Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gregory]

Let me give you an example of logic that is true in its constiltutent parts, yet is false in it conclusion:

1) Animal life has two (2) seperate and distinct genotypes--male and female.   TRUE

2) X is animal, alive and male.    TRUE

3) Therefore, X is not female.   FALSE

How so:

Hermaphrodites are both male and female.  This is a 3rd genotype that is NOT seperate and distinct. As an example, certain worms are both male and female.

There is other living animal life that is male during one part of thier life cycle and female during another part of their life cycle.  I have given you a specifric answer for my statement above.  I will let those who are interested, check out the accuracy of this statement.

O.K.  I will give you a hint:  Clownfish are born male and may change to female.

Wrasses are born female and may change to male.


There is more.  But, you-all can check it out.

[Gregory]

Bob said:

Here we have a major Adventist church moving independently from GC Sessions, which is the highest authority on earth under God within the church, and you say to pay no attention to comments about that independent movement constituting a split?

Again, Bob, you have given an excellent example of how you misrepresent what someone (me in this case) said.

I said that Mercielago shoud not pay any attention to the comments that you make on this issue.  I did not say that he should not pay any attention to comments on that issue mady by other people.  There is a difference.

[Battle Creek]

Might this help?

"I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them."   - Adlai Stevenson

[Bob Pickle]

Bob said:

Here we have a major Adventist church moving independently from GC Sessions, which is the highest authority on earth under God within the church, and you say to pay no attention to comments about that independent movement constituting a split?

Again, Bob, you have given an excellent example of how you misrepresent what someone (me in this case) said.

I said that Mercielago shoud not pay any attention to the comments that you make on this issue.  I did not say that he should not pay any attention to comments on that issue mady by other people.  There is a difference.

How did my statement misrepresent what you said? I think you're being picky.

[Bob Pickle]

Bob said:

One major error that you, Gregory Matthews, have made in this statement is that the Hebrew word used for God's "congregation" and the "company" of Korah is the same, which I made clear in my statement above. I referred to "synagogue" because of the two words, the Greek word is more readily recognizable to the average reader than the Hebrew word.

Bob, I did not expect you  to come back with such a perfect example of what I was saying.  I never stated that the Hebrew words were the same.  I do not believe that they are.  But, I did not check and I did not want to pound on you for another error, especially when I did not want to take the time to check it out.

Then I recommend that you read carefully what someone else writes before you make personal attacks against them. "I never stated that the Hebrew words were the same." BUT I DID!

Read what I wrote. I clearly identified the Hebrew word as being Strong's # 05712, and stated:

"Interestingly, the LXX uses the Greek word sunagoge, "synagogue," for the Hebrew word 05712 in these verses."

I gave every single verse, I believe, that contained that Hebrew word in Num 16.

1) I suggested that you probably do not know Greek.  If I am wrong and you are actually fluent in Greek, tell us so.

Depends on what you mean by fluent. I have the equivalent of two years of Greek classes, and have not forgotten it all.

2) I said that Moses probably did not know Greek.

Straw man.

3)  I referenced the Greek of the LXX.  Bob, you know that the LXX was written in Greek.  You surely cannot be telling me that I am wrong on that.  By the way, it was you who referenced the LXX.

I already explained why I cited the LXX. Straw man.

[Artiste]

I am also still interested in knowing your source for the outright lie you mentioned in your false statement that Loma Linda University Church Wants to split away from the denomination. Would you care to provide the source of that falsehood?

Murcielago,  You need to understand Bob.  He makes a lot of statements that go beyond what can be documented.  I do not know that I would call him a liar as I consider a liar to be someone who intends to decieve.  As I beleive that he believes that what he states is truth, I do not think the word "liar" fits.  But there does seem to be patterns in what he says.

He makes statements that sound to reasonable peopole to be stating X.  When challenged (questioned) he retreats, suggests that he has been misunderstood and that there are other things tha he might have said.  At times the end result is that no one really knows what Bob said. One example of this type of a statement is the statements that he has made about a major payment to the IRS.  The current situation is that at this point in time no one really knows whether Bob has stated that the payment was a million dollars, or some other amount.  No one really knows if Bob stated that 3-ABN made the payment, or if some other person made the payment for 3-ABN, or if some other person made the payment for something that they did, for which the IRS charged them.

Bob also strings together isolated statements/events and puts them together in a manner that he builds a so-called "strawman" that he can then destroy.  Just look at his response to your challenge to his comment about the Loma Linda church.  He cites verses from the Biblical book of Numbers and comments on the Greek in the LXX.  From there, apparently based upon his use of the Greek in the LXX he comments on the choice of words that Moses used.  One major error is that Moses probably did not know Greek.  The Biblical books that Moses wrote were written in Hebrew. 

Bob has clearly done this with me,  in his comments to the effect that I advocate rebellion.    I have not spent a lot of time challenging him on his misrepresentation of my position because I do not believe that it is worth my time to debate with someone who misrepresents to the extent that he does, even though he probably believes what he is saying.

