date:20050729




And since it is the spiritual condition under 
discussion, this would be "spiritually dead" right JD?
 
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 01:27:09 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  
  
  That would be the word "dead" or the phrase " dead already"  
  --  
  kind of like your discussion with Bill at this point. 
  Jd  From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

  
  

  
  Izzy asks  
  >  Do you have a ?biblical term? that expresses man?s spiritual condition prior to receiving Christ as 
  Savior and Lord?  
   
  Okay, I will address your 
  question and then try to summarize my position. I chose not to answer your 
  question for the following reason: implicit in your wording is the assumption 
  that we can separate the spirit aspect of personhood from the other aspects, 
  the whole of which integrates to form what we call "persons," and that we can 
  then address that aspect in abstention of the others. I do not accept 
  that premise as it relates to our discussion, and therefore could not answer 
  your question in the form it was structured. 
   In other words, I stumped you, huh? 
  J 
  
   
  When the biblical authors speak to 
  living subjects of their present or prior state of death, they are speaking 
  metaphorically of their entire person; e.g., when Paul writes that his readers 
  had been dead in trespasses and sin, he is speaking of their entire state of 
  being and not just about their spiritual condition. The spirit aspect of their 
  personhood was no more dead and no more alive than the rest of their being. 
  So you think a person cannot be 
  spiritually dead until they are physically dead? If a person is physically 
  alive, he is also spiritually alive??? 
  He is speaking metaphorically 
  about the hopelessness and helplessness of their entire former 
  existence in the depravity of their fallen state. I mplicit in his use of 
  the term "dead" is the conveyance that they could do nothing of themselves to 
  remedy the fact that they were doomed in that former state. 
   Agreed, of course.  
  
   
  I hope this will satisfy your 
  request and trust that we have pretty much exhausted the need to continue this 
  discussion.  No, not really, but I 
  think you must be tuckered out, Bill.  I think if I keep pointing out the 
  holes in your theory, so to speak, you might get either really angry or have 
  to give up and agree with me once in a while.  
  J 
  
   
  Thank you for your patience and 
  the charity with which you conducted yourself. It is a pleasure to converse 
  with you when we are not nipping at each others heels. God bless 
  you,  Absolutely likewise, 
  Bill, and thanks, as it was enjoyable.  
  izzy
   
  Bill
   
     
judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the 
Lord,   
are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory,   
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


I prefer "you're right again, John"  to "that settles it,"  but I will take what I can get.   
 
Jed  -Original Message-From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:15:00 -0700 (PDT)Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



I cannot think of anything that book that conflicts with that statement. JD   
 
Well.
That settles it then.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



  



On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:22:23 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I see it,  they didn't.  "Death" in Genesis only refers to physical death.   
I cannot think of anything that book that conflicts with that statement. JD   
 
jt: I can JD - Look at the "mystery of godliness" in the 2nd Adam (1 Timothy 3:16)
God was manifested in the flesh
Justified or vindicated in the spirit
Why if the death was physical in the garden wasn't he justified in the flesh?
We are propagating the same error all over again.  
You are saying that God didn't mean what He said when He told Adam 
THE DAY you eat you shall surely die, not 960 yrs down the road.  
Note: A day is defined in Genesis lest we get to the 1,000 yr day speculations.  
Is God like human parents who threaten but don't follow through?   
 
It is always kind of humorous how you bob and weave through a discussion.  I raise a question
about the Genesis text  -  you assert that there IS an answer to be found in Genesis ("I can JD") and then proceed to ignore the Genesis text altogether.  You know full well that God can change His mind.   When Adam heard " you shall Shirely die  "  there is no doubt that he thought of physical death.  God simply changed His mind about this punishment.  it's called grace !!!
 
 
jd: I am saying that God, in His grace, changed His mind.   
Jere 18 makes it clear that He can do such.   
 
jt: When you are God you can do anything you want but why?
What evidence do you have that he changed his mind?
In Jeremiah 18:8 He only relents on condition that they repent.
 
You can establish rules for God's conduct all you want, Judy, but I will not buy any of it.  The point is this:   God can change His mind about anything.  Jere 18 presents a specific change of mind.   And God repented that he ever made man, in the days of Noah.   God changes His mind and when He first promised punishment, this change of mind is a blessing of grace   
 
jd: Could you help me find the reference in the OT when 
the writer finally got around to meaning something other than 
the inclusive of physical death?  
 
jt: A&E lost fellowship with God when they sinned and both were
banished from His garden - By Genesis 6:3 the gulf had gotten so 
wide that God is saying "My Spirit shall not strive with man  forever 
for he is flesh" and man's days were shortened to 120yrs (they are
even less now).  The statement "he is flesh" here does not mean
"he is a physical body"
 
In fact, it means that his whole existence centered around his fleshly nature, his body.   
 
jd: Is it not true that our bodies will be raised on that last day, 
transformed and (for some) presented with death in the "lake of fire?" 
 
jt: Yes, everyone will be raised on the last day, some to life eternal and 
others to everlasting death.  
 
jd: That death includes the whole man -  body, soul mind and spirit. 
 
jt: The object is for the soul to be saved from God's wrath JD which is against 
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men and the redeemed will have a
transformed body; no guarantee that it is just like the one you have right now
The disciples did not recognize Jesus on the road to Emmaus and when
he appears to John the beloved in the book of Revelation the one who once
leaned on his breast is terrified and falls on his face.
 
All of this might be true  --  but what body is transformed?  How earthly body.   Why does God not allow the physical body to remain in the grave?    BECAUSE MAN CAN LIVE (ETERNALLY) WITHOUT IT  (transformed, transfigured or whatever)!!   Our sould does not exist apart from our body.  
 
jd: I am kinda of like DM on this one  --  the more I think about it, the 
better I like it. 
 
jt: Why?  What's so great about the body you have now? 
 
Remember when I said that if I were to share all the miracles and blessings God has provided me, you (all) would be jealous)?    Well,  my body is one of those blessings     A magnificent declaration of God's creative powers!!!
 
judytThere are two C's in the christian lifeEither I am changing daily to be more like ChristOr I am being chastised by Him
 
I have another "C"   --charis, my dear, charis.
 
JD
 
 
 
 




Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

That would be the word "dead" or the phrase " dead already" -- kind of like your discussion with Bill at this point.
Jd -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 22:23:07 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

Izzy asks > Do you have a ?biblical term? that expresses man?s spiritual condition prior to receiving Christ as Savior and Lord?
Okay, I will address your question and then try to summarize my position. I chose not to answer your question for the following reason: implicit in your wording is the assumption that we can separate the spirit aspect of personhood from the other aspects, the whole of which integrates to form what we call "persons," and that we can then address that aspect in abstention of the others. I do not accept that premise as it relates to our discussion, and therefore could not answer your question in the form it was structured. In other words, I stumped you, huh? J
When the biblical authors speak to living subjects of their present or prior state of death, they are speaking metaphorically of their entire person; e.g., when Paul writes that his readers had been dead in trespasses and sin, he is speaking of their entire state of being and not just about their spiritual condition. The spirit aspect of their personhood was no more dead and no more alive than the rest of their being. So you think a person cannot be spiritually dead until they are physically dead? If a person is physically alive, he is also spiritually alive??? He is speaking metaphorically about the hopelessness and helplessness of their entire former existence in the depravity of their fallen state. I
mplicit in his use of the term "dead" is the conveyance that they could do nothing of themselves to remedy the fact that they were doomed in that former state. Agreed, of course.
I hope this will satisfy your request and trust that we have pretty much exhausted the need to continue this discussion. No, not really, but I think you must be tuckered out, Bill. I think if I keep pointing out the holes in your theory, so to speak, you might get either really angry or have to give up and agree with me once in a while. J
Thank you for your patience and the charity with which you conducted yourself. It is a pleasure to converse with you when we are not nipping at each others heels. God bless you, Absolutely likewise, Bill, and thanks, as it was enjoyable. izzy
Bill

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14


This bears repeating --  so here it is again  --  let it sink in.     -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:06:31 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14



by contrast, G-m's apply (theoretical) obedience training, manipulating a dog to a certain behavior, to the subjects of NT because they never volunteered to love Love..
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:00:38 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

..volunteering to love Love, like the Ap John does, to love him who volunteers to love me perpetually, unconditionally, is the normal modern response to the NT
 
it's rooted in (his) healing..
 
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:40:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.No one who lives in him keeps on sinning.1 John 3
acc to the Ap john, JC voluntarily removes sin--all of it, perpetually
i volunteer to love them guys
my committment to them has nothin' to do with the superficial results of involuntary compliance
the truth is that JCs command no one can keep--heal! -- is saving me
i believe this
healing is not conditioned on obedience
and, since God himself, who can't be manipulated to heal, heals voluntarily, perpetually, (then) all obedience training is a farce..
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:41:15 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

for humans biblical salvation is purely voluntary, like the Alamo--you wanna defend the KoG in history with JC, cross his line in the sand
 
this is obedience to him--salvation (via 'a crucifixion') you volunteer for is just that, voluntary
 
who, then, as a volunteer, has any right to compel the involuntary religious obedience of another?
 
while the G-m's (God-manipulators) among us do exactly that requiring y/our compliance by a certain force, ask 'compliance? to whom?'
 
i'd say these G-m types never volunteered for nothin' worth volunteerin' for and that's their real problem; FTR, neither God's nor mine
 
 
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:32:32 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



 
To argue that salvation is free but after the initial event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on several levels:
||
6.    [re: pronouncing] 'that what God could not do for man, man must do for himself !!'
||

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


I asked for examples of those who heard these words of Christ and were sent into all the world  (the 12 apostles).   They and the other evangelists, never used these very words  -  you must be born again in order to be saved.  Never.   Why?   We have thrown water baptism out as that sacrament that symbolizes our inclusion in Christ and have preached "the sinners prayer" as if this were a biblical teaching.   I would expect that if our doctrine were thiers of so many years ago, that we would talk or act like them on some level.  
 
JD 
 
   -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:31:14 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death






JD, I give you scripture (You must be born again, for example) and then you tell me it doesn?t count because there was a better translation meaning another thing entirely, or it was a nonbiblical term, or then you don?t care if it?s a biblical or not as long as it?s a biblical concept, or?izzy
 




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:44 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
 



 

 

So, no scripture.  Thanks for the admission.   Outer space? John 3:21  He who does the truth COMES TO THE LIGHT, that his deeds might be clearly seen,  that they have been done in God."  

 

In the above,  "He who does the truth"  is complimented by  "...they have been done in God."  We are ALREADY indwelt with the Spirit.   That is part of the reconciliation of all things.   Our acceptance of Christ,  our receiving of this gift is our turning to the LIGHT (repentance).   When we do that, it becomes  manifestly clear that God has been there all along.   This verse makes it clear that we are doing the truth BEFORE we come to the light and that this LIGHT reveals that all our works HAVE BEEN 
DONE in God.  

 

 JD
 -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:22:21 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

"from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth on earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



 

And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter to you?   

 

The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !!  (John 3:21).

 

JD

 
 -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 




Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  

 

JD

==

 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 

 

Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!


Thank you,  Apparently I do need some help.
 
Jd  -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:11:30 EDTSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!




In a message dated 7/28/2005 12:11:43 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Indeed  --  it does appear that my source is somewhat off.   And I paid $14.99 for the dern thing.  
 
I stand corrected
 
JD

Next time you have $14.95 to spend on a lousy book let me know and I will give you a list of better buys for your money.  :>)
Blainerb

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death









Izzy asks  >  Do you have a
“biblical term” that expresses man’s spiritual condition
prior to receiving Christ as Savior and Lord?  

 

Okay, I will address your question and then try
to summarize my position. I chose not to answer your question for the following
reason: implicit in your wording is the assumption that we can separate the
spirit aspect of personhood from the other aspects, the whole of which
integrates to form what we call "persons," and that we can then
address that aspect in abstention of the others. I do not accept that
premise as it relates to our discussion, and therefore could not answer your
question in the form it was structured.  In other
words, I stumped you, huh? J 

 

When the biblical authors speak to living subjects of
their present or prior state of death, they are speaking metaphorically of
their entire person; e.g., when Paul writes that his readers had been dead in
trespasses and sin, he is speaking of their entire state of being and not just
about their spiritual condition. The spirit aspect of their personhood was no
more dead and no more alive than the rest of their being. So you think a
person cannot be spiritually dead until they are physically dead? If a person
is physically alive, he is also spiritually alive??? He is
speaking metaphorically about the hopelessness and helplessness of their entire
former existence in the depravity of their fallen state. Implicit in his
use of the term "dead" is the conveyance that they could do nothing
of themselves to remedy the fact that they were doomed in that former state.  Agreed, of course.  

 

I hope this will satisfy your request and trust that
we have pretty much exhausted the need to continue this discussion.  No, not
really, but I think you must be tuckered out, Bill.  I think if I keep
pointing out the holes in your theory, so to speak, you might get either really
angry or have to give up and agree with me once in a while.  J 

 

Thank you for your patience and the charity with
which you conducted yourself. It is a pleasure to converse with you when we
are not nipping at each others heels. God bless you,  Absolutely
likewise, Bill, and thanks, as it was enjoyable.  izzy

 

Bill

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









We had an enjoyable family discussion
around the dinner table tonight about, among other things, how God is the
source of everything that exists in the universe, and how He is the one who
holds it all together by His word at every moment—from the vastness of
the universe to the quarks that make up the molecules.  The more we learn
about science, the more the word of God proves true.  Certainly in Him all
things consist—even your next breath depends upon His presence and grace. 
That doesn’t, however, mean that all humans are “in Christ”, (which
to me is the same thing as “Christ in you.”), just because they are
present in His creation/universe.  Neither are the slugs and spiders,
simply because they are created and exist by His permission/will.  To me “in
Christ” is a whole different thing.  izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:46
PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Col 1.16
For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is
before all things, and in Him all
things consist.

It
is not my opinion that matters here, Izzy. Please read the above and respond if
you like. As for my opinion, I believed that everything is reconciled in
Christ, but not everyone is willing to participate in that reconciliation --
the devil and bin Laden included. They and many others are refusing the
reconciliation of God in Christ. The devil in particular will forever refuse
that reconciliation (we have the end of the story as far as he is concerned).
This however does not negate the fact that God has re-gathered in one all
things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth -- in Him
(see Eph 1.10).

Bill

 

 







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 5:25 PM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



So even satan and osama bin laden are
“in Christ” in your opinion? iz

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



IF it were the same, then how could you have existed prior
to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ is the existence of everything.
Christ in you is exclusive in that he is present only in believers; hence their
hope of glory.





 





Bill





 





 







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 8:20 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



How's that? 

 







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR NOW!





 





Your "spirit" is growing stronger because of
Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is different than you in
Christ, in terms of your existence. 





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 8:04 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



And while I am metaphorically
“sitting with Christ in the heavenlies”, my physical body is
not—it is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting
better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than my
body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor to
express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be spiritually dead
w/o being physically dead? Of course.  izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and it's
getting older.





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 3:00 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



 

 







Iz: I'm sure there's a
lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me that our
physical bodies really are dying, Yes.







 

and you are speaking
only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ at the moment?
Izzy 

Well, if I understand
what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am talking about
your existence, your being, that which holds you together and sustains you, and
makes you real and gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or
of yourself. You ar

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

I cannot think of anything that book that conflicts with that statement. JD   
 
Well.
That settles it then.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



  



On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:22:23 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I see it,  they didn't.  "Death" in Genesis only refers to physical death.   
I cannot think of anything that book that conflicts with that statement. JD   
 
jt: I can JD - Look at the "mystery of godliness" in the 2nd Adam (1 Timothy 3:16)
God was manifested in the flesh
Justified or vindicated in the spirit
Why if the death was physical in the garden wasn't he justified in the flesh?
We are propagating the same error all over again.  
You are saying that God didn't mean what He said when He told Adam 
THE DAY you eat you shall surely die, not 960 yrs down the road.  
Note: A day is defined in Genesis lest we get to the 1,000 yr day speculations.  
Is God like human parents who threaten but don't follow through?   
 
It is always kind of humorous how you bob and weave through a discussion.  I raise a question
about the Genesis text  -  you assert that there IS an answer to be found in Genesis ("I can JD") and then proceed to ignore the Genesis text altogether.  You know full well that God can change His mind.   When Adam heard " you shall Shirely die  "  there is no doubt that he thought of physical death.  God simply changed His mind about this punishment.  it's called grace !!!
 
 
jd: I am saying that God, in His grace, changed His mind.   
Jere 18 makes it clear that He can do such.   
 
jt: When you are God you can do anything you want but why?
What evidence do you have that he changed his mind?
In Jeremiah 18:8 He only relents on condition that they repent.
 
You can establish rules for God's conduct all you want, Judy, but I will not buy any of it.  The point is this:   God can change His mind about anything.  Jere 18 presents a specific change of mind.   And God repented that he ever made man, in the days of Noah.   God changes His mind and when He first promised punishment, this change of mind is a blessing of grace...   
 
jd: Could you help me find the reference in the OT when 
the writer finally got around to meaning something other than 
the inclusive of physical death?  
 
jt: A&E lost fellowship with God when they sinned and both were
banished from His garden - By Genesis 6:3 the gulf had gotten so 
wide that God is saying "My Spirit shall not strive with man  forever 
for he is flesh" and man's days were shortened to 120yrs (they are
even less now).  The statement "he is flesh" here does not mean
"he is a physical body"
 
In fact, it means that his whole existence centered around his fleshly nature, his body.   
 
jd: Is it not true that our bodies will be raised on that last day, 
transformed and (for some) presented with death in the "lake of fire?" 
 
jt: Yes, everyone will be raised on the last day, some to life eternal and 
others to everlasting death.  
 
jd: That death includes the whole man -  body, soul mind and spirit. 
 
jt: The object is for the soul to be saved from God's wrath JD which is against 
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men and the redeemed will have a
transformed body; no guarantee that it is just like the one you have right now
The disciples did not recognize Jesus on the road to Emmaus and when
he appears to John the beloved in the book of Revelation the one who once
leaned on his breast is terrified and falls on his face.
 
