Subj: alchohol

Date: 4/3/00 3:09:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time

From: nordberg42@hotmail.com (Nordberg ware)

To: adb4jesus@aol.com

I was wondering if there was any Biblical basis for abstaining from all use of alchohol, even social drinking in a responsible manner. I cannot find any in the Bible but so many conservative Christians believe this way it seems they would have some basis. Thank you

Subj: Re: alchohol

Date: 4/3/00 8:57:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: nordberg42@hotmail.com

Hello,

Thank you for you question and a good one it is. Scriptures concerning drinking and to excess are;

Proverbs 20:1, 23:20-21 & 29-32, 31:4-6, Isaiah 5:11, Luke 21:34, Romans 13:13, Galatians 5:19-21

I realize that these scriptures deal with drinking usually to the excess and drunkenness.

You ask about social drinking under control. I would say that a person has to judge personal convictions in this area. I would say that Ephesians 5:11 instructs us (Christians) to stay away from all appearance of evil. The concern would be that the act of social drinking would be considered a license to drink in all manors. It may also cause a weaker brother or sister to stumble at this especially if they had a previous problem in this area. Another question I would ask is, "is there not an alternative drink that would satisfy," is it necessary to drink alcohol? As I stated, it is really a matter of personal conviction that you have to get a clear conscience with God about yourself. I hope that this answers your question and thanks again for asking.

Sincerely in Christ, Adam

Subj: Re: Horoscopes

Date: 11/9/00 7:42:00 PM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: rrlady@acninc.net

Hello,

Thank you very much for your question and I will answer the best that I can. You are correct to connect horoscopes with psychics because they are very much related. Horoscopes are nothing more that man's attempt to foretell the future of someone based on astronomical and mystical means. There is nothing innocent about it nor is it something that is acceptable to God.

The following are scriptures that deal with "witchcraft" which is basically the foundation of Horoscopes.

Exodus 22:18 Deuteronomy 18:10 1 Samuel 15:23 2 Kings 9:22 2 Choronicles 33:6 Micah 5:12 Nahum 3:4 Galatians 5:20

Witchcraft is also referred to in the Bible as "Sorcery" the following are scriptures pertaining to Sorcery;

Exodus 7:11 Isaiah 47:9, 57:3 Jeremiah 27:9 Daniel 2:2 Malachi 3:5 Acts 8:9, 11, 13:6, 8 Revelation 9:21, 18:23, 21:8, 22:15

Unfortunately like many other areas there are no specific scriptures that clearly say that dealing with Horoscopes is evil but we have to go to the foundation of it. It is clearly derived from 'witchcraft' and 'sorcery' and therefore we can use the above scriptures to indicate God's disapproval of the practice. I hope that this has been helpful for you. Thank you again, Adam

Subj: (no subject)

Date: 11/27/00 6:30:04 PM Central Standard Time

From: Breed617

To: ADB4JESUS

I recently looked over your "page" concerning eternal security. I found it interesting and seemingly bible based, which is of the upmost importance. while I can not say with full confidence either way. I will look over (intently) again the scriptures you have given supporting what you say. Another topic I find of interest is Election/Predestination, you may have heard some referred to this as "Calvinism" or Reformed Theology. While I do find biblical support 4 Election/Predestination I also have seen verses where believers are seemingly called to exercise their free will though choices n sacrifice. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this subject using the bible as reference. While I would not consider myself a "new" Christian (APR.98 being the time I REdedicated myself to Christ) Reformed Theology is relatively new, and I must also tell you that I Competely reject the notion that God needs permission to do ANYthing in our lives. Thank you for your time, I hope I have made myself clear You may contact me at "Breed617@aol.com" if u decide to answer this Email. Thank you n have a good day............Jesus is Lord Micheal

Subj: Re: (no subject)

Date: 11/29/00 9:26:33 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: Breed617

Hello Micheal,

There are differing views about these two subjects and how they apply to Christians and to what extent. I will give you what I believe to be correct from my understanding and what I believe the Scriptures indicate.

The subject of "Election" concerning Christians.

