subject:"Re\: \[TruthTalk\] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life\?"





DA Smithsonwrites:What if I said that "free moral agency" is a 
problem for God -- who is not 
a free moral agent; 
that His "all knowing" acclaim (a 
claim heeped on Him by others) is a comparative 
statement, His knowledge 
compared to our meager 
share; 

No doubt you've been outsourcing here 
John. So you don't believe God can do what He wants to even if He is God? 

The only thing I know of that He 
can't do is lie but that's me. Why 
would anyone want to conjure up a god withsuch 
limitations? So He is 
neither all knowing and neither is he free?

that the flood incident is a 
testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the Creator' 


jt:Divine learning curve? Tell 
me you're joking..He was about to wipe out all of Israel and start over until 
Moses interceded for them. 
Poor God, seemslike he just can't learn.

that the prophetical and applied 
statement of the psalmist to Christ (" .. thou hast 
TAUGHT me the ways of life .. Acts 
2)
is a continuance of this learning situation, 
perhaps even the conclusion of such on one level. 

jt:You refer to Psalm 16:11 
"Thou hast shown me the path of life" (Acts 2:28)- but this is not referringto 
Christthough the 
verse before this one did; the scriptures are 
like that. David here is speaking for himself and Jesus is the one at 
God's right hand, 
as a member of the Godhead do you really believe thathe would have to learn the "path 
of life?" You have a little God and
one diminished Christ if these are your thoughts 
John.

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-14 Thread Slade Henson




His 
new uniform is not one I would choose to wear! 

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Gary D 
  OttosonSent: Thursday, 13 January, 2005 20.45To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  myth (jt resolves most biblical 
  questionsaprioriw/finality, not vianegotiatg 
  vigorous, rigoroushermeneutic expertise existentially; if it's 
  'hermeneutic', DavidM,then it'safter the fashion of 
  pseudo-intellectual cult/sect administratorswielding 
  autocraticself-confirmation, rubber stampg itevn by JC 
  'theenterprisg spiritual entrepreneur from Nazareth'(©go:)..Lance pointd 
  out that the C Van Til(lian) hermaneuticis defunct which seems true for 
  good reasonswithin segments of Evangelicalism,e.g., w/i the 
  Pietist realmwhich parallels Puritanism...but couple radical 
  anti-Puritan 'pietisim', absolutely, in a moralists' construct with radical 
  perfectionism and term it'orthodoxy';e.g., in the 
  theological vacuumemrgg here from, e.g., mindlessanti-Calvin and 
  Luther-bashing rather than careful Evangelical analysis of certain historical 
  roots..not unlike Reich3, watch itgenerate 'asc' 
  ['autocraticself-confirmation', arrogantly, even racistly (sic)]..did 
  younotice the pics of the prince of England in his'new' uniform? 
  )
  
  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:37:13 -0500 "David 
  Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Glory.org writes: 
  the hermeneutic [sic]criteria 
  used by Judy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 12:27:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

DA Smithson writes:
What if I said that "free moral agency" is a problem for God -- who is not a free moral agent;
that His "all knowing" acclaim (a claim heeped on Him by others) is a comparative statement, His knowledge
compared to our meager share;

No doubt you've been outsourcing here John. Here is a subtle insult implying that poor old John can't come up with his ideas. So you don't believe God can do what He wants to even if He is God? A deliberate misrepresentation of what I believe. A better approach would be to ask.
The only thing I know of that He can't do is lie but that's me. Actually, that is not the only thing you know about God, if you know how to read, that is. Can God be taken out of existence? Can God sin? And, more germane to this discussion, can God even consider a sinful decision? Does God change His mind? And there is more..Why would anyone want to conjure up a god with such
limitations? God's learning curve provides Him NO limitations, ultimately, but have it your way if you want. So He is neither all knowing and neither is he free?The fact that he changes his mind should help to answer the first; the fact that He cannot even consider sin (cannot be tempted) should answer the latter (you know that I am talking about free moral agency, don't you?)

that the flood incident is a testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the Creator'

jt: Divine learning curve? Tell me you're joking..He was about to wipe out all of Israel and start over until Moses interceded for them.
Poor God, seems like he just can't learn.Do you even have a clue as to why I used the flood incident to support my view. And let's all understand something here: dispite Judy's plan to expose me as some kind of heretic, such is not the case. I won't go into detail -- but her plan is one that ignores my several posts declaring my relationship with God in Christ. If we cannot examine some of our more unconventional ideas on this site, where do we do this? I would not mind someone responding, even in disagreement, who actually kinda of likes me as a brother in Christ.

that the prophetical and applied statement of the psalmist to Christ (" .. thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of life .. Acts 2)
is a continuance of this learning situation, perhaps even the conclusion of such on one level.

jt: You refer to Psalm 16:11 "Thou hast shown me the path of life" (Acts 2:28) - but this is not referring to Christ though the
verse before this one did; the scriptures are like that. David here is speaking for himself and Jesus is the one at God's right hand, Acts 2:25 has Peter applying the words in his sermon (from this Psalm 16) to Christ. I'll go with him, on this.
as a member of the Godhead do you really believe that he would have to learn the "path of life?" What I believe are the words of this text. You look to them through your bias (God could not possibly be learning so ..) and I choose to accept what is actually said and try to solve the problem without destroy the text in question. You have a little God and one diminished Christ if these are your thoughts John. If my God can save the likes of you and me, He is big enough, isn't He?

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:26:52 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  
DA Smithson writes:What if I said 
that "free moral agency" is a problem for God 
-- who is not a free moral 
agent; that His "all knowing" acclaim (a 
claim heeped on Him by others) is a 
comparative statement, His knowledge compared 
to our meager share; No doubt 
you've been outsourcing here John. 

Here is a subtle insult implying that poor old 
John can't come up with his ideas. 

jt: It's not implying anything John. 
I am saying that saying God is not a free moral agent does not come from 
HisOwn Word.

So you don't 
believe God can do what He wants to even if He is God? 

A deliberate misrepresentation of what I 
believe. A better approach would be to ask.
  
jt: You have already fallen off the high road 
John; "deliberate misrepresentation?" Do you ask or accuse 
every time you
misunderstand me?
The only thing I know of that 
He can't do is lie but that's me. 

Actually, that is not the only thing you know 
about God, if you know how to read, that is. 

jt: I don't accept everything I read 
about God; it all has to be examined and proved by His Own 
Word.

Can God be taken out of 
existence? Can God sin? And, more germane to 
this discussion, can God even consider a sinful decision? Does 
God change His mind? And there is more..

jt: No, No, No, and He has been 
known to change His mindin response to intercessory 
prayer.

Why would anyone 
want to conjure up a god with such limitations? 

God's learning curve provides Him NO 
limitations, ultimately, but have it your way if you 
want.

jt: But according to yourbelief 
He must be on this learning curve to have no limitations?"Where were you when he 
layed the foundations of the world - declare if you have 
understanding?"

So He is not all knowing and neither is he 
free?

The fact that he changes his mind should help 
to answer the first; the fact that He cannot even consider sin 
(cannot be tempted) should answer the latter (you know that I am 
talking about free moral agency, don't you?)
  jt: The fact that He changes His mind 
indicates His mercy, it does not detract from his 
Omnipotence.
 that the flood incident is a testament to the Divine 
Learning Curve of the Creator' jt: 
Divine learning curve? Tell me you're joking..He was about to wipe out all 
of Israel and start over until Moses interceded for them. Poor God, seems like he just 
can't learn.

Do you even have a clue as to why I used the 
flood incident to support my view. 

jt: No I don't John but then that is 
not unusual since you deny everything leadingto this 
situation.

And let's all understand something here: 
dispite Judy's plan to expose me as some kind of 
heretic, such is not the case. I won't go into detail -- but 
her plan is one that ignores my several posts 
declaring my relationship with God in Christ.

jt: Here we go again John. 
I thought you had decided to take the high road and forgo the personal 
stuff, at least that is what I read. 

