History of the county. Links to local businesses, events, and attractions.

Vital records, election information, office hours and contact information.

Fair schedule, Dearth Community Center, and information links.

Information about the availability and use of the fairgrounds and buildings, the Dearth Community Center, and the Annual 4-H Fair.

In article <346F1A98-F63A-8608-2E02-050D79D28725@srcbs.org>, Ninure Saunders
says...
>
>(~) Happy Are They
>Brother Roger of Taize
>
>
>One of the first things Christ says in the Gospel is this: "Happy the
>simple-hearted!" Yes, happy those who head towards simplicity, simplicity
>of heart and simplicity of life.

The problem is, of course, that is NOT what Christ said at all. What He really
said was:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Mat 5:3 RSVA)

Not the same at all. 'Blessed' is NOT the same as 'happy'. Nor is "poor in
spirit" the same as 'simple-hearted'.

Now what do you think it _really_ says about this "Brother Roger" that he
perverted the sense of Scripture so recklessly? Do you think that perhaps THIS
was why he was so popular?


--
---------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)


((( 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 , lsenders@hotmail.com
says...

>Tracy Hall wrote:
>> On Feb 13, 2005, at 5:11 pm, Matthew Johnson wrote
>>
>>
>>
>> > I see, Tracy, that this is but one example of a very sad trend
>> > you have displayed in your posts: you keep seeing things that
>> > are NOT in the text, then proclaiming with great certainty that
>> > they really are there. This habit will only bring you grief.
>>
>SNIP
>>
>> If, when all things are revealed, we learn that Job was, in fact,
>> completely innocent and without sin throughout his entire life, then
>I
>> will rejoice for him.
>>
>But that is not what is taught in Job.

Yes, it is.

> What is revealed is that Job,
>like all men after the fall, acted selfishly, that is, he operated as
>all men do after the fall.

No, that is not in the book at all.

> Job was guilty of the error of assuming
>that the universe operated according to a principle of rationality.

What a _dazzling_ display of eisegesis! What fictional "principle of
rationality" are you attributing to a man of Job's pre-rationalist era?

>The consuming passion of Job for vindication suddenly presented itself
>as ludicrous once he is placed in God's presence.

First of all, you have _severly_ misunderstoo waht Job's "consuming passion" was
for, but even worse, you have failed to understand the real reason Job was so
satisfied with the theophany.