The Scriptures that deal with the subject give the direct indication that an "elect" person is one that is Born-Again. In the Old Testament it was referring to God's chosen people the Jews. In the New Testament it shifts to persons that accept the plan of salvation and become children of God. The Scriptures that deal with this subject are following; Isaiah 42:1, 45:4, 65:9, Matthew 24:24, 31, Mark 13:20,27, Luke 18:7, Romans 8:33, Colossians 3:12, 1 Timothy 5:21, 1 Peter 1:2, 2:6, Dealing with "Election" Romans 9:11, 11:5, 1 Thessalonians 1:4, 2 Peter 1:10

I believe in each of these scriptures it is clear that it indicates a 'saved' person. I know that your question is asking if this election is "predestined" and I will get into that below covering the subject of "Predestination."

Predestination is only mentioned twice in the following places; Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1:5&11. The question that is raised is that if God has 'predestined' certain people to be saved then what happens to individual choice? Another question would be how that would be "Just" to have certain persons 'predestined' to go to hell? I don't believe that God does take away our choice nor do I believe that others have no choice in going to either heaven or hell. I find it interesting that Peter referred to this very concept in his sermon on the day of Pentecost. He said (speaking of Christ), "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." In this verse, it is evident that they had free choice for what they done with the consequences of their actions. God delivered up His Son, and man was given the choice of what they would do with Christ. The chose to crucify Him, leaving them with the responsibility for their actions.

I believe that scriptures make it clear that Christ died for "ALL." In 1 John 2:2 it says, "And he is the propitiation for our sins, (believers) and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." What Christ accomplished on the cross was for "ALL" and not just a select few that would be considered "predestined." The Bible clearly says, "Who so ever believeth in Him" and not "only those selected and believe in Him." John 3:16-18, 36, Acts 10:43 and more are clear indicators of this very point. To anyone who hears the Gospel it then becomes their choice to either accept what they have heard or reject it as Titus 3:10-11 states.

So what did Paul mean by using the phrase "predestination" and how does it apply? I believe that Christ died for "All" and it was decided even before the foundation of the world that this was going to have to be the price to be paid which is alluded to in Ephesians 1:4, Hebrews 4:3, and 1 Peter 1:20. My belief is that God from the beginning of time, knowing all things, knew the price in advance that was to be paid and the arrangements were made. Therefore since God is not willing that any should perish 2 Peter 3:9 it is evident that God made a way to prevent that through the sacrifice of Christ. The "predestination" in Biblical terms then would be that God has "Predestined" that "ALL" should be saved through the price that was paid for "ALL" sins. I believe that the "predestination" was in the price that was paid in the fact that it opened the door for "Anyone and Everyone" to accept the price. It is obvious that not everyone does nor will everyone accept that price. Therefore it is also obvious by that fact alone that God did not take away our choice. It is also obvious by the other scriptures that predestination as indicated by Paul is not to mean that there will be those that are predestined to hell or heaven. God wants everyone to go to heaven and paid a great price to allow that, but in His great love for us He will never take away our "Choice." This is also the very reason against the view of Eternal Security. It takes away your choice and we have just proven that God does not do that. I hope that this answers your question and if not please let me know. Thanks and God bless you, Adam

Subj: Thank you

Date: 12/3/00 10:22:44 PM Central Standard Time

From: Georgelc07@cs.com

To: ADB4JESUS

Adam,

I thank you very much for this website. I found it on accident while trying to find more about Catholic Beliefs online so I could know how they think and show them where their religion failed them. I have many Catholic friends. If you have time could you give me some advice on how to talk to them and how to bring the subject of how to get to Heaven up in a way that wouldn't make them mad? I would like to talk to you more. Do you have AOL Instant Messenger? I thank you again for the time and effort you put into this website. I will be praying that people who come to this site will be convinced of that Jesus is the only way the truth and the light.

Sincerely, Eric

Subj: Re: Thank you

Date: 12/4/00 11:26:30 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: Georgelc07@cs.com

Hello Eric,

Thank you so much for your email and for the kind words and I am not sure it was by accident that you found it. It is really refreshing to know that the pages do actually help others because that is my main purpose for having this site. Usually I get upset catholics that have read the page and lash out at me for having anti-catholic material as they put it. It is very hard to talk to catholics regarding this topic and God bless you for having the desire to do so. I have found that they are extremely defensive and mainly because they have no idea what they actually believe most of the time. They have only followed traditions all their lives and cannot even defend their doctrine most of the time and that is why they get so defensive. It is really sad to see people like this that are so blindly following a teaching that is destructive like this is. I wish I had an easy answer for you regarding this but to be honest there is no easy approach to talking to them. I have tried various approaches and have had little success with any of them. The main thing is to do it in a non-condemning way. To cause them to search out the answers themselves but challenging them to find Biblical proof for the things they say they believe. Actually that is what I was attempting to do with Richard on the site. If you go to the "emails from Richard" you will see where he was attempting to provide many scriptures that supposedly supported his beliefs. I in turn tried to show him that none of the scriptures he listed were accurately used but rather taken out of context. My approach has always been to provide the scriptures that prove their error and ask them to prove them wrong. This does two things; it causes them to look at those scriptures and also to study to prove what they believe. Unfortunately there are a lot of sites out there also for just such a thing and they look at them and get the distorted information and believe it. Anyway, I hope that this has helped you some in what you wanted to know and if not please let me know and I will do what I can to help. Thanks again for you response and God bless you in your efforts to win the deceived. Sincerely in Christ, Adam

