Is there a chance that you might ask me what I like, and what I don't
like? The Christian way, maybe?

LOL

>> God bless you,
>>
>> ~ vera ~
>
> God Bless
>
> Smiley

God bless you,

~ vera ~
--
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de ~
~ http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm ~

Rowland said:

>Griz, I'm afraid I've noticed over the 10-plus years I've been hanging
>around Usenet, that when people define a Christian, they often (mostly?)
>*don't* refer to these two commands... That's the essential mark of a
>Fundamentalist: they major on 'correct' doctrine, and 'correct' religious
>behaviour.
>
>Might have time to return to the rest, hopefully...

Well, we may still be playing with differing definitions then.  The
fundamentals of the Christ-centred life are summed up in those two
commandments.

Yours in Christ,

Griz

"Smiley" wrote:


> I don't like to read long posts
....
> strate (sic) out of paginisum. (sic)
...
>denie (sic) Jesus as Lord
...
>I think a lot of people on this group would speek (sic) a little differant
>(sic) in person.


You've got a problem that you should address if you want to evangelise
through any type of written media.

"Griz" wrote:

> I still find it interesting that the Legalism represented by the religious
> leaders of >Jesus' day, would in any way be associated with Fundamentalism

Perfectly obvious to one without Faulty Grizian Discernment.


>Jesus was all about the fundamentals of relationship between God and Man --
> >distilling them into two simple commands.

Griz has finally woken up to what I have been saying!


> The religious leaders of the day were all about inserting
> as many rituals and ceremonies as possible, creating a burden of
> performance
> that few if any could bear.

That sounds like the fundamentalists and their 5 added man made fundamentals
which are not mentioned in the Christ's two fundamentals.


> You close by saying "Who are the fundamentalists who'd crucify this Jesus
> today?".


Mmmmmm ...........
How can you be now so self-righteous
........
Yet how many times have you quoted from your Bible
To justify your eye for your eye and your tooth for your tooth
.......
Mmmmmmmmmm ........


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Would You Crucify Him?"

Words and Music by John Michael Talbot
on Firewind
Copyright 1979


Sometimes in the cool of the evening
The truth comes like a lover through the wind
Sometimes though my thoughts have gone misleading
She'll ask that same old question once again

(Chorus)
Would you crucify him?
Would you crucify him?
My old friends
But would you crucify him?
I'm talking 'bout the sweet Lord Jesus
If he'd stand right here among you once again

She's asking how many times
Will you look down  to  the harlot
Looking through her tears pretending you don't know
But you were once just like her
How can you be now so self-righteous
When in the name of the Lord you throw the first stone

(Chorus)

So now I turn to you
Through your years of your robes and your stained-glass windows
And do you vainly echo your prayers say your pleasing the Lord
Profess the marriage with your tongue
But your mind dreams like the harlot
And if the judge looks to your thoughts can't you guess your reward
Yet how many times have you quoted from your Bible
To justify your eye for your eye and your tooth for your tooth
You say that he didn't mean
What he was plainly saying
And like the Pharisee, my friend you're an educated fool

"Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
news:1109unklku64q21@corp.supernews.com...
> Rowland said:
>
>>> Now in the above usage Rowland, is the term "Fundamentalism" used to
> refer
>>> to a particular religious entity . . . or simply in reference to those
> who
>>> seek to look back to the very fundamentals of faith?
>>>
>>> Yours in Christ,
>>>
>>> Griz
>>
>>I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>>
>>http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13969.htm
>
> Hi Rowland.
>
> I've read your article.  I still find it interesting that the Legalism
> represented by the religious leaders of Jesus' day, would in any way be
> associated with Fundamentalism (not the frequently mis-applied group
> label,
> but the dictionary/encyclopedia definition).  Jesus was all about the
> fundamentals of relationship between God and Man -- distilling them into
> two
> simple commands.

As Jesus said to someone... 'You are not far from the Kingdom'...

Griz, I'm afraid I've noticed over the 10-plus years I've been hanging
around Usenet, that when people define a Christian, they often (mostly?)
*don't* refer to these two commands... That's the essential mark of a
Fundamentalist: they major on 'correct' doctrine, and 'correct' religious
behaviour.

