Speaking of Rod Serling, Raelians, Harry-ticks & Bedroom Bishops -- Christian Theology Discussion Group

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:17:12 12/28/02 Sat
Author: Someone From A Lateral Solar System Called Texas
Subject: Speaking of Rod Serling, Raelians, Harry-ticks & Bedroom Bishops
In reply to: Dolly Llama 's message, "Tamarisk, ACNR, Bethany, Preludium, St. Iguanas, 95, & The Saints" on 22:21:07 12/28/02 Sat

Just realised the Raelian movement, in which Brigitte is a �bishop' is a sex cult. So I guess that makes Brigitte a whole new kind of bedroom bishop who doesn't have a congregation. Hummm. Here is moore cultic nonsense from Moore.......

"RevJack Moderator
Posts: 545 (10/8/02 3:59:07 am)
Reply Re: re Von Daniken
"Let's not forget the ancient batteries that have also been discovered, as well as that one anomoly that looks just like a model of a modern day delta-winged aircraft. I have no doubt that the pre-Adamite world was just as advanced if not more so than our race before it faced destruction."

I too, read Von Aniken and even went to the theater to see "Chariots of the Gods" when I was a kid, and although I thought his "findings" and views were intriguing, I felt that he had not sufficiently proven his case and viewed him with skepticism. As I recall, his primary purpose was to debunk the Bible as the inspired, writtten Word of God, and relegate God to nothing more than a space alien who visited planet earth. Rev. Jack Howell Dake Board "

====================================================
Speaking of alien cults and twilight zoners; The notes in Jack�s Bible are full of heresy, illogic and, at worse, bigotry and racism. To being with, Dake has a 14 dispensation scheme with lengthy descriptions of a pre-Adamite world ruled by Lucifer. Creation is known as "re-creation" and is explained by a rather lengthy gap theory (see notes on Genesis chapter 1, and the chart at the rear of the Dake), including "Lucifer's flood." While this study Bible is Arminian to the extreme, and is constantly harping on believers losing their salvation, probably the most extreme heresy concerns the nature and person of God Himself. On page 280 of the New Testament, he has a lengthy discussion of the Trinity. In this discussion, Dake teaches that there are three distinct persons with bodies in the Trinity, and that each one of these also has His own soul and spirit. There are many other heresies and ridiculous positions held by Dake, and the more ridiculous the position, the more stringently he attempts to "prove" it. Finally, Dake is a racist, as he lists on page 159 of the New Testament "30 reasons for the separation of the races." This is a grave error, as he misuses the Holy Scripture in a way I don't believe I have ever seen before. We learn that "God wills the races to be as He made them," and "God made everything to reproduce 'after his own kind,'" applying this to different races. What the Bible actually teaches is that the "one blood" of Acts 17:26 proves that there is only one race, the human race, and skin color is only ethnicity. I won't comment any further on this, but urge anyone who likes this study Bible to look at these notes on page 159 and then defend this work.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]