All of this might be true  --  but what body is transformed?  How earthly body.   Why does God not allow the physical body to remain in the grave?    BECAUSE MAN CAN LIVE (ETERNALLY) WITHOUT IT  (transformed, transfigured or whatever)!!   Our sould does not exist apart from our body.  
 
jd: I am kinda of like DM on this one  --  the more I think about it, the 
better I like it. 
 
jt: Why?  What's so great about the body you have now? 
 
Remember when I said that if I were to share all the miracles and blessings God has provided me, you (all) would be jealous)?    Well,  my body is one of those blessings     A magnificent declaration of God's creative powers!!!
 
judytThere are two C's in the christian lifeEither I am changing daily to be more like ChristOr I am being chastised by Him
 
I have another "C"   --charis, my dear, charis.
 
JD
 
 
 
 


		 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14





..the point is that 
the G-m response is abnormal if not antiChrist in NT 
terms
 
if you don't 
believe it, experiment on your dog--get him to heal without getting sick of 
it
 
is your Bowser 
already sick? 
 
heal 
him!
 
g
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:06:31 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  by contrast, 
  G-m's apply (theoretical) obedience training, manipulating a dog to a 
  certain behavior, to the subjects of NT because they never volunteered to love 
  Love..
   
  On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:00:38 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
..volunteering to love Love, like the Ap John 
does, to love him who volunteers to love me perpetually, 
unconditionally, is the normal modern response to the 
NT
 
it's rooted 
in (his) healing..
 
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:40:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  
  Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is 
  lawlessness.But you know that he appeared so that he might take away 
  our sins. And in him is no sin.No one who lives in him keeps on 
  sinning.1 John 3
  acc to the Ap 
  john, JC voluntarily removes sin--all of it, 
  perpetually
  i volunteer 
  to love them guys
  my committment to them has nothin' to do with the 
  superficial results of involuntary compliance
  the truth 
  is that JCs command no one can keep--heal! -- is saving 
  me
  i believe 
  this
  healing is not 
  conditioned on obedience
  and, since God 
  himself, who can't be manipulated to heal, heals 
  voluntarily, perpetually, (then) all obedience training is a 
  farce..
  On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:41:15 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
for humans 
biblical salvation is purely voluntary, like the Alamo--you 
wanna defend the KoG in history with JC, 
cross his line in the sand
 
this is 
obedience to him--salvation (via 'a crucifixion') you 
volunteer for is just that, voluntary
 
who, 
then, as a volunteer, has any right to compel the involuntary 
religious obedience of another?
 
while the 
G-m's (God-manipulators) among us do exactly that requiring 
y/our compliance by a certain force, ask 'compliance? to 
whom?'
 
i'd say 
these G-m types never volunteered for nothin' worth 
volunteerin' for and that's their real problem; 
FTR, neither God's nor mine
 
 
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:32:32 -0400 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  
  
   
  To argue that salvation is free but 
  after the initial event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is 
  wrong on several levels:
  ||
  6.    [re: pronouncing] 'that what God could not do 
  for man, man must do for himself !!'
  ||

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


lol  -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:49:15 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



But we know Kevin don't we that interpretation is not the same as
"translation"
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:12:05 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Everytime you read your KJV, you are reading "changed" words, Kevin: 
this because you are reading a translation. 
 
Bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Thats always the line!
The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to more accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Here we have a perfect example of what modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out God.
 
I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 
   judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,   are changed into the same image from glory to glory,   even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14




by contrast, G-m's 
apply (theoretical) obedience training, manipulating a dog to a certain 
behavior, to the subjects of NT because they never volunteered to love 
Love..
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:00:38 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  ..volunteering to love Love, like the Ap John 
  does, to love him who volunteers to love me perpetually, 
  unconditionally, is the normal modern response to the 
  NT
   
  it's rooted 
  in (his) healing..
   
   
  On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:40:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  

Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is 
lawlessness.But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our 
sins. And in him is no sin.No one who lives in him keeps on 
sinning.1 John 3
acc to the Ap 
john, JC voluntarily removes sin--all of it, 
perpetually
i volunteer 
to love them guys
my committment to them has nothin' to do with the 
superficial results of involuntary compliance
the truth 
is that JCs command no one can keep--heal! -- is saving 
me
i believe 
this
healing is not 
conditioned on obedience
and, since God 
himself, who can't be manipulated to heal, heals voluntarily, 
perpetually, (then) all obedience training is a 
farce..
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:41:15 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  for humans 
  biblical salvation is purely voluntary, like the Alamo--you 
  wanna defend the KoG in history with JC, 
  cross his line in the sand
   
  this is 
  obedience to him--salvation (via 'a crucifixion') you volunteer for is 
  just that, voluntary
   
  who, 
  then, as a volunteer, has any right to compel the involuntary 
  religious obedience of another?
   
  while the 
  G-m's (God-manipulators) among us do exactly that requiring 
  y/our compliance by a certain force, ask 'compliance? to 
  whom?'
   
  i'd say 
  these G-m types never volunteered for nothin' worth volunteerin' 
  for and that's their real problem; FTR, neither God's nor 
  mine
   
   
  On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:32:32 -0400 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  


 
To argue that salvation is free but after the initial 
event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on 
several levels:
||
6.    [re: pronouncing] 'that what God could not do 
for man, man must do for himself !!'
||

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


  



On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:22:23 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I see it,  they didn't.  "Death" in Genesis only refers to physical death.   
I cannot think of anything that book that conflicts with that statement. JD   
 
jt: I can JD - Look at the "mystery of godliness" in the 2nd Adam (1 Timothy 3:16)
God was manifested in the flesh
Justified or vindicated in the spirit
Why if the death was physical in the garden wasn't he justified in the flesh?
We are propagating the same error all over again.  
You are saying that God didn't mean what He said when He told Adam 
THE DAY you eat you shall surely die, not 960 yrs down the road.  
Note: A day is defined in Genesis lest we get to the 1,000 yr day speculations.  
Is God like human parents who threaten but don't follow through?   
 
It is always kind of humorous how you bob and weave through a discussion.  I raise a question
about the Genesis text  -  you assert that there IS an answer to be found in Genesis ("I can JD") and then proceed to ignore the Genesis text altogether.  You know full well that God can change His mind.   When Adam heard " you shall Shirely die  "  there is no doubt that he thought of physical death.  God simply changed His mind about this punishment.  it's called grace !!!
 
 
jd: I am saying that God, in His grace, changed His mind.   
Jere 18 makes it clear that He can do such.   
 
jt: When you are God you can do anything you want but why?
What evidence do you have that he changed his mind?
In Jeremiah 18:8 He only relents on condition that they repent.
 
You can establish rules for God's conduct all you want, Judy, but I will not buy any of it.  The point is this:   God can change His mind about anything.  Jere 18 presents a specific change of mind.   And God repented that he ever made man, in the days of Noah.   God changes His mind and when He first promised punishment, this change of mind is a blessing of grace..   
 
jd: Could you help me find the reference in the OT when 
the writer finally got around to meaning something other than 
the inclusive of physical death?  
 
jt: A&E lost fellowship with God when they sinned and both were
banished from His garden - By Genesis 6:3 the gulf had gotten so 
wide that God is saying "My Spirit shall not strive with man  forever 
for he is flesh" and man's days were shortened to 120yrs (they are
even less now).  The statement "he is flesh" here does not mean
"he is a physical body"
 
In fact, it means that his whole existence centered around his fleshly nature, his body.   
 
jd: Is it not true that our bodies will be raised on that last day, 
transformed and (for some) presented with death in the "lake of fire?" 
 
jt: Yes, everyone will be raised on the last day, some to life eternal and 
others to everlasting death.  
 
jd: That death includes the whole man -  body, soul mind and spirit. 
 
jt: The object is for the soul to be saved from God's wrath JD which is against 
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men and the redeemed will have a
transformed body; no guarantee that it is just like the one you have right now
The disciples did not recognize Jesus on the road to Emmaus and when
he appears to John the beloved in the book of Revelation the one who once
leaned on his breast is terrified and falls on his face.
 
All of this might be true  --  but what body is transformed?  How earthly body.   Why does God not allow the physical body to remain in the grave?    BECAUSE MAN CAN LIVE (ETERNALLY) WITHOUT IT  (transformed, transfigured or whatever)!!   Our sould does not exist apart from our body.  
 
jd: I am kinda of like DM on this one  --  the more I think about it, the 
better I like it. 
 
jt: Why?  What's so great about the body you have now? 
 
Remember when I said that if I were to share all the miracles and blessings God has provided me, you (all) would be jealous)?    Well,  my body is one of those blessings     A magnificent declaration of God's creative powers!!!
 
judytThere are two C's in the christian lifeEither I am changing daily to be more like ChristOr I am being chastised by Him
 
I have another "C"   --charis, my dear, charis.
 
JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14




..volunteering to love Love, like the Ap John 
does, to love him who volunteers to love me perpetually, 
unconditionally, is the normal modern response to the 
NT
 
it's rooted 
in (his) healing..
 
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:40:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  
  Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is 
  lawlessness.But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our 
  sins. And in him is no sin.No one who lives in him keeps on sinning.1 
  John 3
  acc to the Ap john, 
  JC voluntarily removes sin--all of it, perpetually
  i volunteer 
  to love them guys
  my committment to them has nothin' to do with the superficial 
  results of involuntary compliance
  the truth 
  is that JCs command no one can keep--heal! -- is saving 
  me
  i believe 
  this
  healing is not 
  conditioned on obedience
  and, since God 
  himself, who can't be manipulated to heal, heals voluntarily, 
  perpetually, (then) all obedience training is a 
  farce..
  On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:41:15 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
for humans 
biblical salvation is purely voluntary, like the Alamo--you 
wanna defend the KoG in history with JC, 
cross his line in the sand
 
this is 
obedience to him--salvation (via 'a crucifixion') you volunteer for is 
just that, voluntary
 
who, 
then, as a volunteer, has any right to compel the involuntary religious 
obedience of another?
 
while the G-m's 
(God-manipulators) among us do exactly that requiring 
y/our compliance by a certain force, ask 'compliance? to 
whom?'
 
i'd say 
these G-m types never volunteered for nothin' worth volunteerin' 
for and that's their real problem; FTR, neither God's nor 
mine
 
 
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:32:32 -0400 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  
  
   
  To argue that salvation is free but after the initial 
  event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on several 
  levels:
  ||
  6.    [re: pronouncing] 'that what God could not do for 
  man, man must do for himself !!'
  ||

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


 
John 3:21 says what it says and verse 31 does not contradict it.   The question is this:  when is birth from above (verse 31) a reality in my (our) life.   The Spirit, since the incarnation and the cross,  is a part of who we are       all of us.   We can accept this gift or not  but it is a part of our very ontology.  "Born of the Spirit"  is just that  --  we proceed from the Spirit.   It is there, within,  and in our acceptance of this gift, we proceed to the kind of life God desires for us  --  hence, we are born OF the Spirit.
 
JD
 
  -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:54:01 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



There is scripture JD, Izzy may not have had time right now to find it.
Jesus spells it out for us in John 3:31:
 
"He who comes from above is above all; he wo is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth.
He who comes from heaven is above all" 
 
So there you go .. If you are not born again of the Spirit you are earthly - a "natural man".
 
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:44:21 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



So, no scripture.  Thanks for the admission.   Outer space? John 3:21  He who does the truth COMES TO THE LIGHT, that his deeds might be clearly seen,  that they have been done in God."  
 
In the above,  "He who does the truth"  is complimented by  "...they have been done in God."  We are ALREADY indwelt with the Spirit.   That is part of the reconciliation of all things.   Our acceptance of Christ,  our receiving of this gift is our turning to the LIGHT (repentance).   When we do that, it becomes  manifestly clear that God has been there all along.   This verse makes it clear that we are doing the truth BEFORE we come to the light and that this LIGHT reveals that all our works HAVE BEEN DONE in God.  
 
 JD -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:22:21 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



"from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth on earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



 
And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter to you?   
 
The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !!  (John 3:21).
 
JD
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
   judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,   are changed into the same image from glory to glory,   even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14





Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is 
lawlessness.But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our 
sins. And in him is no sin.No one who lives in him keeps on sinning.1 
John 3
acc to the Ap john, 
JC voluntarily removes sin--all of it, perpetually
i volunteer 
to love them guys
my committment to them has nothin' to do with the superficial 
results of involuntary compliance
the truth 
is that JCs command no one can keep--heal! -- is saving 
me
i believe 
this
healing is not 
conditioned on obedience
and, since God 
himself, who can't be manipulated to heal, heals voluntarily, 
perpetually, (then) all obedience training is a farce..
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:41:15 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  for humans 
  biblical salvation is purely voluntary, like the Alamo--you 
  wanna defend the KoG in history with JC, 
  cross his line in the sand
   
  this is obedience 
  to him--salvation (via 'a crucifixion') you volunteer for is just 
  that, voluntary
   
  who, 
  then, as a volunteer, has any right to compel the involuntary religious 
  obedience of another?
   
  while the G-m's 
  (God-manipulators) among us do exactly that requiring 
  y/our compliance by a certain force, ask 'compliance? to 
  whom?'
   
  i'd say 
  these G-m types never volunteered for nothin' worth volunteerin' for 
  and that's their real problem; FTR, neither God's nor 
  mine
   
   
  On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:32:32 -0400 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  


 
To argue that salvation is free but after the initial 
event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on several 
levels:
||
6.    [re: pronouncing] 'that what God could not do for 
man, man must do for himself !!'
||

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

I fixed a typo. 

- Original Message - 
From: Bill Taylor 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Col 1.16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and 
that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or 
principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for 
Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things 
consist.
It is not my opinion that matters here, 
Izzy. Please read the above and respond if you like. As for my opinion, I 
believe that everything is reconciled in Christ, but not everyone is willing to 
participate in that reconciliation -- the devil and bin Laden included. They and 
many others are refusing the reconciliation of God in Christ. The devil in 
particular will forever refuse that reconciliation (we have the end of the story 
as far as he is concerned). This however does not negate the fact that God has 
re-gathered in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are 
on earth -- in Him (see Eph 1.10).
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:25 PM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death

  So even satan and 
  osama bin laden are in Christ in your opinion? 
  iz

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:30 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death

  IF it were the same, then how 
  could you have existed prior to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ 
  is the existence of everything. Christ in you is exclusive in that he is 
  present only in believers; hence their hope of 
  glory.

  Bill

- Original Message - 

From: ShieldsFamily 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 8:20 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

How's that? 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS 
YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR 
NOW!

Your "spirit" is growing 
stronger because of Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is 
different than you in Christ, in terms of your existence. 

Bill

  - Original Message - 

  From: ShieldsFamily 

  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM

  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

  And while I am 
  metaphorically sitting with Christ in the heavenlies, my physical body 
  is notit is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is 
  getting better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different 
  place than my body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use 
  a metaphor to express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be 
  spiritually dead w/o being physically dead? Of course.  
  izzy

  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death

  Izzy, let's not be silly. 
  You've got one body and it's getting 
  older.

  Bill

- Original Message - 

From: ShieldsFamily 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: 
Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Iz: I'm sure 
there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with 
me that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

and you 
are speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with 
Christ at the moment? 
Izzy 

Well, if 
I understand what you are getting at, this would not be 
metaphorical. I am talking about your existence, your being, that 
which holds you together and sustains you, and makes you real and 
gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or of 
yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither 
does anyone e

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Yes, "Pantheism" means "all is God." 
That, however, is not what I am suggesting. As to your other comment, I will 
direct you to the post I sent to Izzy.
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Excuse me but isn't it pantheism when God and the 
  creation are one and the same?
  Our God is transcendent, that is, above and apart 
  from the Creation.  Only the New
  Creation (which is spiritual) is in Christ.  
  jt
   
  On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:25:17 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
  writes:
  

So even satan and 
osama bin laden are in Christ in your opinion? 
iz
 




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:30 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death
 

IF it were the same, then how 
could you have existed prior to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ 
is the existence of everything. Christ in you is exclusive in that he is 
present only in believers; hence their hope of 
glory.

 

Bill

 

 

  
  - Original Message - 
  
  
  From: ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 8:20 AM
  
  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
  How's that? 
  
   
  
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG 
  AS YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR 
  NOW!
  
   
  
  Your "spirit" is growing 
  stronger because of Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is 
  different than you in Christ, in terms of your existence. 
  
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: 
Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
And while I am 
metaphorically sitting with Christ in the heavenlies, my physical body 
is notit is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is 
getting better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different 
place than my body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can 
use a metaphor to express something that is not a physical reality. Can 
one be spiritually dead w/o being physically dead? Of course.  
izzy
 




From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill 
TaylorSent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 7:03 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death
 

Izzy, let's not be silly. 
You've got one body and it's getting 
older.

 

Bill

  
  - Original Message 
  - 
  
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM
  
  Subject: 
  RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
   
   
  
  
  
  Iz: I'm sure 
  there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing 
  with me that our physical bodies really are dying, 
  Yes.
  

  
   
  and you 
  are speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with 
  Christ at the moment? 
  Izzy 
  
  Well, 
  if I understand what you are getting at, this would not be 
  metaphorical. I am talking about your existence, your being, that 
  which holds you together and sustains you, and makes you real and 
  gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or of 
  yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither 
  does anyone else have this power. All existence is in Christ 
  Jesus. It is 
  in him that the real you exists. 
  Bill 
   
   
  Izzy 
  responds: So you are not be

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





Col 1.16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and 
that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or 
principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for 
Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things 
consist.
It is not my opinion that matters here, 
Izzy. Please read the above and respond if you like. As for my opinion, I 
believed that everything is reconciled in Christ, but not everyone is willing to 
participate in that reconciliation -- the devil and bin Laden included. They and 
many others are refusing the reconciliation of God in Christ. The devil in 
particular will forever refuse that reconciliation (we have the end of the story 
as far as he is concerned). This however does not negate the fact that God has 
re-gathered in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are 
on earth -- in Him (see Eph 1.10).
Bill
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:25 PM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  So even satan and 
  osama bin laden are in Christ in your opinion? 
  iz
   
  
  
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:30 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  IF it were the same, then how 
  could you have existed prior to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ 
  is the existence of everything. Christ in you is exclusive in that he is 
  present only in believers; hence their hope of 
  glory.
  
