County Clerk Office.

Providing site listings for available industrial and commercial land, and economic and socio-economic data.

chantal wrote from possible accidental ignorance:

>Everything you have been taught, believed, studied...All this
knowledge
>came from a governing board who has translates and decifers what
>everything in the original text means

your whole thesis is fallacious. You obviously have not read my posts
here (feel free to do a search on this newsgroup). I've barely used
anything from a Watchtower publication.

You are being presumptuous that I haven't studied outside
"board"-approved material. You are 100% unequivocably incorrect.

With all due respect here's a scripure you may want to consider prior
to posting again:

"Has presumptuousness come? Then dishonor will come; but wisdom is with
the modest ones."

((( 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 <156.02.22.05.638657000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
>
>
>
>Matthew Johnson wrote:
>
>> In article <151.59.14.05.918582000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Gary McNees wrote:
>> >
>> >> For the Calvinist god certainly does not only speak lies, but acts
>> >> unjustly.
>> >
>> >Who says?
>>
>> God's own prophet does. Recall:
>>
>> Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked,
>> says the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should
>> turn from his way and live? (Eze 18:23 RSVA)

As I have already pointed out, this translation is deficient. And the deficiency
even looks theologically biased.

>>
>> But the "Calvinist God" actually _makes_ the wicked wicked, and therefore
>> causes his death. But since God has no pleasure in this, this cannot be
>> just.
>>
>>
>
>Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one
>object for special use and another for ordinary use?

Can't you READ, Bob? The subject here is the potter, NOT God. You make your
error all the more shameful since I already explained this to you at length, and
you snipped it without commentary, repeating the same old bleating.

> What if God,

Again: can't you READ? He said WHAT IF. This makes it HYPOTHETICAL. Deal with
it.

>desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with
>much patience the objects of wrath that are made for destruction... [Rom
>9:21-22]

>Since the answer to this is "yes",

The answer to "what if" is "yes"?? Now I _know_ you haven't ever really read the
passage!

A question introduced with "what if" is NOT answered with "yes", unless it has a