If we cannot examine some of our more 
unconventional ideas on this site, where 
do we do this? I would not 
mind someone responding, even in disagreement, who actually kinda of likes 
me as a brother in Christ.

jt: Why wouldyou think I don't like you 
John?Must I agree with everything you say to like 
you? that the prophetical and 
applied statement of the psalmist to Christ (" .. 
thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of life 
.. Acts 2)is a continuance of this learning situation, perhaps even the 
conclusion of such on one level. jt: You refer to Psalm 16:11 
"Thou hast shown me the path of life" (Acts 2:28) - but this is not referring to 
Christ though the verse before this one did; the scriptures are like that. 
David here is speaking for himself and Jesus is the one at God's right 
hand, 

Acts 2:25 has Peter applying the words in his 
sermon (from this Psalm 16) to Christ. I'll go with him, on this. 

  jt: No, you are going with your own 
preconceived ideas John because Peter goes on in Verse 29 to say"Men and 
brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David" So Vs.27 
refers to Christ and Vs.28 to David.
as a member of the Godhead do 
you really believe that he would have to learn the "path of life?" 


What I believe are the words of this 
text. You look to them through your bias (God could not 
possibly be learning so ..) and I choose to accept what is actually said 
and try to solve the problem without destroy the text in 
question.

jt: But

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 2:36:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

jt: Romans 2:15,16 speaks of born again Gentiles that is people who were not raised under the law of Moses but who now "in Christ" do by nature (their new nature) the things required in the law with their conscience as their guide. When it accuses them they go to the sacrifice and repent. When it excuses them, they continue on in Christ. John no human being born into the first Adam "DOES INSTINCTIVELY" the things in God's Law outside of Christ.

Judy, The problem with this scenario is that you present the shed blood as a static reality, activated from time to time, when we go to the altar and make such a request. I I John 1:7, we are told that when we walk in the light (something that has nothing to do with personal holiness, i.e. not sinning), we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus, the Son, cleanses us from our sins. That word "cleanses" is a greek verb written in the present indicative active. It is (the word "cleanses") has the force of activity that is without ending -- "keeps on cleansing us." It is this fact that gives me the phrase, "the continual flow of the blood of the Lamb." We know that "walking in the light" cannot refer to a state of personal holiness or righteousness (read: sinlessness) because a benefit of "walking in the light" is the continual forgiveness of sins !!

When we might say, "walking in the light is a relatively sinless state" -- the question is almost forced upon us, "Well, then, why the cleansing from sin" in the same verse, in the same breath?

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 8:44:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The fact that He changes His mind indicates His mercy, it does not detract from his Omnipotence. 

Omnipotence -- doesn' t that have to do with power? 
John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 8:44:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

But according to your belief He must be on this learning curve to have no limitations? 

I pretty much believe the learning curve was centered around our creation -- humans -- with larger degree of "free moral agency" that God, who cannot be tempted. "Thou has taught me the ways of life " occured during His incarnation. 
Hebrews 2:17 actually says that "He was made like us SO THAT HE MIGHT BE ..." and v 18 says " since he was tempted [something not possible before or after the incarnation] He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted." Call me weird, if you will, but there it is in orange and white. 

It is not that God did not know, IMO. Rather, that he did not understand until he became like us in all respects. 

With this thinking in mind, I have an explanation for those biblical occasions where we are told that the all knowing God changed His mind !!! ??? 


John


"Where were you when he layed the foundations of the world - declare if you 
have understanding?"

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:53:21 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/14/2005 8:44:06 AM Pacific 
  Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:But 
  according to your belief He must be on this learning curve to have no 
  limitations? 
  I pretty much believe the 
  learning curve was centered around our creation -- humans 
  -- with larger degree of "free moral agency" that God, who cannot be 
  tempted. 
  
  "Thou has taught me the ways of life " 
  occured during His incarnation. 
jt: Can't 
  agree with you John because the word Life in Gk is Zoe or divine life rather 
  than sarx or flesh life. In Psalm 16:11 the word for life is Chay but the 
  cross references in my Bible (not Dakes) are Ps 139:24 "Lead me in the 
  everlasting way" and Matt 7:14 "The gate is small and the way is narrow that 
  leads to life and few are those who find it" This is David talking about 
  receiving pleasures from the throne of grace.
  Hebrews 2:17 actually says that "He was made like us SO THAT HE MIGHT 
  BE ..." and v 18 says " since he was tempted 
  [something not possible before or after the incarnation] He is able to come to 
  the aid of those who are tempted." Call me weird, if you will, but 
  there it is in orange and white. 
  
  jt: I have no problem with Jesus being made LIKE us 
  or in Him being tempted, he had to pass the test in the wilderness in order to 
  be the perfect sacrifice.It is not that God did not know, 
  IMO. Rather, that he did not understand until he became like us in all 
  respects. 
  
  jt: What didn't he understand 
  John?With this thinking in mind, I have an explanation 
  for those biblical occasions where we are told that the all knowing God 
  changed His mind !!! ??? John
  jt: How often did God change his 
  mind -twice? The times I can think of are when we waited before 
  destroying Sodom and Gomorrah because of Abraham and when he decided not to 
  destroy Israel because of Moses. Do you have any more? And howdoes this 
  explanation helpyou?

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 4:55:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, judyT writes:



"Where were you when he layed the foundations of the world - declare if you 
have understanding?"


I believe I was in Compton. 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 5:37:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

jt: Can't agree with you John because the word Life in Gk is Zoe or divine life rather than sarx or flesh life.

Judy, you might dig up a good lexicon. You will change your mind on the above. "Zoe" is a work horse word in the gk and is used for physical life (i.e. Phil 1:20), in a divine sense (I Jo 5:20), final destiny (Mk 10:30); where God is equated with eternal life (I Jo 5:20) and so on. (Arnt  Gingrich) Liddle  Scott (a lexicon of the common vernacular covering word usage in much more than the biblical mesage) give us, substance, property, life, existence -- even scum on milk !!! A work horse word in the gk -- similar to "agape" in that regard. 

I just noticed something: In John 3:15 and 16, the Son of Man and the Son of God are reconciled at the Cross !! 


John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-14 Thread ShieldsFamily









When we might say, walking in the light is a relatively
sinless state -- the question is almost forced upon
us, Well, then, why the cleansing from sin in the same verse,
in the same breath? 

John



Because cleansing
us from all sin means cleansing us from all sinning. Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/14/2005 9:21:00 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


When we might say, "walking in the light is a relatively sinless state" -- the question is almost forced upon us, "Well, then, why the cleansing from sin" in the same verse, in the same breath? 

John

 

Because cleansing us from all sin means cleansing us from all sinning. Izzy




Soo, John got the word wrong? You have a grammatical reason for saying this? You have a reason at all for saying this? Seriously. I see no reason for the need on your part to 1) disagree with what I said and 2) to change it to "sinning."

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-14 Thread ttxpress




morehermeneuticlesspoliticizdrivel

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:14:23 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/14/2005 9:21:00 PM Pacific 
  Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Because cleansing us from all 
  sin means cleansing us from all sinning. 
Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




John my understanding is that walking in the light and 
having fellowship with Jesus implies repentance and
departure from sin rather 
than some continuous flow of blood. Also I can't see how this makes the 
sacrifice
static. In the gospel 
of John we are told that the world (outside of Christ) is condemned because they refuse 
to come to the light becausetheir deeds 
are evil 
(orSINFUL).jht

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:14:23 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/14/2005 9:21:00 PM Pacific 
  Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:When we might say, 
  "walking in the light is a relatively sinless state" -- the 
  question is almost forced upon us, "Well, then, why the cleansing from 
  sin" in the same verse, in the same breath? JohnBecause cleansing us from all sin means cleansing us from 
  all sinning. IzzySoo, John got the word wrong? You have a 
  grammatical reason for saying this? You have a reason at all for 
  saying this? Seriously. I see no reason for the need 
  on your part to 1) disagree with what I said and 2) to change it to 
  "sinning."John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Debbie Sawczak




The 
below is something I definitely did not write. Please pay no attention to the 
intro line, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes.

  -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:21 
  PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
  Life?In a message dated 1/12/2005 7:48:06 PM 
  Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  If they 
never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to 
  heaven.Actually, once again, you missed the point. No 
  one is saying this. Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe 
  situation : "..their conscience either accusing or 
  defending them " In Christ, we have the 
  assurance of our salvation --- or, at least, some of 
  us do. John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Slade Henson




Nah...it was written by Izzy...in response to Bill 
Taylor




Bill it appears to me 
that your theological construct forces one to believe that the worst thing you 
could do is to tell someone about Jesus Christ. If they never hear about 
Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do hear about Him and 
reject Him, that is the only possible way they can be destined for Hell. 
So why go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds like a terrible thing to 
do. Izzy

--Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Debbie 
  SawczakSent: Thursday, 13 January, 2005 07.52To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  The 
  below is something I definitely did not write. Please pay no attention to the 
  intro line, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes.
  