   
  
  Bill
  
   
  
   
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 8:20 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
How's that? 

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS 
YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR 
NOW!

 

Your "spirit" is growing 
stronger because of Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is 
different than you in Christ, in terms of your existence. 


 

Bill

  
  - Original Message - 
  
  
  From: ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM
  
  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
  And while I am 
  metaphorically sitting with Christ in the heavenlies, my physical body 
  is notit is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is 
  getting better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different 
  place than my body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use 
  a metaphor to express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be 
  spiritually dead w/o being physically dead? Of course.  
  izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  Izzy, let's not be silly. 
  You've got one body and it's getting 
  older.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: 
Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



Iz: I'm sure 
there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with 
me that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

  

 
and you 
are speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with 
Christ at the moment? 
Izzy 

Well, if 
I understand what you are getting at, this would not be 
metaphorical. I am talking about your existence, your being, that 
which holds you together and sustains you, and makes you real and 
gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or of 
yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither 
does anyone else have this power. All existence is in Christ 
Jesus. It is in 
him that the real you exists. Bill 
 
 
Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Excuse me but isn't it pantheism when God and the 
creation are one and the same?
Our God is transcendent, that is, above and apart from 
the Creation.  Only the New
Creation (which is spiritual) is in Christ.  
jt
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:25:17 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
writes:

  
  So even satan and 
  osama bin laden are “in Christ” in your opinion? 
  iz
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 
  2005 8:30 AMTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  IF it were the same, then how 
  could you have existed prior to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ 
  is the existence of everything. Christ in you is exclusive in that he is 
  present only in believers; hence their hope of 
  glory.
  
   
  
  Bill
  
   
  
   
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 8:20 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
How's that? 

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 
AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS 
YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR 
NOW!

 

Your "spirit" is growing 
stronger because of Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is 
different than you in Christ, in terms of your existence. 


 

Bill

  
  - Original Message - 
  
  
  From: ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM
  
  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
  And while I am 
  metaphorically “sitting with Christ in the heavenlies”, my physical body 
  is not—it is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is 
  getting better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different 
  place than my body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use 
  a metaphor to express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be 
  spiritually dead w/o being physically dead? Of course.  
  izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  Izzy, let's not be silly. 
  You've got one body and it's getting 
  older.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: 
Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



Iz: I'm sure 
there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with 
me that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

  

 
and you 
are speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with 
Christ at the moment? 
Izzy 

Well, if 
I understand what you are getting at, this would not be 
metaphorical. I am talking about your existence, your being, that 
which holds you together and sustains you, and makes you real and 
gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or of 
yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither 
does anyone else have this power. All existence is in Christ 
Jesus. It is in 
him that the real you exists. Bill 
 
 
Izzy 
responds: So you are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL 
BODY being currently risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? 
Really! 
 
 
 
 

 
     
judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the 
Lord,   
are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory,   
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









JD, I give you scripture (You must be born
again, for example) and then you tell me it doesn’t count because there
was a better translation meaning another thing entirely, or it was a
nonbiblical term, or then you don’t care if it’s a biblical or not
as long as it’s a biblical concept, or…izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:44
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 







 





 





So, no scripture.  Thanks for the
admission.   Outer space? John 3:21  He
who does the truth COMES TO THE LIGHT, that his deeds might be clearly
seen,  that they have been done in God."  





 





In the above,  "He who does the truth" 
is complimented by  "...they have been done in
God."  We are ALREADY indwelt
with the Spirit.   That is part of the reconciliation of all things.   Our acceptance of
Christ,  our receiving of this gift is our turning to the LIGHT (repentance).   When we do
that, it becomes  manifestly clear that God has been
there all along.   This verse makes it clear that we are doing the
truth BEFORE we come to the light and that this LIGHT reveals that all our
works HAVE BEEN DONE in God.  





 





 JD



 
-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005
09:22:21 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



"from below" is the alternative
to "from above"--physical birth on earth.  Your last sentence is
from outer space.  iz

 







From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death







 





And where is this "born from below" in the
text,  or does this matter to you?   





 





The "birth from above"  or "new
birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our
lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish 
--   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !! 
(John 3:21).





 





JD





 



 
-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 









Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from
above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation
actually uses "born from above" rather than "born
again."  





 





JD





==











 Terry wrote:  Born
again is correct. 





 





Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time,
and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time
born "again"?

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









So even satan and osama bin laden are “in
Christ” in your opinion? iz

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:30
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



IF it were the same, then how could you have existed prior
to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ is the existence of everything.
Christ in you is exclusive in that he is present only in believers; hence their
hope of glory.





 





Bill





 





 







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 8:20 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



How's that? 

 







From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR NOW!





 





Your "spirit" is growing stronger because of
Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is different than you in
Christ, in terms of your existence. 





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 8:04 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



And while I am metaphorically
“sitting with Christ in the heavenlies”, my physical body is
not—it is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting
better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than my
body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor to
express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be spiritually dead
w/o being physically dead? Of course.  izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and it's
getting older.





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 3:00 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



 

 







Iz: I'm sure there's a
lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me that our
physical bodies really are dying, Yes.







 

and you are speaking
only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ at the moment?
Izzy 

Well, if I understand
what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am talking about
your existence, your being, that which holds you together and sustains you, and
makes you real and gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or
of yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither does anyone
else have this power. All existence is in Christ Jesus. It is in him that the real you exists. Bill 

 

 

Izzy responds: So you
are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY being currently
risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


some obscure biblical passage 
 
See "Mormon Doctrine" it says under the heading - Angel of Light - "The Devil"
So why does your Intro in the D&C identify Moroni as an "angel of Light" or as Bruce says THE DEVIL? No response from you guys on this one?
 
What do you mean OBSCURE? and maybe you should have said passage"S"
EXODUS 7 And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Show a miracle for you: then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent. And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as the LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent. Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments.

HAVE YOU BEEN DELUDED? 2 Thes 2 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed
 not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
MK 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
 
SINCE U ARE SO INTERESTED IN SIGNS
I was wondering if you could tell us about the SIGNS of your APOSTLES?

HOLY BIBLE: Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



In a message dated 7/28/2005 8:26:40 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Satan comes as an angel of light deceiving with miracles also.  

Blainerb:  I keep hearing this--but other than some obscure biblical passage suggesting it might be true, what other evidence is there that Satan does this sort of thing commonly.  He must have done it a lot of times recently, changing his appearance each time, and having a buddy with him from time to time, since Joseph Smith saw not only God and his Son Jesus Christ standing together in a column of brilliant light, but he saw Moroni numerous times, who could enter into a house through the ceiling, and disappear the same way, he and Oliver Cowdery saw Moses, who committed to him the keys for the gathering of Israel, they saw Elijah, come to fulfill the prophecy in the last chapter of  Malachi, they saw Elias, come to restore the keys to the gospel of Abraham, and prior to this but on the same day, they saw Jesus Christ  in His glory standing on a pavement of pure gold.  All this, not to mention the appearance of John the Baptist when he restored the
 Aaronic Priesthood on the banks of the Susquehanna River, and Peter, James and John later when the Higher PH was restored.  On that occasion, by the way, Satan did try to appear as an angel of light, but was detected by Michael, the archangel, and sent scurrying on his way.  Wow!!  That Satan is a real changeling!  They should hire him for Star Wars movies.  He could alternately pose as Luke Skywalker, Princess Leah, Yoda, Chubaka, and Darth Vader.  :>)
		 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] The LDS Jesus needed to be saved!

Please do
 
Why did the LDS Jesus need to be saved?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



In a message dated 7/28/2005 12:06:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH:  Sometimes you simply entice me too much, Kevin.  As you know, I feel no need to feed the monster in you that wants to attack my beliefs.  Hence, I've avoided responding to your posts for season.   However, this one surely has me itching to respond.  Wish somebody else were interested in what I'd like to say to in reply!

Go ahead just this once Dave,  I read all of your posts-- :>)
Blainerb__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!

So using LDS "Logic"
We see without a DOUBT the RCC "MUST BE THE ONE TRUE CHURCH"[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Blainerb: Interesting Dave, thanks--I have copied a part of one of the below site addresses for the quick and easy perusal of TTr's:

Here's the 2005 list of the largest U.S. denominations:
1. The Catholic Church - 67,259,768
2. Southern Baptist Convention - 16,439,603
3. The United Methodist Church - 8,251,175
4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - 5,503,192
5. The Church of God in Christ - 5,449, 875
6. National Baptist Convention, U.S.A., Inc. - 5,000,000
7. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America - 4,984,925
8. National Baptist Convention of America, Inc. - 3,500,000
9. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) - 3,241,309
10. Assemblies of God - 2,729,562
11. African Methodist Episcopal Church - 2,500,000
12. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America - 2,500,000
13. Progressive National Baptist Convention - 2,500,000
14. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS) - 2,488,936
15. Episcopal Church - 2,320,221
16. Churches of Christ - 1,500,000
17. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America - 1,500,000
18. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Inc. - 1,500,000
19. American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. - 1,433,075
20. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church - 1,432,795
21. United Church of Christ - 1,296,652
22. Baptist Bible Fellowship International - 1,200,000
23. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ - 1,071,616
24. Jehovah's Witnesses - 1,041,030
25. The Orthodox Church in America - 1,000,000
Philip E. Jenks of the National Council of Churches contributed to this story. The 2005 Yearbook of American & Canadian Churches can be ordered at www.electronicchurch.org/order/eorder.
In a message dated 7/27/2005 10:54:49 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH: Your numbers seem a little low, John. How old are they? Here's one from 3 years ago that is a bit higher..http://www.religioscope..com/info/notes/2002_020_US_church_stat.htmAnd here is another that is from just a few months agohttp://news.ucc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=54[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

FYI - The Mormon Church is the 8t largest denom in the US with 2, 787,000 adherents.
Churches of Christ in 9th with 2,503,000 members. Within the US, growth rates for both groups are nearly flat line. In foreign countries, however, Mormons have a very strong presence (somewhere around 11 to 13 million) will the Churches of Christ have only a few hundred thousands. I mention C of C because of the association this church has with the beginnings of the Mormon church (IMO).
JD

__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

God created billions of souls for the express purpose of sending them to hell 
 
WRONG 
Framing the discussion with your evil thoughts, does not make them God's thoughts:
2 PT 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
 
AND HE BACKED IT UP WITH HIS OWN BLOOD!
Acts 20:28 the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
 
JN 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
And remember you MUST be Born "Above"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 
Blainer:   What I hear you saying is that God created billions of souls for the express purpose of sending them to hell because they did not get a chance to hear the truth and accept Jesus Christ, confess him with their mouths, then continue about their daily sinning, but with a renewed heart full of hope of going to heaven.  :>)
 
"They worship me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me."
 
In a message dated 7/27/2005 8:50:59 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 This traditional Christian faith is not just narrow, but extremely so. 
Don't you just hate those Narrow Minded Christians?
Who was it that said?
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 
Blainerb:  What I hear Kevin saying is that he wants to eat, drink and be merry, but still be saved.  He wants to have his cake and eat it too.  His doctrine that all who confess Christ go to heaven basically means there is no hell for Christians, just for others who did not confess Christ, such as the billions of Chinese, Africans, Indians, etc., etc., etc., children included.   This traditional Christian faith is not just narrow, but extremely so. The same psychology was what led to Black slaves being defined as soulless, to Jews being scapegoated, to the American Indian being esteemed as nothing--killing one dealt with legally about the same as if you killed a dog.

 __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Thanks Blaine, that reminds me.
LDS ETERNAL UNIVERSE, PROGRESSION is
BIBLICALLY UNTENABLE
Science tells us for every effect there is a cause.
The God of the Bible is the Cause of ALL that exists
The god of Mormonism comes out of what already existed, so what is the root cause?
Ther God of the Bible can CREATE (He created the Universe & ALL THINGS therein )
Gen. 1:1; Is. 66:1-2; Ps. 33:6-9; Jn. 1:3; Acts 4:24; 17:24-25; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:2
The god of the BoM just organizes and CHANGES what is already there!
BoM postulates a Beginningless Creation ( Unscientific as all things wind down therefore the Universe can not be Eternal)
ETERNAL PROGRESSION is PHILOSOPHICALLY UNTENABLE
Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland points out that, an actual infinite is a timeless totality which neither increases nor decreases in the number of members it contains. On the other hand, a potential infinite increases its number through time by adding new numbers to the series.
In order to be INFINITE there must be NO Beginning!
SCIENTIFICALLY UNTENABLE
The Second Law of Thermodynamics
we know that the universe cannot be eternal; it could not have been dissipating forever. If it had been eternally dissipating, it would have run down long ago..Working backwards, the [second law of thermodynamics] clearly points to a beginning. Fred Heeren, Show Me God: What the Message From Space is Telling Us About God (Wheeling, IL: Searchlight Publications, 1995) 103. (too bad lance is not around as this is nice reading)
BIG BANG COSMOLOGY
time itself must have a beginning. Steven Hawking ( space-time theorem of general relativity.) as quoted in Hugh Ross, Creator and the Cosmos (Colorado Springs: Navpress, 1995) 52.
"The study of physics tells us that matter and time and space must all occur together: if there is no matter, there can be no space or time eitherTherefore, when God created the universe he also created time.Time, therefore does not have existence in itself, but, like the rest of creation, depends on Gods eternal being and power to keep it existing" Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994) 169
The God of the Bible is the CREATOR & CAUSE of that UNIVERSE & TIME
The god of the BoM is Held Bound by that Universe.
Just one more FATAL problem with Mormon Theology
Who came first God or man?
Since God NEEDS to be a man first to progress from, BUT the man NEEDS a God to ORGANIZE the elements into an Earth where he can progress
How do LDS get around this FATAL FLAW?
"There has always existed a boundless infinitude of space...Intermingled with this space there exist all the varieties of the elements, properties, or things of which intelligence takes cognizance; which elements or things taken altogether compose what is called the Universe...The elements of all these properties or things are eternal, uncreated, self-existing. Not one particle can be added to them by creative power. Neither can one particle be diminished or annihilated." Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology (Salt Lake City: George Q. Cannon & Sons Co., 1891) 44.
"The elements are eternal. That which has a beginning will surely have an end; take a ring, it is without beginning or end -- cut it for a beginning place and at the same time you will have an ending place" Richard C. Gilbraith, Scriptural Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Desert Book Co., 1993) 205.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

A Mormon doctrine relating to the body and the spirit--check it out for what it is worth to you: (Jesus Christ speaking:)
The spirit of truth is of God. I am the spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fullness of truth, yea, even of all truth;
And no man receiveth a fullness of truth unless he keepeth His (the father's) commandments.
He that keepeth His commandments receiveth truth and light and knoweth all things.
Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.
All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise, there is no existence.
Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.
And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation, for
Man is spirit.
The elements are eternal, and spirit and element inseparably connected receive a fullness of joy, and
when separated, man cannot receive a fullness of joy. The elements are the tabernacle of God, even temples, and
whatsoever temple is defiled, God shall destroy that temple.
D&C 93:26-35
In a message dated 7/27/2005 6:50:14 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

You may have something here -- I don't know . But thanks for your input.
Jd -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Izzy asks  >  Do you have a 
biblical term that expresses mans spiritual condition prior to receiving 
Christ as Savior and Lord?  
 
Okay, I will address your question and 
then try to summarize my position. I chose not to answer your question for the 
following reason: implicit in your wording is the assumption that we can 
separate the spirit aspect of personhood from the other aspects, the whole of 
which integrates to form what we call "persons," and that we can then address 
that aspect in abstention of the others. I do not accept that premise as it 
relates to our discussion, and therefore could not answer your question in the 
form it was structured. 
 
When the biblical authors speak to living 
subjects of their present or prior state of death, they are speaking 
metaphorically of their entire person; e.g., when Paul writes that his readers 
had been dead in trespasses and sin, he is speaking of their entire state of 
being and not just about their spiritual condition. The spirit aspect of their 
personhood was no more dead and no more alive than the rest of their being. He 
is speaking metaphorically about the hopelessness and helplessness of their 
entire former existence in the depravity of their fallen state. Implicit in 
his use of the term "dead" is the conveyance that they could do nothing of 
themselves to remedy the fact that they were doomed in that former 
state.
 
I hope this will satisfy your request and 
trust that we have pretty much exhausted the need to continue this 
discussion.
 
Thank you for your patience and the charity 
with which you conducted yourself. It is a pleasure to converse with you when 
we are not nipping at each others heels. God bless 
you,
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:27 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Just when I think I've cornered you into acknowledging the 
  obvious you quit playing.  Oh, well  
  iz
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:22 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: 
  Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
  I am not interested in going down the same road 
  again, so I will abstain from answering your question.
   
  God's blessings,
   
  Bill
   
  By the way, I think I understand your position. 
  Thank you for expressing it.
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:09 
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death


My view is more 
correctly this: spiritual death is simply the pre-quickened (ie: 
born-again) spiritual state of any person.  They are not yet awakened 
to things of the Holy Spirit.  Scripture holds no real interest for 
them compared to the philosophies of men.  They have no grasp of true 
spiritual concepts.  It is literal in that it is true.  But it is 
not final until actual physical death.  Do you understand what I am 
saying? I am trying to express my viewnot to convince you.  I would 
use another term if it expressed what I mean in the same way. Do you have a 
biblical term that expresses mans spiritual condition prior to receiving 
Christ as Savior and Lord? Or do you think there is no such condition? 
 izzy
 




From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
On Behalf Of Bill 
TaylorSent: Friday, July 
29, 2005 7:13 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death
 

No, my point was firstly that it 
was a non-biblical term -- so be honest enough to recognize that you too are 
putting your trust in a "doctrine of man"; and secondly that it 
was inaccurate -- if what you are actually holding to is the idea 
of a literal spiritual death.