I wll also note here that Bob has done the same in comments that he has made about Danny Shelton and 3-ABN.  This is just something that Bob does.  Yes, ~Cindy   ,  you can quote me on your web site if you wish.  Yes, there is some truth in what Bob has said.  Yes,  Bob has pointed out some questionable (wrong, inappropriate) that have been done by Danny and 3-ABN.  I do not argue that.  But, reasonable people who are fair and objective cannot agree that 3-ABN and  Danny Shelton have done everything that Bob seems to have claimed.  Of course, it may be that Bob has claimed nothing badabout 3-ABN & Danny and everyone is mistaken as to what he has actually claimed about them.  As I have said, it can be hard to know what Bob has actually said.

So, Murcielago do not pay much attention to what Bob has said about the Loma Linda University Church.  It is not worth your time.  Reasonable people will take Bob's statement with a grain of salt  People who are not rasonable will not agree with your response to Bob. Just let Bob continue to tell the story as he sees it.

NOTE:  On a personal note to ~Cindy:  Recently a proposed post of mine was not allowed to be posted on 3atalk due to the fact that it was considered "off topic."   Actually, my proposed post was dead center to the topic.  However, since the person who rejected it did not understand that it was very much on topic, it just might have been that no one else would have understood it as being on topic.  So, if no one else would have understood it, perhaps it should have been rejected.

Why am I posting a personal message in a public post?  I have talked about Bob in this post.  Actually all of us can be misunderstood, to include me.  I was not clear in that proposed post.

MODERATOR HAT ON

Inappropriate comments.  Please review Forum Rule #1. Address any communications about AdventTalk Administration activities privately.

MODERATOR HAT OFF

[Murcielago]

I am also still interested in knowing your source for the outright lie you mentioned in your false statement that Loma Linda University Church Wants to split away from the denomination. Would you care to provide the source of that falsehood?

It isn't an outright lie.

Spectrum is the source. Spectrum reported that the LLU Church is moving ahead now and will be ordaining women as gospel ministers on October 6. To me, that's trying to split off from the church.

Numbers 16:2  And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly <05712>, famous in the congregation, men of renown:

Numbers 16:3  And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation <05712> are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

Numbers 16:5  And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company <05712>, saying, Even to morrow the LORD will shew who are his, and who is holy; and will cause him to come near unto him: even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.

Numbers 16:6  This do; Take you censers, Korah, and all his company <05712>;

Numbers 16:9  Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation <05712> of Israel, to bring you near to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation <05712> to minister unto them?

Numbers 16:11  For which cause both thou and all thy company <05712> are gathered together against the LORD: and what is Aaron, that ye murmur against him?

Numbers 16:16  And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy company <05712> before the LORD, thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow:

Numbers 16:19  And Korah gathered all the congregation <05712> against them unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto all the congregation <05712>.

Numbers 16:21  Separate yourselves from among this congregation <05712>, that I may consume them in a moment.

Numbers 16:22  And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation <05712>?

Numbers 16:24  Speak unto the congregation <05712>, saying, Get you up from about the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.

Numbers 16:26  And he spake unto the congregation <05712>, saying, Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins.

Numbers 16:40  To be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near to offer incense before the LORD; that he be not as Korah, and as his company <05712>: as the LORD said to him by the hand of Moses.

Interestingly, the LXX uses the Greek word sunagoge, "synagogue," for the Hebrew word 05712 in these verses.

One might argue that Korah was not trying to split off of Israel, was not trying to start a new church or organization, but that he was just trying to change the leadership of the existing organization. But Moses' choice of words suggests that he indeed was trying to establish his own "synagogue" in competition with the "synagogue" that God had established.

Similarly, Spectrum reports that the LLU Church is gearing up to thumb its nose at gospel order and the 1990 and 1995 GC Session votes. To me that says that the LLU Church wants to be an independent ministry.

None of that addresses the question regarding your statement that the Loma Linda University Church wants to split from the denomination. I would still like to know where you heard that, as it is not true. LLUC has never made such a statement, they have never requested to be removed from fellowship with the denomination, and they have never stated any desire or plans to leave the denomination. Anyone who says otherwise needs to show the documentation containing that statement. I am in a position to know if LLUC were to make that drastic a move, and I know very well that they haven't. That accusation is entirely unfounded and untrue.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I am also still interested in knowing your source for the outright lie you mentioned in your false statement that Loma Linda University Church Wants to split away from the denomination. Would you care to provide the source of that falsehood?

It isn't an outright lie.

Spectrum is the source. Spectrum reported that the LLU Church is moving ahead now and will be ordaining women as gospel ministers on October 6. To me, that's trying to split off from the church.

Numbers 16:2  And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly <05712>, famous in the congregation, men of renown:

Numbers 16:3  And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation <05712> are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

Numbers 16:5  And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company <05712>, saying, Even to morrow the LORD will shew who are his, and who is holy; and will cause him to come near unto him: even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.

Numbers 16:6  This do; Take you censers, Korah, and all his company <05712>;

Numbers 16:9  Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation <05712> of Israel, to bring you near to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation <05712> to minister unto them?

