A Maine Family's History

The family history of the Smith/Glidden and Davis/McDowell families from Washington County, Maine and Charlotte County, New Brunswick.

A Semi-Wicked Good Maine Page

A semi-serious resource about the State of Maine for those in exile and the curious.

BillyRhythm.com

Provides a web log, with links to family. Also, offers DJ and percussion services to Midcoast Maine. Contact information available.

Blog: Acton Up

Personal thoughts about the town of Acton, the military, and politics.

Charles Oakes: Maine Coast Poetic Visionary Artist.

Images of his evocative paintings, many of his home town in Port Clyde. Graphics files are large and may load slowly.

Comments from Munjoy Hill: Sick of your Shit

Adoo offers opinions and commentary on events, businesses, and people locally and around the world.

Doyo's Maine Page

General guide for visitors and residents. Photographs, list of local entertainers, activities, sports, and a message board featured.

Fritz's Daughter, Family and Friends

Includes page on windows basics, family reunion, photographs, and other amateur idiosyncrasies.

Hammond, Benjamin

Studies music technology and jazz voice. Includes biography, resume, assignments, pictures, mp3 music downloads, and information about shows.

John Eric Brandt

Personal site for John provides pictures and links to his business, family, and friends.

Matthew Johnson wrote:

>
> No. The warning in Revelation applies ONLY to the Book of Revelation.
There is
> no sound reason for claiming that it applies to the whole Bible,
since it was an
> independent volume at the time.
>
And this is why you do not correctly interpret the book. It is in
everyway dependent upon the previous 65 books of the Bible, especially
on the Jewish testament prophetic passages but equally on the NT
prophetic passages. No, it is nothing short of a Divine affirmation
that the covers of canon are inspired and new revelation is closed
until the 2nd Advent. The testimony of the 2 witnesses and the 144,000
is not new, but a reiteration of the gospel message. There is no need
of anything further. Enough there is to come to saving faith if one
but believes.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

In article <131.16.15.05.483098000@srcbs.org>, lsenders@hotmail.com says...
>

[snip]

>I'm pretty much debated out today so I will say only this. Please find
>a copy of "The 5 Points of Calvinism" coauthored by David Steele and
>Curtis Thomas. Also, if you have access to Shedd's "Dogmatic Theology"
>I would suggest you take a look at his explaination of the doctrine.

Ah, yes, the old ace-in-the hole! When all else fails, assign homework!

[snip]

>That was never my point. My point was the validity of a literal
>interpretation of Genesis and not an allegorical one.

But there IS no validity to it; not in the Creation accounts. That is why the
orders of the two Creation accounts do not agree.

> This ties
>directly to the rudamentary, elemental, foundational, presuppositional
>basis for one's interpretation of the nature of man.

And your "rudamentary[sic], elemental, foundation, psrsuppositional bases" for
this are quite wrong. Largely, but not entirely, because you insist on literal
interpretation in the wrong place.

> All theology
>flows from this.

No, all theology flows from the Trinity, which you _also_ can only
misunderstand, because you deny the key premises of apophatic theology AND
accept the unaccaptable, the Filioque.

> Therefore it is beyond me how you can then write....
>>
>> I am not
>> a Darwinist. But I'm not a creationist, either. One or the other
>> (or some other option) wouldn't matter one whit to my theolgy.

Well, it does not surprise _me_ that it is beyond you. But the problem is your
'presuppositions', not Steve's statement.

>It is the providential arrangement of the canon which rightly places
>Genesis as the first book of the bible.