 

Bill

  
  - Original Message - 
  
  
  From: ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 3:17 AM
  
  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
   
   
  
  
  
   
  

  
   BT:  Paul tells us 
  that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all 
  things have their being or ontological 
  There you go 
  using one of those nonbiblical words, Bill. 
  I had said 
  something the other day in reference to our ontological status in 
  Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what I was 
  talking about. I used the term here to give that first statement some 
  context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical 
  terms to speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has neve

Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'

Emotional reactions can not be resolved with FACTS and LOGIC!
 
"I know the church is True"
"I know the church is True"

"I know the church is True"
"I know the church is True".[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



In a message dated 7/27/2005 6:42:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

IT is not FAITH IN SPITE of the FACTS.
 
A true faith reflects REALITY!
It is not like some LDS believe "God took away the plates and made it look like they were not real so we could have more faith"

Blainerb  It's what we are here for--to have our faith tested. 
Blessed are those who have seen and have believed, but more blessed are those who have not seen yet have believed.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

A Jesuit attempt on King James' life was discovered when 36 barrels of gunpowder were found in the cellar of Westminster palace where King James was to speak in a few hours.  Guy Fawkes and 3 other Roman Soldiers of fortune had taken an oath to assassinate the King.  Their pledge was sealed with a solemn communion service, served by Jesuit priest, Father John Gerard, according to trial testimony later.  These men were all found guilty and sentenced to death. (Final Authority, William Grady, (p189‑191) 
Real Audio of the book is here: 
see "Enter, The Jesuits" 
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Grady/Final_Authority.html
The lesson and application for today's Bible‑believing pastor is all too clear. Any preacher who takes his stand for the King James Bible, versus all the other Alexandrian Egyptian text Bibles (NIV, NASB, NKJV) will also find 36 barrels of gunpowder under his feet, sooner or later! With this background, let us show why we believe the King James Bible is SUPERIOR to the newer Bible versions today!
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Thanks Kevin!
Every day is a learning experience. I had no idea that terrorism in the UK was just as rife in that day - or that Guy Fawkes was a good RC.  One never knows what you will dig up, it's exciting !!!  jt
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 08:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

I guess Guy Fawkes did not like the KJV either.http://www.present-truth.org/KJV-HB/KJV-Bible.htm
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Good Morning David, you write:
Judy wrote: Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this one and you need to repent.
 
DM: I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read this one this morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like this. Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and your inability to make your case Biblically.
 
jt: I don't like it either David but there is some background here that you are 
not aware of that I will address offline.
 
I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to Augustine and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read Augustine.  He is saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and have adopted some of his viewpoints without realizing it.  How?  Because you live in this world and have grown up around ministers and school systems that have been touched by him in one way or another.
 
jt: Then he is saying the same as what Lance would harp on constantly which is
that noone can know what they think they know (if it conflicts with his doctrine) which
contradicts scripture itself because it is written "The spiritual man judges ALL things 
yet he himself is rightly judged by noone" (1 Cor 2:15)
 
Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to say to you, "Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your mind?  Negative thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about this name?  Who taught it to you? 
 
jt: I don't know much of anything about Benedict Arnold, in fact I just had to ask my
husband who he was.  Guy Fawkes would mean more to me since I was raised in the
British system and we would have a bonfire on Guy Fawkes day.
Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you learned about a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a concept of this name without formal training.  I myself do not know where I adopted the negative thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that it came through the school system and society along the way.  Ultimately, in our generation, there are some historians responsible for developing the kind of view that we have about this name.  We may never have read this historian ourselves, but through teachers or the news media or some other secondary source, we adopted a concept concerning it.  In other parts of the world that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" has a very positive connotation.  Why?  Different historians shaped the culture.
 
The point is that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  You may never have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which his views could have come down to you.  Maybe you just heard a minister explain Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with some Augustinian viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself did not even read Augustine directly, but heard the view from someone else.  It may be that at the time, the concept resonated with you and made sense.  It may also be that at the time you were not really paying much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible privately, these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your mind sometime before.  The third concept is, of course, that the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to Augustine.
 
jt: Are you kidding?  At the church I grew up in we heard nothing like that and 
I personally did not begin to study to show m

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Translation 101
Translation:
ENGLISH to Spanish
again   de nuevo
 
Changed words
Again   to   arriba
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


But we know Kevin don't we that interpretation is not the same as
"translation"
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:12:05 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Everytime you read your KJV, you are reading "changed" words, Kevin: 
this because you are reading a translation. 
 
Bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Thats always the line!
The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to more accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Here we have a perfect example of what modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out God.
 
I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 
   judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,   are changed into the same image from glory to glory,   even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)
		Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

2005-07-29 Thread Debbie Sawczak




David, I appreciate the substance and tone of this 
post you wrote to Judy (apart from whether or not I happen to have the same 
opinion about spiritual inheritance). I wanted to say something similar but you 
did so better than I would have. The reality that we are powerfully 
influenced by "ambient" ideas, whether true ones or erroneous ones, is not 
acknowledged often enough. Thanks also for the reminder that the merit 
of a a given idea does not depend on which other individuals have 
subscribed to it or who first enunciated it, or the biographical details of 
such a person. 
 
Debbie
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
Death
> Judy wrote:>> Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on 
this>> one and you need to repent.> > I haven't been 
following the posts the last few days, but I read this one > this 
morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like this. 
> Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and 
your > inability to make your case Biblically.> > I would 
like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to > Augustine 
and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read Augustine.  He is 
> saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and have adopted some 
of > his viewpoints without realizing it.  How?  Because you 
live in this world > and have grown up around ministers and school 
systems that have been touched > by him in one way or another.> 
> Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to 
say to you, > "Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your 
mind?  Negative > thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about 
this name?  Who taught it to you? > Now perhaps you can go to some 
class in grade school where you learned about > a traitor, but even many 
non-educated people have a concept of this name > without formal 
training.  I myself do not know where I adopted the negative > 
thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that it came 
> through the school system and society along the way.  Ultimately, 
in our > generation, there are some historians responsible for developing 
the kind of > view that we have about this name.  We may never have 
read this historian > ourselves, but through teachers or the news media 
or some other secondary > source, we adopted a concept concerning 
it.  In other parts of the world > that do not share our history, 
the name "Benedict" has a very positive > connotation.  Why?  
Different historians shaped the culture.> > The point is that 
Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that > many of his 
viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  You may never > 
have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which his 
> views could have come down to you.  Maybe you just heard a 
minister explain > Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with 
some Augustinian > viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself did not even read 
Augustine directly, but > heard the view from someone else.  It may 
be that at the time, the concept > resonated with you and made 
sense.  It may also be that at the time you were > not really paying 
much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible > privately, 
these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your mind > 
sometime before.  The third concept is, of course, that the Holy Spirit 
> revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to 
Augustine.> >>From my perspective, the question of whether or 
not Augustine is ultimately > responsible for your viewpoint is not 
really all that important.  It could > be that Augustine was right, 
and that you, independently, saw the same thing > and came upon the same 
language to explain it.  What is important to me is > whether the 
concept is right.  Is this concept of "spiritual death" the best > 
way of understanding the truth of what is being discussed.  For example, 
did > Adam die spiritually that day, is that the best way to understand 
his death, > or did he actually die physically that same day, not in the 
sense that he > immediately dropped dead (we know that did not happen), 
but in the sense > that he was delivered to death, which began working 
upon him, such that the > aging process began and he became subject to 
disease, sickness, and death > from that very point in time.  It 
could be that if somebody had stabbed his > heart with a knife prior to 
his sin, he would not have died, but if stabbed > after he had sinned, he 
would have dropped dead right there on the spot. In > other words, he 
became mortal immediately on that very day that he sinned.> > Now 
if on the other hand Adam died "spiritually" and if people are born > 
spiritually dead and if his spiritual death is passed on through > 
inheritance, there are many implications that such a model would have than 
> if such were not true.> > Let

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





In a message dated 7/28/2005 8:26:40 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Satan comes as an 
  angel of light deceiving with miracles also.  


Blainerb:  I keep hearing this--but other than some obscure biblical 
passage suggesting it might be true, what other evidence is there that Satan 
does this sort of thing commonly.  He must have done it a lot of times 
recently, changing his appearance each time, and having a buddy with him from 
time to time, since Joseph Smith saw not only God and his Son Jesus Christ 
standing together in a column of brilliant light, but he saw Moroni numerous 
times, who could enter into a house through the ceiling, and disappear the same 
way, he and Oliver Cowdery saw Moses, who committed to him the keys for the 
gathering of Israel, they saw Elijah, come to fulfill the prophecy in the last 
chapter of  Malachi, they saw Elias, come to restore the keys to the gospel 
of Abraham, and prior to this but on the same day, they saw Jesus Christ  
in His glory standing on a pavement of pure gold.  All this, not to 
mention the appearance of John the Baptist when he restored the Aaronic 
Priesthood on the banks of the Susquehanna River, and Peter, James and John 
later when the Higher PH was restored.  On that occasion, by the way, Satan 
did try to appear as an angel of light, but was detected by Michael, the 
archangel, and sent scurrying on his way.  Wow!!  That Satan is a real 
changeling!  They should hire him for Star Wars movies.  He could 
alternately pose as Luke Skywalker, Princess Leah, Yoda, Chubaka, and Darth 
Vader.  :>)

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!





 
Blainerb:  Just trying to impress you, Perry, but I see we have 
failed.    That being apparently true, I guess we might as well 
pack up our marbles and go home!  (sob, sob)  :>)
 
 
In a message dated 7/28/2005 8:01:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   Since size matters to some in determining the "trueness" 
  of a church, we must consider that according to these numbers (in the 
  US):1. The Catholic Church - 67,259,7682. Southern Baptist 
  Convention - 16,439,603the Catholic church is 400% truer than the 
  Southern Baptist Convention, and the Southern Baptist Convention is at 
  least 300% truer than the mormons. That makes the RCC a whopping 1300% 
  truer than the LDS! C'mon, guys, you have a long way to go to become the 
  one true church!   My point? Size, growth rate, number of 
  members, number of stakes, wards, temples, missionaries, etc, has nothing 
  to do with the truthfulness of the message taught by these man-made 
  establishments.   There is only one church, it belongs to 
  Christ, and consists of people who belong to Him...not by tithing, 
  attending "services" or "masses", peforming temple ordnances, learning 
  secret handshakes, taking communion, being baptised, burning candles, 
  buying indulgences, doing any "good" works, whatever that is, or jumping 
  through any other number of hoops set up by men, either before or after we 
  are "saved". We belong to him because we trust in Jesus Christ (the one 
  revealed to us in the Holy Bible, not some false one) for the forgiveness 
  of our sins and we "accept" the free gift that He has offered. We 
  demonstrate this by doing his will.   So, discuss size all 
  you want. Size really doen't matter. What is in the heart of each 
  individual is what matters. Do we truly love and trust Jesus Christ or do 
  we not? Is this evidenced in our lives by our works, our doing his 
  will?Perry

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!





In a message dated 7/28/2005 12:11:43 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Indeed  --  it does appear that my source is somewhat 
  off.   And I paid $14.99 for the dern thing.  
   
  I stand corrected
   
  JD

Next time you have $14.95 to spend on a lousy book let me know and 
I will give you a list of better buys for your money.  
:>)
Blainerb

Re: [TruthTalk] The LDS Jesus needed to be saved!





In a message dated 7/28/2005 12:06:59 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH:  Sometimes you simply entice me too much, Kevin.  As 
  you know, I feel no need to feed the monster in you that wants to attack my 
  beliefs.  Hence, I've avoided responding to your posts for 
  season.   However, this one surely has me itching to respond.  
  Wish somebody else were interested in what I'd like to say to in 
reply!

Go ahead just this once Dave,  I read all of your posts-- :>)
Blainerb

Re: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]

2005-07-29 Thread Terry Clifton







  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  


It has nothing to do with "liberal."   There are millions of
political liberals that are at least as spiritually oriented as you.  
 
JD
=== 
 Oh yeah?  Well just name 18,324 of them.



  

Terry

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!

Blainerb: Interesting Dave, thanks--I have copied a part of one of
the below site addresses for the quick and easy perusal of TTr's:

Here's the 2005 list of the largest U.S. denominations:
1. The Catholic Church - 67,259,768
2. Southern Baptist Convention - 16,439,603
3. The United Methodist Church - 8,251,175
4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - 5,503,192
5. The Church of God in Christ - 5,449, 875
6. National Baptist Convention, U.S.A., Inc. - 5,000,000
7. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America - 4,984,925
8. National Baptist Convention of America, Inc. - 3,500,000
9. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) - 3,241,309
10. Assemblies of God - 2,729,562
11. African Methodist Episcopal Church - 2,500,000
12. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America - 2,500,000
13. Progressive National Baptist Convention - 2,500,000
14. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS) - 2,488,936
15. Episcopal Church - 2,320,221
16. Churches of Christ - 1,500,000
17. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America - 1,500,000
18. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Inc. - 1,500,000
19. American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. - 1,433,075
20. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church - 1,432,795
21. United Church of Christ - 1,296,652
22. Baptist Bible Fellowship International - 1,200,000
23. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ - 1,071,616
24. Jehovah's Witnesses - 1,041,030
25. The Orthodox Church in America - 1,000,000
Philip E. Jenks of the National Council of Churches contributed to this
story. The 2005 Yearbook of American & Canadian Churches can be ordered at
www.electronicchurch.org/order/eorder.
In a message dated 7/27/2005 10:54:49 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH: Your numbers seem a little low, John. How old are
they? Here's one from 3 years ago that is a bit
higher..http://www.religioscope.com/info/notes/2002_020_US_church_stat.htmAnd
here is another that is from just a few months agohttp://news.ucc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=54[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

FYI - The
Mormon Church is the 8t largest denom in the US with 2, 787,000 adherents.
Churches of Christ in 9th with 2,503,000 members. Within
the US, growth rates for both groups are nearly flat
line. In foreign countries, however, Mormons have a very strong presence (somewhere around 11 to 13 million) will the Churches
of Christ have only a few hundred thousands. I mention C
of C because of the association this church has with the beginnings of
the Mormon church (IMO).
JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





 
Blainer:   What I hear you saying is that God created billions of 
souls for the express purpose of sending them to hell because they did not get a 
chance to hear the truth and accept Jesus Christ, confess him with their mouths, 
then continue about their daily sinning, but with a renewed heart full of hope 
of going to heaven.  :>)
 
"They worship me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me."
 
In a message dated 7/27/2005 8:50:59 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

   This traditional Christian faith is not 
  just narrow, but extremely so. 
  Don't you just hate those Narrow Minded Christians?
  Who was it that said?
  Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, 
  and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go 
  in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the 
  way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that 
  find it. Beware of false prophets, which 
  come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening 
  wolves.
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  


 
Blainerb:  What I hear Kevin saying is 
that he wants to eat, drink and be merry, but still be 
saved.  He wants to have his cake and eat it too.  His 
doctrine that all who confess Christ go to heaven basically means there 
is no hell for Christians, just for others who did not confess Christ, such 
as the billions of Chinese, Africans, Indians, etc., etc., etc., children 
included.   This traditional Christian faith is not just narrow, 
but extremely so. The same psychology was what led to Black slaves 
being defined as soulless, to Jews being scapegoated, to the American Indian being esteemed as nothing--killing one dealt with legally about the 
same as if you killed a 
  dog.

Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!





 
Interesting--where did you get your info?
Blainer
 
In a message dated 7/27/2005 7:00:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  FYI  -   The 
  Mormon Church is the 8t largest denom 
  in the US with 2, 787,000 adherents.  
  
  Churches of Christ in 9th with 2,503,000 members.   Within the 
  US, growth rates for both groups are nearly flat line.  In 
  foreign countries, however,  Mormons 
  have a very strong presence (somewhere 
  around 11 to 13 million) will the Churches of Christ have only a few hundred 
  thousands.   I mention C  of C because of  the association 
  this church has with the beginnings of the Mormon church (IMO).

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





 
A Mormon doctrine relating to the 
body and the spirit--check it out for what it is worth to 
you:  (Jesus Christ speaking:)  

The spirit of truth is of God. I am the spirit 
of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fullness of truth, 
yea, even of all truth;
And no man receiveth a fullness of truth unless 
he keepeth His (the father's) commandments.
He that keepeth His commandments receiveth 
truth and light and knoweth all things.
Man was also in the beginning with God.  
Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can 
be.
All truth is independent in that sphere  
in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also;  
otherwise, there is no existence.
Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is 
the condemnation of man;  because that which was from the beginning is 
plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.  

And every man whose spirit 
receiveth not the light is under condemnation, for 
Man is spirit. 

The elements are eternal, 
and  spirit 
and element inseparably connected receive a fullness of joy, and 

when separated, man cannot receive 
a fullness of joy.  The elements are the tabernacle of God, even 
temples, and 
whatsoever temple is 
defiled,  God shall destroy that temple.
D&C 93:26-35
 
In a message dated 7/27/2005 6:50:14 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  You may have something here --  I don't know .  But 
  thanks for your input.
   
  Jd  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Wed, 27 Jul 
  2005 10:49:07 EDTSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  

  
  
  In a message dated 7/26/2005 8:51:11 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
Do I miss the point? The body, soul, mind 
and spirit are so integral to each other as to be without 
separation.   If we are alive , we are alive in 
total.   If we are dead, we are dead in total.  Our bodies 
will be raised and reunited with soul mind and spirit (correct?) THEN 
transformed into a form we have yet to learn  (I John 3:2)  
"Spiritual death" as a phrase tends to eliminate from our thinking the body, 
the mind and perhaps the spirit or the soul  (if there is a 
difference).  ??
 
JD
  
  Blainer:  This seems a little confusing to me, w/o definitions in 
  the first place as to what you mean by soul, spirit, mind, etc.  I think 
  I read you on what "body" means. :>)  That's a no-brainer.  

  (Mormons believe a soul is the combo of spirit and body--just so you can 
  see where I am coming from.)

Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'





In a message dated 7/27/2005 6:42:12 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  IT is not FAITH IN SPITE of the FACTS.
   
  A true faith reflects REALITY!
  It is not like some LDS believe "God took away the plates and made it 
  look like they were not real so we could have more 
faith"

Blainerb  It's what we are here 
for--to have our faith tested. 
Blessed are those who have seen and have believed, but more blessed are those who have not seen yet have 
believed.

