Listing of official, city and town, government, and chamber of commerce websites.

In article <091.03.23.05.237708000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
>
>Matthew Johnson wrote:
>
>> In article <091.34.08.05.202286000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
>[...]
>
>>
>> >Rather, the Church is the group of people chosen by the Lord Jesus.
>>
>> No. That is an ancient heresy. The Church is represented by the Parable
>> and the wheat and tares, which shows that even up to the end times, there
>> will always be wicked people in the Church -- making life harder for the
>> righteous.
>
>No, the world is represented by the Parable of the wheat and the tares.

So said the ancient heretics. I wish I could say that I was surpised that you
chose to follow them.

>The Church is the wheat.

No. It is the those righteous within the Church who persevere to the end.

>The tares are not a part of the body of
>Christ, unless you hold that part of the body will be burned and
>excluded from the "barn".

Didn't you just say that there are no new arguments here? Then how did you miss
my obvious rejoinder? Of _course_ no part of the body will be burned. But these
are the ones who fell away.

>> And indeed: Judas was an example of this during Christ's time, Simon and
>> "the cutters" an example in Acts, Marcion and Novatian examples in the
>> third century etc.
>>
>
>Was Judas saved?

Of course not.

>> >That makes it hard to define, because He doesn't always consult us on
>> >who He has chosen.
>>
>> But you can get this 'definition' from Scripture only by eisegesis. It is NOT
>> the definition Paul gave. Paul even addressed _some_ of "the cutters" as
>> Christian brethren -- even if as misguided ones.
>>
>
>Aren't the misguided ones also chosen by our Lord?

Now is my turn for the 'rhetorical question': chosen for what? You seem to have
assumed a theologically biased definition of 'chosen' here.

>> >> It can't be all of them.
>> >
>> >Not the way you seem to have defined it. I gave you the defintion of
>> >"Church" that I use; what's your definition?
>>
>> I already gave it to you: the Body of Christ.
>>
>[...]
>> >
>> >So does that mean I don't believe in Christ? Am I damned?
>>
>> That is a question you have to settle with your own conscience. If I try to
>> answer it for you, it will do no good to anyone.
>
>So why will you not answer it for me, but you will answer it for BB?
>
>I hope you don't mind if I ask you to explain to me what appears to be a
>logical inconsistency.

Why do you think it is a _logical_ inconsistency? What logical principle do you
imagine exists that says I have to