Subj: Re: Thank you

From: Georgelc07@cs.com

To: ADB4JESUS

Adam,

I do agree that me finding your site was probably not an accident. I don't believe God does things by accident. Those things mentioned in your e-mail are good ideas to approach Catholics. I was reading some letters you wrote in responce to other people and I liked how you said "I am not anti-Catholic, I am anti-Catholic doctrine." Oh, I did have another question... I know that the Catholic Bible has more books in, so did the Catholics add to the original Bible or did the Protestants take out the extra books? I have been wondering about that. Thank you again for your time and for giving me advice. I really appreciate it. I will be praying that your site will keep helping Catholics see The Light. Thank you again and God bless.

In Christ, Eric

Subj: Re: Thank you

Date: 12/5/00 7:57:52 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: Georgelc07@cs.com

Hello Eric,

Thanks again for the kind words and I do hope that it was helpful. The catholic bible does have some extra books and they are called the "apocrypha" and they are really nothing more than history books. They are all Old Testament books with the Maccabees being between the book of Malachi and Matthew. I have read them and there is nothing bad in them (with the exception of one mention of what could be construed as 'purgatory' in 2 Maccabees) they are mostly just historical accounts. They were actually in the bible until the canonization of the scriptures was done and they were seen as no real benefit. Later Luther, Tyndale, Wycliff, and others agreed and did not include them in there translations. The Protestants took them out but the catholics still hold to them because as I mentioned they allude to 'purgatory' in Maccabees. Thanks again Eric and it is really encouraging to see your hunger to witness to these people. I pray that God will give you the wisdom you need as you talk to them and that He fill you with His Spirit so that you will stand strong. In Christ, Adam

PS> if you have any other questions please let me know.

Subj: Re: Thank you

Date: 12/5/00 5:51:56 PM Central Standard Time

From: Georgelc07@cs.com

To: ADB4JESUS

Adam,

Thanks for the information about the extra books in the Catholic Bible. I had been wondering about that. I have been e-mailing one friend and he has come up with Bible verses that 'prove' his beliefs. On some of them I could see how they were just taken out of context... but this one I don't know about.... He used James 2:24-26 to prove that faith is not enough to get to Heaven. ("You must percieve that a person is justified by his works and not his faith alone. Rahab the harlot will illustrate the point. Was she not justified by her works when she harbored the messengers and sent them out by a different route? Be assured then that fairth without works is as dead as a body without breath.") What is this verse really saying? I do thank you for all your time and for answering the questions I have had.

In Christ, Eric

Subj: Re: Thank you

Date: 12/6/00 9:30:15 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: Georgelc07@cs.com

Hello Eric,

I have heard that argument before also and it is simply a misinterpretation of the scripture or actually taking in out of context to make it say what it doesn't. In Romans 3:20, Paul says, "By works of the law no flesh will be justified," and Ephesians 2:9 tells us that our salvation is "not of works" along with 2 Timothy 1:9 and Titus 3:5. On the other hand James 2:21-24 apparently states that man is not justified by faith only but also by works. Then Paul again says in Romans 2:13,

"The doers of the law will be justified." So what is the answer when scriptures seem to contradict each other? The key is in the whole context of what is being said, James 2:14 does not say, "What doth it profit...though a man have faith?" but he does say, "What use is it my brethren, if a man says he has faith." A mere profession of faith does not mean the possession of faith or the natural accompaniments of faith. Faith that is not accompanied by its inevitable and expectant fruits of faith is not faith at all. It is a mockery and James calls such a faith "dead." There is much more that I could say on this but the bottom line comes down to this; Paul is not advocating, "Works" without faith and James is not advocating "Faith" without works. What they are both saying agrees with the other in the fact that "Faith" produces works and it is not the 'works' that obtain your salvation or even secure it. The 'works' are simply a product of genuine faith. It is our 'faith' alone that brings about our salvation, but in that salvation our life is transformed and through obedience the 'works' are manifest. The only reason that catholics want to use this argument is that it agrees with unbiblical 'traditions' that have been instilled that contradict scriptures. I hope this helps you with this person and your own understanding of the difference. If not let me know, talk to you later, In Christ, Adam

Subj: QUESTION???

Date: 12/5/00 9:28:14 PM Central Standard Time

From: MelvinCowan

To: ADB4JESUS

I had a fellow in my Sunday School class ask a question the other day that set me aback! He was witnessing to a man at his workplace when the man began to question the "integrity" of the scriptures. The guy said to my "brother" why should I believe the Bible when it's just a compilation of stories by a bunch of men. Of course we've all heard that one before and his answer was relatively standard. Next came the thing that caught me offgaurd. The guy at work said that the Bible has been translated so many times that the original meanings of the words have been lost(no biggy, we can handle that one), and Jesus's name in the orginal "text" was not even Jesus!!! I realize all the many names given in the scriptures for Jesus, but did the original Hebrew call Him by some other name?? If so, What??

Subj: Re:QUESTION???

Date: 12/6/00 9:43:40 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: MelvinCowan

Hello,

Thank you so much for your question and I pray that I can give an adequate answer. It sounds like the kind of question that would come from a Jehovah's Witness. They have the same questions and try to convince Protestants that we are incorrect because they assert that "Jehovah" was the true name of God. The King James version of the Bible is the most accurate and there is proof of that. In 1947 in Qumran a shepherd boy found what is known today as the Dead Sea Scrolls. In those scrolls it has been found that they had a complete book of Isaiah and thousand of New Testament fragments. The Book of Isaiah was studied and compared to the book that we currently have in our King James version and was found without one discrepancy. That alone would be proof enough but the fragments they have also confirmed almost all of our New Testament books as well. There will always be doubters of the Word, it started in the Garden with the serpent and Eve and will never cease.

As for the name of Jesus in the Hebrew text, that is much more involved. You are correct that Jesus was referred to in many different terms and therefore it is hard to say that one is preferred above the other. Isaiah 9:6 is about the best source of titles that Jesus bares. The Hebrew word used to name Jesus is "Yeshua" but the word "Jehovah" is also a direct definition of Jesus. I have many of the Hebrew words in the page on the Deity of Jesus which you can see here The Deity Of Jesus1

It is hard to actually say that the Hebrew form of Jesus' name is incorrect because there are no references to that actual name in the Old Testament. He is called by many other names in the Old Testament but if you look up the name Jesus in the Hebrew dictionary it is "Yeshua" which is covered in the Deity of Jesus page above. If that page does not help you in what you are looking for please let me know and I will be glad to research if more for you. Thanks again for you question and hope to talk to you soon, In Christ, Adam

Subj: Mob Rule? God's rule?

Date: 12/6/00 4:23:04 PM Central Standard Time

From: badger@mountain.net (Mark)

Reply-to: badger@mountain.net

To: adb4jesus@aol.com, CHAYRUN@Hotmail.com (Cindy Hay)

Mr. Bartlett,

I am not a Christian, but I have friends who are Christian. I have posed the question that I now posing to you to some of them. I saw your signature, along with the signatures of some friends of mine, on a cyber-petition that is aimed at preventing a film which depicts Jesus and his disciples as gay from entering the U.S. I sometimes take the time to try to understand the behaviors of those who subscribe to specific, established religious belief systems. This is one that I have trouble with. I try to determine the logic behind the behavior. Signing the petition did not indicate that one promised not to go see the film, but represented a desire to ban the film. It was not a promise concerning one's own behavior but a determination to prevent

someone else's.

There are many different religions available from which one might choose. Indeed, atheism itself, has been referred to by some as a "religion" as it makes assumptions that, some argue, is based on faith. Given the knowledge that so many belief systems exist, the question arises as to how one, as an individual, might deal with, interact with people whose beliefs are different than our own. In this case, you have chosen censorship. I have tried to determine your argument for this. I read the introduction to the petition and made certain observations.

In that introduction, the writer states that deleting the e-mail or otherwise not choosing to sign the petition represents a "lack of faith and respect for our Lord!" Indeed, he not only says this but, as the exclamation point indicates, he shouts it. However, there is a problem with that argument. Is a Buddhist being disrespectful to your god? If so, should we deny him or her the right to be Buddhist? Based on your own model of belief, and on what the aforementioned writer says, punishment and/or reward are given to us in the next life. So why deny someone else the right to express his or her beliefs and to subscribe to any religion he or she wants? If someone who subscribed to another belief system had an opportunity to censor your expression of your beliefs, I think that you would hope that he or she would not.

Does preventing someone else from expressing his or her own beliefs really show respect to your god? If someone sees this movie as an accurate representation of Christ, then that person sees Christ differently than you. Obviously, you would assert that this person is wrong. The person in question would argue otherwise. Whose belief do we enforce? Whom do we allow to speak? Do we also ban traditional Christian programming because someone out there disagrees with it? Also, if someone is an atheist or agnostic and sees the Christian religion as a mythology to be manipulated as he or she sees fit, and alters it for artistic purposes, for purposes of making his or her own statement, do we prevent that person from doing so? This is what many poets, screenwriters, etc., have done with the Greek and Norse mythologies. If you argue that this is wrong because Christianity is the one true religion and these things that I have mentioned are mythologies, then it, again, comes down to a question of belief. There are a select few living today who still believe in some form of the Norse and Greek Religions. Yes, pagans still exist. By preventing a person from treating Christianity as a mythology, you censor that person's expression of his or her beliefs because they are different than your own.

I don't know if this film is an actual religious statement or a political one based on Christianity as a mythology, but, in either case, why would you want to silence another opinion? If your opinion were less popular would you want yours to be silenced? I'm sure you wouldn't want to be treated as Christians were by the Roman Empire for a time. The fact is that getting a lot of people together to silence a lesser number who disagree with them is mob rule. This bears repeating: Getting a lot of people together to silence a lesser number is mob rule. The Constitution of the United States contains, in it, certain principles wherein our founding fathers tried to prevent democracy from becoming mob rule. It does so by establishing certain

inalienable rights. Of course, the oft referred to, freedom of speech is one of those. Mob rule is only good when you are one of the mob. This also bears repeating: Mob rule is only good when you are one of the mob.

Why is it, then, that you choose to abandon a principle that would have saved the lives of many and improved the lives of many more who believe the way you do if that principle had been applied in times of Christian persecution? As, if your opinion was not the popular one, you would not want to be silenced, why do you, then, refuse to do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Why do you wish to enact mob rule?

Because I adhere to the first amendment of our constitution because I would not attempt to silence you for expressing your belief, I will not attempt to silence anyone else and, therefore, refuse to sign this petition. I am anxious, however, to hear your argument for applying mob rule in this case. I am also wondering if we can be sure that God, should he or she exist, would actually be very happy about it. I have trouble believing that any God powerful enough to create a universe and enlightened enough to provide man (and woman) with free will and, as a result, individuality, would approve of mob rule. That's another argument, however.

Any thoughtful response will be welcomed. The key word is "thoughtful."

Thank you for your time.

Mark Bennear

Subj: Re: Mob Rule? God's rule?

Date: 12/8/00 11:41:12 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: badger@mountain.net, CHAYRUN@Hotmail.com

Mr. Mark Bennear,

Thank you for you lengthy comments and the question you have posed. I have read your comments and have not been surprised by them, for I have heard this type of rhetoric before. Nothing surprises me anymore about the total abasement and complete ignorance of people anymore. Since you claim that you are not a Christian it comes as no surprise as to why you would have trouble understanding the ways and thinking of Christians. God says in His Word that:

1 Corinthians 2:13-16:: New International Version (NIV)

13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.

14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:

16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.

I know of course Mark, that you also claim that you do not believe in God (by your reference that "if he or she exists" ), so you will not accept His Word. Regardless of you immense knowledge or your perception to be that way, there is an absolute truth. You also referenced the Constitution and the section of "free speech" as your platform to say that Christianity is guilty of 'mob rule.' Apparently your vast intelligence has failed you in this area because if you were to research the history of the Constitution and the founding fathers you would find that it was formed on Biblical principles. Not only formed on those principles but instituted with the intention that these rules would continue to be enforced by a "godly run" government. I would be happy to send you any information you would like on this subject.

Mark, I would hope that you would agree that rules and laws are necessary in any society. If so, then why is it considered 'mob rule' when these are to be enforced? Most of the laws that were instituted by the founding fathers also were based on a 'Moral Code’, which has been swept under the rug for the last 50 yrs or more.

A more direct answer to you claim, Christians should never expect to "force" anyone to accept their views or beliefs. I don't believe this is the case nor do I believe that Christians are supposed to be doormats for the world and the immoral moves in society either.

America has not stood by its roots as established by the founding fathers. This country was intended to be a free country, but never was it intended that those freedoms would destroy the very foundation that allowed that freedom. Just about every other country has a founded 'religion' and they may tolerate other beliefs but they are never to become subject to anything other than that country's founded belief. America was founded as a "Christian" nation based on the Word of God as it's moral and legal code. America has allowed the usurping of its freedom by radical groups and others that are opposed to it's fundamental roots. Those that do not want to be held accountable to God's Word such as yourself that want freedom with no absolutes or restrictions.

Why do Christians stand up against things like this movie that is a direct insult to the Word of God? Because we are bound to a higher call that you would not understand nor will you until you understand the scriptures above. Should we as Christians expect that no one should have a right to speak against Christianity? Absolutely not, but at the same time Christians should not be looked down upon because they exercise the same rights that everyone has to object to things that assault their belief. True Christians will always stand against Abortion, Homosexuality, and all other forms of immorality and injustice. You have accused Christians of double standards in this area but I believe that if there are any biases that they are most obviously against Christians.

Mark, we could argue about this endlessly but the bottom line is this. You are deceived and blind to the truth and do not know what the truth is. Until you allow God to open your spiritual eyes you will never be able to see anything any other way. You might say how would I know? I was there, right there were you are and played those same games you are. I know that side of the fence, and now I am on this side and yes, I can speak from experience. You can reject God because He has given you that choice and neither I nor anyone else can "force" you to choose HIM. I can say that one day you will stand before Him though and then regardless of what you say or think you will KNOW that He is real.

Romans 14

11 It is written: "`As surely as I live,' says the Lord, `every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.'"

12 So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

Mark, I can only encourage you to give you life over to Jesus and "willingly" serve Him and then all things will be clear to you. You will then see that there are absolutes and there is a need for morality. You will see that Christians need to stand up for the truth and morality and righteousness. You will never see these things until then. I can tell you right now that all the things I have written, you will not accept without the Spirit of God. Mark if you want to know how to accept Jesus into your life please let me know. Sincerely in Christ, Adam

Subj: an answer to a question please

Date: 12/20/00 5:09:25 PM Central Standard Time

From: mrtc@voyager.net (mrtc)

To: adb4jesus@aol.com

HELLO I LOVE YOUR WEB SIGHT AND I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION IF I MAY I'D

LIKE TO KNOW WHERE IN THE BIBLE IS PUTTING TATOOS ON YOUR BODY NOT OF GOD?

I KNOW IT'S THERE I JUST CAN'T FIND IT !! THANKS I'LL BE WAITING MARIA

Subj: Re: an answer to a question please

Date: 12/21/00 8:29:33 AM Central Standard Time

To: mrtc@voyager.net

Hello Maria,

Thank you so much for your kind comments and I am glad that you like the site. Thank you for your question also, there are some verses that seemingly refer to tattoos but it may not be as direct as you would like. It was apparent that after the Jews had spent over 400 years in Egypt that they picked up some of their customs. One of those customs was to cut their skin or make markings in their skin to remember a dead person, usually a loved one. They would also shave their heads or part of their beards. Regardless it was a custom that God did not want His people to follow. Here are the scriptures that deal with that subject.

Leviticus 19: 28, 21:5, Deut. 14:1, Jeremiah 16:6, 48:37

Thanks again and God bless you, Adam

PS> Please let me know if this is not what you were looking for.

Subj: hello once again!

Date: 12/20/00 10:49:05 PM Central Standard Time

From: Georgelc07@cs.com

To: ADB4JESUS

Adam,

I have one more question. I have been talking to my Catholic friend again and he has talked of the Rosary. What is that? Just a quick question. Thanks for your time.

Eric

Subj: Re: hello once again!

Date: 12/21/00 8:45:26 AM Central Standard Time

From: ADB4JESUS

To: Georgelc07@cs.com

Hello Eric,

Thanks once again for the question and instead of giving you the long answer I will give you the link to the 'catholic encyclopedia' where I get a lot of my information regarding the catholic practices.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13184b.htm

You should be able to get all the information about the 'rosary' and there are many rosaries to pick from. Let me know if there is anything else I can help with and God bless you, in Christ, Adam