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death




Thanks Kevin!
Every day is a learning experience. I had no idea that 
terrorism in the UK was just as rife in
that day - or that Guy Fawkes was a good RC.  One 
never knows what you will dig up, it's
exciting !!!  jt
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 08:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
writes:

  I guess Guy Fawkes did not like the KJV either.http://www.present-truth.org/KJV-HB/KJV-Bible.htm
  Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

Good Morning David, you write:
Judy wrote: Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this one and 
you need to repent.
 
DM: I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read 
this one this morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem 
arguments like this. Such only reveals your frustration in being able to 
communicate and your inability to make your case Biblically.
 
jt: I don't like it either David but there is some 
background here that you are 
not aware of that I will 
address offline.
 
I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to 
Augustine and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read 
Augustine.  He is saying that you have been influenced by Augustine 
and have adopted some of his viewpoints without realizing it.  
How?  Because you live in this world and have grown up around 
ministers and school systems that have been touched by him in one way or 
another.
 
jt: Then he is saying the same as what Lance would 
harp on constantly which is
that noone can know what they think they know 
(if it conflicts with his doctrine) which
contradicts scripture itself because it is 
written "The spiritual man judges ALL things 

yet he himself is rightly judged by noone" 
(1 Cor 2:15)
 
Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to 
say to you, "Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your 
mind?  Negative thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about 
this name?  Who taught it to you? 
 
jt: I don't know much of anything about Benedict 
Arnold, in fact I just had to ask my
husband who he was.  Guy Fawkes would mean 
more to me since I was raised in the
British system and we would have a bonfire on Guy 
Fawkes day.
Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you 
learned about a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a 
concept of this name without formal training.  I myself do not know 
where I adopted the negative thoughts that I have about the name 
"Benedict," but I am sure that it came through the school system and 
society along the way.  Ultimately, in our generation, there are 
some historians responsible for developing the kind of view that we have 
about this name.  We may never have read this historian ourselves, 
but through teachers or the news media or some other secondary source, 
we adopted a concept concerning it.  In other parts of the world 
that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" has a very positive 
connotation.  Why?  Different historians shaped the 
culture.
 
The point is that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, 
that many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  
You may never have read him or even heard of him, but there are many 
ways in which his views could have come down to you.  Maybe you 
just heard a minister explain Genesis and use the term, "spiritual 
death" along with some Augustinian viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself 
did not even read Augustine directly, but heard the view from someone 
else.  It may be that at the time, the concept resonated with you 
and made sense.  It may also be that at the time you were not 
really paying much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible 
privately, these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your 
mind sometime before.  The third concept is, of course, that the 
Holy Spirit revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to 
Augustine.
 
jt: Are you kidding?  At the church I grew up 
in we heard nothing like that and 
I personally did not begin to study to show myself 
approved to God until after
I was "born again"
 
>From my perspective, the question of whether or not Augustine is 
ultimately responsible for your viewpoint is not really all that 
important.  It could be that Augustine was right, and that you, 
independently, saw the same thing and came upon the same language to 
explain it.  
 
jt: What other way is there to explain what took 
place in the garden David?
Adam did not die physically for 960 more years so 
unless God lied or changed
his mind as JD claims and did not follow through - 
then Adam died but not 
physically.
 
What is important to me is whether the conc

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




But we know Kevin don't we that interpretation is 
not the same as
"translation"
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:12:05 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

  Everytime you read your KJV, you are reading 
  "changed" words, Kevin: 
  this because you are reading a 
  translation. 
   
  Bill
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:04 
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Thats always the line!
The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the 
translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

  
  

  No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is 
  a false accusation. I changed the translation of a word 
  to more accurately reflect the original intent.
   
  bill
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Here we have a perfect example of what 
modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their 
doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once 
you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out 
God.
 
I wonder if Marcion got his start by 
modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is 
distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a 
half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and 
of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing 
which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," 
says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he 
omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to 
the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of 
having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 
106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when 
Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the 
penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until 
all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the 
hearth.ShieldsFamily 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
  


Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" 
to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear 
English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than 
"born again."  
 
JD
==
   Terry wrote: 
   Born again is correct. 
   
  Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first 
  time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second 
  time born "again"?  
  


 
 
 
  
__Do You 
Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection 
around http://mail.yahoo.com 
__Do You 
Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
     
judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the 
Lord,   
are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory,   
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

[TruthTalk] Spiritual Death




 
DM writes:
My viewpoint tends to be one that recognizes spiritual inheritance only as 

an authority issue, not as something passed on through the act of creating 

progeny.  Sin gives spirits in the air authority over us and over our 
children. 
Therefore, they have an effect upon future generations, not because the 

children inherited some kind of spiritual sin or spiritual death from their 

parents, but because their parents authority over them has granted 
authority 
to evil spirits over their children.  
 
jt: David sins follow family trees, the characteristics 
of spirituality follow families.
That is the sin and iniquity we are conceived in (Ps 
51) and when ppl participate
in the same sin that their ancestors did we see the movement of sin through the 
generations.  This is called the old man 
or the carnal nature.  When the first Adam 

died, his body went back to the dust  and 
a kingdom transferred by its fallen nature 

to his seed.
 
It is similar to how the children are sanctified by believing parents, not 
by some 
kind of transference in the birthing process, but by way of spiritual 
authority issues. 
The passages that shape my thinking on this are Exodus 20:5 & Ezek. 
18.
In a nutshell, I believe that we inherit the basis for physical sin from 
our parents, 
but I do not see our spirits as being inherited from our parents, and 
therefore, I 
have trouble seeing any kind of spiritual sin or spiritual death being 
inherited from 
our parents. 
 
jt: Generational sin is a spiritual rather than a 
psychological issue and acting
it out always follows unless the child dies in 
infancy.
 
I believe in a concept of curses being passed on to future generations, but 
not in 
the same sense of inheritance as we find for physical inheritance.  It 
is only through authority that parents give to evil spirits through their 
sin that allows curses to be 
passed on.  How else do we understand the Lord's teaching in Ezekiel 
18?
 
jt: Ezekiel 18 is exhorting these ppl to repent and 
turn so that generational
iniquity willl not be their ruin.  It has 
always been true that we are judged for our
own transgression; Vs26,27 explain how when the wicked 
turn to righteousness
or the righteous turn to wickedness each is 
judged/rewarded accordingly.
 
Ezekiel 18:1-3 (1) The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying,(2) 
What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, 
saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set 
on edge? (3) As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any 

more to use this proverb in Israel.
 
jt: These ppl were falsely accusing God. 
 
Ezekiel 18:19-20(19) Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the 
iniquity of the father? 
When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my 
statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.(20) The soul that 
sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, 
neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of 
the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be 
upon him.
 
jt: Exactly - no problem there.  We don't have to 
walk in the iniquity of our fathers
but most of us do because of ignorance.  For 
Israel it was walking in God's
Law, statutes, and commandments.  For us it is 
obeying the law of Christ.
Either way involves removal of the other kingdom and 
renewing of the mind.
   
judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the 
Lord,   
are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory,   
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Changed subjects should be reflected on the Subject line.
Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Everytime you read your KJV, you are reading "changed" words, Kevin: this because you are reading a translation. 
 
Bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Thats always the line!
The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to more accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Here we have a perfect example of what modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out God.
 
I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

I guess Guy Fawkes did not like the KJV either.http://www.present-truth.org/KJV-HB/KJV-Bible.htm
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Good Morning David, you write:
Judy wrote: Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this one and you need to repent.
 
DM: I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read this one this morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like this. Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and your inability to make your case Biblically.
 
jt: I don't like it either David but there is some background here that you are 
not aware of that I will address offline.
 
I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to Augustine and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read Augustine.  He is saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and have adopted some of his viewpoints without realizing it.  How?  Because you live in this world and have grown up around ministers and school systems that have been touched by him in one way or another.
 
jt: Then he is saying the same as what Lance would harp on constantly which is
that noone can know what they think they know (if it conflicts with his doctrine) which
contradicts scripture itself because it is written "The spiritual man judges ALL things 
yet he himself is rightly judged by noone" (1 Cor 2:15)
 
Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to say to you, "Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your mind?  Negative thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about this name?  Who taught it to you? 
 
jt: I don't know much of anything about Benedict Arnold, in fact I just had to ask my
husband who he was.  Guy Fawkes would mean more to me since I was raised in the
British system and we would have a bonfire on Guy Fawkes day.
Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you learned about a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a concept of this name without formal training.  I myself do not know where I adopted the negative thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that it came through the school system and society along the way.  Ultimately, in our generation, there are some historians responsible for developing the kind of view that we have about this name.  We may never have read this historian ourselves, but through teachers or the news media or some other secondary source, we adopted a concept concerning it.  In other parts of the world that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" has a very positive connotation.  Why?  Different historians shaped the culture.
 
The point is that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  You may never have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which his views could have come down to you.  Maybe you just heard a minister explain Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with some Augustinian viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself did not even read Augustine directly, but heard the view from someone else.  It may be that at the time, the concept resonated with you and made sense.  It may also be that at the time you were not really paying much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible privately, these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your mind sometime before.  The third concept is, of course, that the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to Augustine.
 
jt: Are you kidding?  At the church I grew up in we heard nothing like that and 
I personally did not begin to study to show myself approved to God until after
I was "born again"
 
>From my perspective, the question of whether or not Augustine is ultimately responsible for your viewpoint is not really all that important.  It could be that Augustine was right, and that you, independently, saw the same thing and came upon the same language to explain it.  
 
jt: What other way is there to explain what took place in the garden David?
Adam did not die physically for 960 more years so unless God lied or changed
his mind as JD claims and did not follow through - then Adam died but not 
physically.
 
What is important to me is whether the concept is right.  Is this concept of "spiritual death" the best way of understanding the truth of what is being discussed.  For example, did Adam die spiritually that day, is that the best way to understand his death, or did he actually die physically that same day, not in the sense that he immediately dropped dead (we know that did not happen), but in the sense that he was delivered to death, which began working upon him, such that the aging process began and he became subject to disease, sickness, and death from that very point in time.  
 
jt: Well yes, that is the way it works.  Both Adam and the creation were cursed
at the same time and the curse is always implemented by the powers of
darkness who only work death and destruction.  Th

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

And there are only ONE Set of MARBLES in this game, BUMMER!ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:








Just when I think I've cornered you into acknowledging the obvious you quit playing.  Oh, well  iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:22 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

I am not interested in going down the same road again, so I will abstain from answering your question.
 
God's blessings,
 
Bill
 
By the way, I think I understand your position. Thank you for expressing it.

- Original Message - 
From: ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:09 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


My view is more correctly this: spiritual death is simply the pre-quickened (ie: born-again) spiritual state of any person.  They are not yet awakened to things of the Holy Spirit.  Scripture holds no real interest for them compared to the philosophies of men.  They have no grasp of true spiritual concepts.  It is literal in that it is true.  But it is not final until actual physical death.  Do you understand what I am saying? I am trying to express my viewnot to convince you.  I would use another term if it expressed what I mean in the same way. Do you have a biblical term that expresses mans spiritual condition prior to receiving Christ as Savior and Lord? Or do you think there is no such condition?  izzy
 




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:13 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
 

No, my point was firstly that it was a non-biblical term -- so be honest enough to recognize that you too are putting your trust in a "doctrine of man"; and secondly that it was inaccurate -- if what you are actually holding to is the idea of a literal spiritual death.

 

Bill


- Original Message - 

From: ShieldsFamily 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:17 AM

Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



 



 BT:  Paul tells us that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all things have their being or ontological There you go using one of those nonbiblical words, Bill. I had said something the other day in reference to our ontological status in Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what I
 was talking about. I used the term here to give that first statement some context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical terms to speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do this. My gripe is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate others when they do it.   
 
Iz: I find that interesting, Bill, since this whole discussion got started because you objected to those of us who were using the term "spiritual" in front of death because you considered "spiritual" to be a nonbiblical term.  So, since then, I've been trying to point out that you, also, use "nonbiblical" terms all the time. Right?
 
You'd better check your records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out that Judy too had been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, namely, Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused of "touting" Barth and Torrance, and I was simply pointing out that it was not just the "libs" who treat others authoritatively. In point of fact, I have never had a problem with using appropriately indicative language to speak about biblical concepts, even when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same post I also wrote, "I have been very candid throughout about both my appreciation of Torrance and the influence he has
 had upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed quite significant." The reason that this thread took off like it did was because Judy took offence that I had attributed her doctrine to Augustine, claiming instead that he was not the one who came up with "spiritual death"; that it "is right there in Genesis." Well, it is not right there in Genesis. It is not anywhere. On every ocassion it is an interpretation, just as when I read the same Scripture pertaining to language of death and interpret it in a different way. So you can keep on pointing out my use of non-biblical termonology if you like, but it won't make much of a splash on my end of the pool, 'cause I'm not the hypocrite on this one. 
 
Izzy responds: So you really don't object, on the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use the term "spiritual death" Bill? __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz
 
It is from the TEXAS Translation, "God is our partner"
HOWDY PARDNER!
 
Maybe then we don't need  an "appointment", after all?
ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


"from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth on earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



 
And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter to you?   
 
The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !!  (John 3:21).
 
JD
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
		 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]

Actually this is what happens when the Righteous ignore their duty to their neighbor, and themselves. We have abdicated our rightful positions and handed them to the wicked.
The enemy is more than willing to take positions of power in the government. And you wonder why things are headed the way they are.
 
Come watch the Politicians tripping over themselves to be in the SODOMITE Parades across this nation. All the while turning a blind eye to the filth they are in the midst of. When I grew up they would have arrested people for half of what goes on in these parades. Now they are courting them.
How does 3% of the population tell everyone else how to speak, act, and think?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



It has nothing to do with "liberal."   There are millions of political liberals that are at least as spiritually oriented as you.  
 
JD
 
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:07:55 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]



Truly frightening.  This is what happens in a nation where the majority are liberals. izzy


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry CliftonSent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:18 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]














link.net> http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45485


		 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Everytime you read your KJV, you are reading 
"changed" words, Kevin: this because you are reading a translation. 

 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Kevin 
  Deegan 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:04 AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Thats always the line!
  The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the 
  translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
  wrote:
  



No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a 
false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to 
more accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Kevin Deegan 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Here we have a perfect example of what 
  modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine 
  CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change 
  one word why not another and another. See how men help out 
  God.
   
  I wonder if Marcion got his start by 
  modifying one word?
  
  "Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly 
  charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, 
  with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's 
  Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion 
  tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says 
  Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits 
  syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the 
  Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having 
  furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 
  106
  Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when 
  Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, 
  and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was 
  consumed in the fire that was on the 
  hearth.ShieldsFamily 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  
  
  Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" 
  to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear 
  English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born 
  again."  
   
  JD
  ==
 Terry wrote: 
 Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and 
"born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born 
"again"?  

  
  
   
   
   
    
  __Do You 
  Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com 
  __Do You 
  Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Thats always the line!
The watchtower did not change anywords either, they changed the translation, see the NWT!Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to more accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

- Original Message - 
From: Kevin Deegan 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Here we have a perfect example of what modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out God.
 
I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?  



 
 
 
  
__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14

Are you the Apostle of Lawlessness?
Lawless: Not subject to law; unrestrained by law
 
You preach The theology of "lawless grace" 
Have you power then to absolve all responsibility for your actions?
Are we then to "sin that grace may abound"?
Is the Law of God illegal in your eyes?
A Christian has Liberty from Sin & Death, not Liberty to be LAWLESS
Antinomianism is Flawed 
 
1 JN 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law
 
1 JN 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.

"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul" Ps 19:7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 John says, in >so many worfs, Jesus is wrong   Terry
 
Now, Terry is just making up stuff without giving a response to my objections.  
 
 
  "Come on in  --   its FREE  --  but you can't stay in our FREE home unless you pay $750 a month after the first month...and never ever forget, it's all FREE."    Terry  
 
Either you are saved by works or you are not  ..   many on this forum try to have it both ways.   
 
 
jd 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:39:18 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14


I hear you loud and clear, Terry.  >From: Terry Clifton  >Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 >Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:37:13 -0500 > >Just found this note from you, Perry. I don't know where it has been for >the last two days. To answer your question, I do not consider all of John's >comments to be pitiful. What is pitiful is that Jesus says in so many >words is that if you do not obey, you are not one
 of His, and John says, in >so many worfs, Jesus is wrong. Obedience means nothing. Just have faith. > >Satan knows that Jesus is the Savior, but Satan's disobedience has >eliminated him forever from Heaven. It is pitiful that John and many >other libs cannot see that simple truth. >Terry >= > >>Terry, can you take comment on these points one by one and let me know why >>you think each is pitiful. Thanks. >> >>Perry >> >>>From: Terry Clifton  >>>Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:22:24 -0500 >>> >>>Pitiful. >>>=== >>> >>>knpraise@aol.com wrote: >>> To argue that salvation is free but after the initial event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on several levels:  1..
 Such denies the unmeritorious gift of salvation by faith through grace and THAT NOT OF YOURSELVES, it is the gift of God. 2. It does not allo w for failure -- we must obey all of the law (cf. #4)  3. It creates a system that is essentially the same as that of the Mosaic Covenant. 4. The blood of Christ, which replaced the continuing sacrifices of bulls and goats, is replaced by  by repeated confession of sins --- the disciple being lost until confession is presented and  repentance is evidences. 5. It denies that obedience extend from saving and vital faith -- demanding a soteriological value be  attached to works, in and of
 themselves!!! 6. It pronounces that what God could not do for man, man must do for himself !!  7. It denies the need for the exchange of faith for righteousness >>>&g t;(Rom 4). JD  -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John
 16:13,14  knpraise@aol.com wrote:  >Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that  >we are blessed in following the advice of the Lord? Where, pray tell, >is it said that we are not saved until and unless we accomplish this >task? Where are those words? (Hint - they are not there). JD >=== >   They may not be there in the words you have chosen to use, John, but they are
 there.  "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I tell you?" Hint: Faith saves, but fruit is the proof of salvation. You produce fruit by doing as you are told by your Lord.. That is why He is called Lord. He is the guy in charge. We are His slaves. He orders, we obey.  > ;>>> Put another way, if you do not do as He says, you are not His. It is important to understand that. Terry  >-    >>> >> >> >>-- >>"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that yo

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




There is scripture JD, Izzy may not have had time right 
now to find it.
Jesus spells it out for us in John 3:31:
 
"He who comes from above is above all; he wo is of the 
earth is earthly and speaks of the earth.
He who comes from heaven is above all" 
 
So there you go .. If you 
are not born again of the Spirit you are earthly - a "natural man".
 