Might have time to return to the rest, hopefully...

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"Smiley" <smiley_b1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gx6Nd.470$p37.16519@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> "~ vera ~" <verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
> news:36j2cnF516066U1@individual.net...
>> Rowland Croucher wrote:
>>> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> Rowland said:
>>> I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>>
>> Sir, you can place the texts here, if you please, for all to read them
>> without having to click the link to your website.
>
> I don't like to read long posts on this NG as it takes up bandwith.
> I prefere a link so that if i am iterested i go look at it when i have
> more
> time to do so.


Said it better than I could Smiley

You're an intelligent man: you will soon be able to discern 'the agenda
behind the agenda' in some of this :-)

--
                                                               *
Shalom!   Rowland Croucher
                                                           *       *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/                               *
(14200+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference    http://ie-21stcentury.com/
                                                              *

"~ vera ~" <verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
news:36le5eF522sboU1@individual.net...
> Smiley wrote:
>> "~ vera ~" <verasix@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
>> news:36j2cnF516066U1@individual.net...
>>> Rowland Croucher wrote:
>>>> "Griz" <griz@cois.no-no.on.ca> wrote in message
>>>> news:1108fekki6d9a2d@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>> Rowland said:
>>>> I've recently reviewed a book right on this topic:
>>>
>>> Sir, you can place the texts here, if you please, for all to read
>>> them without having to click the link to your website.
>>
>> Spam is the unwanted bulk emailing to private email address'.
>
> Not only, Smiley. Spam can be in the newsgroups as well. Spam is not
> what you have in your sig - this is allowed up to a certain amount.
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spam

Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature,
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
or newsgroups; junk e-mail.

as per your link.

>
>> not a coment pointing you to a review.
>>
>> The newest one of these false doctrine is the mother god one. which is
>> strate out of paginisum. there are a groing number of church groups
>> taking this doctrine on. (even the mormons).
>>
>> what is a Christian? Acts 11:19 tels us that "The disciples were
>> called Christians first at Antioch." (it was an insulte) So a
>> Christian is a disciple
>> of Jesus. Anyone that denies Jesus can not be a Christian. Jesus
>> himself said. "he that denies me I will denie before my Father."
>>
>> Who are Christians? Paul in Romans 10:9-11 tells us "That if you
>> confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart
>> that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with
>> your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your
>> mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone
>> who trusts in
>> him will never be put to shame."[a]
>> [a] Isaiah 28:16 (NIV).
>>
>> So there are many on this NG that are Christians but do not show
>> the fruits of the Spirit very well. there are also some that claim to
>> be Christians but denie Jesus as Lord. so they are not due to
>> Romans 10:9-11.
>
> All these verses you have quoted mean the same. Like when you define
> what a car is, you can say:

Each has different meanings.

>
> - A car is a vehicle.
> or
> - A car has four wheels.
> or
> -
> There must be a driver in a car to drive it.
> or
> A car has a roof.
> or

What about convertable with the top down?
What about F1 cars no roof?
are they still cars.
There a 3 wheeled cars in England.

I gave you the Biblical defernition of what is and who is
a Christian. the second ref. is who not what is a Christian.


> ...
>
> All these sentences describe what a car is.
>
> Well, but is everything that has a roof a car?
>

Snip

>> One of the things that we must try to do is to try to live
>> in peace with everyone as Paul tells us in Romans 12:17-21
>> ? Do not repay anyone evil for evil.
>
> Why do you not tell that to others? I am not spamming - they are.
>
>> Be careful to do what is
>> right in the eyes of everybody.
>
> Oh dear me - no! I cannot do what is right in the eyes of everybody. How
> terrible that would be! I am a Christian, and I am only looking what is
> right in the eyes of God!

Some times we do not like what the Bible says.

>
> You people in Oz are really badly informed. Are you sure there are
> Bibles in Oz? LOL

This does not correrlate with some of the thing that you have said to
me in other posts on this NG. as yes we do have Bibles in Aus.
I have access to over 30 different versions on my computer.
as well as over 1500 Biblical resources (computer and hard copy)


>
> Where have you got that from? It reminds me of Kant, not of Jesus
> Christ. He said: "Love God and your neighbour."

