Re: [TruthTalk] your job
I'll be five weeks in training (indoctrination)before I start teaching. Some of it will be helpful; most of it just learning how to do things the CCA way. Bill - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:15 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] your job First day on job? How goes it.
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
DAVEH: Hmm Kevin..your admission qualifies as your second error! ;-) Kevin Deegan wrote: OK you win it takes 2 ERRORS to make it a PHONY! Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DAVEH: Would that apply to one who erroneously would suggest that all those who disagree with the LDS Church are anti-Mormons? :-) Kevin Deegan wrote: All it takes isONE internal Inconsistency or ERROR to make it a PHONY -- ~~~ 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] Clowning Around
*PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! * DAVEH: I think I finally found it, Perry..see attachment. Request to DavidM.I think it is time to replace the old Perry photo on the TT members' picture site with this new one! Charles Perry Locke wrote: Perry the Clown wrote to Blaine: PRODUCE THE PHOTOS [of perry the clown] OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Looks like the mormon boys are tag-teaming me. But, I must confess. I did not think anyone would find my clown picture on the internet (in fact, I forgot it was even posted), but Dave found it and posted it, so, Blaine, I guess I owe you an apology. I am a clown. You can call me a clown any time you wish. In all humility, Perry the Clown *PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! * DAVEH: Can it be an AH attack if there are pictures to prove it, Perry. :-D Charles Perry Locke wrote: Third, it is an ad hominem attack to call me a clown unless you have photos of my huge red nose, frizzy read hair, whiteface, painted on smile, and painted stars over my eyes! not to mention my over-baggy striped pants, red suspenders, and huge floppy shoes! I may be funny looking, but a clown I am not! Besides, I get claustrophobic in small cars EVEN WHEN BY MYSELF, MUCH MORE SO WITH 9-10 OTHER CLOWNS IN THERE WITH ME! PRODUCE THE PHOTOS OR RETRACT YOUR MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY COUNTENANCE! Perry Blaine wrote: Laugh, clown, laugh!! -- ~~~ 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. PerrytheClown.jpg -- "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 subscribed. -- ~~~ 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. attachment: Perry_the_Clown.jpg
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:13:18 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mar 12.30 'And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." To which Judy responded with ridicule, implying insteadthatJesus' statement was only in reference to the spiritual aspect, i.e., it was a reference to spiritual death and nothing else.* jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. There is no way a physically dead person can get out there and dig a hole in order to bury another physically dead person now is there?In scripture this concept of death is that of being separated from God because of sin which as I have been saying is what happened to AE in the garden. Anything else is confusion. Judy, if first century Jews prior to the cross were called to love God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, what do you suppose they were not doing when they refused to follow his Son? jt: Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Also I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. judyt Bill * When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? ... The dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Now you and Bill are contradicting each other JD. Why not just allow God's Word to do the defining. If you would rather call it "dead in trespass and sin" we can do that, but it is still a death that is in another dimension (other than physical that is). jt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:11:52 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes -- very good. Could it be that if you are following the way of God in Christ, you are as good as dead, hence "dead." ?? Bill wrote Jesus knows that his hearers will realize that dead people cannot bury dead people. Hence he knows that they will not be able to take his statement literally; they will have to conclude that the first death is representative of something other than yet similar tothe second death: in other words, they will know it is a metaphor. jt: You sure make something terribly complicated out of one sentence Bill. How would you expect thest ppl to have such a wide ranging overview which includes first and second deaths? Judy, the word "dead" is used twice in Jesus' statement, a first time and a second time: "Follow Me, and let the dead (that's the first time)bury their own dead (and that's the second time)"; hencemy reference to two "deaths," the first one being metaphorical and the second literal. Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill writes:I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Henceyou are both treating your concept as a metaphor, whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me,If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet.These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined asa similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here- When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated. jt: You arenot dealing with the truth of scripture then. You are dealingwith some"centuries old doctrine of man" Neither of youseem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblical language; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is a synthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of this doctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently by you thanby those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: No Bill - You are the one hamstrung by this doctrine. I am not dealing with any such thing and neither is Izzy; the dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around. Yet, how am I to know that this is what you are doing when I see you using the language of that old doctrine?I can't know
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
jt: You have added the requirement of being born again to the mix Bill when this is impossible under the Law. However, God is a covenant God andppl who lived under the Old Covenant or even before that who worshipped and served him with what was available to them (like Job) He calls"righteous" ... Why make it so difficult?? Leave the infants, unborn babies and mentally retarded in the hands of a faithful Creator.We don't need to be anxious over them jt On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lorddwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry fromfollowing Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family aboveJesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view "spiritual death": those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or dothey have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus.From: "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it. Thanks,Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me, If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound. ... It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet. These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined as a similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here - When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or soul death). What do you suppose it was? Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated. jt: You are not dealing with the truth of scripture then. You are dealing with some "centuries old doctrine of man" Neither of you seem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblical language; it is a
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Please don't be offended then if I point out that "two deaths" is no more of a Biblical term than "spiritual death" your objection to which began this thread. IMO your definitionis veryconfusing because a person who is dead in sin and trespasses is still able to function mentally as well as physically. jt On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:32:15 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bill wrote Jesus knows that his hearers will realize that dead people cannot bury dead people. Hence he knows that they will not be able to take his statement literally; they will have to conclude that the first death is representative of something other than yet similar tothe second death: in other words, they will know it is a metaphor. jt: You sure make something terribly complicated out of one sentence Bill. How would you expect thest ppl to have such a wide ranging overview which includes first and second deaths? Judy, the word "dead" is used twice in Jesus' statement, a first time and a second time: "Follow Me, and let the dead (that's the first time)bury their own dead (and that's the second time)"; hencemy reference to two "deaths," the first one being metaphorical and the second literal. Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill writes:I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Henceyou are both treating your concept as a metaphor, whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me,If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet.These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined asa similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here- When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated. jt: You arenot dealing with the truth of scripture then. You are dealingwith some"centuries old doctrine of man" Neither of youseem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblical language; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is a synthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of this doctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently by you thanby those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: No Bill - You are the one hamstrung by this doctrine. I am not dealing with any such thing and neither is Izzy; the dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around. Yet, how am I to know that this is what you are doing when I see you using the language of that old doctrine?I can't know that you are using it differently,until after I have been through a very long
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Neither - Bill is the one asking for a tutor. He is concerned for the wrong person. Talk with him. jt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:13:08 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who is your choice, Judy - me or G? From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this?I would very much appreciate it. Thanks, Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote:I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Henceyou are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me,If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet.These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined asa similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here- When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated. jt: You arenot dealing with the truth of scripture then. You are dealingwith some"centuries old doctrine of man" Neither of youseem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblical language; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is a synthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of this doctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently by you thanby those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: No Bill - You are the one hamstrung by this doctrine. I am not dealing with any such thing and neither is Izzy; the dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around. Yet, how am I to know that this is what you are doing when I see you using the language of that old doctrine?I can't know that you are using it differently,until after I have been through a very long process with you. Why not drop the language and then, when it is necessary, explain your concept by using "death" as the metaphor which speaks to your perceived conclusions? At least this way people will not be so likely to misunderstand you going in. jt: Why would Izzy and I assume that everyone we speak to has a load of "centuries old" doctrines of men to wade through? I had none until I began reading extra biblical stuff and as soon as I saw the conflict with the written word I layed it down fast. My daughter-in-law has a newly energized hunger for God and she is asking me about commentaries because we live in a fast food era where we want everything yesterday. However, I hesitate because I don't want to fill that God-given hunger with error thatwill slow her down. Better
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:42:18 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:46:06 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No blessing? Judy, such a comment demonstrates just how confused you really are. On many occasions, I have stated that if I were to speak of the many blessings from God, I would make you jealous. I will leave it at that. jt: You wouldn't be making me jealous JD; don't know where you would get that idea. To each his own. Why would you think we are trying to manipulate God? jt My life is absolutely full of blessings from God, Judy. jt: Not surprising since He blesses both thejust and the unjust. I explained my understanding of manipulation in the posted comments you admitted. Why you did not read them is beyond me. jt: Oh! You are calling obedience "manipulation" - what a travesty. We truly are in the last days when men will not endure sound doctrine. We didn't get the necessity for obedience out of a hat you know. As for Gary -: Honest? Most of the time noone knows what he is saying The travesty, here, is that you beliefve and teach others a gospel that simply does not work. jt: What do you mean "does not work?" Does God have to "work for us" before we choose His way? Rather we serve Him... No one argues against obedience. But to say that obedience (doing this right and doing that right) is a cornstone in our salvation is plain old pure false teaching IMO. jt: You do argue against it constantly JD and you have even renamed it "works salvation" Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walk that is no different from the core beliefs (on this subject) from the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's.. jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice has nothing at all to do with any of the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies. I assume G's honesty just as surely as I assume yours or DM. jt: What if he is a well-meaning deceived person JD? Would you still call that honest? Where is discernment? What if I have been wrong about YOU !!! To date, I have refused to consider "what if" when it comes to those on this forum.even with our Mormon friends. Please tell me why I should consider you to be honest and Gary to be something else. jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and if you are unable to recognizewhether or not a person speaks truth by God's Word then it is worse than a pointless endeavor. Works salvationism IS a doctrine of manipulation and is a false teaching. Now, that is what I believe. jt: Nobody I know of on TThas been discussing "works salvationism" JD so this is a construct of your own mind. Do you know why you resist "works salvationists"? Because you know that "works salvationism" is false doctrine. jt: Works salvationism is a non Biblical term that I never have any reason to have to deal with. I don't go to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church I do attend that way since they teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit that are evident in the lives of thos who profess to have it. Probably a roll-over from your CofC legalism trauma. Fact is God is and always has been a God of Covenant and his ppl are either covenant keepers or covenant breakers. Lance has some pie in the sky idea that for us the covenant is unilateral meaning that God does the lot and we just go on our merry way. His doctrine may back this up but the scriptures certainly do not. I am going to start tracking the times when you have answered a question with pure speculation or avoided my questioning (or others) altogether. When the time is right -- you are going to be startled. Your tactic, at that time, will included accussing me of cut and pasteand other such dishonest endeavors -- but that tactic will be considered as I track you and your buds on this action. It will take perhaps six months. I will be fully silent on this -- you all will forget I am doing this and then BAM :-) jt: What makes you think that any of us will accept such tactics as God inspired or true? I'm human and miss it at times but then so do you JD. I assume G feels the same. You will disagree, of course.We cannot help but to speak and write out of our theological construct. Your construct includes (apparently) the idea that you can judge a fellow Christian to be a disciple of Satan and that you should tellthem this -- evenfrequently. Ditto for kevin and shields. jt:: I can discern what comes from your own mouth/keyboard John and recognize the source. Accusation is never ablessing. i DON'T NEED TO DISCERN
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Contradicting each other?How so? In the phrase "let the dead bury the dead," you do not see a metaphor being used in the first case? JD-Original Message-From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 05:05:15 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Now you and Bill are contradicting each other JD. Why not just allow God's Word to do the defining. If you would rather call it "dead in trespass and sin" we can do that, but it is still a death that is in another dimension (other than physical that is). jt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:11:52 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes -- very good. Could it be that if you are following the way of God in Christ, you are as good as dead, hence "dead." ?? Bill wrote Jesus knows that his hearers will realize that dead people cannot bury dead people. Hence he knows that they will not be able to take his statement literally; they will have to conclude that the first death is representative of something other than yet similar tothe second death: in other words, they will know it is a metaphor. jt: You sure make something terribly complicated out of one sentence Bill. How would you expect thest ppl to have such a wide ranging overview which includes first and second deaths? Judy, the word "dead" is used twice in Jesus' statement, a first time and a second time: "Follow Me, and let the dead (that's the first time)bury their own dead (and that's the second time)"; hencemy reference to two "deaths," the first one being metaphorical and the second literal. Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill writes:I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Henceyou are both treating your concept as a metaphor, whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me,If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet.These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined asa similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here- When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? Why do I have a problem with this? Because of that centuries-old doctrine of "spiritual death," which literally does refer to one's spirit as being dead until it is regenerated. jt: You arenot dealing with the truth of scripture then. You are dealingwith some"centuries old doctrine of man" Neither of youseem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblical language; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is a synthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of this doctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently by you thanby those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: No Bill - You are the one hamstrung by this doctrine. I am not dealing with any such thing and neither is Izzy; the dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around. Yet, how am I to know that this is what you are doing when I see you using the language of that old doctrine?I can't know that you are using it differently,until after I have been through a very long
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Impossible under the law? Whatdoes this mean? Nicodemus was told of the new birth. New birth occurs when I turn around (repent -- change the direction, in my mind, in which I am headed) and accept the workings of God already a part of who I am. What of the thousands (IMO) of people Christ told to be "be perfect as your heavenlyFather is perfect"? That can only be accomplished with the help of the indwelling Spirit of God. God was their "heavenly Father" long before Pentecost. The indwelling Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit are two different things. Keep in mind that reconciliation (which repaired the wall of separation between God and man) was torn down in His flesh through death (Col 1:22). What was finalized on the cross was being carried out during theincarnation "ev ent" -- thus, in his flesh through death! I used to see this Colossian passage as referring to the Cross only -- as if the writer had simply said that "He hath reconciled [al things] .. at the cross." But all things were (are) reconciled in the body ofHis flesh through death. When Jesussaid "the kingdom of God is among you" He was referring to this reconciliation as taking place prior to the cross, during his (incarnational) ministry. When he offered new birth to Nicodemus before the cross, He was presenting reconciliation "in the body of His flesh." When hegave the people instruction to seek forgiveness directly from God AND to consider God to be their Father (the "Lord's Prayer"), He was, in fact, preaching the reconciliation of all things unto Hi mself in the body of His flesh. JD -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor jandgtaylor1@juno.comTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 05:25:45 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death jt: You have added the requirement of being born again to the mix Bill when this is impossible under the Law. However, God is a covenant God andppl who lived under the Old Covenant or even before that who worshipped and served him with what was available to them (like Job) He calls"righteous" ... Why make it so difficult?? Leave the infants, unborn babies and mentally retarded in the hands of a faithful Creator.We don't need to be anxious over them jt On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" wmtaylor@plains.net writes: Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lorddwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry fromfollowing Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family aboveJesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view "spiritual death": those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or dothey have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill From: "Charles Perry Locke" cpl2602@hotmail.com The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lorddwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry fromfollowing Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family aboveJesus.From: "Bill Taylor" wmtaylor@plains.net Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it. Thanks,Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me, If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound. ... It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet. These statements treat "spiritual death"
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:42:18 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:46:06 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No blessing? Judy, such a comment demonstrates just how confused you really are. On many occasions, I have stated that if I were to speak of the many blessings from God, I would make you jealous. I will leave it at that. jt: You wouldn't be making me jealous JD; don't know where you would get that idea. To each his own. Why would you think we are trying to manipulate God? jt My life is absolutely full of blessings from God, Judy. jt: Not surprising since He blesses both thejust and the unjust.THIS IS TRUE JD I explained my understanding of manipulation in the posted comments you admitted. Why you did not read them is beyond me. jt: Oh! You are calling obedience "manipulation" - what a travesty. We truly are in the last days when men will not endure sound doctrine. We didn't get the necessity for obedience out of a hat you know. As for Gary -: Honest? Most of the time noone knows what he is saying The travesty, here, is that you believe and teach others a gospel that simply does not work. jt: What do you mean "does not work?" Does God have to "work for us" before we choose His way? Rather we serve Him... WORKS SALVATION IS NOT THE GOSPEL JD No one argues against obedience. But to say that obedience (doing this right and doing that right) is a cornstone in our salvation is plain old pure false teaching IMO. jt: You do argue against it constantly JD and you have even renamed it "works salvation"ONLY BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IT IS JD Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walk that is no different from the core beliefs (on this subject)of the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's.. jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice has nothing at all to do with any of the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies. NOT AT ALL, JUDY. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND THE MORMONS OR THE RCC OR THE JW'S IS WHICH RULES YOU MUST OBEY TO GET SAVED OR TO KEEP SALVATION. ALL I HAVE HEARD FROM ANY OF YOU IS WHICH MAN, WHICH GOD, WHICH BOOK, WHAT COMMANDMENTS NONE SEEM INTERESTEDIN THEOSE THINGS THAT TRANSCEND THE OUTWARD AND THE LEGAL COMPLIANCE AND FORMULA ARE THE NAMES OF THE GAME. AS FOR ME AND MY HOUSE, I DON'T BUY IT I assume G's honesty just as surely as I assume yours or DM. jt: What if he is a well-meaning deceived person JD? Would you still call that honest? Where is discernment? What if I have been wrong about YOU !!! To date, I have refused to consider "what if" when it comes to those on this forum.even with our Mormon friends. Please tell me why I should consider you to be honest and Gary to be something else. jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and if you are unable to recognizewhether or not a person speaks truth by God's Word then it is worse than a pointless endeavor. AND YOU ARE KIDDING - RIGHT? YOU HAVE RENDERED ONE OF THE HARSHEST OF JUDGMENTS AGAINST GARY AND THEN HAVE THE WHATEVER TO WRITE THE ABOVE? PARDON ME FOR NOT TAKING YOU SERIOUSLY. AND AVOID THE REAL ISSUE, WHY DON'T YOU. EXPLAIN TO ME WHY I SHOULD ASUME YOUR HONESTY AND NOT G'S .. YOU CAN'T DO THIS, CAN YOU. Works salvationism IS a doctrine of manipulation and is a false teaching. Now, that is what I believe. jt: Nobody I know of on TThas been discussing "works salvationism" JD so this is a construct of your own mind. Do you know why you resist "works salvationists"? Because you know that "works salvationism" is false doctrine. jt: Works salvationism is a non Biblical term that I never have any reason to have to deal with. I don't go to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church I do attend that way since they teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit that are evident in the lives of thos who profess to have it. IN A COMPARISON BETWEEN WHAT I Believe AND WHAT YOU Believe, YOU WILL DISCOVER HE IDEA OF " WORKS SALVATION." AS FAR AS THE PCA -- YOUR TEACHINGS HAVE VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THAT DENOMINAION -- NEXT TO NOTHING, IN FACT. Probably a roll-over from your CofC legalism trauma. Fact is God is and always has been a God of Covenant and his ppl are either covenant keepers or covenant breakers. Lance has some pie in the sky idea that for us the covenant is unilateral meaning that God does the lot and we just go on our merry way. His doctrine may back this up but the scriptures certainly do not. I am going to start tracking the times when you have answered a question with pure speculation or avoided my questioning (or others) altogether. When the time is right -- you are going to be startled. Your tactic, at that time, will included accusing me of cut and pasteand other such dishonest endeavors -- but that tactic will be considered as I track you and your buds on this action. It will take perhaps six
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:56:08 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Impossible under the law? Whatdoes this mean? It means that thePromise of the Father who does the work and the sealing was not sent until after the death burial and resurrection of Christ. Jesus was sent as a covenant to the ppl which was in in place until post Calvary. Nicodemus was told of the new birth. New birth occurs when I turn around (repent -- change the direction, in my mind, in which I am headed) and accept the workings of God already a part of who I am. jt: Nicodemus was being prepared in the same way John the Baptist was preparing the way of the Lord.Jesustaught about the Kingdom of God which was with then and eventually would be in some of them. The devil - not God - is working in ppl who are dead in trespass and sin (Ephesians 2:1) What of the thousands (IMO) of people Christ told to be "be perfect as your heavenlyFather is perfect"? That can only be accomplished with the help of the indwelling Spirit of God. jt:God does not tell ppl to do what they are incapable of doing and when you read this into the test you are misunderstanding His Word.Being holy/perfect is being obedient to his Word and His Will under whatever Covenantal generationone is born into; it only gets complicated when we try to fit His Way into the doctrines that men have constructed. God was their "heavenly Father" long before Pentecost. jt: The Covenant was with Israel and he was a "husband" to them. However, by the time of Christ they were badly backslidden and had fallen away from God. Truth had perished in the streets. The indwelling Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit are two different things. jt: No, the Spirit is thesame Spirit and both events are a baptism of Christ. Keep in mind that reconciliation (which repaired the wall of separation between God and man) was torn down in His flesh through death (Col 1:22). jt: Rather the potential for reconciliation was now a reality; the apostles still had to go out and teach the ppl before it became real and a factor for some of them in their lives. What was finalized on the cross was being carried out during theincarnation "event" -- thus, in his flesh through death! I used to see this Colossian passage as referring to the Cross only -- as if the writer had simply said that "He hath reconciled [al things] .. at the cross." But all things were (are) reconciled in the body ofHis flesh through death. When Jesussaid "the kingdom of God is among you" He was referring to this reconciliation as taking place prior to the cross, during his (incarnational) ministry. jt: The Colossian passage does not mean that in actuality everything on earth - in heaven - and under the earth have been reconciled at the cross JD. However, this will be a reality at the end when every knee bows and every tongue confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Note the Kingdom of God among them was the fullness of the Spirit in Christ and the anointing for ministry (received at his baptism) that was on Him. Jesus defined what the Kingdom of God looks likewhen he said "if I cast out Satan with the finger of God you can know the Kingdom of God is upon you" His followers (in general) were not enabled in this way until after Pentecost although the 12 and the 70 received a special anointing when they were sent out to heal the sick and cast out devils. When he offered new birth to Nicodemus before the cross, He was presenting reconciliation "in the body of His flesh." When hegave the people instruction to seek forgiveness directly from God AND to consider God to be their Father (the "Lord's Prayer"), He was, in fact, preaching the reconciliation of all things unto Hi mself in the body of His flesh. JD jt: Where does he make Nicodemus an offer? From what I read he was teaching Nicodemus. Yes he taught the ppland prepared them for the reality which came post resurrection when the Holy Spirit brought back to their remembrance everything He had said. judytFrom: Judy Taylor jandgtaylor1@juno.com jt: You have added the requirement of being born again to the mix Bill when this is impossible under the Law. However, God is a covenant God andppl who lived under the Old Covenant or even before that who worshipped and served him with what was available to them (like Job) He calls"righteous" ... Why make it so difficult?? Leave the infants, unborn babies and mentally retarded in the hands of a faithful Creator.We don't need to be anxious over them jt On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" wmtaylor@plains.net writes: Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
I have not one time claimed that Jesus' statement pertained to physically dead people buryingthe dead. This is your confusion, Judy -- not mine. If you are so base as to draw that conclusion, how are you competent to draw any conclusions? Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:57 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:13:18 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mar 12.30 'And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." To which Judy responded with ridicule, implying insteadthatJesus' statement was only in reference to the spiritual aspect, i.e., it was a reference to spiritual death and nothing else.* jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. There is no way a physically dead person can get out there and dig a hole in order to bury another physically dead person now is there?In scripture this concept of death is that of being separated from God because of sin which as I have been saying is what happened to AE in the garden. Anything else is confusion. Judy, if first century Jews prior to the cross were called to love God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, what do you suppose they were not doing when they refused to follow his Son? jt: Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Also I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. judyt Bill * When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? ... The dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Are you Perry? I didn't think so. bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 3:25 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death jt: You have added the requirement of being born again to the mix Bill when this is impossible under the Law. However, God is a covenant God andppl who lived under the Old Covenant or even before that who worshipped and served him with what was available to them (like Job) He calls"righteous" ... Why make it so difficult?? Leave the infants, unborn babies and mentally retarded in the hands of a faithful Creator.We don't need to be anxious over them jt On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lorddwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry fromfollowing Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family aboveJesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view "spiritual death": those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or dothey have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are"spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lorddwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry fromfollowing Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family aboveJesus.From: "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it. Thanks,Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A "spiritually dead" person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't "get it" about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me, If folks in that condition die to today they are hell-bound. ... It simply defines for us that they are not actually physically dead yet. These statements treat "spiritual death" in a metaphorical sense and not a literal one. jt: Sounds to me as though you are evading the point Bill - what difference does the word make life is life and death is death so far as God is concerned - now what does He mean by this concept? You ask in a separate post what the difference is between us? The difference is this: I let the word "death" or "dead" supply the metaphor without adding "spiritual" to it. You add a word and then treat the two -- spiritual + death -- as a metaphor for something else, as you both explain above. jt: I have a question. What kind of death is God talking about then? In the garden Adam died the day he ate from the wrong tree, yet he lived another 960yrs physically and the whole time he had a working body, a conscious soul, and a spirit (albeit one that had lost communion with God). Since a metaphor is defined as a similitude reduced to a single word - your definition is in error. God is not using similitude or metaphor here - When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or soul death). What do you
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling this person to follow him? And were only certain Jews supposed tolove God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS, they are so obvious as to not require answers. Also I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. Judy, you are the one who made a big issue out of distinguishing things before the cross and after the cross. I simply satisfied your criterion and asked questions pertaining to a time prior to the cross. Yes, "dead" is used of people on both sides of the cross. However after the cross it is used in a past tense, i.e, you were dead. The cross stands as that which gave them life. Bill - Original Message - From: Bill Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 7:17 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death I have not one time claimed that Jesus' statement pertained to physically dead people buryingthe dead. This is your confusion, Judy -- not mine. If you are so base as to draw that conclusion, how are you competent to draw any conclusions? Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:57 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:13:18 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mar 12.30 'And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." To which Judy responded with ridicule, implying insteadthatJesus' statement was only in reference to the spiritual aspect, i.e., it was a reference to spiritual death and nothing else.* jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. There is no way a physically dead person can get out there and dig a hole in order to bury another physically dead person now is there?In scripture this concept of death is that of being separated from God because of sin which as I have been saying is what happened to AE in the garden. Anything else is confusion. Judy, if first century Jews prior to the cross were called to love God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, what do you suppose they were not doing when they refused to follow his Son? jt: Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Also I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. judyt Bill * When He says "death" he means "death" and since the death Adam experienced that day was not physical, nor was it alzheimers (brain or souldeath). What do you suppose it was? ... The dead burying their dead is not speaking of physical or soulish death since they were able to dig a hole and had presence of mind enough not to let a dead body just lay around.
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:36:49 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:jt: Not surprising since He blesses both the just and the unjust. jd: THIS IS TRUE JD jt: What do you mean "does not work?" Does God have to "work for us" before we choose His way? Rather we serve Him... jd: WORKS SALVATION IS NOT THE GOSPEL JD jt: You do argue against obedience constantly JD and you have even renamed it "works salvation" jd: ONLY BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IT IS JD Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walk that is no different from the core beliefs (on this subject) of the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's.. jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice has nothing at all to do with any of the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies. Anyway lawlessness is no more the gospel than what you call "works salvation" jd: NOT AT ALL, JUDY. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND THE MORMONS OR THE RCC OR THE JW'S IS WHICH RULES YOU MUST OBEY TO GET SAVED OR TO KEEP SALVATION. ALL I HAVE HEARD FROM ANY OF YOU IS WHICH MAN, WHICH GOD, WHICH BOOK, WHAT COMMANDMENTS NONE SEEM INTERESTED IN THEOSE THINGS THAT TRANSCEND THE OUTWARD AND THE LEGAL COMPLIANCE AND FORMULA ARE THE NAMES OF THE GAME. AS FOR ME AND MY HOUSE, I DON'T BUY IT jt: Ok JD, put some feet to your accusations and tell me which man I am assigned to while you elevate the RCC church fathers? jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and if you are unable to recognize whether or not a person speaks truth by God's Word then it is worse than a pointless endeavor. jd:AND YOU ARE KIDDING - RIGHT? YOU HAVE RENDERED ONE OF THE HARSHEST OF JUDGMENTS AGAINST GARY AND THEN HAVE THE WHATEVER TO WRITE THE ABOVE? PARDON ME FOR NOT TAKING YOU SERIOUSLY. AND AVOID THE REAL ISSUE, WHY DON'T YOU. EXPLAIN TO ME WHY I SHOULD ASUME YOUR HONESTY AND NOT G'S .. YOU CAN'T DO THIS, CAN YOU. Do you know why you resist "works salvationists" ? Because you know that "works salvationism" is false doctrine. jt: I agree it is every bit as false as lawlessness but never have any reason to have to deal withthis since I don't go to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church I do attend that way since they teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit that is evident in the lives of those who profess to follow Jesus. jd: IN A COMPARISON BETWEEN WHAT I Believe AND WHAT YOU Believe, YOU WILL DISCOVER HE IDEA OF " WORKS SALVATION." AS FAR AS THE PCA -- YOUR TEACHINGS HAVE VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THAT DENOMINAION -- NEXT TO NOTHING, IN FACT. jt: From what I read JDyour beliefs change continually alsoand you are wrong about the PCA. I very seriously doubt that you know what they teach and believe. The problem with this is probably a roll-over from your CofC legalism trauma. Fact is God is and always has been a God of Covenant and his ppl are either covenant keepers or covenant breakers. Lance has some pie in the sky idea that for usthe covenant is unilateral meaning that God does the lot and we just go on our merry way. His doctrine mayback this up but the scriptures certainly do not. jd: I am going to start tracking the times when you have answered a question with pure speculation or avoided my questioning (or others) altogether. When the time is right -- you are going to be startled. Your tactic, at that time, will included accusing me of cut and paste and other such dishonest endeavors -- but that tactic will be considered as I track you and your buds on this action. It will take perhaps six months. I will be fully silent on this -- you all will forget I am doing this and then BAM :-) jt: What makes you think that any of us will accept such tactics as God inspired or true? I'm human and miss it at times but then so do you JD. jd:I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT MISSING IT AT TIMES - I SPEAK OF AVOIDANCE, SPECULATION AND JUDGMENTALISM. I assume G feels the same. You will disagree, of course. We cannot help but to speak and write out of our theological construct. Your construct includes (apparently) the idea that you can judge a fellow Christian to be a disciple of Satan and that you should tell them this -- even frequently. Ditto for kevin and shields. jt:: I can discern what comes out of your own mouth/keyboard John and I can recognize the source of same. Accusation is never a blessing to those on the other side. jd: i DON'T NEED TO DISCERN ANYTHING IN THIS PRESENT DISTRESS. ALL I NEED TO DO IS TO BE ABLE TO READ. If you do not see the source in my life as being the Spirit of God, you and all who agree with you are have nothing to do with God in that c consideration. Nothing. And you transgress I don't know how many scriptures - thank God we don;t have to be right to be saved. jt: Oh? So we can be totally wrong and still be saved?What is the point of
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:56:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling this person to follow him? jt: He said this to one of his disciples - they are the ones who travelled with him for 3 1/2yrs; he did send out the 70 to do the work of the ministry but ppl were not called and invited to His Kingdom until the Promise was sent on the day of Pentecost because the covenant was not ratified until there was a death. And were only certain Jews supposed tolove God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS, they are so obvious as to not require answers. jt: They are only obvious in your mind Bill. Loving God under the Old Covenant was obeying the law of Moses. The ministry of the Son was teaching about and introducing a "New and Living Way" available to them upon his death. I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. Judy, you are the one who made a big issue out of distinguishing things before the cross and after the cross. jt: Things - having to do with covenants Bill. Before the cross it was through Moses and then it changed. Do you have a problem with this?? I simply satisfied your criterion and asked questions pertaining to a time prior to the cross. Yes, "dead" is used of people on both sides of the cross. However after the cross it is used in a past tense, i.e, you were dead. jt: More accurately "after the New Birth" In Ephesians 2:1 Paul is addressing the church. the cross in and of itself did not change the hearts of those who would not receive God's Word. The ones who received the power to become sons of God (John 1:12) are the ones who "received Him" The cross stands as that which gave them life. Bill jt: The cross always represents death. judyt - Original Message - From: Bill Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 7:17 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death I have not one time claimed that Jesus' statement pertained to physically dead people buryingthe dead. This is your confusion, Judy -- not mine. If you are so base as to draw that conclusion, how are you competent to draw any conclusions? Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:57 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:13:18 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mar 12.30 'And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." To which Judy responded with ridicule, implying insteadthatJesus' statement was only in reference to the spiritual aspect, i.e., it was a reference to spiritual death and nothing else.* jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. There is no way a physically dead person can get out there and dig a hole in order to bury another physically dead person now is there?In scripture this concept of death is that of being separated from God because of sin which as I have been saying is what happened
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
The prison is in lock-down today -- some kind of weapons violation; hence no one goes in and no one comes out. And so,for those who may be wondering,I am at home for the time being and not at work. Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt Judy, you are the one who is constantly ridiculing others for referring to the Christ event (the life, death, resurrection, and ascension) rather than to"the cross." If I had said instead that the Christ event stands as that which gave them life, what would your response have been? You are being ridiculous. jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60. Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definition you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:23 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:56:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling this person to follow him? jt: He said this to one of his disciples - they are the ones who travelled with him for 3 1/2yrs; he did send out the 70 to do the work of the ministry but ppl were not called and invited to His Kingdom until the Promise was sent on the day of Pentecost because the covenant was not ratified until there was a death. And were only certain Jews supposed tolove God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS, they are so obvious as to not require answers. jt: They are only obvious in your mind Bill. Loving God under the Old Covenant was obeying the law of Moses. The ministry of the Son was teaching about and introducing a "New and Living Way" available to them upon his death. I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. Judy, you are the one who made a big issue out of distinguishing things before the cross and after the cross. jt: Things - having to do with covenants
RE: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Myth. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 9:03 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter' Blainer: Are you confusing Joseph Smith with God? God was the one quoting scripture when He spoke to Joseph Smith. He (God) is the same, yesterday, today, and forever, is my point. He does not change. In a message dated 7/24/2005 8:17:40 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JSmith was no Jesus. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 10:44 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter' Blainerb: Why do you not believe God can use his own words from thescriptures to express his displeasure over a current situation? Jesus often quoted the scriptures to the Jews to makea point. In the book of Matthew, the writer (Matthew) often does much the same thing. A departure from this would have indicated the story was false.
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead. But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit. Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." Bill
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill, Spiritual death is as much a reality as is physical death. Do you agree? (Please answer.) It means spiritual separation from Godhell bound. Jesus just called it dead. Would you prefer that we call people dead like Jesus did, rather than clarifying which type of death we are referring to? (Please answer.) Do you object to us using the term physical death? (Please answer.) If not, why the objection to us using the term spiritual death? (Please answer.) Thanks, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word dead and the second time he uses the word dead. The first reference to dead has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to dead.The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in spiritual to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat spiritual death itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day. Hence, byyour own definition you treat spiritual death as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat their spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Would you like it better if I said Dead to the things of God??? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:02 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead. But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit. Bill
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Izzy in red: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:16 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? Yes, to the things of God. If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? By His grace alone. Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? How can an alive spirit be regenerated and made alive, Bill? How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. You think Im digressing? You are my friend, also, Bill. Im trying to help both of you. iz Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead. But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit. Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:45:31 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The prison is in lock-down today -- some kind of weapons violation; hence no one goes in and no one comes out. And so,for those who may be wondering,I am at home for the time being and not at work. Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt Judy, you are the one who is constantly ridiculing others for referring to the Christ event (the life, death, resurrection, and ascension) rather than to"the cross." If I had said instead that the Christ event stands as that which gave them life, what would your response have been? You are being ridiculous. jt: So far as I'm concerned Bill "the Christ event" is not biblical language at all; it means something to those of you who have embraced this distinction. To me the cross means death - covenant death - which can be applied to us ONLY as we are willing to die to the old and embrace the new. Walking after the flesh and being carnally minded is still death - even on this side of the cross. jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60. Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. jt: But you define Luke 9:60 this way Bill. I am trying to point out to you that this promotes confusion; it is so much easier to allow God's Word to define these things because it is always consistent and there is no such confusion. I don't believe seeking truth and examining it against error is obstinance, it should be normal christian living. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. jt: Both are literal. One is spiritual and the other physical. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definition you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. jt: Then I was not being clear, I should have used different words. Spiritual death is as literal as physical death; it is walking in sin/ transgression which separates one from God. Why don't we leave Augustine out of this Bill since he has nothing to do with anything. Augustine did not pay the price for my sin and Augustine didn't draw meto the kingdom of God, nor did he revealtruth to me; he stands or falls before the same Lord as me and that is it. Also I have to wonder why it doesn't bother you to make the accusation above. Is there no fear of the Lord with you Bill? Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead. jt: Augustine may have a doctrine - I don't. I just accept the clear teaching of God's Word about this. Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill From: Judy Taylor On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:56:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:15:37 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? Uh, Oh! I knew there was more than Augustine involved here. Here we go - Calvinism 101. I'll have to go get my TULIP acronym out and brush up on it. I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. Bill jt: What a sweet fellow you are Bill wanting to give me all that help. Only thing is you can't find it in God's Word and must depend on semantics and ancient creeds. From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill you also wrote: Neither of you seem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblicallanguage; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is asynthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of thisdoctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently byyou than by those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: So Bill, you can't see scripture clearly because you are locked into Augustine above and then later you write Bill: Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? jt:You do not understand this concept in a biblical way Bill, to do so you will have todispense with Augustinian and Calvinistic eyeglasses Do you see thatyou claim metaphorin the discussion onLuke 9:60 and then go on to talk about Calvin's corpse conceptand nothaving a choice (which is"literal" taken to the extreme) rather than the metaphor. Can you see how doctrinal understandings that come from men are contradictory and cause confusion? Much better to allow the Holy Spirit to reveal God's Word and give us understanding. That way we don't have to cut anything out and it is not complicated. Really.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Got pay ??? -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:45:31 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The prison is in lock-down today -- some kind of weapons violation; hence no one goes in and no one comes out. And so,for those who may be wondering,I am at home for the time being and not at work. Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt Judy, you are the one who is constantly ridiculing others for referring to the Christ event (the life, death, resurrection, and ascension) rather than to"the cross." If I had said instead that the Christ event stands as that which gave them life, what would your response have been? You are being ridiculous. jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60. Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definit ion you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:23 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:56:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling this person to follow him? jt: He said this to one of his disciples - they are the ones who travelled with him for 3 1/2yrs; he did send out the 70 to do the work of the ministry but ppl were not called and invited to His Kingdom until the Promise was sent on the day of Pentecost because the covenant was not ratified until there was a death. And were only certain Jews supposed tolove God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS, they are so obvious as to not require answers. jt: They are only obvious in your mind Bill. Loving God under the Old Covenant was obeying the law of Moses. The ministry of the Son was teaching about and introducing a "New and Living Way" available to them upon his death. I would like to point out that the same _expression_ is used in the parable of the Prodigal Son who was dead in the pigpen and returned to life after a change of heart (now is alive). It is also used in Ephesians 2:1 and in 1 Timothy 5:6. Judy, you are the one who made a big issue out of distinguishing things before the cross and after the cross. jt: Things - having to do with covenants Bill. Before the cross it was through Moses and then it changed. Do you have
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
- Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, Spiritual death is as much a reality as is physical death. Do you agree? (Please answer.) No, I do not agree. This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something elso, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. It means spiritual separation from Godhell bound. Jesus just called it dead. Would you prefer that we call people dead like Jesus did, rather than clarifying which type of death we are referring to? (Please answer.) I wouldmuchprefer that you speak of it as Jesus did. And if you insist on then explaining his metaphor as being a reference to the spiritual aspect of personhood, then by all means go ahead as you have been doing and distinguish that this too (i.e., spiritual+death) is a metaphor for "separation from God." We will still disagree, but we will not be misleading ourselves with termonology which has stood for centuries as literal spiritual death. Do you object to us using the term physical death? (Please answer.) Do I do not -- but neither is there a long-standing, non-biblical doctrine of spiritual death, which stands in the way of our discussion, confusing our use of the term. If not, why the objection to us using the term spiritual death? (Please answer.) Because when you use this term, you open the door to no end of confusion, as demonstrated by our present discussion. You are not using the term in the way that those who coined it, used it. NOR are you using it in the way that the church has traditionally used it. You are using it in a different way. Hence in order to be understood, you have to be able to nuance it -- and that takes time. Why not drop the termonology and speak instead to the conclusion you have drawn from this metaphor? Bill Thanks, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definition you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Yes, that would at least leave open the possibility for further discussion, without first having to muddle our way through the nuancing of an existing doctrine. Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:22 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Would you like it better if I said Dead to the things of God??? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamilySent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:02 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
heal! On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:08:10 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jd: WORKS SALVATION IS NOT THE GOSPEL JD jt: You..argue against obedience [training] constantly JD.. renamed it "works salvation"
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
- Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:26 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Izzy in red: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:16 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? Yes, to the things of God.If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? By His grace alone. Then you are taking the Augustinian/Calvinist/traditional stance on this doctrine. The only ones who have the capability of believing are those whom God quickens to life; if he does not quicken you, you are left in yoursins and completely dead, dead, dead to the things of God. Hence you have no ability nor desire to even want to make a free-will choice to serve God.Is this yourposition? If it is not then I would suggest that you are not treating the spirit as if it were literally dead, as in spiritually dead. Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? How can an alive spirit be regenerated and made alive, Bill? I am not treating the language literally, Izzy. You are. Now you tell me the answers to your questions. How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. You think Im digressing? You are my friend, also, Bill. Im trying to help both of you. iz Thank you, Izzy. I consider you a friend as well; however I also think you are digressing, if indeed you are now treating the spiritual aspect of personhood as being literally dead. Not even Judy is willing to go that far: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Moreover, when I pointed this out to you (her comments), along with comments that you had made, you agreed, stating "Yes. I see spiritually dead pretty much as you describe here IF you are assuming the person is dead (not alive) to things of the Holy Spirit (and hell-bound), which I think you do." To which I was able to agree, precisely because we were speaking of people who had been called to follow Jesus, but were rejecting him instead. Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: "those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit." Bill
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Judy, you are building a strawman. Please either stick with the discussion or drop it altogether. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:22 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill you also wrote: Neither of you seem to "get it" that "spiritual death" is not biblicallanguage; it is a doctrine which speaks to biblical concepts; it is asynthesis, a conclusion. You have picked up on the language of thisdoctrine, but the concepts that it represents are treated differently byyou than by those who adhere to the classic doctrine. jt: So Bill, you can't see scripture clearly because you are locked into Augustine above and then later you write Bill: Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? jt:You do not understand this concept in a biblical way Bill, to do so you will have todispense with Augustinian and Calvinistic eyeglasses Do you see thatyou claim metaphorin the discussion onLuke 9:60 and then go on to talk about Calvin's corpse conceptand nothaving a choice (which is"literal" taken to the extreme) rather than the metaphor. Can you see how doctrinal understandings that come from men are contradictory and cause confusion? Much better to allow the Holy Spirit to reveal God's Word and give us understanding. That way we don't have to cut anything out and it is not complicated. Really.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Yes, it's a salaried position; however I would be getting overtime, had I have been their and had to stay over. Bill - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Got pay ??? -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:45:31 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The prison is in lock-down today -- some kind of weapons violation; hence no one goes in and no one comes out. And so,for those who may be wondering,I am at home for the time being and not at work. Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt Judy, you are the one who is constantly ridiculing others for referring to the Christ event (the life, death, resurrection, and ascension) rather than to"the cross." If I had said instead that the Christ event stands as that which gave them life, what would your response have been? You are being ridiculous. jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60. Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definit ion you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely out of your considerations. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:23 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:56:22 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jt: Bill, I don't see it as ridicule to say what the Bible says. The Bible doesn't say anything about spiritual death. That is something you are adding. Why don't you treat yourself with the scrutiny you exact on others? Why don't you say what the Bible says? jt: I try to exact the same scrutiny on myself and I want to say what the Bible says. the 2nd death is described in Revelation 21:8 and is different from what Jesus speaks of in Luke 9:60.Only disciples were being called to follow the son at this point (Matt 8:22, Luke 9:60)- Whom was Jesus calling when he said, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead"? Do you deny that he was calling this person to follow him? jt: He said this to one of his disciples - they are the ones who travelled with him for 3 1/2yrs; he did send out the 70 to do the work of the ministry but ppl were not called and invited to His Kingdom until the Promise was sent on the day of Pentecost because the covenant was not ratified until there was a death. And were only certain Jews supposed tolove God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and the rest were exempt? What do you suppose this Jew was not doing when he refused to follow God's Son? You don't have to answer these questions, Judy; they are rhetorical: one of those confusing linguistic constructs. IN OTHER WORDS,
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
(a command which is impossible to obey) On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:26:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: heal! On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:08:10 -0400 Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: jd: WORKS SALVATION IS NOT THE GOSPEL JD jt: You..argue against obedience [training] constantly JD.. renamed it "works salvation"
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
I'll correct some typos below. - Original Message - From: Bill Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, Spiritual death is as much a reality as is physical death. Do you agree? (Please answer.) No, I do not agree. This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something else, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. It means spiritual separation from Godhell bound. Jesus just called it dead. Would you prefer that we call people dead like Jesus did, rather than clarifying which type of death we are referring to? (Please answer.) I wouldmuchprefer that you speak of it as Jesus did. And if you insist on then explaining his metaphor as being a reference to the spiritual aspect of personhood, then by all means go ahead as you have been doing and distinguish that this too (i.e., spiritual+death) is a metaphor for "separation from God." We will still disagree, but we will not be misleading ourselves with termonology which has stood for centuries as literal spiritual death. Do you object to us using the term physical death? (Please answer.) No, I do not -- but neither is there a long-standing, non-biblical doctrine of physical death, which stands in the way of our discussion, confusing our use of the term. If not, why the objection to us using the term spiritual death? (Please answer.) Because when you use this term, you open the door to no end of confusion, as demonstrated by our present discussion. You are not using the term in the way that those who coined it, used it. NOR are you using it in the way that the church has traditionally used it. You are using it in a different way. Hence in order to be understood, you have to be able to nuance it -- and that takes time. Why not drop the termonology and speak instead to the conclusion you have drawn from this metaphor? Bill Thanks, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word "dead" and the second time he uses the word "dead." The first reference to "dead" has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to "dead."The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in "spiritual" to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat "spiritual death" itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Hence, byyour own definition you treat "spiritual death" as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself. Please just stop being so obstinate about this --either that or go ahead and embrace Augustine's positionand treat your doctrine of spiritual death in the same way as he: that spiritual death meansthat "their" spirit is literally dead.Then at least you will not have to concede that spiritual death is metaphorical of something else. If you won't do this, then do whatever you want:just leave my comments completely
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
An excellent point G. But so is your comment equating obedience to training. In a time when it is admitted that righteousness does not come by the Law, the place of obedience is, perhaps, better understood as a "fitting" or a "training. Thanks. You got the juices flowing once again. Et al: a few comments from Bonhoeffer: He does not have the power of being for me; He is the power Christ stands for His new humanity before God. But if tht is so, He is the new humanity...therefore in Him, mankind is crucified, dead and judged." D Bonhoeffer, Christ The Center, p 48. Bonhoeffer was murdered in 1945. I believe this was written in 1906. Anyone with a better guess? JD -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:59:22 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 (a command which is impossible to obey) On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:26:57 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: heal! On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:08:10 -0400 Judy Taylor jandgtaylor1@juno.com writes: jd: WORKS SALVATION IS NOT THE GOSPEL JD jt: You..argue against obedience [training] constantly JD.. renamed it "works salvation"
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt jd writes: He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD jt: I always have plenty to do JD and am never, ever bored. You must have really struggled over those to points - neither having to do with the cross. which not only is shameful, it is offensive. The Romans made it intentionally so, it was nothing to be desired.. Jesus endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb 12:2b Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, een the death of the cross Phil 2:8 Many walk who are enemies of the cross whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who glory in their shame Phil 3:18 I brethren if I yet preach circumcision why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased Gal 5:11 If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me Where do you find life in any of the above JD?
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Actually, when John said, ...I would make you jealous, I thought he was using a metaphor to say I have many blessings, or you would be surprised at how much I have been blessed. I didn't think he was really assuming any other believer would be jealous. We use similar phrases all the time. I have more blessings than Carter has pills. (How many pills does Carter have?) I have more blessings than you can shake a stick at!. (Exactly how many is too many to shake a stick at?) Was I being naive in reading his comment that way? Do you think he seriously meant that you would really be jealous? Maybe he did...I don't know. Perry From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org CC: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:33:56 -0400 This is so true Izzy - I hope and pray for many more blessings on both JD and Bill . Judyt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:05:42 -0500 ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I find it interesting the JD would assume that another Believer would be jealous of his blessings. That is a mighty sour assumption for one walking in love. Love rejoices at the blessings of another, and such is what we Believers walk in. Love also assumes the best of others unless there is a compelling reason not to. I wish only many more blessings to you JD, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:42:18 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:46:06 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No blessing? Judy, such a comment demonstrates just how confused you really are. On many occasions, I have stated that if I were to speak of the many blessings from God, I would make you jealous. I will leave it at that. jt: You wouldn't be making me jealous JD; don't know where you would get that idea. To each his own. Why would you think we are trying to manipulate God? jt My life is absolutely full of blessings from God, Judy. jt: Not surprising since He blesses both the just and the unjust. I explained my understanding of manipulation in the posted comments you admitted. Why you did not read them is beyond me. jt: Oh! You are calling obedience manipulation - what a travesty. We truly are in the last days when men will not endure sound doctrine. We didn't get the necessity for obedience out of a hat you know. As for Gary -: Honest? Most of the time noone knows what he is saying The travesty, here, is that you beliefve and teach others a gospel that simply does not work. jt: What do you mean does not work? Does God have to work for us before we choose His way? Rather we serve Him... No one argues against obedience. But to say that obedience (doing this right and doing that right) is a cornstone in our salvation is plain old pure false teaching IMO. jt: You do argue against it constantly JD and you have even renamed it works salvation Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walk that is no different from the core beliefs (on this subject) from the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's.. jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice has nothing at all to do with any of the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies. I assume G's honesty just as surely as I assume yours or DM. jt: What if he is a well-meaning deceived person JD? Would you still call that honest? Where is discernment? What if I have been wrong about YOU !!! To date, I have refused to consider what if when it comes to those on this forum.even with our Mormon friends. Please tell me why I should consider you to be honest and Gary to be something else. jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and if you are unable to recognize whether or not a person speaks truth by God's Word then it is worse than a pointless endeavor. Works salvationism IS a doctrine of manipulation and is a false teaching. Now, that is what I believe. jt: Nobody I know of on TT has been discussing works salvationism JD so this is a construct of your own mind. Do you know why you resist works salvationists ? Because you know that works salvationism is false doctrine. jt: Works salvationism is a non Biblical term that I never have any reason to have to deal with. I don't go to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church I do attend that way since they teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit that are evident in the lives of thos who profess to have it. Probably a roll-over from your CofC legalism trauma. Fact is God is and always has been a God of Covenant and his ppl are either covenant keepers or covenant breakers. Lance has some pie in the sky idea that for us the covenant is unilateral meaning that God does the lot and we just go on our merry way. His doctrine may back this up but the scriptures certainly do
[TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
Bill writes: This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something else, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. jt: No Bill "It is Bible truth" Why don't we leave the Greeks out there with Augustine, Calvin, and their metaphors and begin to study God's Word with a clear mind and an open heart. He has a lot to say about life and death. Why not allow Him to define His terms for us and open our hearts to see what He has to sayabout the issues of life. The writers of Greek mythology did not know God and what's more He divides soul and spirit Himself since this is the ministry of his Word (Hebrews 4:12) the sword of the Spirit which discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. We know that there is a spirit in man (Job 32:8) and Job knew it. The wisdom of God tells us "the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord" (Prov 20:27) and that Perverseness is a breach in the spirit (Prov 15:4). The Lord says "I formeth the spirit of man within him (Zech 12:1) There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about God is a spirit (John 4:24) Man is a spirit (Num 16:22, Num 27:16, 1 Thess 5:23) Satan is a spirit (Deut 18:11, Isa 8:19, Isa 19:3) and angels are spirits Sin or perverseness is a breach in the spirit - so how does God define life and death is itphysical ONLY? DEATH LIFE are in the power of the tongue (Prov 18:21) An evil man is snared by the transgression of his lips (Prov12:13) The one who guards his mouth preserves his life (Prov 13:3) From the fruit of a man's mouth he enjoys good (Prov 13:2) For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words, you shall be condemned (Matt 12:37) So what EMPOWERS the tongue and determines this fruit? The mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart; the good man out of his good treasure brings forth what is good and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth what is evil (Matt 12:34) Looks like we have a HEART PROBLEM Bill and since heart/spirit are one and the same this is basically a spiritual problem and it has nothing at all to do with Greek Mythology, Augustine, or Calvin. It is scripture. The Words of God. judyt
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
Please do not respond to the comments I make to other people, Judy. I will show the same courtesy to you. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:46 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death Bill writes: This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something else, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. jt: No Bill "It is Bible truth" Why don't we leave the Greeks out there with Augustine, Calvin, and their metaphors and begin to study God's Word with a clear mind and an open heart. He has a lot to say about life and death. Why not allow Him to define His terms for us and open our hearts to see what He has to sayabout the issues of life. The writers of Greek mythology did not know God and what's more He divides soul and spirit Himself since this is the ministry of his Word (Hebrews 4:12) the sword of the Spirit which discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. We know that there is a spirit in man (Job 32:8) and Job knew it. The wisdom of God tells us "the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord" (Prov 20:27) and that Perverseness is a breach in the spirit (Prov 15:4). The Lord says "I formeth the spirit of man within him (Zech 12:1) There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about God is a spirit (John 4:24) Man is a spirit (Num 16:22, Num 27:16, 1 Thess 5:23) Satan is a spirit (Deut 18:11, Isa 8:19, Isa 19:3) and angels are spirits Sin or perverseness is a breach in the spirit - so how does God define life and death is itphysical ONLY? DEATH LIFE are in the power of the tongue (Prov 18:21) An evil man is snared by the transgression of his lips (Prov12:13) The one who guards his mouth preserves his life (Prov 13:3) From the fruit of a man's mouth he enjoys good (Prov 13:2) For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words, you shall be condemned (Matt 12:37) So what EMPOWERS the tongue and determines this fruit? The mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart; the good man out of his good treasure brings forth what is good and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth what is evil (Matt 12:34) Looks like we have a HEART PROBLEM Bill and since heart/spirit are one and the same this is basically a spiritual problem and it has nothing at all to do with Greek Mythology, Augustine, or Calvin. It is scripture. The Words of God. judyt
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
If you don't want a public response Bill then you will need to write to them off-line. I will show the same courtesy when I desire privacy. judyt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:53:45 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please do not respond to the comments I make to other people, Judy. I will show the same courtesy to you. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:46 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death Bill writes: This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something else, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. jt: No Bill "It is Bible truth" Why don't we leave the Greeks out there with Augustine, Calvin, and their metaphors and begin to study God's Word with a clear mind and an open heart. He has a lot to say about life and death. Why not allow Him to define His terms for us and open our hearts to see what He has to sayabout the issues of life. The writers of Greek mythology did not know God and what's more He divides soul and spirit Himself since this is the ministry of his Word (Hebrews 4:12) the sword of the Spirit which discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. We know that there is a spirit in man (Job 32:8) and Job knew it. The wisdom of God tells us "the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord" (Prov 20:27) and that Perverseness is a breach in the spirit (Prov 15:4). The Lord says "I formeth the spirit of man within him (Zech 12:1) There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about God is a spirit (John 4:24) Man is a spirit (Num 16:22, Num 27:16, 1 Thess 5:23) Satan is a spirit (Deut 18:11, Isa 8:19, Isa 19:3) and angels are spirits Sin or perverseness is a breach in the spirit - so how does God define life and death is itphysical ONLY? DEATH LIFE are in the power of the tongue (Prov 18:21) An evil man is snared by the transgression of his lips (Prov12:13) The one who guards his mouth preserves his life (Prov 13:3) From the fruit of a man's mouth he enjoys good (Prov 13:2) For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words, you shall be condemned (Matt 12:37) So what EMPOWERS the tongue and determines this fruit? The mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart; the good man out of his good treasure brings forth what is good and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth what is evil (Matt 12:34) Looks like we have a HEART PROBLEM Bill and since heart/spirit are one and the same this is basically a spiritual problem and it has nothing at all to do with Greek Mythology, Augustine, or Calvin. It is scripture. The Words of God. judyt
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Again, I am just amazed that you would argue this point with BT. I know of absolutely no on who would correct BT on this : "the cross stands as that which gave them life." . Life as a result of the cross??? You want "evidence" of life as a result of the cross !!! absolutely incredble. SIMPLE. He has reconciled all things unto Himself (Col 1:20 and IN HIM IS LIFE, Judy Taylor, or do you now deny this). Withthe cross, He has made peace (and I see life in this peace -- perhaps you don't). In the body of His flesh through death [on the cross]He is presenting us to be holy, beyond judgment and above reproach IN HIS SIGHT - a condition of living or life. Heb 1:9 tells us that He tasted death for all of mankind -- the promise, then, of lifeproceeds from this insurance. HE DIED THAT WE MIGHT LIVE is the whole point of Heb 1:9. In the comments you posted below, youquote If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. Because you do not see life in "follow me" is not my problem. Heb 3:14-15 tells us that it was through His death that Satan was destroyed -- who had the power death AND (through His death) gave release to those who feared death unto bondage. BECAUSE OF THEVICTORY THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE Cross, WE HAVE COMPLETE AND TOTAL VICTORY OVER HIM WHO HAD THE POWER OF DEATH --- LIFE, JUDY, LIFE !!! No wonder you do not understand the gospel of Grace. You haven't a clue as to what the cross of Christ is all about. You might read Hebrews -- so much of this book is about the effect of the cross on us, individually and upon mankind as a whole. JD -Original Message-From: Judy Taylor jandgtaylor1@juno.comTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:44:06 -0400Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 knpraise@aol.com writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt jd writes: He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD jt: I always have plenty to do JD and am never, ever bored. You must have really struggled over those to points - neither having to do with the cross. which not only is shameful, it is offensive. The Romans made it intentionally so, it was nothing to be desired.. Jesus endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb 12:2b Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, een the death of the cross Phil 2:8 Many walk who are enemies of the cross whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who glory in their shame Phil 3:18 I brethren if I yet preach circumcision why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased Gal 5:11 If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me Where do you find life in any of the above JD?
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Blainerb: Here is a closer approximation of the truth regards the translation of the BoM. Kevin's version is, naturally, taken from his favorite anti-Mormon sites. Of course you IGNORE the fact that Joe was a Warlock. A number of "LDS" Historians have written scholarly articles books on this subject Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, (Signature Books, SLC, 2002, pp. 2-7,66,169). Palmer is an LDS seminary teacher and three-time director of LDS Institutes of Religion in California and Utah; D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1987; revised, expanded 1998, pp. 41-ff); James E. Lancaster, "By the Gift and Power of God," Saints Herald, 109:22 (November 15, 1962) pp. 14-18, 22, 33; Edward H. Ashment, "The Book of Mormon A Literal Translation," Sunstone, 5:2 (March-April 1980), pp. 10-14; Richard S. Van Wagoner and Steven C. Walker in "Joseph Smith: The Gift of Seeing," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 15:2 (Summer 1982), pp. 48-68; Blake T. Ostler, "The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 20:1 (Spring 1987), pp. 66-123; Stephen D. Ricks, "The Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon," Foundation for Ancient Research Mormon Studies, official F.A.R.M.S. transcript of video lecture, 1994, 16 pages; As far as the translation process, the updated story modified for consumption bymodern LDS, Joe put the plates on a table. The witnesses of ALL the scribes, Unfortunately denies the modern modified story. The quotes previously provided come right from the only people who were EYEWITNESSES. It is their testimony. Your complaint is with them.You can deny it, but facts are stubborn things. Emma Hale Smith wife of Joe FIRST scribeTESTIFIED "with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us." ALL THREE of the BoM Witnesses including: David Whitmer scribeTESTIFIED"put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine." "He did not use the plates in translation" "The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret, was the same as when he looked for the money-diggers, with a stone in his hat, and his hat over his face, while the Book of Plates were at the same time hid in the woods." Affidavit of Isaac Hale dated March 20, 1834 Here is a scan of the source documents:http://www.irr.org/mit/Translation%20or%20Divination%20Packet.pdf__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
Is this not being intentionally quarrelsome, Judy? Please respect my request and stay out of my conversations. I will do the same for you. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 3:02 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death If you don't want a public response Bill then you will need to write to them off-line. I will show the same courtesy when I desire privacy. judyt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:53:45 -0600 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please do not respond to the comments I make to other people, Judy. I will show the same courtesy to you. Bill - Original Message - From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:46 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death Bill writes: This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something else, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the "second death," as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. jt: No Bill "It is Bible truth" Why don't we leave the Greeks out there with Augustine, Calvin, and their metaphors and begin to study God's Word with a clear mind and an open heart. He has a lot to say about life and death. Why not allow Him to define His terms for us and open our hearts to see what He has to sayabout the issues of life. The writers of Greek mythology did not know God and what's more He divides soul and spirit Himself since this is the ministry of his Word (Hebrews 4:12) the sword of the Spirit which discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. We know that there is a spirit in man (Job 32:8) and Job knew it. The wisdom of God tells us "the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord" (Prov 20:27) and that Perverseness is a breach in the spirit (Prov 15:4). The Lord says "I formeth the spirit of man within him (Zech 12:1) There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about God is a spirit (John 4:24) Man is a spirit (Num 16:22, Num 27:16, 1 Thess 5:23) Satan is a spirit (Deut 18:11, Isa 8:19, Isa 19:3) and angels are spirits Sin or perverseness is a breach in the spirit - so how does God define life and death is itphysical ONLY? DEATH LIFE are in the power of the tongue (Prov 18:21) An evil man is snared by the transgression of his lips (Prov12:13) The one who guards his mouth preserves his life (Prov 13:3) From the fruit of a man's mouth he enjoys good (Prov 13:2) For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words, you shall be condemned (Matt 12:37) So what EMPOWERS the tongue and determines this fruit? The mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart; the good man out of his good treasure brings forth what is good and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth what is evil (Matt 12:34) Looks like we have a HEART PROBLEM Bill and since heart/spirit are one and the same this is basically a spiritual problem and it has nothing at all to do with Greek Mythology, Augustine, or Calvin. It is scripture. The Words of God. judyt
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Thank you. And if any on this forum were to respond by saying, "On yeah, I have more blessings than you" I would smile,nod my head in agreement and say "praise the Lord." JD-Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke cpl2602@hotmail.comTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:41:59 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 Actually, when John said, "...I would make you jealous", I thought he was using a metaphor to say "I have many blessings", or "you would be surprised at how much I have been blessed". I didn't think he was really assuming any other believer would be jealous. We use similar phrases all the time. "I have more blessings than Carter has pills". (How many pills does Carter have?) "I have more blessings than you can shake a stick at!". (Exactly how many is too many to shake a stick at?)Was I being naive in reading his comment that way? Do you think he seriously meant that you would really be jealous? Maybe he did...I don't know.PerryFrom: Judy Taylor jandgtaylor1@juno.comReply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCC: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:33:56 -0400This is so true Izzy - I hope and pray for many more blessings on both JDand Bill . JudytOn Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:05:42 -0500 "ShieldsFamily"[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Judy, I find it interesting the JD would assume that another Believerwould be ?jealous? of his blessings. That is a mighty sour assumptionfor one walking in love. Love rejoices at the blessings of another, andsuch is what we Believers walk in. Love also assumes the best of othersunless there is a compelling reason not to. I wish only many moreblessings to you JD, IzzyFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Judy TaylorOn Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:42:18 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:46:06 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:No blessing? Judy, such a comment demonstrates just how confusedyou really are. On many occasions,I have stated that if I were to speak of the many blessings from God, Iwould make you jealous. I will leave it at that.jt: You wouldn't be making me jealous JD; don't know where you would getthat idea. To each his own.Why would you think we are trying to manipulate God? jtMy life is absolutely full of blessings from God, Judy.jt: Not surprising since He blesses both the just and the unjust.I explained my understanding of manipulation in the posted comments youadmitted. Why you did not readthem is beyond me.jt: Oh! You are calling obedience "manipulation" - what a travesty. Wetruly are in the last days when men will notendure sound doctrine. We didn't get the necessity for obedience out of ahat you know . As for Gary -: Honest?Most of the time noone knows what he is sayingThe travesty, here, is that you beliefve and teach others a gospel thatsimply does not work.jt: What do you mean "does not work?" Does God have to "work for us"before we choose His way?Rather we serve Him...No one argues against obedience. But to say that obedience (doing thisright and doing that right) is a cornstone in our salvation is plain oldpure false teaching IMO.jt: You do argue against it constantly JD and you have even renamed it"works salvation"Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walkthat is no different from thecore beliefs (on this subject) from the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's..jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice hasnothing at all to do with anyof the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies.I assume G's honesty just as surely as I assume yours or DM.jt: What if he is a well-meaning deceived person JD? Would you stillcall that honest? Where is discernment?What if I have been wrong about YOU !!! To date, I have refused toconsider "w hat if" when it comes to those on this forum.even withour Mormon friends. Please tell me why I should consider you to behonest and Gary to be something else.jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and ifyou are unable to recognize whether or not a person speaks truth by God'sWord then it is worse than a pointless endeavor.Works salvationism IS a doctrine of manipulation and is a false teaching. Now, that is what I believe.jt: Nobody I know of on TT has been discussing "works salvationism" JD sothis is a construct of your own mind.Do you know why you resist " works salvationists" ? Because you knowthat "works salvationism"is false doctrine.jt: Works salvationism is a non Biblical term that I never have anyreason to have to deal with. I don'tgo to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church Ido attend that way sincethey teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit thatare evident in the lives of thoswho profess to have it.Probably a roll-over from your CofC legalism trauma. Fact is God is andalways has been a God of Covenantand his ppl are either
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about Well, at least you admit just how out of step you are in this discussion between Bill and , and, I have forgotten. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:09:28 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Again, I am just amazed that you would argue this point with BT. I know of absolutely no on who would correct BT on this : "the cross stands as that which gave them life." . Life as a result of the cross??? You want "evidence" of life as a result of the cross !!! absolutely incredble. jt: The cross ministers death JD, death to Him and death to our old man. It was at the resurrection that Jesus became a life-giving spirit - see the mystery of godliness. Christ was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received into glory. SIMPLE. He has reconciled all things unto Himself (Col 1:20 and IN HIM IS LIFE, Judy Taylor, or do you now deny this). Withthe cross, He has made peace (and I see life in this peace -- perhaps you don't). In the body of His flesh through death [on the cross]He is presenting us to be holy, beyond judgment and above reproach IN HIS SIGHT - a condition of living or life. Heb 1:9 tells us that He tasted death for all of mankind -- the promise, then, of lifeproceeds from this insurance. HE DIED THAT WE MIGHT LIVE is the whole point of Heb 1:9. In the comments you posted below, youquote jt: The above istrue JD but pointless withoutthe cross in our own lives because the same principle is true and "except a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies it abides alone". Unless we were crucified with Him which involves reckoning the old man dead and being quickened to newness of life - we are alone. Cross or no cross. If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. Because you do not see life in "follow me" is not my problem. jt: I don't see any life without first denying self and dealing with sin in our own lives and your sin IS your problem Heb 3:14-15 tells us that it was through His death that Satan was destroyed -- who had the power death AND (through His death) gave release to those who feared death unto bondage. BECAUSE OF THEVICTORY THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE Cross, WE HAVE COMPLETE AND TOTAL VICTORY OVER HIM WHO HAD THE POWER OF DEATH --- LIFE, JUDY, LIFE !!! jt: Sure hate to burst the bubble JD but Satan has not yet been destroyed. He is still around so that he may try the saints to see who will stand by faith and who will not. If you are not in the battle then you are already whipped. The power of sin is what has been defeated, that is, the penalty for past sin, along with the power and presence of present sin - on condition that we fall out of agreement with it. Satan's day is coming. No wonder you do not understand the gospel of Grace. You haven't a clue as to what the cross of Christ is all about. You might read Hebrews -- so much of this book is about the effect of the cross on us, individually and upon mankind as a whole. JD On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 knpraise@aol.com writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt jd writes: He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD jt: I always have plenty to do JD and am never, ever bored. You must have really struggled over those to points - neither having to do with the cross. which not only is shameful, it is offensive. The Romans made it intentionally so, it was nothing to be desired.. Jesus endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb 12:2b Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, een the death of the cross Phil 2:8 Many walk who are enemies of the cross whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who glory in their shame Phil 3:18 I brethren if I yet preach circumcision why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased Gal 5:11 If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me Where do you find life in any of the above JD?
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual Death
jt: The jury is out on that JD We will see who is left standing and who Jesus calls an overcomer at the end. judyt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:26:27 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a whole spirit realm out there that probably 90% of professing christendom is ignorant about Well, at least you admit just how out of step you are in this discussion between Bill and , and, I have forgotten. JD
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:09:28 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Again, I am just amazed that you would argue this point with BT. I know of absolutely no on who would correct BT on this : "the cross stands as that which gave them life." . Life as a result of the cross??? You want "evidence" of life as a result of the cross !!! absolutely incredble. jt: The cross ministers death JD, death to Him and death to our old man. It was at the resurrection that Jesus became a life-giving spirit - see the mystery of godliness. Christ was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received into glory. "death to the old man" means "life" to a reasonable person. SIMPLE. He has reconciled all things unto Himself (Col 1:20 and IN HIM IS LIFE, Judy Taylor, or do you now deny this). Withthe cross, He has made peace (and I see life in this peace -- perhaps you don't). In the body of His flesh through death [on the cross]He is presenting us to be holy, beyond judgment and above reproach IN HIS SIGHT - a condition of living or life. Heb 1:9 tells us that He tasted death for all of mankind -- the promise, then, of lifeproceeds from this insurance. HE DIED THAT WE MIGHT LIVE is the whole point of Heb 1:9. In the comments you posted below, youquote jt: The above istrue JD but pointless withoutthe cross in our own lives because the same principle is true and "except a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies it abides alone". Unless we were crucified with Him which involves reckoning the old man dead and being quickened to newness of life - we are alone. Cross or no cross.You blaspheme the Cross dening Jesus' words "it is finished." If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. Because you do not see life in "follow me" is not my problem. jt: I don't see any life without first denying self and dealing with sin in our own lives and your sin IS your problem Again, you blaspheme the Cross -- arguing that His work of death did not destroy Satan. Heb 3:14-15 tells us that it was through His death that Satan was destroyed -- who had the power death AND (through His death) gave release to those who feared death unto bondage. BECAUSE OF THEVICTORY THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE Cross, WE HAVE COMPLETE AND TOTAL VICTORY OVER HIM WHO HAD THE POWER OF DEATH --- LIFE, JUDY, LIFE !!! jt: Sure hate to burst the bubble JD but Satan has not yet been destroyed. Just quoting scripture, Judy - kinda of word for word !!! You want to change the wording of the Message, have at it. I accept Heb 3:14-15and try to bring my theology intoline with those words - you do not. He is still around so that he may try the saints to see who will stand by faith and who will not. If you are not in the battle then you are already whipped. The power of sin is what has been defeated, that is, the penalty for past sin, along with the power and presence of present sin - on condition that we fall out of agreement with it. Satan's day is coming. Satan has no power over me - sorry about you. No wonder you do not understand the gospel of Grace. You haven't a clue as to what the cross of Christ is all about. You might read Hebrews -- so much of this book is about the effect of the cross on us, individually and upon mankind as a whole. JD On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 knpraise@aol.com writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt jd writes: He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD jt: I always have plenty to do JD and am never, ever bored. You must have really struggled over those to points - neither having to do with the cross. which not only is shameful, it is offensive. The Romans made it intentionally so, it was nothing to be desired.. Jesus endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb 12:2b Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, een the death of the cross Phil 2:8 Many walk who are enemies of the cross whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who glory in their shame Phil 3:18 I brethren if I yet preach circumcision why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased Gal 5:11 If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me Where do you find life in any of the above JD?
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied.I guess they did not try real hard: "sometimes Joseph used a seer stone when enquiring of the Lord, and receiving revelation" Report of Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith, Concluded", Deseret Evening News, 23 Nov, 1878 "The statement has been made that the Urim and Thummim was on the altar in the Manti Temple when that building was dedicated. The Urim and Thummim so spoken of, however, was the seer stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days. This seer stone is now in the possession of the Church" Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956), 3:225. PICS of MAGICAL MORMON SEER PEEP STONES http://www.realmormonhistory.com/pixof.htm Some years before, he said, his son had happened upon a man who looked into a dark stone and told people where to dig for money and other things. "Joseph requested the privilege of looking into the stone, which he did by putting his face into the hat where the stone was." Interview with the Father of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet, Forty Years Ago; Historical Magazine 7, May 1870, 305-306 The SEER STONE referred to here was a chocolate-colored, somewhat egg-shaped stone which the Prophet found while digging a well... It possessed the qualities of Urim and Thummim, since by means of itas described aboveas well as by means of the Interpreters found with the Nephite record, Joseph was able to translate the characters engraven on the plates. History of the Church Vol 1 P129 Question 10. Was not Jo Smith a money digger.Answer. YES, but it was never a very proffitable job to him, as he only got fourteen dollars a month for it. Elders' Journal, July, 1838, p.43; reprinted in the History of the Church, Vol. 3, page 29 LDS STILL BELIEVE IN CRYSTAL BALLS! EVERYONE GETS ONE: "Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation 2:17, will become a Urim and Thummim to each individual who receives one, whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known. And a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word"DC 130:10-11 God lives on a CRYSTAL BALL: "The place where God resides is a great Urim and Thummin." DC130:8 The Earth will become a GIANT CRYSTAL BALL TO FORETELL ALL: "This earth, in it's sanctified and immortal state, will be made like unto crystal and will be a Urim and Thummim to the inhabitants who dwell thereon, whereby all things pertaining to an inferior kingdom, or all kingdoms of a lower order, will be manifest to those who dwell on it; and this earth will be Christ's. DC 130:9http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/130 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:09:28 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Again, I am just amazed that you would argue this point with BT. I know of absolutely no on who would correct BT on this : "the cross stands as that which gave them life." . Life as a result of the cross??? You want "evidence" of life as a result of the cross !!! absolutely incredble. jt: The cross ministers death JD, death to Him and death to our old man. It was at the resurrection that Jesus became a life-giving spirit - see the mystery of godliness. Christ was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received into glory. "death to the old man" means "life" to a reasonable person. jt: Reasonable or religious JD? You argue that the law has been done away with but ATST you claim that we can't help but sin every day. Scripture tells us that walking in sin and carnality is walking in death. You can't have it both ways. SIMPLE. He has reconciled all things unto Himself (Col 1:20 and IN HIM IS LIFE, Judy Taylor, or do you now deny this). Withthe cross, He has made peace (and I see life in this peace -- perhaps you don't). In the body of His flesh through death [on the cross]He is presenting us to be holy, beyond judgment and above reproach IN HIS SIGHT - a condition of living or life. Heb 1:9 tells us that He tasted death for all of mankind -- the promise, then, of lifeproceeds from this insurance. HE DIED THAT WE MIGHT LIVE is the whole point of Heb 1:9. In the comments you posted below, youquote jt: The above istrue JD but pointless withoutthe cross in our own lives because the same principle is true and "except a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies it abides alone". Unless we were crucified with Him which involves reckoning the old man dead and being quickened to newness of life - we are alone. Cross or no cross. You blaspheme the Cross dening Jesus' words "it is finished." jt: When it finished for Him it was just beginning for us. If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. Because you do not see life in "follow me" is not my problem. jt: I don't see any life without first denying self and dealing with sin in the flesh and your own daily sin IS your problem Again, you blaspheme the Cross -- arguing that His work of death did not destroy Satan. jt: Satan was defeated at the cross JD. He has not been destroyed as yet and is still busy because he knows his time is short. Heb 3:14-15 tells us that it was through His death that Satan was destroyed -- who had the power death AND (through His death) gave release to those who feared death unto bondage. BECAUSE OF THEVICTORY THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE Cross, WE HAVE COMPLETE AND TOTAL VICTORY OVER HIM WHO HAD THE POWER OF DEATH --- LIFE, JUDY, LIFE !!! jt: You have taken a little license here JD have you not? "that through death he (Jesus) might destroy him that had the power of death that is the devil and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage" OK, Jesus has the victory over sin and death; you don't have it until you take it. I sure hate to burst the bubble JD but Satan has not yet been destroyed even though the victory is won. Just quoting scripture, Judy - kinda of word for word !!! You want to change the wording of the Message, have at it. I accept Heb 3:14-15and try to bring my theology intoline with those words - you do not. jt: No I don't want to change the words but neither do I want to add meaning to the text that is not there. Satan has been left here and isstill around so that he may try the saints to see who will stand by faith and who will not. If you are not in the battle then you are already whipped. The power of sin is what has been defeated, that is, the penalty for past sin, along with the power and presence of present sin - on condition that we fall out of agreement with it. Satan's day is coming. Satan has no power over me - sorry about you. Oh really? Who is it who tempts you to accuse the brethren. You can not say he has no power over you so long as sin still reigns in your life. No wonder you do not understand the gospel of Grace. You haven't a clue as to what the cross of Christ is all about. You might read Hebrews -- so much of this book is about the effect of the cross on us, individually and upon mankind as a whole. JD On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 knpraise@aol.com writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Ill try to keep that in mind. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:24 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Yes, that would at least leave open the possibility for further discussion, without first having to muddle our way through the nuancing of an existing doctrine. Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:22 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Would you like it better if I said Dead to the things of God??? iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:02 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead. But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit. Bill
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Izzy in red: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:22 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, Spiritual death is as much a reality as is physical death. Do you agree? (Please answer.) No, I do not agree. This term is either an unbiblical doctrine(cf. as set forth in the Augustinian/Calvinist position) or it is metaphorical language and as such it is representative of something elso, which may be real (cf. this has been your position).In reality, and this is my position, it is not something which takes place in the absence of physical death, and in view of the resurrection of the dead, it is only something which could happen in the second death, as set forth in thebook ofRevelation. Humans are non-reductive wholes. You have said so yourself. You can talk about the differnent aspects of personhood, but once you separate them and call one dead and the rest alive, you are no longer talking about humans.A personis either alive, or he is dead, but he is not partly this and partly that. That is Greek mythology. Oh, at least now I think I understand where you are coming from, and your bias against the term, although I dont necessarily agree. I still think that you can be alive physically but not alive to the things of God. I was thinking about the terms born again vs born, and this caused me to think about the fact that an unborn fetus is alive, but it still needs to be born. That is us spirituallywe can be physically born, but not born into the realm of Gods Kingdom. We need to be quickened by the Holy Spirit. What do you think of that analogy? It means spiritual separation from Godhell bound. Jesus just called it dead. Would you prefer that we call people dead like Jesus did, rather than clarifying which type of death we are referring to? (Please answer.) I wouldmuchprefer that you speak of it as Jesus did. And if you insist on then explaining his metaphor as being a reference to the spiritual aspect of personhood, then by all means go ahead as you have been doing and distinguish that this too (i.e., spiritual+death) is a metaphor for separation from God. We will still disagree, but we will not be misleading ourselves with termonology which has stood for centuries as literal spiritual death. Okay, but I think youll be pretty confused if I tell you that the mormons are dead. J Do you object to us using the term physical death? (Please answer.) Do I do not -- but neither is there a long-standing, non-biblical doctrine of spiritual death, which stands in the way of our discussion, confusing our use of the term. If not, why the objection to us using the term spiritual death? (Please answer.) Because when you use this term, you open the door to no end of confusion, as demonstrated by our present discussion. I wasnt confused at all until I got into this conversation with you. J Am I the first person to tell you that you seem to take the simple and make it confusing? You are not using the term in the way that those who coined it, used it. NOR are you using it in the way that the church has traditionally used it. You are using it in a different way. Hence in order to be understood, you have to be able to nuance it -- and that takes time. Why not drop the termonology and speak instead to the conclusion you have drawn from this metaphor? Actually, I thought spiritually dead did just that. Bill Thanks, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Judy, I've already clarified this. Why the obstinance? Once again, AND PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, I am not distinguishing between the first death and the second death as mentioned in Revelation. Let go of that fallacious idea. I am distinguishing between the two deaths mentioned in Jesus' statement: the first time he uses the word dead and the second time he uses the word dead. The first reference to dead has to be understood as speaking to a different situation than the second reference to dead.The first reference is a metaphor; the second reference is literal. You plug in spiritual to satisfy the metaphor, as did Augustine and many since him.BUT unlikeAugustine,you then treat spiritual death itself as a metaphor and not as a literal spiritual death.I will quote you again: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day. Hence, byyour own definition you treat spiritual death as a metaphor which speaks to something else. Now, you don't have to admit this, but if you won't, why don't you just drop it? You are making a fool of yourself.
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Izzy in bold blue: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:49 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:26 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Izzy in red: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:16 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? Yes, to the things of God.If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? By His grace alone. Then you are taking the Augustinian/Calvinist/traditional stance on this doctrine. The only ones who have the capability of believing are those whom God quickens to life; if he does not quicken you, you are left in yoursins and completely dead, dead, dead to the things of God. Hence you have no ability nor desire to even want to make a free-will choice to serve God.Is this yourposition? If it is not then I would suggest that you are not treating the spirit as if it were literally dead, as in spiritually dead. No, actually Im not familiar with their stances. But I have stated before that I believe God extends His grace to every person, but most refuse it. (The parable of the wedding feast illustrates this.) Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? How can an alive spirit be regenerated and made alive, Bill? I am not treating the language literally, Izzy. You are. Now you tell me the answers to your questions. Yes, I always attempt to receive the words of scripture literally first, and then as parable or metaphor or something else only if that is obviously not possible. How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. You think Im digressing? You are my friend, also, Bill. Im trying to help both of you. iz Thank you, Izzy. I consider you a friend as well; however I also think you are digressing, if indeed you are now treating the spiritual aspect of personhood as being literally dead. Not even Judy is willing to go that far: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day. Moreover, when I pointed this out to you (her comments), along with comments that you had made, you agreed, stating Yes. I see spiritually dead pretty much as you describe here IF you are assuming the person is dead (not alive) to things of the Holy Spirit (and hell-bound), which I think you do. To which I was able to agree, precisely because we were speaking of people who had been called to follow Jesus, but were rejecting him instead. Again, trying to grasp your meaning is like nailing jello to the wall. Whenever I think we agree on a point it turns out things are just half a bubble off. Please tell me, though, if you can the answer to my question: How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? Thanks for your patience. izzy Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy I told Izzy that I thought there was aspiritual element included in Jesus' statement: Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead. But I also told her that I thought it was not just directed at the spirit aspect of personhood: those who reject Christ are doing so with their entire being -- mind, body, soul, and spirit. Bill
RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Yes, Judy, the cross means death to self and alive to Christ. Which means life. You are both right. J izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 1:44 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:12:33 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bill wrote The cross stands as that which gave them life. jt: The cross always represents death. judyt jd writes: He died that we might live..that's life as opposed to death He has reconciled all things unto Himself -- and in Him is the word, LIFE and light. You are arguing, now, just to hear your head rattle. To disagree with Bill on this point is so far out there as to make it clear that you just don't have anything to do this morning; if you agree, end of discussion and BAM --- nothing much to do!! JD jt: I always have plenty to do JD and am never, ever bored. You must have really struggled over those to points - neither having to do with the cross. which not only is shameful, it is offensive. The Romans made it intentionally so, it was nothing to be desired.. Jesus endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb 12:2b Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, een the death of the cross Phil 2:8 Many walk who are enemies of the cross whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who glory in their shame Phil 3:18 I brethren if I yet preach circumcision why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased Gal 5:11 If any man will come after me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me Where do you find life in any of the above JD?
RE: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Why don't you ask John. He has made this same statement many times, and I think he really means it, as if to gloat or something. izzy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:42 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 Actually, when John said, ...I would make you jealous, I thought he was using a metaphor to say I have many blessings, or you would be surprised at how much I have been blessed. I didn't think he was really assuming any other believer would be jealous. We use similar phrases all the time. I have more blessings than Carter has pills. (How many pills does Carter have?) I have more blessings than you can shake a stick at!. (Exactly how many is too many to shake a stick at?) Was I being naive in reading his comment that way? Do you think he seriously meant that you would really be jealous? Maybe he did...I don't know. Perry From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org CC: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:33:56 -0400 This is so true Izzy - I hope and pray for many more blessings on both JD and Bill . Judyt On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:05:42 -0500 ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I find it interesting the JD would assume that another Believer would be jealous of his blessings. That is a mighty sour assumption for one walking in love. Love rejoices at the blessings of another, and such is what we Believers walk in. Love also assumes the best of others unless there is a compelling reason not to. I wish only many more blessings to you JD, Izzy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:42:18 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:46:06 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No blessing? Judy, such a comment demonstrates just how confused you really are. On many occasions, I have stated that if I were to speak of the many blessings from God, I would make you jealous. I will leave it at that. jt: You wouldn't be making me jealous JD; don't know where you would get that idea. To each his own. Why would you think we are trying to manipulate God? jt My life is absolutely full of blessings from God, Judy. jt: Not surprising since He blesses both the just and the unjust. I explained my understanding of manipulation in the posted comments you admitted. Why you did not read them is beyond me. jt: Oh! You are calling obedience manipulation - what a travesty. We truly are in the last days when men will not endure sound doctrine. We didn't get the necessity for obedience out of a hat you know. As for Gary -: Honest? Most of the time noone knows what he is saying The travesty, here, is that you beliefve and teach others a gospel that simply does not work. jt: What do you mean does not work? Does God have to work for us before we choose His way? Rather we serve Him... No one argues against obedience. But to say that obedience (doing this right and doing that right) is a cornstone in our salvation is plain old pure false teaching IMO. jt: You do argue against it constantly JD and you have even renamed it works salvation Such people deny the Spirit of God for others and lead people into a walk that is no different from the core beliefs (on this subject) from the Mormons, the RCC and the JW's.. jt: Plain old unadulterated nonsense JD. What I believe and practice has nothing at all to do with any of the above which are all exclusive man made hierarchies. I assume G's honesty just as surely as I assume yours or DM. jt: What if he is a well-meaning deceived person JD? Would you still call that honest? Where is discernment? What if I have been wrong about YOU !!! To date, I have refused to consider what if when it comes to those on this forum.even with our Mormon friends. Please tell me why I should consider you to be honest and Gary to be something else. jt: I don't think you should be judging either of us personally JD and if you are unable to recognize whether or not a person speaks truth by God's Word then it is worse than a pointless endeavor. Works salvationism IS a doctrine of manipulation and is a false teaching. Now, that is what I believe. jt: Nobody I know of on TT has been discussing works salvationism JD so this is a construct of your own mind. Do you know why you resist works salvationists ? Because you know that works salvationism is false doctrine. jt: Works salvationism is a non Biblical term that I never have any reason to have to deal with. I don't go to those places - but then you would probably define the PCA Church I do attend that way since they teach that true faith will have corresponding actions or fruit that are evident in the lives of thos who profess to have it. Probably a
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that we are blessed in following theadvice 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 -
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Morehear-say from Kevin's anti-Mormon sites, none of which can be verified by first-hand documentation. Warlock? LOL I bet he's been watching "Charmed." See Below for truth -- Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied. In a message dated 7/26/2005 3:12:04 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: Here is a closer approximation of the truth regards the translation of the BoM. Kevin's version is, naturally, taken from his favorite anti-Mormon sites. Of course you IGNORE the fact that Joe was a Warlock. A number of "LDS" Historians have written scholarly articles books on this subject Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, (Signature Books, SLC, 2002, pp. 2-7,66,169). Palmer is an LDS seminary teacher and three-time director of LDS Institutes of Religion in California and Utah; D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1987; revised, expanded 1998, pp. 41-ff); James E. Lancaster, "By the Gift and Power of God," Saints Herald, 109:22 (November 15, 1962) pp. 14-18, 22, 33; Edward H. Ashment, "The Book of Mormon — A Literal Translation," Sunstone, 5:2 (March-April 1980), pp. 10-14; Richard S. Van Wagoner and Steven C. Walker in "Joseph Smith: The Gift of Seeing," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 15:2 (Summer 1982), pp. 48-68; Blake T. Ostler, "The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 20:1 (Spring 1987), pp. 66-123; Stephen D. Ricks, "The Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon," Foundation for Ancient Research Mormon Studies, official F.A.R.M.S. transcript of video lecture, 1994, 16 pages; As far as the translation process, the updated story modified for consumption bymodern LDS, Joe put the plates on a table. The witnesses of ALL the scribes, Unfortunately denies the modern modified story. The quotes previously provided come right from the only people who were EYEWITNESSES. It is their testimony. Your complaint is with them.You can deny it, but facts are stubborn things. Emma Hale Smith wife of Joe FIRST scribeTESTIFIED "with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us." ALL THREE of the BoM Witnesses including: David Whitmer scribeTESTIFIED"put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine." "He did not use the plates in translation" "The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret, was the same as when he looked for the money-diggers, with a stone in his hat, and his hat over his face, while the Book of Plates were at the same time hid in the woods." Affidavit of Isaac Hale dated March 20, 1834 Here is a scan of the source documents:http://www.irr.org/mit/Translation%20or%20Divination%20Packet.pdf
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Blainerb: One of Kevin's favorite tricks--take something out of context, then prove it wrong. The entire context is on one of my previous posts, but here it is again--as can be seen, my post states that the use of the seer stone is a well documented fact. Kevin knows it was stated in my post as such, and still tries to make it appear as thoughthe "late reports" refer tothe seer stone. Seethe ENTIRE context of the part of my post being referred to below: "Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied." In a message dated 7/26/2005 3:42:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied.I guess they did not try real hard: "sometimes Joseph used a seer stone when enquiring of the Lord, and receiving revelation" Report of Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith, Concluded", Deseret Evening News, 23 Nov, 1878 ***Blainer: why are you repeating what I already indicated was true--this proves nothing for your agenda, only mine. "The statement has been made that the Urim and Thummim was on the altar in the Manti Temple when that building was dedicated. The Urim and Thummim so spoken of, however, was the seer stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days. This seer stone is now in the possession of the Church" Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956), 3:225. **Blainerb: Aren't you just setting up a little straw man here, Kevin? In fact, most of your stuffdoes just that.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
In a message dated 7/26/2005 6:23:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, at least now I think I understand where you are coming from, and your bias against the term, although I don’t necessarily agree. I still think that you can be alive physically but not alive to the things of God. I was thinking about the terms born again vs born, and this caused me to think about the fact that an unborn fetus is alive, but it still needs to be born. That is us spiritually—we can be physically born, but not born into the realm of God’s Kingdom. We need to be quickened by the Holy Spirit. What do you think of that analogy? I agree--as would most Mormons, Izzy. That's because it is the truth as most Christians understand it. You see, we are not all that different from traditional Christians like yourself huh? Blainerb
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
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 allow 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 thatobedience 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 (Rom 4). JD-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton wabbits1234@earthlink.netTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that we are blessed in following theadvice 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 -
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Hi Izzy, thanks for your patience too. It is very much appreciated. I am working on a response to your question and will get it posted as soon as I can. Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:24 PM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Izzy in bold blue: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:49 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:26 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Izzy in red: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:16 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually separated from Him (deadnot physically but spiritually!). Izzy Do you mean that their spirits are literally dead? Yes, to the things of God.If so, then how can they, of their own free will, choose to serve God? By His grace alone. Then you are taking the Augustinian/Calvinist/traditional stance on this doctrine. The only ones who have the capability of believing are those whom God quickens to life; if he does not quicken you, you are left in yoursins and completely dead, dead, dead to the things of God. Hence you have no ability nor desire to even want to make a free-will choice to serve God.Is this yourposition? If it is not then I would suggest that you are not treating the spirit as if it were literally dead, as in spiritually dead. No, actually Im not familiar with their stances. But I have stated before that I believe God extends His grace to every person, but most refuse it. (The parable of the wedding feast illustrates this.) Wouldn't the spiritual aspect of their beings have to be regenerated before that choice could be made? In other words, how could a dead spirit choose to become a live spirit, one which could respond to God in service to him? How can an alive spirit be regenerated and made alive, Bill? I am not treating the language literally, Izzy. You are. Now you tell me the answers to your questions. Yes, I always attempt to receive the words of scripture literally first, and then as parable or metaphor or something else only if that is obviously not possible. How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? I know you want to help your friend, and she certainly needs all the help you can give her, but please don't digress. That only adds further confusion to the discussion. You think Im digressing? You are my friend, also, Bill. Im trying to help both of you. iz Thank you, Izzy. I consider you a friend as well; however I also think you are digressing, if indeed you are now treating the spiritual aspect of personhood as being literally dead. Not even Judy is willing to go that far: "This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both in the last day." Moreover, when I pointed this out to you (her comments), along with comments that you had made, you agreed, stating "Yes. I see spiritually dead pretty much as you describe here IF you are assuming the person is dead (not alive) to things of the Holy Spirit (and hell-bound), which I think you do." To which I was able to agree, precisely because we were speaking of people who had been called to follow Jesus, but were rejecting him instead. Again, trying to grasp your meaning is like nailing jello to the wall. Whenever I think we agree on a point it turns out things are just half a bubble off. Please tell me, though, if you can the answer to my question: How is one regenerated if one was not dead in the first place? Thanks for your patience. izzy Bill - Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, the reason they arent serving God with their mind, body, soul is because they are spiritually
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Pitiful. === [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 allow 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 thatobedience 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 (Rom 4). JD -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton wabbits1234@earthlink.net To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that we are blessed in following theadvice 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 -
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Bill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes spiritually alive. Often, this is referred to as quickeneing. Check out these verses: Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: So, we might think of spiritual death as being dead in trespasses and sins. It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it implies) that we are quickened, or gain spiritual life. How about these verses: John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead. By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this? As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held accountable until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin. Perry From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 Perry wroteThe greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view spiritual death: those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or do they have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:33:26 -0600 Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it. Thanks, Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of spiritual death as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions. jt: Why can't we just call life what God calls it and death what God calls it? Why do we have to qualify with all of these advanced linguistics? In response to David's expressed concerns, Judy wrote: This does not mean that their spirit is literally dead or that they are physically dead - it means that if something does not change they will inherit both at the last day. And in response to her, you (Izzy) wrote: A spiritually dead person is going to hell when he physically dies. He already doesn't get it about things of the Spirit. And you also wrote to me, If folks in that
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Most definitely -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:22:24 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 Pitiful.===[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 allow 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 thatobedience 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 (Rom 4). JD-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton wabbits1234@earthlink.netTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Specifically (if you know), what is the point here? Who denies that we are blessed in following theadvice 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 -
Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. === [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 allow 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 (Rom 4).JD -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:05:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Blaine, I had posed a few questions to you regarding the bom, and I fear you got sidetracked by Kevin's posts...lets try again, if you will... Most books, fiction and non-fiction, have internal consistency. But, they are typically written by a single author, so internal consistency is not remarkable in such books. The Bible was written by many authors over thousands of years, and shows internal consistency across author as well as time periods. 1. How many authors wrote the bom over how many years? 2. Is there consistency between the various authors of the bom? The Bible has hundreds if not thousands of external consitencies. 3. What external consistencies does the bom show? Perry From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter' Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:12:32 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 7/24/2005 10:31:24 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It [the bom] sincerely is what it says it is. How do you know this? I read it, I now read it, I will read it, I will have read it . . . too many internal consistencies for it not to be true. I can open it to any page, and be impressed with its truthfulness. It does not, contrary to claims, contradict the Bible. Just a few of many reasons why I know it is true. Blainer Most books, fiction and non-fiction, have internal consistency. But, they are typically written by a single author, so internal consistency is not remarkable in such books. The Bible was written by many authors over thousands of years, and shows internal consistency across author as well as time periods. How many authors wrote the bom over how many years? Is there consistency between the various authors of the bom? The Bible has hundreds if not thousands of external consitencies. What external consistencies does the bom show? Perry -- 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 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 subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
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 -Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:34:12 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes "spiritually alive". Often, this is referred to as "quickeneing". Check out these verses:Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:So, we might think of "spiritual death" as being "dead in trespasses and sins". It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it im plies) that we are "quickened", or gain spiritual life.How about these verses:John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead.By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved". Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this?As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held account able until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin.PerryFrom: "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual deathDate: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are "spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus.Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do a gree with your final statement.Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view "spiritual death": those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or do they have the Spirit of God indwelling them?Just curious,Bill- Original Message -From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ;Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:13 PMSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are "spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. From: "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:33:26 -0600 ;Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it.Thanks,Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of "spiritual death" as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are both treating your concept as a metaphor, and this whether you realize it or not, and so I don't really have an issue with either of your positions.
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Perry wroteBy the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? It makes a difference in your ability to hold consistent and true beliefs pertaining to the things of God and to rightly explain those things to others. Perry wroteIf thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this? Yes, certainly I would. Bill - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes spiritually alive. Often, this is referred to as quickeneing. Check out these verses: Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: So, we might think of spiritual death as being dead in trespasses and sins. It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it implies) that we are quickened, or gain spiritual life. How about these verses: John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead. By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this? As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held accountable until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin. Perry From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 Perry wroteThe greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view spiritual death: those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or do they have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 21:33:26 -0600 Would someone else please step in and help Judy through this? I would very much appreciate it. Thanks, Bill From: Judy Taylor Bill wrote: I actually don't think we've got that much left to argue about. Both you and Judy have said that you do not think of spiritual death as literally being dead in the spirit. Hence you are
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Have you read any of the scholarly books and articles by LDS Authors? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560851570/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/002-4317535-3904844 Insider's View of Mormon Origins by Grant Palmer The author of this exceptionally clear thoroughly documented book is an active, fourth-generation Mormon, a 34-year professional historian and Mormon-studies director at college-level religious institutes. From thye Preface: "I, along with colleagues, and drawing from years of research, find the evidence employed to support many traditional [official Mormon] claims about the [Mormon] church to be either nonexistent or problematic." http://www.lds-mormon.com/ematmwv.shtml Among the practices no longer a part of Mormonism are the use of divining rods for revelation, astrology to determine the best times to conceive children and plant crops, the study of skull contours to understand personality traits, magic formula utilized to discover lost property, and the wearing of protective talismans Joe's MAGIC TALISMAN Mormon scholar LaMar C. Berrett"This piece was in Joseph Smith's pocket when he was martyred at Carthage Jail." The Wilford C. Wood Collection, 1972, Vol. 1, page 173Joe's Talisman is same as any other occult talisman: http://www.renaissanceastrology.com/barrett.html#C GLASS LOOKER http://www.utlm.org/images/changingworld/chwp68glasslooker.jpg The signs are everywhere, the only way you can miss it is to close your eyes and repeat after me I Know the church is True I Know the Church is True [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Morehear-say from Kevin's anti-Mormon sites, none of which can be verified by first-hand documentation. Warlock? LOL I bet he's been watching "Charmed." See Below for truth -- Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied. In a message dated 7/26/2005 3:12:04 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Blainerb: Here is a closer approximation of the truth regards the translation of the BoM. Kevin's version is, naturally, taken from his favorite anti-Mormon sites. Of course you IGNORE the fact that Joe was a Warlock. A number of "LDS" Historians have written scholarly articles books on this subject Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, (Signature Books, SLC, 2002, pp. 2-7,66,169). Palmer is an LDS seminary teacher and three-time director of LDS Institutes of Religion in California and Utah; D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1987; revised, expanded 1998, pp. 41-ff); James E. Lancaster, "By the Gift and Power of God," Saints Herald, 109:22 (November 15, 1962) pp. 14-18, 22, 33; Edward H. Ashment, "The Book of Mormon â A Literal Translation," Sunstone, 5:2 (March-April 1980), pp. 10-14; Richard S. Van Wagoner and Steven C. Walker in "Joseph Smith: The Gift of Seeing," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 15:2 (Summer 1982), pp. 48-68; Blake T. Ostler, "The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 20:1 (Spring 1987), pp. 66-123; Stephen D. Ricks, "The Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon," Foundation for Ancient Research Mormon Studies, official F.A.R.M.S. transcript of video lecture, 1994, 16 pages; As far as the translation process, the updated story modified for consumption bymodern LDS, Joe put the plates on a table. The witnesses of ALL the scribes, Unfortunately denies the modern modified story. The quotes previously provided come right from the only people who were EYEWITNESSES. It is their testimony. Your complaint is with them.You can deny it, but facts are stubborn things. Emma Hale Smith wife of Joe FIRST scribeTESTIFIED "with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us." ALL THREE of the BoM Witnesses including: David Whitmer scribeTESTIFIED"put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine." "He did not use the plates in translation" "The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret, was the same as when he looked for the
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
John, will everyone be raised to eternal life? And, will all have the same state? If so, then why is salvation desirable? What is a term we can use while one is still alive to indicate whether they will be saved or not? how about spiritually alive (saved) or spiritually dead (not saved)? Perry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:50:32 -0400 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 -Original Message- From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:34:12 -0700 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes spiritually alive. Often, this is referred to as quickeneing. Check out these verses: Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: So, we might think of spiritual death as being dead in trespasses and sins. It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it implies) that we are quickened, or gain spiritual life. How about these verses: John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead. By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this? As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held accountable until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin. Perry From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view spiritual death: those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his ascension? What do you think: were those followers spiritually dead, or were they spiritually alive? Are all non-believers spiritually dead -- infants and unborn babies included? What about the mentally retarded: are they spiritually dead, or do they have the Spirit of God indwelling them? Just curious, Bill - Original Message - From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are spiritually dead. That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. From: Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To:
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
SEER STONES are OCCULT that is why Joe used them, along with all his other tools of the trade. At first the stones were used tofind Treasure and then he changed the story to the BoM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blainerb: One of Kevin's favorite tricks--take something out of context, then prove it wrong. The entire context is on one of my previous posts, but here it is again--as can be seen, my post states that the use of the seer stone is a well documented fact. Kevin knows it was stated in my post as such, and still tries to make it appear as thoughthe "late reports" refer tothe seer stone. Seethe ENTIRE context of the part of my post being referred to below: "Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied." In a message dated 7/26/2005 3:42:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied.I guess they did not try real hard: "sometimes Joseph used a seer stone when enquiring of the Lord, and receiving revelation" Report of Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith, Concluded", Deseret Evening News, 23 Nov, 1878 ***Blainer: why are you repeating what I already indicated was true--this proves nothing for your agenda, only mine. "The statement has been made that the Urim and Thummim was on the altar in the Manti Temple when that building was dedicated. The Urim and Thummim so spoken of, however, was the seer stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days. This seer stone is now in the possession of the Church" Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956), 3:225. **Blainerb: Aren't you just setting up a little straw man here, Kevin? In fact, most of your stuffdoes just that. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Man, you may be talking to fast for me. I am following along, here, and did not intend my comments below to be anything other than a long question to Bill (especially) Your questions were good, as well. Eternal whatever is something that I am still working on. Right now, I see some raised to eternal life and others to destruction. Heaven is the reasonable conclusion to the life lived by a believer. Hell (death and destruction) is the reasonable conclusion to a life lived in rejection of all that God has offered to the person.The scriptures below, seem to contrast quickening (life) to death.Why is the prefix "spiritual" not applied -- especially sense there was such a word as "spiritual" avaiable to the writers?I do know that those who do not follow the way of the Lord are "dead already." JD -Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke cpl2602@hotmail.comTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:55:33 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death John, will everyone be raised to eternal life? And, will all have the same state? If so, then why is salvation desirable? What is a term we can use while one is still alive to indicate whether they will be saved or not? how about "spiritually alive" (saved) or "spiritually dead" (not saved)?PerryFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual deathDate: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:50:32 -0400Do 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-Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:34:12 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual deathBill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes "spiritually alive". Often, this is referred to as "quickeneing". Check out these verses:& gt;Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:So, we might think of "spiritual death" as being "dead in trespasses and sins". It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it implies) that we are "quickened", or gain spiritual life.How about these verses:Jo hn 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead.By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved". Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this?As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held accountable until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin.Perry From: "Bill Taylor" wmtaylor@plains.net Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 Perry wrote The greater message here is that those who choose not to follow Jesus are "spiritually dead". That is, they do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them. The man he chose as an example wanted to tarry from following Jesus until his father passed away, thus putting his family above Jesus. Well, this is not exactly what I had in mind, Perry; although, I do agree with your final statement. Would you mind clarifying your opening comments? Is this how you view "spiritual death": those who do not have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually dead, and those who do have the Spirit of the Lord dwelling in them are spiritually alive? Was the Spirit of the Lord indwelling Jesus' followers prior to his
Re: [TruthTalk] A 'prooftexter' vs a 'contexter'
Why do you always focus on Minutia? Sort of like the Wizard of OZ. "PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!" http://www.chugachconsumers.org/images/Oz-ManBehind.jpgAs Groucho Marx used to say: "Who are you going to believe me or your eyes?" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blainerb: One of Kevin's favorite tricks--take something out of context, then prove it wrong. The entire context is on one of my previous posts, but here it is again--as can be seen, my post states that the use of the seer stone is a well documented fact. Kevin knows it was stated in my post as such, and still tries to make it appear as thoughthe "late reports" refer tothe seer stone. Seethe ENTIRE context of the part of my post being referred to below: "Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied." In a message dated 7/26/2005 3:42:55 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied.I guess they did not try real hard: "sometimes Joseph used a seer stone when enquiring of the Lord, and receiving revelation" Report of Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith, Concluded", Deseret Evening News, 23 Nov, 1878 ***Blainer: why are you repeating what I already indicated was true--this proves nothing for your agenda, only mine. "The statement has been made that the Urim and Thummim was on the altar in the Manti Temple when that building was dedicated. The Urim and Thummim so spoken of, however, was the seer stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days. This seer stone is now in the possession of the Church" Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956), 3:225. **Blainerb: Aren't you just setting up a little straw man here, Kevin? In fact, most of your stuffdoes just that. Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Why is the prefix "spiritual" not applied -- especially sense there was such a word as "spiritual" available to the writers? That's a really good question, John. Maybe it is because those writers did not dichotomize personhood like, say, Augustine would. Bill - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 9:16 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Man, you may be talking to fast for me. I am following along, here, and did not intend my comments below to be anything other than a long question to Bill (especially) Your questions were good, as well. Eternal whatever is something that I am still working on. Right now, I see some raised to eternal life and others to destruction. Heaven is the reasonable conclusion to the life lived by a believer. Hell (death and destruction) is the reasonable conclusion to a life lived in rejection of all that God has offered to the person.The scriptures below, seem to contrast quickening (life) to death.Why is the prefix "spiritual" not applied -- especially sense there was such a word as "spiritual" avaiable to the writers?I do know that those who do not follow the way of the Lord are "dead already." JD -Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke cpl2602@hotmail.comTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:55:33 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death John, will everyone be raised to eternal life? And, will all have the same state? If so, then why is salvation desirable? What is a term we can use while one is still alive to indicate whether they will be saved or not? how about "spiritually alive" (saved) or "spiritually dead" (not saved)?PerryFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual deathDate: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:50:32 -0400Do 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-Original Message-From: Charles Perry Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:34:12 -0700Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual deathBill, It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes "spiritually alive". Often, this is referred to as "quickeneing". Check out these verses: gt;Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:So, we might think of "spiritual death" as being "dead in trespasses and sins". It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that it implies) that we are "quickened", or gain spiritual life.How about these verses:Jo hn 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physically dead, but spiritually dead.By the way, what difference does it make if I understand this or not? "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved". Both of these apply to me. Would you assume that I am saved because of this?As for those who are unable to reason and understand the gospel, I believe that they are not held accountable until they first know right from wrong and understand that they are sinners, i.e., convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin.Perry From: "Bill Taylor" wmtaylor@plains.net Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 23:08:22 -0600 Perry wrote The greater message here is
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
You see, we are not all that different from traditional Christians like yourself huh? Christians Believe in a Personal Relationship with Jesus LDS reject such. Bruce R. McConkie,stated that people who speak of a "special relationship with Christ" are guilty of "excessive zeal" and "pure sectarian nonsense." "Who Answers Prayers?" Sunstone Review (April 1982), 13 Christians Believe that the Blood of Jesus christ cleanses from ALL sin 1 JN 1:7 LDS The blood covers for some sins "Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose ones salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept him as our personal savior, we are thereby saved. They say that his blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean." WHAT THE MORMONS THINK OF CHRIST, page 22 1976 edition Christians believe in Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus...Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Romans 3:24, 28) LDS believe "What then is the law of justification?.. As with all other doctrines of salvation, justification is available because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ, but it becomes operative in the life of an individual only on conditions of personal righteousness." Mormon Doctrine, by Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, on page 408, under "Justification" MORMONS are NOT Chritians! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/26/2005 6:23:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, at least now I think I understand where you are coming from, and your bias against the term, although I donât necessarily agree. I still think that you can be alive physically but not alive to the things of God. I was thinking about the terms born again vs born, and this caused me to think about the fact that an unborn fetus is alive, but it still needs to be born. That is us spirituallyâwe can be physically born, but not born into the realm of Godâs Kingdom. We need to be quickened by the Holy Spirit. What do you think of that analogy? I agree--as would most Mormons, Izzy. That's because it is the truth as most Christians understand it. You see, we are not all that different from traditional Christians like yourself huh? Blainerb Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
Re: [TruthTalk] LDS Church has ZERO Growth!
Keeping members a challenge for LDS churchMormon myth: The belief that the church is the fastest-growing faith in the world doesn't hold up http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2890645 When the Graduate Center of the City University of New York conducted an American Religious Identification Survey in 2001, it discovered that about the same number of people said they had joined the LDS Church as said they had left it. The CUNY survey reported the church's net growth was zero percent. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
Having read the"LDS" response to these purportedly Christian beliefs, Ican'thelp thinkingthat there are far more Mormons around here than I first realized. Maybe John is on to something. Bill - Original Message - From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:33 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death You see, we are not all that different from traditional Christians like yourself huh? Christians Believe in a Personal Relationship with Jesus LDS reject such. Bruce R. McConkie,stated that people who speak of a "special relationship with Christ" are guilty of "excessive zeal" and "pure sectarian nonsense." "Who Answers Prayers?" Sunstone Review (April 1982), 13 Christians Believe that the Blood of Jesus christ cleanses from ALL sin 1 JN 1:7 LDS The blood covers for some sins "Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose ones salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept him as our personal savior, we are thereby saved. They say that his blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean." WHAT THE MORMONS THINK OF CHRIST, page 22 1976 edition Christians believe in Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus...Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Romans 3:24, 28) LDS believe "What then is the law of justification?.. As with all other doctrines of salvation, justification is available because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ, but it becomes operative in the life of an individual only on conditions of personal righteousness." Mormon Doctrine, by Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, on page 408, under "Justification" MORMONS are NOT Chritians! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/26/2005 6:23:01 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, at least now I think I understand where you are coming from, and your bias against the term, although I donât necessarily agree. I still think that you can be alive physically but not alive to the things of God. I was thinking about the terms born again vs born, and this caused me to think about the fact that an unborn fetus is alive, but it still needs to be born. That is us spirituallyâwe can be physically born, but not born into the realm of Godâs Kingdom. We need to be quickened by the Holy Spirit. What do you think of that analogy? I agree--as would most Mormons, Izzy. That's because it is the truth as most Christians understand it. You see, we are not all that different from traditional Christians like yourself huh? Blainerb Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
Re: [TruthTalk] The LDS Jesus needed to be saved!
Bruce McConkie confesses that "Christ... is a saved being."McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 257. The official student manual, Doctrines of the Gospel, teaches that "the plan of salvation which he [Elohim] designed was to save his children, Christ included; neither Christ nor Lucifer could of themselves save anyone." Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Doctrines of the Gospel, Student Manual Salt Lake City, UT: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint, 1986, p. 15. The same manual also quotes the tenth president and prophet, Joseph Fielding Smith, on the subject: The Savior did not have a fullness [of deity] at first, but after he received his body and the resurrection all power was given unto him both in heaven and in earth. Although he was a God, even the Son of God, with power and authority to create this earth and other earths, yet there were some things lacking in which he did not receive until after his resurrection. In other words, he had not received the fullness until he got a resurrected body. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Doctrines of the Gospel, Student Manual Salt Lake City, UT: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint, 1986 pp. 9-10 Pres,Benson, "Jesus was a God in the pre-mortal existence," He was still imperfect and lacking certain necessary things. Benson, Teachings, p. 6. McConkie taught: "These laws [of salvation], instituted by the father, constitute the gospel of God, which gospel is the plan by which all of his spirit children, Christ included, may gain eternal life." McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 2:215 "Jesus Christ is the Son of God He came to earth to work out his own salvation." McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:238 "by obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God." McConkie, Mormon Doctrine Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death
- Original Message - From: "Charles Perry Locke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spiritual death Bill,It appears in scripture that there is a point at which one becomes"spiritually alive". Often, this is referred to as "quickening". Check outthese verses: Ephesians 2:1 - And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses andsins; BT: Yes, and Paul clarifies in Eph 2.5 and Col 2.13 that this happened "together with Christ." When was Christ made alive from the dead? At his resurrection. When were we made alive together with him? At his resurrection. _ Ephesians 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us togetherwith Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) BT: Again, it was while they were dead that something happened which made them alive (by grace they were saved). In other words, it had nothing to do with anything they did on their part.When did this quickening take place? "together with Christ." _ Colossians 2:13 - And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision ofyour flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you alltrespasses; BT: It was while they were yet dead that this took place, their forgiveness included. _ 1 Peter 3:18 - For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for theunjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, butquickened by the Spirit: BT: This is speaking of what Christ endured on our behalf as well as what he accomplished via his deathand resurrection, he "being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." _ So, we might think of "spiritual death" as being "dead in trespasses andsins". It is when we come to believe and trust in Jesus (and all that itimplies) that we are "quickened", or gain spiritual life. BT: I know that this is what you believe, Perry, along with many other Christians today, but I ask you to consider how it is possible that your "belief" and "trust" have anything to do with this. Paul's tells us that this happened while his readers "were yet dead"; that is to saythat they were in a state of death when Christ accomplished this quickening on their behalf. _ How about these verses: John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, andbelieveth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not comeinto condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. BT: I very much love this verse; it is one of my favorites. It speaks to the assurance of salvation for those who believe. Yet it does not take away from the possibility of salvation for some who do not believe -- and I am thinking primarily of people who have not rejected Jesus Christ. They are not necessarily condemned, although theylack the assurance of belief. _ 1 John 3:14 John We know that we have passed from death unto life, becausewe love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. BT: John's writings are rich with contrasts: light vs darkness; love vs hate;truth vs lies; life vs death; children of God vs children of the devil, and on and on. To conclude that this is all about spiritual life vs spiritual death is to miss much of the thrust of his writing. He is talking about "abiding" in God, which is to say that he is addressing our entire being, our whole person in relation to God, and not just the spiritual aspect. __ If we can pass from death unto life if we are not dead first? Not physicallydead, but spiritually dead. BT: I am addressing this in a response to Izzy. You can watch for that post. In the meantimemay I suggest thatyou do a study on the NT use of the word "regeneration"? Check it out for yourself and see if you don't agree with me that the NT does not use the term, as most modern Christians do, for that which goes on in the "heart" of new converts. That should sort of set the tone for my response. I think you shall find that this term is used not of existential experiences in the here and now, but of eschatological events -- when Christ returns and the quick and the dead are judged and all things shall be made anew.And ifyou press on,I believe you will also find that it is wholly bound up withthe merciful activity ofGod alone in theHoly Spirit through Jesus Christ our Savior; that it really has nothing to do with anything we have done ourselves. 'Til tomorrow evening sometime, Bill