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:44:21 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  
  
  So, no scripture.  Thanks for the admission.   Outer 
  space? John 3:21  He who does the truth COMES TO 
  THE LIGHT, that his deeds might be clearly seen,  that they have been 
  done in God."  
   
  In the above,  "He who does the truth"  is complimented 
  by  "...they have been done in God."  We are ALREADY 
  indwelt with the Spirit.   That 
  is part of the reconciliation of all 
  things.   Our acceptance of Christ,  our receiving of this gift 
  is our turning to the LIGHT (repentance).   When we do that, it becomes 
   manifestly clear that God has been there all 
  along.   This verse makes it clear that we are doing the truth 
  BEFORE we come to the light and that this LIGHT reveals that all our works 
  HAVE BEEN DONE in God.  
   
   JD -Original 
  Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:22:21 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  

  
  "from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth 
  on earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
  Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
  
  
   
  And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this 
  matter to you?   
   
  The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the 
  manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this 
  manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our 
  partner all along !!  (John 3:21).
   
  JD
    -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: 
  Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  

  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
  


Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my 
Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English 
translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  

 
JD
==
   Terry wrote:  Born again 
  is correct. 
   
  Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the 
  first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time 
  born "again"?  
  


 
 
 
  
     
judytBut we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the 
Lord,   
are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory,   
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18)

[TruthTalk] Spiritual Death




Good Morning David, you write:
Judy wrote: Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this one and you 
need to repent.
 
DM: I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read this 
one this morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like 
this. Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and 
your inability to make your case Biblically.
 
jt: I don't like it either David but there is some 
background here that you are 
not aware of that I will address offline.
 
I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to 
Augustine and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read 
Augustine.  He is saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and 
have adopted some of his viewpoints without realizing it.  How?  
Because you live in this world and have grown up around ministers and school 
systems that have been touched by him in one way or another.
 
jt: Then he is saying the same as what Lance would harp 
on constantly which is
that noone can know what they think they know (if 
it conflicts with his doctrine) which
contradicts scripture itself because it is written 
"The spiritual man judges ALL things 
yet he himself is rightly judged by noone" 
(1 Cor 2:15)
 
Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to say to 
you, "Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your mind?  
Negative thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about this name?  
Who taught it to you? 
 
jt: I don't know much of anything about Benedict 
Arnold, in fact I just had to ask my
husband who he was.  Guy Fawkes would mean more to 
me since I was raised in the
British system and we would have a bonfire on Guy 
Fawkes day.
Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you learned 
about a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a concept of this 
name without formal training.  I myself do not know where I adopted the 
negative thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that 
it came through the school system and society along the way.  
Ultimately, in our generation, there are some historians responsible for 
developing the kind of view that we have about this name.  We may never 
have read this historian ourselves, but through teachers or the news media 
or some other secondary source, we adopted a concept concerning it.  In 
other parts of the world that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" 
has a very positive connotation.  Why?  Different historians 
shaped the culture.
 
The point is that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that 
many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  You may 
never have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which 
his views could have come down to you.  Maybe you just heard a minister 
explain Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with some 
Augustinian viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself did not even read Augustine 
directly, but heard the view from someone else.  It may be that at the 
time, the concept resonated with you and made sense.  It may also be 
that at the time you were not really paying much attention, but later as you 
were reading your Bible privately, these ideas came to mind, having first 
been planted in your mind sometime before.  The third concept is, of 
course, that the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps 
did to Augustine.
 
jt: Are you kidding?  At the church I grew up in 
we heard nothing like that and 
I personally did not begin to study to show myself 
approved to God until after
I was "born again"
 
>From my perspective, the question of whether or not Augustine is 
ultimately responsible for your viewpoint is not really all that 
important.  It could be that Augustine was right, and that you, 
independently, saw the same thing and came upon the same language to explain 
it.  
 
jt: What other way is there to explain what took place 
in the garden David?
Adam did not die physically for 960 more years so 
unless God lied or changed
his mind as JD claims and did not follow through - then 
Adam died but not 
physically.
 
What is important to me is whether the concept is right.  Is this 
concept of "spiritual death" the best way of understanding the truth of what 
is being discussed.  For example, did Adam die spiritually that day, is 
that the best way to understand his death, or did he actually die physically 
that same day, not in the sense that he immediately dropped dead (we know 
that did not happen), but in the sense that he was delivered to death, which 
began working upon him, such that the aging process began and he became 
subject to disease, sickness, and death from that very point in time.  

 
jt: Well yes, that is the way it works.  Both Adam 
and the creation were cursed
at the same time and the curse is always implemented by 
the powers of
darkness who only work death and destruction.  
They never bless.  Actually
biology responds to psychology and psychology

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

Nice THEORY
Where are the facts?
You nor BT can prove this Theory anymore than proving the Tooth Fairy!David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Judy wrote:> Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this> one and you need to repent.I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read this one this morning. Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like this. Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and your inability to make your case Biblically.I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to Augustine and you. Bill is not saying that you have read Augustine. He is saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and have adopted some of his viewpoints without realizing it. How? Because you live in this world and have grown up around ministers and school systems that have been touched by him in one way or another.Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms. If I were to say to you, "Benedict" or
"Benedict Arnold," what would form in your mind? Negative thoughts? Why? What do you know about this name? Who taught it to you? Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you learned about a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a concept of this name without formal training. I myself do not know where I adopted the negative thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that it came through the school system and society along the way. Ultimately, in our generation, there are some historians responsible for developing the kind of view that we have about this name. We may never have read this historian ourselves, but through teachers or the news media or some other secondary source, we adopted a concept concerning it. In other parts of the world that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" has a very positive connotation. Why? Different historians shaped the culture.The point is
that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources. You may never have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which his views could have come down to you. Maybe you just heard a minister explain Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with some Augustinian viewpoints. Perhaps he himself did not even read Augustine directly, but heard the view from someone else. It may be that at the time, the concept resonated with you and made sense. It may also be that at the time you were not really paying much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible privately, these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your mind sometime before. The third concept is, of course, that the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to Augustine.>From my perspective, the question of whether or not Augustine is
ultimately responsible for your viewpoint is not really all that important. It could be that Augustine was right, and that you, independently, saw the same thing and came upon the same language to explain it. What is important to me is whether the concept is right. Is this concept of "spiritual death" the best way of understanding the truth of what is being discussed. For example, did Adam die spiritually that day, is that the best way to understand his death, or did he actually die physically that same day, not in the sense that he immediately dropped dead (we know that did not happen), but in the sense that he was delivered to death, which began working upon him, such that the aging process began and he became subject to disease, sickness, and death from that very point in time. It could be that if somebody had stabbed his heart with a knife prior to his sin, he would not have died, but if stabbed after he had sinned, he would
have dropped dead right there on the spot. In other words, he became mortal immediately on that very day that he sinned.Now if on the other hand Adam died "spiritually" and if people are born spiritually dead and if his spiritual death is passed on through inheritance, there are many implications that such a model would have than if such were not true.Let's take just the situation of inheritance. I understand physical inhertiance pretty well, I think, having taught classes on genetics at the university. What I do not understand is spiritual inheritance, or whether spiritual inheritance even exists in the sense of being passed on from parent to offspring. My viewpoint tends to be one that recognizes spiritual inheritance only as an authority issue, not as something passed on through the act of creating progeny. Sin gives spirits in the air authority over us and over our children. Therefore, they have an effect upon future
generations, not because the children inherited some kind of spiritual sin or spiritual death from their parents, but because their parents authority over them has granted authority to evil spirits over their children. It is similar to how the children are sanctified by beli

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


 
 
So, no scripture.  Thanks for the admission.   Outer space? John 3:21  He who does the truth COMES TO THE LIGHT, that his deeds might be clearly seen,  that they have been done in God."  
 
In the above,  "He who does the truth"  is complimented by  "...they have been done in God."  We are ALREADY indwelt with the Spirit.   That is part of the reconciliation of all things.   Our acceptance of Christ,  our receiving of this gift is our turning to the LIGHT (repentance).   When we do that, it becomes  manifestly clear that God has been there all along.   This verse makes it clear that we are doing the truth BEFORE we come to the light and that this LIGHT reveals that all our works HAVE BEEN DONE in God.  
 
 JD -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:22:21 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



"from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth on earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



 
And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter to you?   
 
The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !!  (John 3:21).
 
JD
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 it is that content which may be the focus of the passage
Why would anyone be persuaded by a uncertain sound?
KJV Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Debbie Sawczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?
 
Yes. However, "from above" adds specific content that is not contained in "again", and it is that content which may be the focus of the passage.
 
Debbie__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

We really have to drop this whole "nonbiblical term" red herring. 
 
First step to becoming a Jehudi!Debbie Sawczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:








Izzy responds: So you really don't object, on the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use the term "spiritual death" Bill? 
 
I think you are a bit confused, Izzy. It is not the term (since it has long ago been shown here that objection to a "nonbiblical term" is inherently absurd) but the idea that matters. The objection is that the idea of spiritual death is not taught in the Bible. The non-occurrence in the Bible of an _expression_ translatable as "spiritually dead", in view of the fact that the equivalents of both "spiritual" and "dead" occur quite frequently, is merely an interesting supporting incidental. 
 
Please note, BTW, that I'm not the one making the objection or claim, I'm just pointing out the difference to you between a term and an idea. We really have to drop this whole "nonbiblical term" red herring. 
 
Debbie  
		 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




IF it were the same, then how could you have 
existed prior to your reception of the Holy Spirit? In Christ is the existence 
of everything. Christ in you is exclusive in that he is present only in 
believers; hence their hope of glory.
 
Bill
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:20 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  How's that? 
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: 
  Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
  Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS YOU REALIZE THAT 
  YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR NOW!
   
  Your "spirit" is growing stronger because of 
  Christ IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is different than you in 
  Christ, in terms of your existence. 
   
  Bill
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death


And while I am 
metaphorically sitting with Christ in the heavenlies, my physical body is 
notit is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting 
better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than 
my body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor 
to express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be spiritually 
dead w/o being physically dead? Of course.  
izzy
 




From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
On Behalf Of Bill 
TaylorSent: Friday, July 
29, 2005 7:03 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death
 

Izzy, let's not be silly. You've 
got one body and it's getting older.

 

Bill

  
  - Original Message - 
  
  
  From: ShieldsFamily 
  
  
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  
  Sent: 
  Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM
  
  Subject: RE: 
  [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
  
   
   
   
  
  
  
  Iz: I'm sure 
  there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me 
  that our physical bodies really are dying, 
  Yes.
  

  
   
  and you are 
  speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ 
  at the moment? Izzy 
  
  Well, if I 
  understand what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I 
  am talking about your existence, your being, that which holds you 
  together and sustains you, and makes you real and gives you life. You 
  do not have the power of existence in or of yourself. You are totally 
  dependent on another for that. Neither does anyone else have this 
  power. All existence is in Christ 
  Jesus. It is in 
  him that the real you exists. Bill 
   
   
  Izzy 
  responds: So you are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL 
  BODY being currently risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Just when I think I've cornered you into acknowledging the obvious 
you quit playing.  Oh, well  
iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill 
TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:22 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

I am not interested in going down the same road 
again, so I will abstain from answering your question.
 
God's blessings,
 
Bill
 
By the way, I think I understand your position. 
Thank you for expressing it.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:09 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  My view is more 
  correctly this: “spiritual death” is simply the pre-“quickened” (ie: 
  born-again) spiritual state of any person.  They are not yet awakened to 
  things of the Holy Spirit.  Scripture holds no real interest for them 
  compared to the philosophies of men.  They have no grasp of true 
  spiritual concepts.  It is literal in that it is true.  But it is 
  not final until actual physical death.  Do you understand what I am 
  saying? I am trying to express my view—not to convince you.  I would use 
  another term if it expressed what I mean in the same way. Do you have a 
  “biblical term” that expresses man’s spiritual condition prior to receiving 
  Christ as Savior and Lord? Or do you think there is no such condition? 
   izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 
  2005 7:13 AMTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  No, my point was firstly that it 
  was a non-biblical term -- so be honest enough to recognize that you too are 
  putting your trust in a "doctrine of man"; and secondly that it 
  was inaccurate -- if what you are actually holding to is the idea of 
  a literal spiritual death.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 3:17 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



 

  

 BT:  Paul tells us 
that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all 
things have their being or ontological 
There you go 
using one of those “nonbiblical” words, Bill. 
I 
had said something the other day in reference to our ontological 
status in Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what 
I was talking about. I used the term here to give that first statement 
some context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical 
terms to speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do 
this. My gripe is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate 
others when they do it.   
 
Iz: I find 
that interesting, Bill, since this whole discussion got started 
because you objected to those of us who were using the term 
"spiritual" in front of death because you considered "spiritual" to be a 
nonbiblical term.  So, since then, I've been trying to point out 
that you, also, use "nonbiblical" terms all the time. 
Right?
 
You'd better 
check your records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out 
that Judy too had been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, 
namely, Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused 
of "touting" Barth and Torrance, and I was simply 
pointing out that it was not just the "libs" who treat others 
authoritatively. In point of fact, I have never had a problem with using 
appropriately indicative language to speak about biblical concepts, even 
when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the 
influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same post I 
also wrote, "I have been very candid throughout about both my 
appreciation of Torrance and the influence he has had 
upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed quite 
significant." The reason that this thread took off like it did was 
because Judy took offence that I had attributed her doctrine to 
Augustine, claiming instead that he was not the one who came up 
with "spiritual death"; that it "is right there in 
Genesis." Well, it is not right there in Genesis. It is not 
anywhere. On every ocassion it is an interpretation, just as when I read 
the same Scripture pertaining to language of death and interpret it in a 
different way. So you can keep on pointing out my use of non-biblical 
termonology if you like, but it won't make much of a splash o

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


:-)
 
JD  -Original Message-From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 06:37:57 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


DAVEH:  While that may apply to Izzy's husband's body, you must know Izzy does not appear to be aging at all   (If you don't believe me, check out her picture on the members' photo pageshe looks the same as she did 5 years ago!) :-) Bill Taylor wrote: 



Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and it's getting older.
 
Bill





-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




"from below" is the alternative to "from above"--physical birth on 
earth.  Your last sentence is from outer space.  
iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:17 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death



 
And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter 
to you?   
 
The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation 
of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation 
accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all 
along !!  (John 3:21).
 
JD
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 
29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote: 

  
  
  Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a 
  viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation 
  actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
   
  JD
  ==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is 
correct. 
 
Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from 
above" the second time, wasn't the second time born 
"again"?

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




I am not interested in going down the same road 
again, so I will abstain from answering your question.
 
God's blessings,
 
Bill
 
By the way, I think I understand your position. 
Thank you for expressing it.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:09 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  My view is more 
  correctly this: spiritual death is simply the pre-quickened (ie: 
  born-again) spiritual state of any person.  They are not yet awakened to 
  things of the Holy Spirit.  Scripture holds no real interest for them 
  compared to the philosophies of men.  They have no grasp of true 
  spiritual concepts.  It is literal in that it is true.  But it is 
  not final until actual physical death.  Do you understand what I am 
  saying? I am trying to express my viewnot to convince you.  I would use 
  another term if it expressed what I mean in the same way. Do you have a 
  biblical term that expresses mans spiritual condition prior to receiving 
  Christ as Savior and Lord? Or do you think there is no such condition? 
   izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 
  2005 7:13 AMTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  No, my point was firstly that it 
  was a non-biblical term -- so be honest enough to recognize that you too are 
  putting your trust in a "doctrine of man"; and secondly that it 
  was inaccurate -- if what you are actually holding to is the idea of 
  a literal spiritual death.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 3:17 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



 

  

 BT:  Paul tells us 
that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all 
things have their being or ontological 
There you go 
using one of those nonbiblical words, Bill. 
I 
had said something the other day in reference to our ontological 
status in Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what 
I was talking about. I used the term here to give that first statement 
some context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical 
terms to speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do 
this. My gripe is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate 
others when they do it.   
 
Iz: I find 
that interesting, Bill, since this whole discussion got started 
because you objected to those of us who were using the term 
"spiritual" in front of death because you considered "spiritual" to be a 
nonbiblical term.  So, since then, I've been trying to point out 
that you, also, use "nonbiblical" terms all the time. 
Right?
 
You'd better 
check your records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out 
that Judy too had been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, 
namely, Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused 
of "touting" Barth and Torrance, and I was simply 
pointing out that it was not just the "libs" who treat others 
authoritatively. In point of fact, I have never had a problem with using 
appropriately indicative language to speak about biblical concepts, even 
when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the 
influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same post I 
also wrote, "I have been very candid throughout about both my 
appreciation of Torrance and the influence he has had 
upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed quite 
significant." The reason that this thread took off like it did was 
because Judy took offence that I had attributed her doctrine to 
Augustine, claiming instead that he was not the one who came up 
with "spiritual death"; that it "is right there in 
Genesis." Well, it is not right there in Genesis. It is not 
anywhere. On every ocassion it is an interpretation, just as when I read 
the same Scripture pertaining to language of death and interpret it in a 
different way. So you can keep on pointing out my use of non-biblical 
termonology if you like, but it won't make much of a splash on 
my end of the pool, 'cause I'm not the hypocrite on this 
one. 
 
Izzy responds: 
So you really don't object, on the grounds of being a nonbiblical 
term,  if we use the term "spiritual death" Bill?

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




How's that? 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill 
TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:16 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death

Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS YOU REALIZE THAT 
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR NOW!
 