Numbers 16:11  For which cause both thou and all thy company <05712> are gathered together against the LORD: and what is Aaron, that ye murmur against him?

Numbers 16:16  And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy company <05712> before the LORD, thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow:

Numbers 16:19  And Korah gathered all the congregation <05712> against them unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto all the congregation <05712>.

Numbers 16:21  Separate yourselves from among this congregation <05712>, that I may consume them in a moment.

Numbers 16:22  And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation <05712>?

Numbers 16:24  Speak unto the congregation <05712>, saying, Get you up from about the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.

Numbers 16:26  And he spake unto the congregation <05712>, saying, Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins.

Numbers 16:40  To be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near to offer incense before the LORD; that he be not as Korah, and as his company <05712>: as the LORD said to him by the hand of Moses.

Interestingly, the LXX uses the Greek word sunagoge, "synagogue," for the Hebrew word 05712 in these verses.

One might argue that Korah was not trying to split off of Israel, was not trying to start a new church or organization, but that he was just trying to change the leadership of the existing organization. But Moses' choice of words suggests that he indeed was trying to establish his own "synagogue" in competition with the "synagogue" that God had established.

Similarly, Spectrum reports that the LLU Church is gearing up to thumb its nose at gospel order and the 1990 and 1995 GC Session votes. To me that says that the LLU Church wants to be an independent ministry.

None of that addresses the question regarding your statement that the Loma Linda University Church wants to split from the denomination. I would still like to know where you heard that, as it is not true. LLUC has never made such a statement, they have never requested to be removed from fellowship with the denomination, and they have never stated any desire or plans to leave the denomination. Anyone who says otherwise needs to show the documentation containing that statement. I am in a position to know if LLUC were to make that drastic a move, and I know very well that they haven't. That accusation is entirely unfounded and untrue.

I could be wrong, but I think it is in reference with their rebellion against the session voted policy of the GC in that they are going forward with the also rebellious decision of the session vote of the PUC, which also went against the session voted policy of the GC.

[Gregory]

If the Unions have the authority to make decisions on ordination it may not be rebellion.

[Daryl Fawcett]

If the Unions have the authority to make decisions on ordination it may not be rebellion.

They have authority only within the policies of the GC that were voted on in GC Sessions. 

They don't have the authority to go against those GC policies.

[Gregory]

Daryl:

They have authority according to their Constitutions, which were approved by the General Conference.  You are clearly wrong to say that they only have authority within the policies of the GD that were voted in GC sessions.

This is one reason that this problems exists.

[Gregory]

There are two groups on the issue of the authority of the Unions:

One group, which includes a retired General Conference Officer who has published on this, state that the Unions have the authority, based upon their Constitution and By-laws and the General Conference does not have the authority to  override in this issue.    This GC retired officer clearly states that the present attempt by the General Conference to intervene in this issue is an attempt to assert power that the GC does not have.  NOTE:  My wording.

The other group states that the GC does have this power and the Unions do not havea the power to go against what the GC wants at this time.

Both groups have knowledgeable people on their sides.

Ulltimately, the decision as to auathoritiy will not be made by eithere you or I.  The denomination will have to resolve the underlying issue.  It will not be resolved by those who make simplistic quotes from Ellen White and/or other written policies.  It is not that simplistic.

[Gregory]

http://www.atoday.org/article/1297/columns/z-columns-by-guest-writers/analysis-of-what-is-happening-with-the-ordination-of-women-pastors

The above website will give you the perspective of a retired General Conference officer as to why the action of the Unions is legal.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Well, the GC is on the verge of having their Annual Fall meeting, therefore, we will soon know who has the authority and who doesn't.

I am also certain their GC legal people are also preparing for this.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Bad news...General Counsel seems to support Women's Ordination and is actively coordinating the process of closing the door to debate or revision by encouraging having the Unions ordain asap.

Remember, Todd McFarland was Parlaimentarian for the Pacific Union Special Constituency and could easily have encouraged a Special Meeting of the General Conference Executive Committee, but did not.

Understand that once the two unions have ordained women there will be no easy way to put that Genie Back in the bottle. If the GC moves to discipline (assuming they had the political will to do so) and tried any maneuver to reverse the Ordination, the cost of litigation with various entities would be cost prohibitive, not to mention issues with the EEOC once the door is pushed open. Can you see Mr Obama's Justice department just thrilled to tear apart the GC's fundamental beliefs in open administrative hearings, then tearing apart the colleges and universities for Title 7 issues and taking away federal student aid (yes, the feds now have COMPLETE control of student funding)?

There is little question we are on the edge of disaster and will pay a heavy price for this Apostasy.
 
On the other hand, take away the funding and we would have to return to old fashioned SDA education. Back to the waldensian era. Might actually be a good thing. VERY CATHARTIC...Bye, bye Loma Linda, Andrews, La Sierra and whatever else is left!!! Bye, Bye whole churches, conferences and even unions. Bye, bye NAD!!! And what is left will be pure Seventh-day Adventists.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter