Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: All Our Nothing Approach

Expand Messages
  • Joe Gill
    Wow, Don! It seems really disingenuous to quote from Acts 15 ultimately in support of the position that gentiles must obey the Tanakh. After all, that passage
    Message 1 of 147 , Nov 1, 2005

      Wow, Don!

      It seems really disingenuous to quote from Acts 15 ultimately in support of the position that gentiles must obey the Tanakh. After all, that passage of scripture continues:

      "Therefore my judgment is that we don't trouble those from among the Goyim who turn to God,
      but that we write to them that they abstain from the pollution of idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood.
        For Moshe from generations of old has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every Shabbat."
      Then it seemed good to the apostles and the Zakenim, with the whole assembly, to choose men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Sha'ul and Bar-Nabba: Yehudah called Bar-Sabba, and Sila, chief men among the brothers.
      They wrote these things by their hand: "The apostles, the Zakenim, and the brothers, to the brothers who are of the Goyim in Antioch, Aram, and Cilicia: greetings.
      Because we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, 'You must be circumcised and keep the law,' to whom we gave no mitzvah;
      it seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose out men and send them to you with our beloved Bar-Nabba and Sha'ul,
      men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah.
      We have sent therefore Yehudah and Sila, who themselves will also tell you the same things by word of mouth.
      For it seemed good to the Ruach HaKodesh, and to us, to lay no greater burden on you than these necessary things:
      that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, it will be well with you. Farewell." [Acts 15:19-29, HNV]


      By prompting of the Holy Spirit [verse 28], James and the apostolic leadership at Jerusalem came to the conclusion that gentiles should not have to keep the law of Moses. Seems to me, for consistancy's sake, you would distrust James' words like you do Paul's. Seems also like this would taint the Book of the Acts of the Apostles in your eyes... you must be running out of New Testament books to accept as inspired!

      - Berean Joe

       

      --- In TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com, dsimmons <dsimmons@h...> wrote:

      >
      > Well Tim, what do you think? I know you¹ve asked this now a couple of times
      > but I never responded because I thought the answer should be rather obvious.
      >
      > A common misconception is that we are required to keep all of the Law. This
      > is bred from an ignorance of what Torah actually teaches us. Of the 613
      > Laws,
      > * some pertained to those specifically living in the land of Israel
      > * Some pertained to the priests only
      > * Some pertained to slaves, etc.
      >
      > Only someone looking from the outside would think all of these were
      > applicable to the average individual. So addressing your original question
      > in light of this,
      > * Sacrifices, according to the requirements of Torah, cannot be offered at
      > this time
      > * More importantly, for us believers, the sacrificial aspects of Torah have
      > been fulfilled in Y¹shua [but this does not absolve us of Torah altogether
      > (no all or nothings here) ­ see Matthew 5:18 ­ all has not been fulfilled
      > yet!]
      >
      > In order to understand what Hebrews 8:10 is saying we have to compare it
      > with like or similar verses, starting with the original source text from the
      > Tanakh being quoted.
      >
      > > ³Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the
      > > house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: (32) not according to the
      > > covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the
      > > hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake,
      > > although I was a husband unto them, saith Yahweh. (33) But this is the
      > > covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith
      > > Yahweh: I will put my Torah in their inward parts, and in their heart will I
      > > write it; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be my people: (34) and
      > > they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother,
      > > saying, Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto
      > > the greatest of them, saith Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and
      > > their sin will I remember no more. (35) Thus saith Yahweh, who giveth the sun
      > > for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a
      > > light by night, who stirreth up the sea, so that the waves thereof roar;
      > > Yahweh of hosts is his name: (36) If these ordinances depart from before me,
      > > saith Yahweh, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation
      > > before me for ever.² Jeremiah 31:31-36
      >
      > Yes, the promises are for the House of Judah and the House of Israel. This
      > is consistent with the Tanakh and the non-Sauline NT books. But those who
      > enjoin themselves to Israel are included too; they have the same rights and
      > privileges as full Israelites! Discussing this theme, the true apostles and
      > the elders acknowledged the incoming of the ³gentiles².
      >
      > > ³And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Brethren,
      > > hearken unto me: (14) Symeon hath rehearsed how first Elohim visited the
      > > Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name. (15) And to this agree
      > > the words of the prophets; as it is written, (16) After these things I will
      > > return, And I will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen; And I
      > > will build again the ruins thereof, And I will set it up: (17) That the
      > > residue of men may seek after Yahweh, And all the Gentiles, upon whom my name
      > > is called, saith Yahweh, who doeth all these things. (18) Saith the Master,
      > > who maketh these things known from of old.² Acts 15:13-18
      >
      > ---
      > Shalom in Y¹shua,
      > Donimus
      >
      > ³When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth,
      > he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest!² ­ Author Unknown
      >
      >

    • randy
      Dear Don, Jesus did not come to do away with the Torah, but to fulfill it by fulfilling all prophecy. The interesting thing to know about the differences
      Message 147 of 147 , Nov 3, 2005
        Dear Don,

        Jesus did not come to do away with the Torah, but to fulfill it by
        fulfilling all prophecy. The interesting thing to know about the
        differences between the old testament and the new is that the old is
        symbolic of physical law written in stone while the new is the
        physical law being born again and becoming the spiritual law that is
        written on the fleshy tablets of men's hearts by believing in God's
        only begotten son and being circumcised in the heart. Not saying the
        there were not many who did walk with God prior to Christ, but they
        only knew in part of the great plan God had for humanity through his
        son. After Jesus was crucified, the more perfect understanding of
        God's devine plan became evident and that was that he sent his son to
        die so that we may live. Jesus, the eternal priest, the eternal
        unblemished lamb shed his blood on the cross to wash away all sin on
        all who call upon his name.


        randy


        --- In TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com, "Simmons, Don"
        <dsimmons@h...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Randy,
        > I'm guessing you haven't been following any of these threads? Did
        you get
        > a chance to read all the parts of this one? As I mentioned earlier
        in the
        > thread, it is not a salvational issue!!
        >
        > As you know, Scripture is consistant with Scripture. Please provide
        a
        > collaborative passage from the Tanakh, from Y'shua or any of the
        named
        > apostles that agrees with Saul's if you are trying to say Torah is
        done
        > away with.
        >
        > Thanks!
        > Donimus
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com on behalf of randy
        > Sent: Wed 11/2/2005 7:28 PM
        > To: TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [TruthorTradition] Re: Acts 15 Does Not Chuck Torah
        >
        > Dear dsimmons,
        >
        >
        > Circumsion of the flesh gains nothing and means nothing. To be
        saved,
        > man must be circumcised in his heart. It is this circumcision that
        > saves us. Romans 2:29
        >
        >
        > randy
        > --- In TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com, dsimmons <dsimmons@h...>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > Howdy Tim! =)
        > >
        > > TIM H:
        > > > Incorrect. It was not just centered around circumcision.
        > >
        > >
        > > Yes, it does say that in verse 5. And I addressed this in my
        > original post
        > > (which you¹ve obviously chose to edit out for some reason).
        > >
        > > > [removed quote]
        > > > I see another misconception is at work here. As always, context
        > is the key.
        > > > The case in Acts 15 centered around the need to be circumcised
        > (or keep Torah
        > > > in general) in order to be recognized as being saved. Correct???
        > > >
        > > > ³And certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren,
        > saying, Except
        > > > ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be
        saved.²
        > Acts 15:1
        > >
        > >
        > > TIM H:
        > > > I disagree, Don. As I showed above in verse 5 it was
        > > > not only about circumcision, but also about keeping the
        > > > law of Moses, and verse 5 is not the only part of the
        > > > context that tells us that. Look again at verse 10:
        > > >
        > > > Acts 15:10 now, therefore, why do ye tempt God, to put
        > > > a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, WHICH NEITHER OUR
        > > > FATHERS NOR WE WERE ABLE TO BEAR?
        > > >
        > > > This clearly shows it was not just about circumcision,
        > > > because it was NOT circumcision that their fathers and
        > > > they were unable to bear---it was the whole law of Moses!
        > >
        > >
        > > And I also included verse 10 in my original post! What¹s going on
        > here?!?
        > >
        > > This is my original comment:
        > > > Peter agrees and also presents his case against this teaching...
        > > >
        > > > ³Brethren, ye know that a good while ago Elohim made choice
        among
        > you, that by
        > > > my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the evangel, and
        > believe. (8)
        > > > And Elohim, who knoweth the heart, bare them witness, giving
        them
        > the Holy
        > > > Spirit, even as he did unto us; (9) and He made no distinction
        > between us and
        > > > them, cleansing their hearts by faith. (10) Now therefore why
        > make ye trial of
        > > > Elohim, that ye should put a yoke [this is referring back to
        > salvation by
        > > > works issue in Acts 15:1.] upon the neck of the disciples which
        > neither our
        > > > fathers nor we were able to bear? (11) But we believe that we
        > shall be saved
        > > > through the grace of the Master Yahshua, in like manner as
        they.²
        > Acts 15:7-11
        > >
        > > You not only took my comments out of context, but you¹re doing
        the
        > same with
        > > the message Acts 15 is telling us. You are totally disregarding
        the
        > key
        > > verse 21. It is in there, like it or not and the ramifications
        are
        > huge. The
        > > only way one could conclude the Torah is to be removed from the
        > picture
        > > entirely is to extract the text out of context which you and
        others
        > are
        > > appearing to do.
        > >
        > > ---
        > > Shalom in Y¹shua,
        > > Donimus
        > >
        > > ³When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth,
        > > he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest!² ­
        Author
        > Unknown
        > >
        > >
        > > On 11/2/05 3:40 PM, "Tim H" wrote:
        > >
        > > > Hi Don, my comments below.
        > > >
        > > >>> > > Tim H wrote:
        > > >>> > > ³It seems to me that the apostles DID change the
        > applicablility
        > > >>> > > of the Torah to the Gentiles when they determined that
        > Gentiles
        > > >>> > > only needed to do four things: abstain from pollutions of
        > idols,
        > > >>> > > and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from
        > blood.²
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Don wrote:
        > > >> > I see another misconception is at work here. As always,
        > > >> > context is the key. The case in Acts 15 centered around
        > > >> > the need to be circumcised (or keep Torah in general) in
        > > >> > order to be recognized as being saved. Correct???
        > > >
        > > > TIM H:
        > > > Incorrect. It was not just centered around circumcision.
        > > >
        > > > Acts 15:5 and there rose up certain of those of the sect of
        > > > the Pharisees who believed, saying--`It behoveth to circumcise
        > > > them, to command them ALSO to keep the law of Moses.'
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >>> > > Don wrote:
        > > >>> > > ³And certain men came down from Judaea and taught the
        > > >>> > > brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the
        > > >>> > > custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved.² Acts 15:1
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > Peter agrees and also presents his case against this
        > teaching...
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > ³Brethren, ye know that a good while ago Elohim made
        > > >>> > > choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should
        > > >>> > > hear the word of the evangel, and believe. (8) And Elohim,
        > > >>> > > who knoweth the heart, bare them witness, giving them the
        > > >>> > > Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us; (9) and He made no
        > > >>> > > distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts
        > > >>> > > by faith. (10) Now therefore why make ye trial of Elohim,
        > > >>> > > that ye should put a yoke [this is referring back to
        > > >>> > > salvation by works issue in Acts 15:1.] upon the neck
        > > >>> > > of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were
        > > >>> > > able to bear? (11) But we believe that we shall be saved
        > > >>> > > through the grace of the Master Yahshua, in like manner
        > > >>> > > as they.² Acts 15:7-11
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > James and the rest of the named apostles/elders agree and
        > > >>> > > render a verdict...
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > ³Wherefore my judgment is, that we trouble not them that
        > > >>> > > from among the Gentiles turn to Elohim; (20) but that we
        > > >>> > > write unto them, that they abstain from the pollutions of
        > > >>> > > idols, and from fornication, and from what is strangled,
        > > >>> > > and from blood.² Acts 15:19-20
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > Why were they comfortable seemingly side-stepping the
        > > >>> > > tradition of keeping Torah? Doesn¹t this seem
        contradictive?
        > > >>> > > James answers this question...
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > ³For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them
        > > >>> > > that preach him, being read in the synagogues every
        > sabbath.²
        > > >>> > > Acts 15:21
        > > >> >
        > > >> > In other words, ³Yes, let¹s have them keep these four minimum
        > > >> > requirements in order for them to be acknowledged as being
        > > >> > saved and a part of the assembly of believers. They will
        > > >> > always be able to learn about the rest of Torah in the
        > > >> > synagogues.²
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Acts 15 is clearly about whether any believer (be it a Jewish
        > > >> > one or a ³gentile²) has to keep Torah to be saved. It
        > emphatically
        > > >> > shows this is not the case. But this does not diminish the
        > > >> > importance of Torah. It is still to be taught/followed for
        the
        > > >> > purpose of the maturation of a believer. Any conclusion
        > otherwise
        > > >> > is contrary to what is being shown in this chapter.
        > > >> > ---
        > > >> > Shalom in Y¹shua,
        > > >> > Donimus
        > > >
        > > > TIM H:
        > > > I disagree, Don. As I showed above in verse 5 it was
        > > > not only about circumcision, but also about keeping the
        > > > law of Moses, and verse 5 is not the only part of the
        > > > context that tells us that. Look again at verse 10:
        > > >
        > > > Acts 15:10 now, therefore, why do ye tempt God, to put
        > > > a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, WHICH NEITHER OUR
        > > > FATHERS NOR WE WERE ABLE TO BEAR?
        > > >
        > > > This clearly shows it was not just about circumcision,
        > > > because it was NOT circumcision that their fathers and
        > > > they were unable to bear---it was the whole law of Moses!
        > > >
        > > > Love in Christ,
        > > > Tim H
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >>> > > Tim H wrote:
        > > >> >
        > > >>> > > Hi Don, my comments below.
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>> > > TIM H:
        > > >>> > > Oh, I agree that there has always been an open door to the
        > > >>> > > Gentiles "to come into the assembly of the Israelites",
        > > >>> > > but there was not an acceptance of the Gentiles to become
        > > >>> > > believers/followers of Christ in their own right. You're
        > > >>> > > talking apples and oranges.
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>> > > That's why there was such a controversy between the Jews
        > > >>> > > and Gentiles as to whether or not Gentiles had to observe
        > > >>> > > everything that the Jews did. Sure, the Jews would have
        > > >>> > > no problem proselytizing Gentiles, and making them conform
        > > >>> > > to all of their religious beliefs and practices, but to
        just
        > > >>> > > accept them as equals in God's sight was quite another
        > thing.
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>> > > You say it was not a change in the Torah? It seems to me
        > > >>> > > that the apostles DID change the applicablility of the
        Torah
        > > >>> > > to the Gentiles when they determined that Gentiles only
        > needed
        > > >>> > > to do four things: abstain from pollutions of idols, and
        > from
        > > >>> > > fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>> > > Love in Christ,
        > > >>> > > Tim H
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Tim H wrote:
        > > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Hi Don, sorry, I have to disagree with you
        again.
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Yes, it is clear to anyone reading Acts 10 that
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Peter's vision was symbolic of accepting the
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Gentiles. That's pretty much of a given, since
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > no one really disputes that clear fact.
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > However, it's disingenuous to say that God would
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > use the symbols of 'unclean' food, telling Peter
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > to "kill and eat" not only once, but three
        times,
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > and then say that it does not apply to food.
        The
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > clear parallel is there to accept ALL things
        that
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > God "hath cleansed, that call not thou common."
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Even though the 'unclean', 'common' food was
        being
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > used to symbolize the Gentiles, God clearly was
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > referring to the food when He said, "What God
        hath
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > cleansed, that call not thou common" because He
        > told
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Peter to "kill and eat" that food.
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Whether you can accept it or not, some things
        DID
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > change from the OT Mosaic law to the
        > Administration
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > of the Church, and that was one of them, just as
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > acceptance of the Gentiles was one. The only
        > thing
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > WE, as Gentiles, are forbidden to eat is "meats
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > offered to idols, and from blood, and from
        things
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > strangled..." (Acts 15:29)
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > If you believe you must continue to adhere to