Romans 12:17 reads ? "Do not repay anyone evil for evil.
Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody." (NIV)

the quote ended at at the OT referances. they were all Pauls words
please do not ignore them.

>
>> If it is possible, as far as it
>> depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
>
> So true. Now go and tell it to them. Okay?

It is a public NG the message was to all that read it.
I did not mean for it to sound as if I was having a go at
you, and I am sorry for that. It was for all to read. it was not
directed at any one spercific.

>
>> Do not take
>> revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for
>> it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," [a] says
>> the Lord. On the contrary:
>> "If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
>> if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
>> In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." [b]
>> Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
>> [a] Deut. 32:35
>> [b] Prov. 25:21,22
>
> So true. I am sure you are doing this in your life.

I try to do my best as the Lord directs me.

>
> Why are you telling this to me? I do not take any "revenge". What
> "revenge" and for what?

I do not like to take verses out of context so I often quote the whole
section.
I was not saying that you take revenge on any one. I was pointing to
where Paul said "Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody"
(Rom 12:17b NIV)

>
> I can understand your taste is different from mine - you like links more
> than texts. Okay, but allow me that I do not like spam at all.

None of us like spam. but I dissagree with you that Rowlands reply to Griz
is spam. We can agree to disagree I have no problem with this. it does not
stop us from Loving each other in Christ.

>
>> One saying that I do not like is "what WOULD Jesus do"
>> I would prefere people to say "what DID Jesus do" as we
>> what he did written for us in the Bible.
>
> Okay now I know what you like and what you do not like.
>
> Is there a chance that you might ask me what I like, and what I don't
> like? The Christian way, maybe?

you like to help your brother that suffers when he reads KJV. so
you warn him. I do not like to use the KJV due to the fact that
so many people can not understand the words that it uses. I believe
that the KJV is a good translation. but I also believe that some more
moden translations are better. you may disagree with this that OK.

Getting to know a persons likes and dislikes takes time. Over time
I will get to know most of your likes and dislikes.
With some people it takes time to get to know. others it takes no time at
all, espeseraly them that have been hurt by a church group. they need
special care.

>>> God bless you,
>>>
>>> ~ vera ~

 God Bless

 Smiley

"Griz" wrote:

> Rowland said:
>>Griz, I'm afraid I've noticed over the 10-plus years I've been hanging
>>around Usenet, that when people define a Christian, they often (mostly?)
>>*don't* refer to these two commands... That's the essential mark of a
>>Fundamentalist: they major on 'correct' doctrine, and 'correct' religious
>>behaviour.
>
> Well, we may still be playing with differing definitions then.  The
> fundamentals of the Christ-centred life are summed up in those two
> commandments.


Now it is time for you to THINK about the CONSEQUENCES of the Christ's two
fundamentals.

Romans 12: 2 "Don't copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let
God transform you into a new person by changing the way you THINK. Then
you will know what God wants you to do, and you will know how good and
pleasing and perfect his will really is."

I Corinthians 10:4 -5 " ...for the weapons of our warfare are NOT WORLDLY
but have DIVINE POWER TO DESTROY STRONGHOLDS.  WE DESTROY ARGUMENTS AND
EVERY PROUD OBSTACLE TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD, AND TAKE EVERY THOUGHT CAPTIVE
to obey Christ ..."

2 Ti.1:7 - For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but [spirit] of
power, and[spirit] of love, and [ spirit] of a SOUND MIND.

1Tim 4:4-5 - For EVERYTHING created by God is GOOD, and NOTHING is to be
REJECTED if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of
the word of God and prayer.

Colossians 2:20-23- If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the
universe, why do you  live as if you still belonged to the WORLD? Why do you
submit to regulations, "DO NOT HANDLE, DO NOT TASTE, DO NOT TOUCH"
(referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human
precepts and doctrines? These have indeed AN APPEARANCE OF WISDOM in
promoting rigor of devotion  and self-abasement and severity to the body,
but they are of NO VALUE in  checking the indulgence of the flesh.