Your "spirit" is growing stronger because of Christ 
IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is different than you in Christ, in 
terms of your existence. 
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  And while I am 
  metaphorically “sitting with Christ in the heavenlies”, my physical body is 
  not—it is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting 
  better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than my 
  body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor to 
  express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be spiritually dead 
  w/o being physically dead? Of course.  izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 
  2005 7:03 AMTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  Izzy, let's not be silly. You've 
  got one body and it's getting older.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



Iz: I'm sure 
there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me 
that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

  

 
and you are 
speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ at 
the moment? Izzy 

Well, if I 
understand what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am 
talking about your existence, your being, that which holds you together 
and sustains you, and makes you real and gives you life. You do not have 
the power of existence in or of yourself. You are totally dependent on 
another for that. Neither does anyone else have this power. All 
existence is in Christ Jesus. It is in him 
that the real you exists. Bill 
 
 
Izzy 
responds: So you are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY 
being currently risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Thank you for admitting that. iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:11 AMTo: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
death



Referring to "born again."-Original 
Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 03:50:21 -0500Subject: 
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



Were they referring to the first physical birth, JD? Or the second 
one? iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 5:50 
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] 
Spiritual death



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a 
viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation 
actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
 
 
 
  -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 
Jul 2005 09:27:34 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





Bill in Black

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:47 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  Izzy is 
  red:
   
  
  
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:44 
  PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  
   
  
  As it pertains to the 
  question of "regeneration" and being "born again," the church, and especially 
  the "rivalist" (Revivalist) Yikes! thanks, no offence intended. Perhaps this was one of 
  those Freudian slips :>) church in America since the early 19th c., 
  has done much to shift the emphasis of these terms away from their biblical 
  root and source in Jesus Christ, to the activities of individual believers. 
  With this shift has developed a whole new and biblically foreign way of 
  speaking about matters pertaining to salvation. 
  Such as Perichoresis 
  or Trinity? These actually find their origin back in the 
  3rd and 4th centuries. But your point is well 
  taken. Much stress has been 
  placed on the "new birth" as an immediate life-changing religious 
  experience. David touched upon this in his discussion with you in regards to 
  "the sinners prayer" and the vacancy of that practice in the New Testament 
  witness. I?m 
  hoping you read my post on that regarding the fact that I was referring to one 
  praying a non-scripted type of prayer to receive Jesus as Lord and Savior. 
  & lt; 
  O:P>
  
   
  
  The 
  language of "regeneration" is a great case in point. Contemporary Christians 
  use this term to speak of the "conversion experience" and what happens in that 
  event, as if it were often used in the NT in this same capacity; when in 
  actual fact the term is used only twice and neither time in reference to 
  conversion or "born again" experiences. I 
  believe I?ve read you using that term, have I not? I 
  probably have, if you are referring to 'regeneration.' But then again, I 
  consider this to be an act of God as set forth in Titus 3, so I'm not treating 
  it as a "born again experience." I don't recall talking in terms of being 
  "born again," but I may have; I would want to check the 
  context. The 
  truth is, the NT does not use the term, as modern evangelicals do, for 
  that which goes on in the "heart" of new converts. It speaks only in terms of 
  the great and vicarious regeneration Book 
  chapter and verse please? Titus 3.4-7 
  which 
  took place in Jesus Christ in his resurrection, as something which God alone 
  in the Holy Spirit through Christ did for humanity, and it speaks to the 
  last day when the twelve will sit in judgment over Israel, and when all things 
  shall be made new and rewards granted to those who have forsaken all to 
  follow Christ. Yet we are accustomed to using this term in an entirely 
  different way -- i n a w ay that I would suggest has minimal if any 
  referential correspondence to our conversion 
  experience.
  
   
  
  Now let's 
  talk about "born again" and what that means in the context in which it was 
  used. The same word that is translated as "again" in John 3.3 and 3.7, is used 
  also in John 3.31. But in 3.31 it is translated not as "again" but 
  as "from above": "He who comes from above is above all ..." I 
  believe that this is how John's word needs to be understood in verses 3 and 7, 
  and this even though Nicodemus misinterprets Jesus' use of the word. How could 
  Nicodemus make this mistake? In the Greek this word can mean several things; 
  it can mean "from the beginning"; or "from the first"; or "from above"; or 
  "anew" or "again." Nicodemus understood Jesus to be saying that he needed to 
  be born "again"; therefore his question about returning a se

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


 
And where is this "born from below" in the text,  or does this matter to you?   
 
The "birth from above"  or "new birth"  brings the manifestation of Christ into our lives.   And what does this manifestation accomplish  --   it reveals that God has been our partner all along !!  (John 3:21).
 
JD
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:21:20 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Yeah, I suppose so -- AS LONG AS YOU REALIZE THAT 
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A METAPHOR NOW!
 
Your "spirit" is growing stronger because of Christ 
IN you via the Holy Spirit. That is different than you in Christ, in 
terms of your existence. 
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:04 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  
  And while I am 
  metaphorically sitting with Christ in the heavenlies, my physical body is 
  notit is right here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting 
  better every day in Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than my 
  body, Bill? Of course not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor to 
  express something that is not a physical reality. Can one be spiritually dead 
  w/o being physically dead? Of course.  izzy
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Friday, July 29, 
  2005 7:03 AMTo: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
   
  
  Izzy, let's not be silly. You've 
  got one body and it's getting older.
  
   
  
  Bill
  

- Original Message - 


From: ShieldsFamily 


To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 


Sent: Friday, 
July 29, 2005 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: 
[TruthTalk] Spiritual death

 
 
 



Iz: I'm sure 
there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me 
that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

  

 
and you are 
speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ at 
the moment? Izzy 

Well, if I 
understand what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am 
talking about your existence, your being, that which holds you together 
and sustains you, and makes you real and gives you life. You do not have 
the power of existence in or of yourself. You are totally dependent on 
another for that. Neither does anyone else have this power. All 
existence is in Christ Jesus. It is in him 
that the real you exists. Bill 
 
 
Izzy 
responds: So you are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY 
being currently risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

RE: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]









I could just as easily have used the word “lost”. 
Same difference.  (Spiritually oriented ain’t the same as saved,
JD.)  iz

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:06
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] [Fwd:
WorldNetDaily Canada,
the compatible]



 







It has nothing to do with "liberal."  
There are millions of political liberals that are at least as spiritually
oriented as you.  





 





JD





 





 



 
-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:07:55 -0500
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]



Truly frightening.  This is what
happens in a nation where the majority are liberals. izzy

 







From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005
11:18 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: [TruthTalk] [Fwd:
WorldNetDaily Canada,
the compatible]






 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
  link.net>
  
 


 

 http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45485

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


Referring to "born again."-Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 03:50:21 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



Were they referring to the first physical birth, JD? Or the second one? iz


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 5:50 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death



Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
 
JD
 
 
 
  -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:27:34 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death





Bill in Black

- Original Message - 
From: ShieldsFamily 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:47 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


Izzy is red:
 




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:44 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
 


 

As it pertains to the question of "regeneration" and being "born again," the church, and especially the "rivalist" (Revivalist) Yikes! thanks, no offence intended. Perhaps this was one of those Freudian slips :>) church in America since the early 19th c., has done much to shift the emphasis of these terms away from their biblical root and source in Jesus Christ, to the activities of individual believers. With this shift has developed a whole new and biblically foreign way of speaking about matters pertaining to salvation. 
Such as Perichoresis or Trinity? These actually find their origin back in the 3rd and 4th centuries. But your point is well taken. Much stress has been placed on the "new birth" as an immediate life-changing religious experience. David touched upon this in his discussion with you in regards to "the sinners prayer" and the vacancy of that practice in the New Testament witness. I?m hoping you read my post on that regarding the fact that I was referring to one praying a non-scripted type of prayer to receive Jesus as Lord and Savior. &
lt; O:P>

 

The language of "regeneration" is a great case in point. Contemporary Christians use this term to speak of the "conversion experience" and what happens in that event, as if it were often used in the NT in this same capacity; when in actual fact the term is used only twice and neither time in reference to conversion or "born again" experiences. I believe I?ve read you using that term, have I not? I probably have, if you are referring to 'regeneration.' But then again, I consider this to be an act of God as set forth in Titus 3, so I'm not treating it as a "born again experience." I don't recall talking in terms of being "born again," but I may have; I would want to check the context. The truth is, the NT does not use the term, as modern evangelicals do, for that which goes on in the "heart" of new converts. It speaks only in terms of the great and vicarious regeneration Book chapter and verse please? Titus 3.4-7 which took place in Jesus Christ in his resurrection, as something which God alone in the Holy Spirit through Christ did for humanity, and it speaks to the last day when the twelve will sit in judgment over Israel, and when all things shall be made new and rewards granted to those who have forsaken all to follow Christ. Yet we are accustomed to using this term in an entirely different way -- i
n a w ay that I would suggest has minimal if any referential correspondence to our conversion experience.

 

Now let's talk about "born again" and what that means in the context in which it was used. The same word that is translated as "again" in John 3.3 and 3.7, is used also in John 3.31. But in 3.31 it is translated not as "again" but as "from above": "He who comes from above is above all ..." I believe that this is how John's word needs to be understood in verses 3 and 7, and this even though Nicodemus misinterprets Jesus' use of the word. How could Nicodemus make this mistake? In the Greek this word can mean several things; it can mean "from the beginning"; or "from the first"; or "from above"; or "anew" or "again." Nicodemus understood Jesus to be saying that he needed to be born "again"; therefore his question about returning a second time to his mother's womb. But Jesus was not speaking of being born a second time; he was speaking about being born "from above"; hence his reply that it takes both a physical birth and a birth of the Spirit to be one who is "born from above."  Of course.  However the term ?again? was used and should not be swept aside as irrelevant, either. It was used as a translation of John's word. The question is, is it the best translation? It is obvious that "again" will not wor

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









Just goes to show that Jesus inside
changes us on the outside.  J (Plus I only post the good photos!) 

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hansen
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:38
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 

DAVEH:  While that may apply to Izzy's husband's
body, you must know Izzy does not appear to be aging at all   (If
you don't believe me, check out her picture on the members' photo pageshe
looks the same as she did 5 years ago!) :-) 


Bill Taylor wrote: 



Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and it's
getting older.





 





Bill





























-- ~~~Dave Hansen[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.langlitz.com~~~If you wish to receivethings I find interesting,I maintain six email lists...JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









My view is more correctly this: “spiritual
death” is simply the pre-“quickened” (ie: born-again)
spiritual state of any person.  They are not yet awakened to things of the Holy
Spirit.  Scripture holds no real interest for them compared to the philosophies
of men.  They have no grasp of true spiritual concepts.  It is literal in that
it is true.  But it is not final until actual physical death.  Do you
understand what I am saying? I am trying to express my view—not to
convince you.  I would use another term if it expressed what I mean in the same
way. Do you have a “biblical term” that expresses man’s
spiritual condition prior to receiving Christ as Savior and Lord? Or do you
think there is no such condition?  izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:13
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



No, my point was firstly that it was a non-biblical term --
so be honest enough to recognize that you too are putting your trust in a
"doctrine of man"; and secondly that it was inaccurate --
if what you are actually holding to is the idea of a literal spiritual
death.





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 3:17 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



 

 







 







 BT:  Paul
tells us that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all
things have their being or ontological There you go using one of those “nonbiblical” words,
Bill. I had
said something the other day in reference to our ontological status in
Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what I was talking
about. I used the term here to give that first statement some
context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical terms to
speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do this. My gripe
is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate others when they do
it.   

 

Iz: I find that
interesting, Bill, since this whole discussion got started because you
objected to those of us who were using the term "spiritual" in
front of death because you considered "spiritual" to be a nonbiblical
term.  So, since then, I've been trying to point out that you, also, use
"nonbiblical" terms all the time. Right?

 

You'd better check your
records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out that Judy too had
been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, namely,
Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused
of "touting" Barth and Torrance,
and I was simply pointing out that it was not just the "libs"
who treat others authoritatively. In point of fact, I have never had a problem
with using appropriately indicative language to speak about biblical concepts,
even when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the
influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same post I also
wrote, "I have been very candid throughout about both my appreciation of Torrance and the
influence he has had upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed
quite significant." The reason that this thread took off like it did was
because Judy took offence that I had attributed her doctrine to Augustine,
claiming instead that he was not the one who came up with "spiritual
death"; that it "is right there in Genesis." Well, it
is not right there in Genesis. It is not anywhere. On every ocassion it is an
interpretation, just as when I read the same Scripture pertaining to language
of death and interpret it in a different way. So you can keep on pointing out
my use of non-biblical termonology if you like, but it won't make much of a
splash on my end of the pool, 'cause I'm not the hypocrite on this
one. 

 

Izzy responds: So you really
don't object, on the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use
the term "spiritual death" Bill?

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









And while I am metaphorically “sitting
with Christ in the heavenlies”, my physical body is not—it is right
here, going downhill, even as my spirit person is getting better every day in
Christ.  So is my spirit in a different place than my body, Bill? Of course
not.  This shows that one can use a metaphor to express something that is not a
physical reality. Can one be spiritually dead w/o being physically dead? Of
course.  izzy

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 7:03
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and it's
getting older.





 





Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Friday, July 29,
2005 3:00 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Spiritual death





 



 

 







Iz: I'm sure there's a
lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me that our
physical bodies really are dying, Yes.







 

and you are speaking
only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with Christ at the moment?
Izzy 

Well, if I understand
what you are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am talking about
your existence, your being, that which holds you together and sustains you, and
makes you real and gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or
of yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither does anyone
else have this power. All existence is in Christ Jesus. It is in him that the real you exists. Bill 

 

 

Izzy responds: So you
are not being metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY being currently
risen in Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

Re: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]


It has nothing to do with "liberal."   There are millions of political liberals that are at least as spiritually oriented as you.  
 
JD
 
  -Original Message-From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:07:55 -0500Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]



Truly frightening.  This is what happens in a nation where the majority are liberals. izzy


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry CliftonSent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:18 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: [TruthTalk] [Fwd: WorldNetDaily Canada, the compatible]














link.net> http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45485

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death


  Linda:  
 
My computer froze up when I tried to respond to the post you wrote indicating your confusion over the issue of "spiritual death."   The words, themselves, are not the issue.   I  attach concepts to words.  It is the concept of "spiritual death" that is in question.   "Trinty" is a non-biblical word giving us a concept that appears to be biblical.  Ditto for "perichoresis."   This may not hold true for "spiritual death,"  a wording that seems to divide man into components that are capable of life in and of themselves, separate from the whole man.   Such a doctrine may even deny the bodily resurrection.  
 
That is the issue.   But don't answer my question.   That's ok.   
 
JD

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









No one has suggested that the Holy Spirit
came from anywhere else but above.  izzy

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Debbie Sawczak
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 6:07
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Izzy responds: If you were born "from
below" the first time, and "born from above" the second
time, wasn't the second time born "again"?





 





Yes. However, "from above" adds
specific content that is not contained in "again", and it is that content
which may be the focus of the passage.





 





Debbie

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death









Thanks Debbie.  That’s what I was
asking BT, because at one point his objection included that issue.  I’m
sure he will get back to me on that. izzy

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Sawczak
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 6:05
AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual
death



 



Izzy responds: So you really
don't object, on the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use
the term "spiritual death" Bill? 





 





I think you are a bit confused,
Izzy. It is not the term (since it has long ago been shown here that
objection to a "nonbiblical term" is inherently absurd) but the idea
that matters. The objection is that the idea of spiritual death is not taught
in the Bible. The non-occurrence in the Bible of an
_expression_ translatable as "spiritually dead", in view
of the fact that the equivalents of both "spiritual" and
"dead" occur quite frequently, is merely an interesting supporting
incidental. 





 





Please note, BTW, that I'm not the one
making the objection or claim, I'm just pointing out the difference to you
between a term and an idea. We really have to drop this
whole "nonbiblical term" red herring. 





 





Debbie

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

2005-07-29 Thread Dave Hansen





DAVEH:  While that may apply to Izzy's husband's body, you must know
Izzy does not appear to be aging at all   (If you don't believe me,
check out her picture on the members' photo pageshe looks the same
as she did 5 years ago!)  :-) 


Bill Taylor wrote:

  
  

  
  Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got
one body and it's getting older.
   
  Bill
  

  






  

  


-- 
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.

Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14


 John says, in >so many worfs, Jesus is wrong   Terry
 
Now, Terry is just making up stuff without giving a response to my objections.  
 
 
  "Come on in  --   its FREE  --  but you can't stay in our FREE home unless you pay $750 a month after the first month...and never ever forget, it's all FREE."    Terry  
 
Either you are saved by works or you are not  ..   many on this forum try to have it both ways.   
 
 
jd 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:39:18 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14


I hear you loud and clear, Terry.  >From: Terry Clifton  >Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 >Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:37:13 -0500 > >Just found this note from you, Perry. I don't know where it has been for >the last two days. To answer your question, I do not consider all of John's >comments to be pitiful. What is pitiful is that Jesus says in so many >words is that if you do not obey, you are not one of His, and John says, in >so many worfs, Jesus is wrong. Obedience means nothing. Just have faith. > >Satan knows that Jesus is the Savior, but Satan's disobedience has >eliminated him forever from Heaven. It is pitiful that John and many >other libs cannot see that simple truth. >Terry >= > >>Terry, can you take comment on these points one by one and let me know why >>you think each is pitiful. Thanks. >> >>Perry >> >>>From: Terry Clifton  >>>Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org >>>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:22:24 -0500 >>> >>>Pitiful. >>>=== >>> >>>knpraise@aol.com wrote: >>> To argue that salvation is free but after the initial event, we must obey to maintain this salvation is wrong on several levels:  1.. Such denies the unmeritorious gift of salvation by faith through grace and THAT NOT OF YOURSELVES, it is the gift of God. 2. It does not allo
w for failure -- we must obey all of the law (cf. #4)  3. It creates a system that is essentially the same as that of the Mosaic Covenant. 4. The blood of Christ, which replaced the continuing sacrifices of bulls and goats, is replaced by  by repeated confession of sins --- the disciple being lost until confession is presented and  repentance is evidences. 5. It denies that obedience extend from saving and vital faith -- demanding a soteriological value be  attached to works, in and of themselves!!! 6. It pronounces that what God could not do for man, man must do for himself !!  7. It denies the need for the exchange of faith for righteousness >>>&g
t;(Rom 4). JD  -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14  knpraise@aol.com wrote:  >Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that 
>we are blessed in following the advice of the Lord? Where, pray tell, >is it said that we are not saved until and unless we accomplish this >task? Where are those words? (Hint - they are not there). JD >=== >   They may not be there in the words you have chosen to use, John, but they are there.  "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I tell you?" Hint: Faith saves, but fruit is the proof of salvation. You produce fruit by doing as you are told by your Lord.. That is why He is called Lord. He is the guy in charge. We are His slaves. He orders, we obey.  >
;>>> Put another way, if you do not do as He says, you are not His. It is important to understand that. Terry  >-    >>> >> >> >>-- >>"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may >>know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) >>http://www.InnGlory.org >> >>If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a >>friend who wants to join, tell him to se
nd an e-mail to >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. >> > >-- >"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may >know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) >http://www.InnGlory.org > >If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a >friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




No one has changed any words, Kevin. This is a 
false accusation. I changed the translation of a word to more 
accurately reflect the original intent.
 
bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Kevin 
  Deegan 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:45 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
  Here we have a perfect example of what modern 
  day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the 
  word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not 
  another and another. See how men help out God.
   
  I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying 
  one word?
  
  "Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly 
  charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with 
  having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles 
  in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to 
  a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion 
  employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits 
  whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out 
  by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last 
  Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
  Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi 
  had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it 
  into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the 
  fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  
  
  Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be 
  a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English 
  translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born 
  again."  
   
  JD
  ==
 Terry wrote: 
 Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from 
above" the second time, wasn't the second time born 
"again"?  

  
  
   
   
   
    
  __Do You 
  Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




No, my point was firstly that it was a non-biblical 
term -- so be honest enough to recognize that you too are putting your trust in 
a "doctrine of man"; and secondly that it was inaccurate -- if what 
you are actually holding to is the idea of a literal spiritual 
death.
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:17 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
   
  
  
   
  

  
  
   BT:  Paul 
  tells us that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in 
  him all things have their being or ontological 
  There you 
  go using one of those nonbiblical words, Bill. I had 
  said something the other day in reference to our ontological status 
  in Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what I was 
  talking about. I used the term here to give that first statement some 
  context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical terms to 
  speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do this. My 
  gripe is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate others 
  when they do it.   
   
  Iz: I find that interesting, Bill, since this 
  whole discussion got started because you objected to those of us who 
  were using the term "spiritual" in front of death because you considered 
  "spiritual" to be a nonbiblical term.  So, since then, I've been 
  trying to point out that you, also, use "nonbiblical" terms all the time. 
  Right?
   
  You'd better check 
  your records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out that Judy 
  too had been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, namely, 
  Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused 
  of "touting" Barth and Torrance, and I was simply pointing out 
  that it was not just the "libs" who treat others authoritatively. In point 
  of fact, I have never had a problem with using appropriately indicative 
  language to speak about biblical concepts, even when that language is 
  "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the influence of others in my 
  spiritual development. In that same post I also wrote, "I have been very 
  candid throughout about both my appreciation of Torrance and the influence 
  he has had upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed quite 
  significant." The reason that this thread took off like it did was because 
  Judy took offence that I had attributed her doctrine to Augustine, 
  claiming instead that he was not the one who came up with "spiritual 
  death"; that it "is right there in Genesis." Well, it is not 
  right there in Genesis. It is not anywhere. On every ocassion it is an 
  interpretation, just as when I read the same Scripture pertaining to 
  language of death and interpret it in a different way. So you can keep on 
  pointing out my use of non-biblical termonology if you like, but it won't 
  make much of a splash on my end of the pool, 'cause I'm not the 
  hypocrite on this one. 
   
  Izzy responds: So you really don't object, 
  on the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use the term 
  "spiritual death" Bill?

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Izzy, let's not be silly. You've got one body and 
it's getting older.
 
Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:00 AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual 
  death
  
   
  
  
  Iz: 
  I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing 
  with me that our physical bodies really are dying, 
  Yes.
  

  
  
   
  and you are speaking only metaphorically about our 
  bodies being risen with Christ at the moment? Izzy 
  
  Well, if I understand what you 
  are getting at, this would not be metaphorical. I am talking about your 
  existence, your being, that which holds you together and sustains you, and 
  makes you real and gives you life. You do not have the power of existence 
  in or of yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither 
  does anyone else have this power. All existence is in Christ 
  Jesus. It 
  is in him that the real you exists. 
  Bill 
   
   
  Izzy responds: So you are not being 
  metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY being currently risen in 
  Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death

2005-07-29 Thread David Miller

Judy wrote:
> Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this
> one and you need to repent.

I haven't been following the posts the last few days, but I read this one 
this morning.  Judy, please refrain from ad hominem arguments like this. 
Such only reveals your frustration in being able to communicate and your 
inability to make your case Biblically.

I would like to frame what I think Bill's position is in regards to 
Augustine and you.  Bill is not saying that you have read Augustine.  He is 
saying that you have been influenced by Augustine and have adopted some of 
his viewpoints without realizing it.  How?  Because you live in this world 
and have grown up around ministers and school systems that have been touched 
by him in one way or another.

Let me illustrate this with a non-Biblical terms.  If I were to say to you, 
"Benedict" or "Benedict Arnold," what would form in your mind?  Negative 
thoughts?  Why?  What do you know about this name?  Who taught it to you? 
Now perhaps you can go to some class in grade school where you learned about 
a traitor, but even many non-educated people have a concept of this name 
without formal training.  I myself do not know where I adopted the negative 
thoughts that I have about the name "Benedict," but I am sure that it came 
through the school system and society along the way.  Ultimately, in our 
generation, there are some historians responsible for developing the kind of 
view that we have about this name.  We may never have read this historian 
ourselves, but through teachers or the news media or some other secondary 
source, we adopted a concept concerning it.  In other parts of the world 
that do not share our history, the name "Benedict" has a very positive 
connotation.  Why?  Different historians shaped the culture.

The point is that Augustine has so influenced our culture and society, that 
many of his viewpoints become ours through secondary sources.  You may never 
have read him or even heard of him, but there are many ways in which his 
views could have come down to you.  Maybe you just heard a minister explain 
Genesis and use the term, "spiritual death" along with some Augustinian 
viewpoints.  Perhaps he himself did not even read Augustine directly, but 
heard the view from someone else.  It may be that at the time, the concept 
resonated with you and made sense.  It may also be that at the time you were 
not really paying much attention, but later as you were reading your Bible 
privately, these ideas came to mind, having first been planted in your mind 
sometime before.  The third concept is, of course, that the Holy Spirit 
revealed the truth to you just like he perhaps did to Augustine.

>From my perspective, the question of whether or not Augustine is ultimately 
responsible for your viewpoint is not really all that important.  It could 
be that Augustine was right, and that you, independently, saw the same thing 
and came upon the same language to explain it.  What is important to me is 
whether the concept is right.  Is this concept of "spiritual death" the best 
way of understanding the truth of what is being discussed.  For example, did 
Adam die spiritually that day, is that the best way to understand his death, 
or did he actually die physically that same day, not in the sense that he 
immediately dropped dead (we know that did not happen), but in the sense 
that he was delivered to death, which began working upon him, such that the 
aging process began and he became subject to disease, sickness, and death 
from that very point in time.  It could be that if somebody had stabbed his 
heart with a knife prior to his sin, he would not have died, but if stabbed 
after he had sinned, he would have dropped dead right there on the spot. In 
other words, he became mortal immediately on that very day that he sinned.

Now if on the other hand Adam died "spiritually" and if people are born 
spiritually dead and if his spiritual death is passed on through 
inheritance, there are many implications that such a model would have than 
if such were not true.

Let's take just the situation of inheritance.  I understand physical 
inhertiance pretty well, I think, having taught classes on genetics at the 
university.  What I do not understand is spiritual inheritance, or whether 
spiritual inheritance even exists in the sense of being passed on from 
parent to offspring.  My viewpoint tends to be one that recognizes spiritual 
inheritance only as an authority issue, not as something passed on through 
the act of creating progeny.  Sin gives spirits in the air authority over us 
and over our children.  Therefore, they have an effect upon future 
generations, not because the children inherited some kind of spiritual sin 
or spiritual death from their parents, but because their parents authority 
over them has granted authority to evil spirits over their children.  It is 
similar to how the children are sanctified by believing parents, not by some 
kind of trans

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

2005-07-29 Thread Debbie Sawczak




Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from 
above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?
 
Yes. However, "from above" adds specific content that is not 
contained in "again", and it is that content which may be the focus of the 
passage.
 
Debbie

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

2005-07-29 Thread Debbie Sawczak




Izzy responds: So you really don't object, on the 
grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use the term "spiritual death" 
Bill? 
 
I 
think you are a bit confused, Izzy. It is not the term (since it 
has long ago been shown here that objection to a "nonbiblical term" is 
inherently absurd) but the idea that matters. The objection is that the idea of 
spiritual death is not taught in the Bible. The non-occurrence in the Bible of 
an _expression_ translatable as "spiritually dead", in view of the 
fact that the equivalents of both "spiritual" and "dead" occur quite frequently, 
is merely an interesting supporting incidental. 

 
Please note, BTW, that I'm not the one making the objection or 
claim, I'm just pointing out the difference to you between a term and an idea. 
We really have to drop this whole "nonbiblical term" red 
herring. 
 
Debbie

Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




Thanks for this Kevin, it is really interesting and 
proves the truth of there being "nothing new under the sun"
It's the same old battle isn't it?  "Hath God 
said?"  "Hath God said?"  And if folk don't like what He said 
there is
always some philosopher out there with some 50 million 
dollar words of man's wisdom who can straighten
everything out and get the old unregenerated fallen 
creation to heaven as is  Who needs to be born again?
 
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
writes:

  Here we have a perfect example of what modern 
  day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the 
  word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not 
  another and another. See how men help out God.
   
  I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying 
  one word?
  
  "Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly 
  charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with 
  having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles 
  in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to 
  a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion 
  employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits 
  whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out 
  by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last 
  Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
  Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi 
  had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it 
  into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the 
  fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  
  
  Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be 
  a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English 
  translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born 
  again."  
   
  JD
  ==
 Terry wrote: 
 Born again is correct. 
 
Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from 
above" the second time, wasn't the second time born 
"again"?  

  
  
   
   
   
    
  __Do You 
  Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com 
   judytThere are two C's in the 
christian lifeEither I am changing daily to be more like ChristOr I am 
being chastised by Him

[TruthTalk] Spiritual Death




Good Morning Izzy :)
 
I've been watching your interaction here with interest 
along with the hope that you will suceed in communicationg where I have 
failed but so far it does not look good.
 
bt writes: You'd better check your records, Izzy. This whole thing started 
when I pointed out that Judy too had been treating a "doctrine of man" as 
authoritative, namely, Augustine's doctrine of spiritual death. 
 
jt:  Can you help me Izzy - How does one deal 
with being called a hypocrite and a liar on 
this public list continuously by a 
professing believer who is just plain wrong? If I have 
said this once, I must have said it at least 10 times. I have never ever 

read Augustine and nothing I believe is a doctrine from 
him.  I study the scriptures and my belief concerning spiritual death 

is from my own personal study.  After I 
experienced the New Birth in my own life I already understood experientially 
what before and after were like because I began to understand spiritual truth 
and in my own personal study I saw the death God warned Adam about in Genesis 
2:17 where God told Adam that IN THE DAY he ate of a certain fruit HE WOULD 
SURELY DIE as spiritual death.  
 
bt: I had been accused of "touting" Barth and Torrance, and I was simply 
pointing out that it was not just the "libs" who treat others authoritatively. 

 
jt: This is not an accusation; Bill's doctrine has no 
clear scriptural foundation and he does quote these 
theologians.
 
bt: In point of fact, I have never had a problem with using appropriately indicative language to speak about biblical concepts, even when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I denied the 
influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same post I also wrote, 
"I have been very candid throughout about both my appreciation of Torrance and 
the influence he has had upon the formation of my beliefs -- which is indeed 
quite significant." 
 
jt: Not only is his language "non-biblical" - his 
concepts are as well.  The Bible is basically a spiritual book since God is 
a Spirit and the Bible is His revelation of Himself to humanity.  His 
servant Paul explicitly used the word I am accused of using constantly. He said 
"Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from 
God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 
These things we also speak not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the 
Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.  But the 
natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are 
foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually 
discerned.  But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is 
rightly judged by no one." (1 Corinthians 2:12-15)
 
bt: The reason that this thread took off like it did was because Judy took 
offence that I had attributed her doctrine to Augustine, claiming instead that 
he was not the one who came up with "spiritual death"; that it "is right there 
in Genesis." Well, it is not right there in Genesis. It is not anywhere. 
 
jt: Here he goes again. Calling me a liar and a 
hypocrite which is offensive - it would be to him if the shoe were on the other 
foot.
Not only that he is wrong.  Spiritual life and 
spiritual death are all over the Bible and if he is blind to this then he 
is a natural man.
 
bt: On every ocassion it is an interpretation, 
just as when I read the same Scripture pertaining to language of death and 
interpret it in a different way. So you can keep on pointing out my use of 
non-biblical termonology if you like, but it won't make much of a splash on my 
end of the pool, 'cause I'm not the hypocrite on this one.
 
jt: Let's see what the Bible says about 
interpretation.  "For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit 
of the man which is in him?  Even so no one knows the things of God except 
the Spirit of God.  Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but 
the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely 
given to us by God"  Hence we do not "interpret" nor superimpose other 
concepts willy nilly - We receive understanding by way of the 
Spirit.
 
Yes Bill you are the hypocrite on this one and you need 
to repent.
 
 
judyt
 
There are two C's in the christian lifeEither I am changing daily to be 
more like ChristOr I am being chastised by Him

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death

Here we have a perfect example of what modern day Jehudi's do to God's word. If it disagrees with their doctrine CHANGE the word. "A better translation would be 'ABOVE'" Once you change one word why not another and another. See how men help out God.
I wonder if Marcion got his start by modifying one word?

"Marcion the heretic, (AD 140) is distinctly charged by Tertullian (AD 200), and by Jerome a century and a half later, with having abundantly mutilated the text of Scripture, and of S. Paul's Epistles in particular. Epiphanius compares the writing which Marcion tampered with to a moth-eaten coat. "Instead of a stylus," says Tertullian, "Marcion employed a knife. What wonder if he omits syllables, since often he omits whole pages?" S. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Tertullian even singles out by name, accusing Marcion of having furnished it with a new title." The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark, p 106
Jer 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."
JD
==
Terry wrote: Born again is correct.
Izzy responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from above" the second time, wasn't the second time born "again"?

__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

  
  
  Footnotes in the New King James and NASV show born "from above" to be a 
  viable translation and my Brown/Comfort Greek interlinear English translation 
  actually uses "born from above" rather than "born again."  
   
  JD
  ==
 Terry wrote:  Born again is 
correct. 
 
Izzy 
responds: If you were born "from below" the first time, and "born from 
above" the second time, wasn't the second time born 
"again"?

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




 


 

  


 BT:  Paul tells 
us that Christ re-gathered all things (Eph 1.10) and that in him all 
things have their being or ontological There you go 
using one of those “nonbiblical” words, Bill. I had said 
something the other day in reference to our ontological status in 
Christ, to which you responded that you didn't understand what I was talking 
about. I used the term here to give that first statement some 
context. Yes, we sometimes use non-biblical terms to 
speak to biblical concepts. My gripe has never been that we do this. My 
gripe is with the hypocrisy of those who do the same but berate others when 
they do it.   
 
Iz: 
I find that interesting, Bill, since this whole discussion got started 
because you objected to those of us who were using the term "spiritual" 
in front of death because you considered "spiritual" to be a nonbiblical 
term.  So, since then, I've been trying to point out that you, also, 
use "nonbiblical" terms all the time. 
Right?
 
You'd better check your 
records, Izzy. This whole thing started when I pointed out that Judy too had 
been treating a "doctrine of man" as authoritative, namely, Augustine's 
doctrine of spiritual death. I had been accused of "touting" Barth 
and Torrance, and I was simply pointing out that it was not just the 
"libs" who treat others authoritatively. In point of fact, I have never had 
a problem with using appropriately indicative language to speak about 
biblical concepts, even when that language is "non-biblical." Neither have I 
denied the influence of others in my spiritual development. In that same 
post I also wrote, "I have been very candid throughout about both my 
appreciation of Torrance and the influence he has had upon the formation of 
my beliefs -- which is indeed quite significant." The reason that this 
thread took off like it did was because Judy took offence that I had 
attributed her doctrine to Augustine, claiming instead that he was not 
the one who came up with "spiritual death"; that it "is right there in 
Genesis." Well, it is not right there in Genesis. It is not anywhere. 
On every ocassion it is an interpretation, just as when I read the same 
Scripture pertaining to language of death and interpret it in a different 
way. So you can keep on pointing out my use of non-biblical termonology if 
you like, but it won't make much of a splash on my end of the pool, 
'cause I'm not the hypocrite on this one. 
 
Izzy responds: So you really don't object, on 
the grounds of being a nonbiblical term,  if we use the term "spiritual 
death" Bill?

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death




 


Iz: I'm 
sure there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-)  So are you agreeing with me 
that our physical bodies really are dying, 
Yes.

  


 
and 
you are speaking only metaphorically about our bodies being risen with 
Christ at the moment? Izzy 

Well, if I understand what you are getting at, 
this would not be metaphorical. I am talking about your existence, your 
being, that which holds you together and sustains you, and makes you real 
and gives you life. You do not have the power of existence in or of 
yourself. You are totally dependent on another for that. Neither does anyone 
else have this power. All existence is in Christ 
Jesus. It is 
in him that the real you exists. 
Bill 
 
 
Izzy responds: So you are not being 
metaphorical about my PHYSICAL BODY being currently risen in 
Christ, sitting in heaven? Really!

RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death