        the
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Mosaic law of eating only 'kosher' foods, then
        you
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > are simply putting yourself under the law, and
        > when
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > you do that, you must obey ALL of the law. You
        > can't
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > just pick and choose which laws to obey and
        which
        > ones
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > to ignore, so are you offering regular animal
        > sacrifices
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > to God? Of course not, because that changed,
        too.
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Love in Christ,
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > Tim H
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>> > >>> > >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > Don wrote:
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > Hi Tad,
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > I know you already know this, but just
        > for the sake
        > > of
        > > > clarity, the statement you made below concerning Acts 10 is an
        > example
        > > > of why we must take a verse in it's context, so the real
        meaning
        > is
        > > > clear and concise.
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > That statement, "And a voice came unto
        > him again the
        > > > second time, What Elohim hath cleansed, make not thou common."
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > ... later shows what is meant in this
        > same context...
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > "Now while Peter was much perplexed in
        > himself what
        > > > the vision which he had seen might mean... the Spirit said unto
        > him,
        > > > Behold, three men seek thee. But arise, and get thee down, and
        go
        > > > with them, nothing doubting: for I have sent them...
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > and he said unto them, Ye yourselves
        > know how it is
        > > an
        > > > unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to join himself or come
        > unto
        > > > one of another nation; and yet unto me hath Elohim showe that I
        > > > should not call any man common or unclean...
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > It was clear to Peter what the Ruach
        > HaKodesh was
        > > > telling him in the vision. This wasn't giving him clearance to
        go
        > out
        > > > and immediately chomp down on an honkin' BLT sandwich. He knew
        > (as we
        > > > should by context) that it applied to non-jewish people
        desiring
        > to
        > > > become believers.
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > It is incorrect to try to apply this
        to
        > foods as
        > > being
        > > > suddenly kosher when they were specifically prohibited by God
        > (Eloah)
        > > > in the Torah.
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > Shalom in Y'shua,
        > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > Donimus
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > SPONSORED LINKS
        > Traditions
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Traditions&w1=Traditions&w2=Christian
        >
        ity+today&w3=Debate+topics&w4=Mere+christianity&w5=Presidential+debate
        &c=5
        > &s=107&.sig=pLFi_1EBoplUW41Z-9xrZQ> Christianity today
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Christianity+today&w1=Traditions&w2=C
        >
        hristianity+today&w3=Debate+topics&w4=Mere+christianity&w5=Presidentia
        l+de
        > bate&c=5&s=107&.sig=jvFxe2XHcINg59DVE_Aqxw> Debate topics
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Debate+topics&w1=Traditions&w2=Christ
        >
        ianity+today&w3=Debate+topics&w4=Mere+christianity&w5=Presidential+deb
        ate&
        > c=5&s=107&.sig=ySSVvaO7poHfcavT2366BQ>
        > Mere christianity
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Mere+christianity&w1=Traditions&w2=Ch
        >
        ristianity+today&w3=Debate+topics&w4=Mere+christianity&w5=Presidential
        +deb
        > ate&c=5&s=107&.sig=fxE3qZbVbfgcGBN6yHkDpA> Presidential debate
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Presidential+debate&w1=Traditions&w2=
        >
        Christianity+today&w3=Debate+topics&w4=Mere+christianity&w5=Presidenti
        al+d
        > ebate&c=5&s=107&.sig=cBVfiWeaGXwcxuWI8VF6Zg>
        >
        > ________________________________
        >
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        >
        > * Visit your group "TruthorTradition
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TruthorTradition> " on the web.
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > TruthorTradition-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:TruthorTradition-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
        subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
        >
        >
        > ________________________________
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.