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:21 
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
[TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
Life?In a message dated 1/12/2005 7:48:06 
PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If they never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket 
  to heaven.Actually, once again, you missed the point. 
No one is saying this. Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe 
situation : "..their conscience either accusing or 
defending them " In Christ, we have the 
assurance of our salvation --- or, at least, some 
of us do. 
John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Debbie Sawczak




Thank 
you, Bill. I don't think I'll pursue the 'negative-option marketing' plan just 
now. It is not a good way of putting it. I am the slow one--I think slowly, and 
communicate slowly, and when I rush I get it wrong.

I am 
trying to work out all of what the Trinitarian position means. I love the 
account of how salvation is fully accomplished for the whole human race, nay, 
the whole cosmos, as opposed to a whole lot of little personal salvations, but 
Iam stumbling over thequestion of the "mechanics" of our 
participation as individuals and where the wooing comes in. Interesting that you 
used that word in one of your posts. I don't see the 
wooing-people-one-at-a-timein the Trinitarian position so far. I am not 
comfortable, I haven't worked it all out yet. I introduced myself to this 
listserv as a person re-examining a lot of things all at once. The process is 
kind of overwhelming me.

Debbie

  -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:16 
  PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
  Life?
  Debbie, I am sorry I 
  jumped to conclusions. I should have known better. Please forgive me. 
  If it's alright with you, let's start over. Hi, my name is Bill Taylor. 
  I am very glad to meet you and am equally happy that you are here with us 
  :) 
  
  I do have a couple questions for you: 
  You said, "Iagree with you there. But I'm not satisfied with the 
  'negative-option marketing' plan." I am a bit slow 
  to catch on. What is this "'negative-option marketing' plan," and why the 
  "But"?
  
  I said, for the 
  life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my 
  frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's 
  finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone 
  else,"believers" included.We do not need a second "gospel" to get 
  those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view 
  concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our 
  behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is 
  overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, 
  and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is me through 
  and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my 
  comment.
  
  Bill
  
  
  
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Debbie Sawczak 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 8:57 
PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



  -Original Message-From: Bill Taylor 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 
  10:32 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: 
  Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
  Life?
  If your logic holds, then we had better 
  be teaching people their babies went to hell. That might keep them from 
  killing the rest of them.
  Exactly.I was trying to point out the absurdity of 
  it.
  
  Why are you so convinced that it rests in the 
  mystery ofGod seeing the end from the beginning? Way too Arminian 
  for me -- you are still waiting to get people saved. I've got news for 
  you: they are saved. That is the Good News: He is Jesus Christ. If a 
  person persistentlyrejects that news unto death, she SHOULD have 
  been struck in the head as a baby!But 
  rest assured the responsibility for her subsequent rejection rests 
  squarely and totallyupon her own shoulders. Our heart bleeds for 
  her, but she heard the Good News of Jesus Christ, and this under the 
  tutelage of none other than the greatest teacher in the universe, the 
  Spirit of God himself, and still rejected that news. What a 
  tragedy!
  I am not an 
  Arminian (not that there's anything wrong with that...). My position is 
  actually the opposite of Arminianism. What I meant was not really all that 
  different from what you said last time. When I said God sees the end from 
  the beginning, I didn't mean foreknowledge. I meant that theperson's 
  whole life-direction is one.And by that I meant, if they reject the 
  messageafter hearing, then they have already been saying no 
  to whatever light/Spirit-preparation they have already received. If they 
  accept it, they have already been saying yes. Which is pretty 
  much what you 
  said.
  
  But it is as great atragedy to limp 
  along under the weight of a gospel of a Savior, who 
  has not saved anyone until each one completes in the right order a 
  specific rite of initiation 
  Iagree with you there. But I'm not satisfied with the 
  "negative-option marketing" plan.
  
  For the life of me, I

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 8:42:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

the mind is the home of faith which is wrong. 

And for this you decided the guy was hell bound? Get a grip. The mind and where it places it's interests is used by Paul to define that which is spiritual and that which is flesh --- Romans 8:5 (as opposed to more traditional notions of that tell us that sin, even a single sin, is that which makes of "of the flesh"). 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 9:27:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Yes, there is that problem if you press it to the logical conclusion, isn't there? Same with the all-babies-go-to-heaven view. In that case, best kill your kid before s/he reaches the age of accountability, or at least ensure a good pervasive brain injury. But no; the Heard-Not can't lose by hearing, nor the child by understanding. I think it relates to your earlier post--God sees the end from the beginning. Also, everyone has some knowledge or experience to respond to. The response doesn't have to be propositional, nor intelligible to us--only intelligible to God. (Mind you, I don't think I've figured this out yet...) 
 
Debbie 


What if I said that "free moral agency" is a problem for God -- who is not a free moral agent; that His "all knowing" acclaim (a claim heeped on Him by others) is a comparative statement, His knowledge compared to our meager share; that the flood incident is a testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the Creator' that the prophetical and applied statement of the psalmist to Christ (" .. thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of life .. Acts 2) is a continuance of this learning situation, perhaps even the conclusion of such on one level. 


DA Smithson

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?









Debbie, I hear you. We dont
have to have it all figured out thankfully. We just have to
trust and obey a loving God. BTW, I love the song Maybe Theres
a Loving God by Sara Grovesits so awesome. (Im
playing it on the computer as I type.) Izzy



http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Maybe-There's-A-Loving-God-lyrics-Sara-Groves/4F803844416C7AC948256DE9000DF162












From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Sawczak
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
8:38 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?







Yes, there is that problem if you press it
to the logical conclusion, isn't there? Same with the all-babies-go-to-heaven
view. In that case, best kill your kid before s/he reaches the age of
accountability, or at least ensure agood pervasivebrain injury. But
no; the Heard-Notcan't lose byhearing, nor the child by
understanding. I think it relates to yourearlier post--God sees the end
from the beginning.Also, everyone has some knowledge or experience
to respond to. The response doesn't have to be propositional, nor intelligible
to us--only intelligible to God. (Mind you,Idon't thinkI've
figured this out yet...) 











Debbie





-Original Message-
From: ShieldsFamily [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
8:55 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



Don't you believe that
all mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for
heaven whether or not they
overcome anything. I underlined the portion
of your statement which is a true representation of things I've said. The
second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to what I actually believe and
have stated. I am confident (and this because I have had to defend and clarify
myself so many times) that I have written more about the potential of humans to
lose their salvation, than anyone on this list. I do not damn people to hell,
like, say, you do, but I have written many substantive words expressing the
possibility of people rejecting Christ and damning themselves to hell. You know
this, so why do you continue to misrepresent my position?





Bill



Bill it appears to me that your
theological construct forces one to believe that the worst thing you could do
is to tell someone about Jesus Christ. If they never hear about Jesus
they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do hear about Him and reject
Him, that is the only possible way they can be destined for Hell. So why
go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds like a terrible thing to do.
Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 10:07:39 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


 Debbie wrote  When I said God sees the end from the beginning, I didn't mean foreknowledge. I meant that the person's whole life-direction is one. And by that I meant, if they reject the message after hearing, then they have already been saying no to whatever light/Spirit-preparation they have already received. If they accept it, they have already been saying yes. 
 


This has a whole lot to do with understanding the Gentile hypthetical of Romans 2

JD

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





















From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
9:02 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





Bill it appears to me that your
theological construct forces one to believe that the worst thing you could do
is to tell someone about Jesus Christ. If they never hear about Jesus
they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do hear about Him and reject
Him, that is the only possible way they can be destined for Hell. So why
go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds like a terrible thing to do.
Izzy















Izzy, that would be trueIF it were not for that fact
that it is the Holy Spirit who draws people to the Father through the Son.
TheHoly Spirit is always working aheadof evangelism,preparing
people to hear andrespond to the Gospel message. Stated another way, the
Gospel presentation never precedes the work of the Holy Spirit in a hearer's
life. Since the Gospel is Good News, and since the Holy Spirit always prepares
people to hear it, it will never ever be received as Bad News except by those
who have already rejected the preparatory drawing of the Holy Spirit. That, my
concerned friend, is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. It is taking the truth
of his testimony and calling it a lie; for the HolySpirit only testifiesto
the truthfulness of Christ.Once aperson has heard the Gospel and
rejected Jesus Christ, then he must repent of those beliefs, certainly; for to
die in that state is to have committed the unforgivable sin, whichis to
trample under foot the Son of God and to deny the Lord who redeemed him; it is
to lose his salvation.











If the Spirit were not involved in leading people to Christ,
then I would rush to agree with you. Why would I want to tell someone about
Christ who would otherwise be saved. The risk of rejection appears to out weigh
the benefits they will receive here on earth on this side of death. Why not let
them wait and be assured of receiving the benefits on the other side?This
however is not the case.











Please pursue this further if I have not made this clear to
you.











Bill



Im afraid you have made it
abundantly clear. Another circular argument (much like the once saved
always saved thingy). If one rejects Christ after hearing about Him, he
would have done so anyway. How can you lose an argument like that? The person
would still have been much better off not to have been given the opportunity to
reject Christ! The question remains: what is the point in preaching Christ if
not the save the lost? Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 10:57:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Why is it that whenever some TTers cannot agree on certain (usually non-essential) points of theology, instead of plainly explaining their position and then letting it go at that, they instead resort to personal attacks upon those who dont agree? (You said this! You said that! You were so nasty!!!) Why this insistence on others being convinced? Why the acrimony when they arent? Isnt this the road to the Crusades? Is that how the Holy Spirit works? I have been accused by some here of not caring about theology (ie: not too bright???) I just dont care enough to fight about nuances and nonessentials, or even essentials for that matter, or to argue with those who dont have ears to hear. I am only called to speak the truth. I am not responsible for how/if it is received. There will be NO theology test on Judgment Day. There will be NO debating test on Judgment Day. There will be a test of Obedience. We can only encourage one another to believe and obey the Lord. We cannot force anyone to believe or to obey. Izzy




There is a serious typo at the end of the is wonderful post. The name "Izzy" was somehow attached. Please note and make the necessary correct as time permits.

John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

















I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You
caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the
sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved
everyone else,believers included.We do not need a
second gospel to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our
problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has
accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have
said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No,
it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one
post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light
of my comment.











Bill



Bill, I posted this yesterday and got (as
usual) as resounding non-response. What say you???



Speaking
of such, I am of the opinion (have I ever been taught this???) that we are born
with a propensity to sinnot
actually already condemned by sin (since we havent yet). So, in
that case, anyone who dies prior to actually sinning is not under Gods
judgment, and does not go to hell. Is there some scriptural reason for
not believing this anyone? izzy

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





















From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
10:21 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





In a message dated 1/12/2005 7:48:06 PM Pacific Standard
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:




If they never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket
to heaven.



Actually, once again, you missed the point. No one is saying
this. Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe situation
: ..their conscience either accusing or defending
them  

In Christ, we have the assurance of our salvation ---
or, at least, some of us do. 

John



John, I
fail to understand how that differs from what I said above. Splain the
difference please. BTW, I have NO fear of not being saved. Do
you? DM recently said that those who hold the once saved always
saved theology are the most insecure Believers, and I heartily
agree. I simply walk in the awareness that I had better keep out of sin
if I want to walk in Gods grace. Those in your camp seem to have
no real concern about sin we all sin, so God will forgive us and get on
with it kind of attitude. Something that would certainly cause one
to lose their inner assurance of salvation, I think; causing them to want to
loudly convince themselves and everyone else that sin/obedience doesnt
matter to our salvation. . Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

That's perfectly fine, Debbie. I think (if I may
take a little license with what you wrote) that a lot of the misunderstandings
come in via the door of missed opportunities, and I mean on the part of the
Trinitarians, to fully answer questions when asked. I am fairly confident that
most Trinitarians would agree with me on the wooing. I am certain that James and
Thomas Torrance do in fact believe this, and teach it (although dear old J.B. is
now deceased). The wooing is but one aspect of a thoroughly participatory
salvation that begins with Jesus Christ and never ends.

Thanks,

Bill

- Original Message -

From:
Debbie Sawczak

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 6:04
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Thank you, Bill. I don't think I'll pursue the 'negative-option
marketing' plan just now. It is not a good way of putting it. I am the slow
one--I think slowly, and communicate slowly, and when I rush I get it
wrong.

I am
trying to work out all of what the Trinitarian position means. I love the
account of how salvation is fully accomplished for the whole human race, nay,
the whole cosmos, as opposed to a whole lot of little personal salvations, but
Iam stumbling over thequestion of the "mechanics" of our
participation as individuals and where the wooing comes in. Interesting that
you used that word in one of your posts. I don't see the
wooing-people-one-at-a-timein the Trinitarian position so far. I am not
comfortable, I haven't worked it all out yet. I introduced myself to this
listserv as a person re-examining a lot of things all at once. The process is
kind of overwhelming me.

Debbie

-Original Message-From: Bill Taylor
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
11:16 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of
Life?
Debbie, I am sorry I
jumped to conclusions. I should have known better. Please forgive me.
If it's alright with you, let's start over. Hi, my name is Bill
Taylor. I am very glad to meet you and am equally happy that you are here
with us :)

I do have a couple questions for you:
You said, "Iagree with you there.
But I'm not satisfied with the 'negative-option marketing' plan." I am a bit slow to catch on. What is this "'negative-option
marketing' plan," and why the "But"?

I said, for the
life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my
frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's
finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone
else,"believers" included.We do not need a second "gospel" to
get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a
deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our
stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards
to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your
theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is
me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my
comment.

Bill

- Original Message -
From:
Debbie Sawczak

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
8:57 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

-Original Message-From: Bill Taylor
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
10:32 PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of
Life?
If your logic holds, then we had
better be teaching people their babies went to hell. That might keep
them from killing the rest of them.
Exactly.I was trying to point out the absurdity of
it.

Why are you so convinced that it rests in
the mystery ofGod seeing the end from the beginning? Way too
Arminian for me -- you are still waiting to get people saved. I've got
news for you: they are saved. That is the Good News: He is Jesus Christ.
If a person persistentlyrejects that news unto death, she SHOULD
have been struck in the head as a baby!But rest assured the responsibility for her subsequent rejection
rests squarely and totallyupon her own shoulders. Our heart bleeds
for her, but she heard the Good News of Jesus Christ, and this under the
tutelage of none other than the greatest teacher in the universe, the
Spirit of God himself, and still rejected that news. What a
tragedy!
I am not

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




I would say -- "How about them Dodgers?" 


Bill :)
What if 
  I said that "free moral agency" is a problem for God 
  -- who is not a free moral agent; that His "all 
  knowing" acclaim (a claim heeped on Him by others) is a comparative 
  statement, His knowledge compared to our meager share; that the flood 
  incident is a testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the Creator' 
  that the prophetical and applied statement of the psalmist to Christ 
  (" .. thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of life 
  .. Acts 2) is a continuance of this learning 
  situation, perhaps even the conclusion of such on one level. 
  DA Smithson

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Judy Taylor

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:10:22 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

In a
message dated 1/12/2005 8:42:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
the mind is the home of faith
which is wrong.
And for this you decided
the guy was hell bound? Get a grip.

jt: John I have not
everconsigned Newbigin or anyother theologian or religious man to
hell because
this isnot my call.
You need to read more accurately
- we went through all of this last night. This was
Bill's accusation entirely for which he has not seen fitto
repent.

The mind and where it places it's interests is used by Paul to define that which is spiritual and
that
which is flesh Romans
8:5

jt: Yes we either walk
after the mind of the flesh which is carnal or the mind of the Spirit. Romans
8:1-5

(as opposed to more traditional notions of that tell us that
sin, even a single sin, is that which makes
of "of the flesh"). John

jt: When one walks after the
spirit they don't fulfill the lusts of the flesh because they are spiritually
minded but this is a daily
choice. However, faith is of the heart - When Peter preached on the
day
of Pentecost people were pricked in
their heart and 3,000 souls were saved that day (this is the
anointing of the Holy Spirit on the
Word spoken by him). Peter told Ananias Sapphira that
'satan had filled their hearts to
lie (Acts 5:3) Peter told Simon the sorcerer his heart was not
right in the sight of God (Acts
8:21) Philip told the Ethiopian eunuch to "believe with all thine
heart" (Acts 8:37) Paul and
Barnabus spoke to the women washing at the river in Phillipi and
God opened Lydia's heart (Acts
16:14).

We understand with the heart - Acts
28:27 and the head follows along

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Now that you've vented, please go back and reread
what I've written.

Bill

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

Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:47
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 9:02
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Bill it appears to me
that your theological construct forces one to believe that the worst thing you
could do is to tell someone about Jesus Christ. If they never hear about
Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do hear about Him and
reject Him, that is the only possible way they can be destined for Hell.
So why go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds like a terrible thing to
do. Izzy

Izzy, that would be trueIF
it were not for that fact that it is the Holy Spirit who draws people to the
Father through the Son. TheHoly Spirit is always working aheadof
evangelism,preparing people to hear andrespond to the Gospel
message. Stated another way, the Gospel presentation never precedes the work
of the Holy Spirit in a hearer's life. Since the Gospel is Good News, and
since the Holy Spirit always prepares people to hear it, it will never ever be
received as Bad News except by those who have already rejected the preparatory
drawing of the Holy Spirit. That, my concerned friend, is blasphemy against
the Holy Spirit. It is taking the truth of his testimony and calling it a lie;
for the HolySpirit only testifiesto the truthfulness of
Christ.Once aperson has heard the Gospel and rejected Jesus
Christ, then he must repent of those beliefs, certainly; for to die in that
state is to have committed the unforgivable sin, whichis to trample
under foot the Son of God and to deny the Lord who redeemed him; it is to lose
his salvation.

If the Spirit were not involved in
leading people to Christ, then I would rush to agree with you. Why would I
want to tell someone about Christ who would otherwise be saved. The risk of
rejection appears to out weigh the benefits they will receive here on earth on
this side of death. Why not let them wait and be assured of receiving the
benefits on the other side?This however is not the
case.

Please pursue this further if I
have not made this clear to you.

Bill

Im afraid you have
made it abundantly clear. Another circular argument (much like the once
saved always saved thingy). If one rejects Christ after hearing about
Him, he would have done so anyway. How can you lose an argument like
that? The person would still have been much better off not to have been
given the opportunity to reject Christ! The question remains: what is the
point in preaching Christ if not the save the lost?
Izzy

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





















From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005
9:47 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?







Now that you've vented, please go back and reread what I've
written.











Bill









Im afraid you have made it
abundantly clear. Another circular argument (much like the once
saved always saved thingy). If one rejects Christ after hearing
about Him, he would have done so anyway. How can you lose an argument
like that? The person would still have been much better off not to have
been given the opportunity to reject Christ! The question remains: what is the
point in preaching Christ if not the save the lost? Izzy











Bill, you call what I wrote above venting???
I call it calm, sincere questions which you have avoided answering by calling
it venting. 

This
is what I would call venting: Judy, You are
impossible! Bill

Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Yeah, Izzy, I know. At that point I was just 
beginning to brew. The pot boiled later on -- poor Debbie!I think that 
your answer is a practical-outworking part of the full answer, but it 
does not address the theological 'whys' of this issue. Like why were those 
babies even alive in the first place? How is it that in a fallen world, which 
can only produce death, there could be any human life at all? And the list is 
myriad.

For those answers we have to look to --guess 
who? -- Jesus Christ!

Talk to ya later,

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:58 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  
  
  
  I said, for the life of me, I 
  don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my frustration. I have 
  posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save 
  babies the same way he has saved everyone else,"believers" 
  included.We do not need a second "gospel" to get those who cannot 
  believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO 
  Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It 
  frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is overlooked when the 
  discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, and certainly not all 
  of your theology from just one post. It is me through and through. Thanks for 
  being gracious and making light of my 
  comment.
  
  
  
  Bill
  
  Bill, I posted this 
  yesterday and got (as usual) as resounding non-response. What say 
  you???
  
  Speaking 
  of such, I am of the opinion (have I ever been taught this???) that we are 
  born with a propensity to 
  sinnot actually already condemned by sin (since we havent yet). So, in 
  that case, anyone who dies prior to actually sinning is not under Gods 
  judgment, and does not go to hell. Is there some scriptural reason for 
  not believing this anyone? 
  izzy

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?









Exactly. Iron sharpens iron.
(And mud muddies the muddled?) Izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005
7:56 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?







Welcome to the list Debbie and please
take your time. This is a matter of life and death even though you may see a
bit of of tongue in cheek talking and jokingat times - Noone here has
endured to the end so far and we are all examining and re examining what we
hear daily .. well I am anyway and it's good to know I'm not alone. judyt











On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:04:50 -0500 Debbie Sawczak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:







Thank you, Bill. I don't think I'll pursue
the 'negative-option marketing' plan just now. It is not a good way of putting
it. I am the slow one--I think slowly, and communicate slowly, and when I rush
I get it wrong.











I am trying to work out all of what the
Trinitarian position means. I love the account of how salvation is fully
accomplished for the whole human race, nay, the whole cosmos, as opposed to a
whole lot of little personal salvations, but Iam stumbling over
thequestion of the mechanics of our participation as
individuals and where the wooing comes in. Interesting that you used that word in
one of your posts. I don't see the wooing-people-one-at-a-timein the
Trinitarian position so far. I am not comfortable, I haven't worked it all out
yet. I introduced myself to this listserv as a person re-examining a lot of
things all at once. The process is kind of overwhelming me.











Debbie





-Original Message-
From: Bill Taylor
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
11:16 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



Debbie, I am sorry I jumped to conclusions. I should have
known better. Please forgive me. If it's alright with you, let's start over.
Hi, my name is Bill Taylor. I am very glad to meet you and am equally happy
that you are here with us :) 











I do have a couple questions for you: You said, Iagree with you there. But I'm not
satisfied with the 'negative-option marketing' plan. I am a bit slow to catch on. What
is this 'negative-option marketing' plan, and why the
But?











I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You
caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the
sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved
everyone else,believers included.We do not need a
second gospel to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our
problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has
accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have
said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No,
it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one
post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light
of my comment.











Bill

























- Original Message - 





From: Debbie Sawczak 





To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Wednesday, January
12, 2005 8:57 PM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

















-Original Message-
From: Bill Taylor
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
10:32 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



If your logic holds, then we had better be teaching people
their babies went to hell. That might keep them from killing the rest of them.






Exactly.I was trying to point out
the absurdity of it.











Why are you so convinced that it rests in the mystery
ofGod seeing the end from the beginning? Way too Arminian for me -- you
are still waiting to get people saved. I've got news for you: they are saved.
That is the Good News: He is Jesus Christ. If a person
persistentlyrejects that news unto death, she SHOULD have been struck in
the head as a baby!But rest assured the responsibility
for her subsequent rejection rests squarely and totallyupon her own
shoulders. Our heart bleeds for her, but she heard the Good News of Jesus
Christ, and this under the tutelage of none other than the greatest teacher in
the universe, the Spirit of God himself, and still rejected that news. What a
tragedy!






I am not an Arminian (not that there's
anything wrong with that...). My position is actually the opposite of
Arminianism. What I meant was not really all that different from what you said
last time. When I said God sees the end from the beginning, I didn't mean
foreknowledge. I meant that theperson's whole life-direction is
one.And by that I meant, if they reject the messageafter hearing,
then they have already been saying no to

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Excuse me, Judy, for what do I need to repent? At 
the time this took place you apologized to me for your accusation and admitted 
that you had judged him without first understanding his position. Are you now 
taking that back and turning on me? I am at a loss to know how to take you. You 
asked me to provide you with an example. I did that. Now, you are reframing the 
events of that equation. I don't get it.I think we need some space for a 
few days. 

Bill OUT!

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 8:29 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  
  On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:10:22 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
In 
a message dated 1/12/2005 8:42:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
the mind is the home of 
  faith which is wrong. 
And for this you decided 
the guy was hell bound? Get a grip. 


jt: John I have not 
everconsigned Newbigin or anyother theologian or religious man 
to hell because
this isnot my call. 
You need to read more 
accurately - we went through all of this last night. This 
was
Bill's accusation entirely for which he has not seen 
fitto repent.

The mind and where it places it's 
interests is used by Paul to define that which is spiritual 
and that 
which is flesh  Romans 
8:5

jt: Yes we either walk 
after the mind of the flesh which is carnal or the mind of the Spirit. 
Romans 8:1-5 

(as opposed to more traditional notions of that tell us that 
sin, even a single sin, is that which makes 
of "of the flesh"). John 

jt: When one walks after 
the spirit they don't fulfill the lusts of the flesh because they are 
spiritually 
minded but this is a daily 
choice. However, faith is of the heart - When Peter preached on the 
day
of Pentecost people were pricked 
in their heart and 3,000 souls were saved that day (this is the
anointing of the Holy Spirit on 
the Word spoken by him). Peter told Ananias  Sapphira 
that
'satan had filled their hearts to 
lie (Acts 5:3) Peter told Simon the sorcerer his heart was not
right in the sight of God (Acts 
8:21) Philip told the Ethiopian eunuch to "believe with all 
thine
heart" (Acts 8:37) Paul and 
Barnabus spoke to the women washing at the river in Phillipi 
and
God opened Lydia's heart (Acts 
16:14). 

We understand with the heart - 
Acts 28:27 and the head follows along

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Judy Taylor




jt: Bill if I apologized to you back then it may have 
been for misunderstanding Newbigin, it certainly wasn't
for consigning him to hell which was your accusation 
yesterday and which incidentally John has picked up on.
Amazing how bad news spreads. I am not turning on 
you, nor am I reframing anything... have a nice rest.
judyt

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:10:20 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Excuse me, Judy, for what do I need to repent? At 
  the time this took place you apologized to me for your accusation and admitted 
  that you had judged him without first understanding his position. Are you now 
  taking that back and turning on me? I am at a loss to know how to take you. 
  You asked me to provide you with an example. I did that. Now, you are 
  reframing the events of that equation. I don't get it.I think we need 
  some space for a few days. 
  
  Bill OUT!
  

From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:10:22 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/12/2005 8:42:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  the mind is the home of 
faith which is wrong. 
  And for 
  this you decided the guy was hell bound? Get a 
  grip. 
  
  jt: John I have not 
  everconsigned Newbigin or anyother theologian or religious man 
  to hell because
  this isnot my call. 
  You need to read more 
  accurately - we went through all of this last night. This 
  was
  Bill's accusation entirely for which he has not seen 
  fitto repent.
  
  The mind and where it places it's interests is used by Paul to define that which is spiritual 
  and that 
  which is flesh  Romans 
  8:5
  
  jt: Yes we either walk 
  after the mind of the flesh which is carnal or the mind of the Spirit. 
  Romans 8:1-5 
  
  (as opposed to more traditional notions of that tell us 
  that sin, even a single sin, is that which makes 
  of "of the flesh"). John 
  
  jt: When one walks after 
  the spirit they don't fulfill the lusts of the flesh because they are 
  spiritually 
  minded but this is a daily 
  choice. However, faith is of the heart - When Peter preached on the 
  day
  of Pentecost people were 
  pricked in their heart and 3,000 souls were saved that day (this is 
  the
  anointing of the Holy Spirit on 
  the Word spoken by him). Peter told Ananias  Sapphira 
  that
  'satan had filled their hearts 
  to lie (Acts 5:3) Peter told Simon the sorcerer his heart was 
  not
  right in the sight of God (Acts 
  8:21) Philip told the Ethiopian eunuch to "believe with all 
  thine
  heart" (Acts 8:37) Paul and 
  Barnabus spoke to the women washing at the river in Phillipi 
  and
  God opened Lydia's heart (Acts 
  16:14). 
  
  We understand with the heart - 
  Acts 28:27 and the head follows along

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?











Yeah, Izzy, I know. At that point I was just beginning to
brew. The pot boiled later on -- poor Debbie!I think that your answer is
a practical-outworking part of the full answer, but it does not address
the theological 'whys' of this issue. Like why were those babies even alive in
the first place? Ask the stork! How
is it that in a fallen world, which can only produce death, there could be any
human life at all? God gives life.
Satan gives death. (Physical AND spiritual) And the list is
myriad.











For those answers we have to look to --guess who? --
Jesus Christ!











Talk to ya later,
Okydoke! Izzy











Bill

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





Bill, you call what I 
wrote above venting??? I call it calm, sincere questions which you have 
avoided answering by calling it venting. 
This is what I would call venting: 
Judy, You are impossible! 
Bill
Izzy
I 
am glad we are getting to know each other better. No, That is the truth! 


For the record, I am not avoiding anything. Your 
questions were so far off the mark as to not apply to anything I've said. What 
am I to do? Should I coral them for you, bring them in and reframed them, and 
then answer what would then not even be your questions? Or should I do as I did? 
The "lost" are already saved, recapitulated in Christ, they just don't know it. 
The gospel is the good news of their salvation. If they reject the gospel it is 
an indication that they are already rejecting the call of God upon their life. 
I've already said this. And so, the last thing I am with youis evasive. I 
answered you. You blew me off, lumped me in with a caricature of another group 
and then smeared us all. You then asked some questions impertinent to the 
framework of my post. If you want to better understand my positions, cut the 
accusations, and ask questions for clarification. You can also read what I 
posted to Judy, which goes further in explaining what I believe. 

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  ShieldsFamily 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 8:50 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill TaylorSent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 9:47 
  AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  Now that you've vented, please go 
  back and reread what I've written.
  
  
  
  Bill
  


Im afraid you have 
made it abundantly clear. Another circular argument (much like the 
once saved always saved thingy). If one rejects Christ after hearing 
about Him, he would have done so anyway. How can you lose an argument 
like that? The person would still have been much better off not to 
have been given the opportunity to reject Christ! The question remains: what 
is the point in preaching Christ if not the save the lost? 
Izzy

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?









Nice talk, Bill. I did ask
questions for clarification, and this is what I get? Izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005
10:31 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?







Bill, you call what I wrote above
venting??? I call it calm, sincere questions which you have
avoided answering by calling it venting. 

This
is what I would call venting: Judy, You are
impossible! Bill

Izzy



I am glad we are getting to know each other better. No, That
is the truth! 











For the record, I am not avoiding anything. Your questions
were so far off the mark as to not apply to anything I've said. What am I to
do? Should I coral them for you, bring them in and reframed them, and then
answer what would then not even be your questions? Or should I do as I did? The
lost are already saved, recapitulated in Christ, they just don't
know it. The gospel is the good news of their salvation. If they reject the
gospel it is an indication that they are already rejecting the call of God upon
their life. I've already said this. And so, the last thing I am with
youis evasive. I answered you. You blew
me off, lumped me in with a caricature of another group and then smeared us
all. You then asked some questions impertinent to the framework of my post. If
you want to better understand my positions, cut the accusations, and
ask questions for clarification.
You can also read what I posted to Judy, which goes further in explaining what
I believe. 











Bill







- Original Message - 





From: ShieldsFamily






To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org






Sent: Thursday, January
13, 2005 8:50 AM





Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





















From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Taylor
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005
9:47 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?







Now that you've vented, please go back and reread what I've
written.











Bill









Im afraid you have made it
abundantly clear. Another circular argument (much like the once
saved always saved thingy). If one rejects Christ after hearing
about Him, he would have done so anyway. How can you lose an argument
like that? The person would still have been much better off not to have
been given the opportunity to reject Christ! The question remains: what is the
point in preaching Christ if not the save the lost? Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread David Miller

Bill Taylor wrote:
 I am fairly confident that most Trinitarians would agree
 with me on the wooing. I am certain that James and
 Thomas Torrance do in fact believe this, and teach it
 (although dear old J.B. is now deceased). The wooing
 is but one aspect of a thoroughly participatory salvation
 that begins with Jesus Christ and never ends.

For what its worth, Bill, I also believe in the wooing concept you have 
described.  I hope to share some passages with Judy when time permits.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
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] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 7:14:02 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone else, "believers" included. We do not need a second "gospel" to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my comment.

Bill

Bill, I posted this yesterday and got (as usual) as resounding non-response. What say you???

Speaking of such, I am of the opinion (have I ever been taught this???) that we are born with a propensity to sinnot actually already condemned by sin (since we havent yet). So, in that case, anyone who dies prior to actually sinning is not under Gods judgment, and does not go to hell. Is there some scriptural reason for not believing this anyone?

Doesn't the Romans message give us a view that presents sin as that which is defined by law? Read 7: 7,8. Until one (a child or a special ed type) comes to the point of understanding sin as defined by law -- there is "no sin" in terms of accountability.

I know - spoken like a true legalist, but isn't there some truth to this?

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 7:33:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


I would say -- "How about them Dodgers?" 
 
Bill :)
 

What if I said that "free moral agency" is a problem for God -- who is not a free moral agent; that His "all knowing" acclaim (a claim heeped on Him by others) is a comparative statement, His knowledge compared to our meager share; that the flood incident is a testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the Creator' that the prophetical and applied statement of the psalmist to Christ (" .. thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of life .. Acts 2) is a continuance of this learning situation, perhaps even the conclusion of such on one level. 


DA Smithson 


How do I make the sound of a chicken cluking? buk buk buk buk?

:-

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 8:44:13 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

If they never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven.

 

Actually, once again, you missed the point. No one is saying this. Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe situation : "..their conscience either accusing or defending them " 

In Christ, we have the assurance of our salvation --- or, at least, some of us do. 

John



John, I fail to understand how that differs from what I said above. Splain the difference please. 



Does "either accusing or defending" sound like a guaranteed ticket to heaven to you? Not to me. As a matter of fact, not even close. 

JD

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Slade Henson




Try 
this

buk 
buk buk buk b'gock!

:^

-- 
slade

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, 13 January, 2005 
  16.12To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
  Life?In a message dated 1/13/2005 7:33:24 AM 
  Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  I would say -- "How about them Dodgers?" Bill :)
What if I said that "free moral agency" is a problem for 
  God -- who is not a free moral agent; 
  that His "all knowing" acclaim (a claim heeped on Him by others) is 
  a comparative statement, His knowledge compared to our meager share; 
  that the flood incident is a testament to the Divine Learning Curve of the 
  Creator' that the prophetical and applied statement of the psalmist 
  to Christ (" .. thou hast TAUGHT me the ways of 
  life .. Acts 2) is a continuance 
  of this learning situation, perhaps even the conclusion of such on one 
  level. DA Smithson How 
  do I make the sound of a chicken cluking? buk buk buk 
  buk?:-

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 2:13:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Try this
 
buk buk buk buk b'gock!
 
:^
 
-- slade


AAA -- the theater of the mind  

I've heard that eggs taste better than tripe? 

John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Slade Henson




That I 
wouldn't know, but I would venture to guess, uh... YES!  However, I'd have to ask my brother who 
married a Mexican gal whose mother cooks a killer menudo (did I spell that 
correctly?) -- or so I've heard. I eat vegetarian at his home (that's a joke... 
kinda).
 By the way, 
John... The financing on the home and property came through.. in duplicate. We 
can choose between two banks (Wells Fargo, I guess just took too 
long.).
 By the way, warn 
Bill T for me. I plan on getting hold of him to keep in touch. Like David Miller 
and unlike Terry, I valued his input.

-- 
slade

  -Original Message-From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, 13 
  January, 2005 17.22Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written 
  in the Lambs Book of Life?In a message dated 1/13/200514:13:07 PM PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  Try 
thisbuk buk buk buk 
b'gock!:^-- sladeAAA -- the theater of 
  the mind  I've heard that eggs taste 
  better than tripe? John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?









Speaking of such, I am of the opinion (have
I ever been taught this???) that we are born with a propensity to sinnot actually already condemned by sin (since
we havent yet). So, in that case, anyone who dies prior to actually
sinning is not under Gods judgment, and does not go to hell. Is there
some scriptural reason for not believing this anyone? 

Doesn't the Romans message give us a view that presents sin as that which is
defined by law? Read 7: 7,8. Until one (a child or a special
ed type) comes to the point of understanding sin as defined by law
-- there is no sin in terms of accountability. 
I know - spoken like a true legalist, but isn't
there some truth to this?
John

Thats
my view of it. Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 2:51:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 By the way, John... The financing on the home and property came through.. in duplicate. We can choose between two banks (Wells Fargo, I guess just took too long.).
 By the way, warn Bill T for me. I plan on getting hold of him to keep in touch. Like David Miller and unlike Terry, I valued his input.
 
-- slade


Awesome on the house. You work your butt off for years and once in a while, something really good happens besides the wife and kids. I'm smil 'en for you all -- and your older other kid (I bet), brother P P P P P P Powers.

Will do with Billy T. 

David Miller - I sent your post to Bill. A very good thing, on your part. Not simply the words, but the heart of the matter was outstanding. Hats off on tht one. 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Jeff Powers

So Sara has a new album out? I'd like to see her
and Troy again. I haven't seen them since I turneddown Sara's offer to
tour with them as her Sound Tech.
Jeff

Life makes warriors of us all.To emerge the victors,
we must armourselves with the most potent of weapons.That weapon is
prayer.--Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

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

Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005
9:41
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Debbie, I hear
you. We dont have to have it all figured out thankfully. We
just have to trust and obey a loving God. BTW, I love the song Maybe
Theres a Loving God by Sara Grovesits so awesome. (Im playing it on
the computer as I type.) Izzy

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Maybe-There's-A-Loving-God-lyrics-Sara-Groves/4F803844416C7AC948256DE9000DF162

From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Debbie
SawczakSent: Wednesday,
January 12, 2005 8:38 PMTo:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Yes, there is that
problem if you press it to the logical conclusion, isn't there? Same with the
all-babies-go-to-heaven view. In that case, best kill your kid before s/he
reaches the age of accountability, or at least ensure agood
pervasivebrain injury. But no; the Heard-Notcan't lose
byhearing, nor the child by understanding. I think it relates to
yourearlier post--God sees the end from the beginning.Also,
everyone has some knowledge or experience
to respond to. The response doesn't have to be propositional, nor intelligible
to us--only intelligible to God. (Mind you,Idon't thinkI've
figured this out yet...)

Debbie

-Original
Message-From:
ShieldsFamily [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 8:55
PMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Don't you
believe that all mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all
headed for heaven
whether or not they overcome anything. I underlined the
portion of your statement which is a true representation of things I've
said. The second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to what I
actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this because I have
had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have written more
about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone on this
list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you do, but I have written
many substantive words expressing the possibility of people rejecting Christ
and damning themselves to hell. You know this, so why do you continue to
misrepresent my position?

Bill

Bill it appears to
me that your theological construct forces one to believe that the worst
thing you could do is to tell someone about Jesus Christ. If they
never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do
hear about Him and reject Him, that is the only possible way they can be
destined for Hell. So why go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds
like a terrible thing to do.
Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread David Miller

John wrote:
 Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe
 situation  :  ..their conscience either
 accusing or defending them  
 In Christ, we have the assurance of our salvation
 ---   or, at least, some of us do.
 ...
 Does either accusing or defending sound like
 a guaranteed ticket to heaven to you?   Not to me.
 As a matter of fact,  not even close.

I'm not sure I understand how you are understanding this passage.  What does 
assurance of salvation or a guaranteed ticket to heaven have to do with 
the effect of the conscience upon the mind?  I have full assurance of 
salvation, but this description of thoughts (reasonings of the mind) either 
accusing or else excusing one another describes exactly what goes on among 
believers, ESPECIALLY ON TRUTHTALK!   :-)

Paul's point here is that judgment is not based upon who has the law and who 
hears the law.  It is the same argument some have made here in this forum 
but with a little different twist.  The judgment is not based upon who has 
the right theology and who hears the right theology.  Rather, judgment is 
based upon how we live.  We are judged based upon OUR DEEDS (whether or not 
we sin).  Period.

The Gentile believer is not a second class citizen of God's covenant just 
because he does not have the law, nor because he does not jump into Judaism 
and learn God's law.  Paul's point here is that the Gentile believer has the 
law of God written upon his heart, and his own conscience testifies to him 
that it is God's law, and he will do the same thing the Jew does, either 
accuse or excuse the deeds of one another, based upon that law written on 
his heart.  His point is that the Jew who boasts in having the law really 
has no advantage over the Gentile who believes in Christ and walks in 
righteousness based not upon Moses' law, but based upon faith in Christ 
which causes the law of God to be written upon his heart.

Why do I infer that these are believing Gentiles?  Context.  Also, the fact 
that Paul asserts strongly in this same passage that Gentiles apart from 
Christ are unable to keep the law.  I realize that you believe this passage 
to be hypothetical, but that causes the passage to completely lose its force 
(according to Tom Wright, and I agree with him on this one :-) ).

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
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] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 1:05:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone else, "believers" included. We do not need a second "gospel" to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my comment.



What ever you think of Billy T -- he does have a heart for his own impatience. He will be back. Like a moth to a flame, all in Jesus Name, the flight away from danger is short, a return to the destructive flame he cannot abort. 


JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Gary D Ottoson





myth (jt resolves most biblical 
questionsaprioriw/finality, not vianegotiatg 
vigorous, rigoroushermeneutic expertise existentially; if it's 
'hermeneutic', DavidM,then it'safter the fashion of 
pseudo-intellectual cult/sect administratorswielding 
autocraticself-confirmation, rubber stampg itevn by JC 
'theenterprisg spiritual entrepreneur from Nazareth'(©go:)..Lance pointd 
out that the C Van Til(lian) hermaneuticis defunct which seems true for 
good reasonswithin segments of Evangelicalism,e.g., w/i the Pietist 
realmwhich parallels Puritanism...but couple radical anti-Puritan 
'pietisim', absolutely, in a moralists' construct with radical perfectionism and 
term it'orthodoxy';e.g., in the theological vacuumemrgg 
here from, e.g., mindlessanti-Calvin and Luther-bashing rather than 
careful Evangelical analysis of certain historical roots..not unlike Reich3, 
watch itgenerate 'asc' ['autocraticself-confirmation', arrogantly, 
even racistly (sic)]..did younotice the pics of the prince of England in 
his'new' uniform? )

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:37:13 -0500 "David 
Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Glory.org writes: the hermeneutic 
[sic]criteria used by Judy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/13/2005 7:14:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


I'm not sure I understand how you are understanding this passage. What does 
"assurance of salvation" or a "guaranteed ticket to heaven" have to do with 
the effect of the conscience upon the mind? I have full assurance of 
salvation, but this description of thoughts (reasonings of the mind) either 
accusing or else excusing one another describes exactly what goes on among 
believers, ESPECIALLY ON TRUTHTALK! :-)



You might go back in time a little, David, and acquaint yourself with the thread. It should be rather obvious what is being said. 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-13 Thread Judy Taylor






On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:30:43 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/13/2005 7:14:11 PM Pacific 
  Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:I'm not sure I understand how you 
  are understanding this passage. What does "assurance of salvation" or a 
  "guaranteed ticket to heaven" have to do with the effect of the conscience 
  upon the mind? I have full assurance of salvation, but this description 
  of thoughts (reasonings of the mind) either accusing or else excusing one 
  another describes exactly what goes on among believers, ESPECIALLY ON 
  TRUTHTALK! :-)
  John responds: You might go back in time a 
  little, David, and acquaint yourself with the thread. It should be 
  rather obvious what is being said.John 
  
  jt: Is this the start of the thread?:
  
Izzy: If they never hear about Jesus they are 
guaranteed a ticket to heaven.Actually, once again, you missed the point. No one is 
saying this. 
Romans 2:15 -16 speaks only of a maybe 
situation : "..their conscience either accusing or 
defending them " In Christ, we have the 
assurance of our salvation --- or, at least, some 
of us do. JohnIzzy: John, I fail to understand how that differs from what I 
said above. Splain the difference please. 
  Does "either accusing or defending" sound like 
  a guaranteed ticket to heaven to you? Not to me. As a matter 
  of fact, 
  not even close.JD 
  
  jt: Romans 2:15,16 speaks ofborn 
  again Gentiles that is people who were not raised underthe law of Moses 
  but who now "in Christ" do by nature 
  (their new nature) the things required in the law with their conscience as 
  their guide. When it accuses them they go to the sacrifice and repent. 
  When it excuses them, they continue on in Christ. John no human being born 
  into the first Adam "DOES INSTINCTIVELY" the things in God's Law outside of 
  Christ.

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem
believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will remain
unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me and the triad
articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to
smear us with caricatures and misrepresentations, just think of how you
like it when others do that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do it,
then go ahead and do it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll still
forgive you. Your friend, Bill

jt: Verydramatic
Bill.But please tell me inwhat wayI have smeared,
misrepresented and caricatured you? BTW you are included in the triad
along withLance, and Jonathan. Before you forgive me please tell
me what I have done wrong. Don't you believe that all mankind is included in
the incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven whether or not they
overcome anything and weren't you writing about the perils of enlightenment
thinking and how it keeps one from being able to understand scripture?
If you don't believe these things then at least give me the opportunity to
repent.. judyt

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:49:40 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:So, the really important thing is
not the book of life but the Divine Eraser.
Interesting teaching.

jt: Not my
"teaching" John it is in the Book and the really important thing should be
what God says even if it does conflict with your ontological
model.
Unscriptural John. -
I would not have so written if it were
unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's interpretation of
my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of
Christ;s- oh, never mind !
JD

jt: Oh, I see. We are back to this is
just my interpretation and I can't know anything because of my
"enlightenment thinking?" Please yourself John. It's your future. I knew you (and
the triad) wouldn't want "overcoming" on the front burner since the
theological theories are so much easier.
judyt
__jt: Unscriptural John. How did he get born saved since
everyone is born into a "fallen creation" (sin) in the first Adam. The
scriptures teach that God saw us in Christ before the foundation of the
world (Eph 1:4) and everyone's name was written in the Lamb's Book of Life
at the beginning because Jesus was the lamb slain before the foundation of
the world. However, this does not negate the fall nor does it insure
salvation unless one keeps their name from being blotted out. The soul
that sinneth, it shall die. Is an eternal truth So rather than get so
tangled up with saved, not saved, saved, not saved. Wouldn't we be wiser to
learn what God call's sin and stop doing it? John: Interesting scripture, Judy.
Our names are in that book from the beginning. Wow. I had
forgotten this passage. Do you see God erasing some of these
names? I don't. jt: Yes I
do, only the ones who overcome make it. Moses was aware that one could
be blotted out (Exodus 32:32) and so was David (Ps 69:28). Jesus Himself
says of the one who "overcomes" - I will not erase his name from the book of
life (Rev 3:5).
So, the really important thing is not the book of life
but the Divine Eraser. Interesting teaching.
Unscriptural John.
- I would not have so written
if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's
interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of
Christ;s
- oh,
never mind !JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Judy wrote  I 
have no ideawhat you are talking about Bill. First you might define what 
you mean by "hermeneutical criteria" and then tell me 
how I hold your feet to the fire and excuse myself, because to me this is 
nothing but an unfounded accusation. You say there is no such thing as 
"spiritual death". I say there is and it is right under your nose in the 
book of Genesis. Why not deal with the 
facts? Just throwing out accusationsolves 
nothing.

The hermeneutical criteria that I am 
questioningis the criteria of interpretation that you use against others 
but are unwilling to apply to yourself. Let me state it in different words. At 
the beginning of our debate over the Sonship of Christ, you sent a series of 
posts stating that no where in Scripture are the words "eternal Son" used. You 
therefore used that to draw the conclusion that the Son of God was not the 
eternal Son of God. Do you remember this, or would you like me to dig up those 
posts? Judy, the words "spiritual death" do not appear in Scripture. The concept 
of spiritual death is a theological construct that you and many others have 
built, based upon less than explicit statements in the Bible. This in itself is 
not a bad this, if in fact the Bible does set forth this doctrine in its 
non-specific language. I do not believe it does that. If in Genesis God had 
said, On the day you eat of it, you will surely die a spiritual death, then I 
would have no recourse to argue against your concept of spiritual death. But God 
did not say that; he said "On the day you eat of it, you will surely die." There 
is nothing explicit about that death,no mention as to how they would die 
or what kind of death that it would be, just that they would die. I believe that 
rather than allowing them to die on that day, God substituted his own Son on 
their behalf. This does not mean that the Son died on that day (although he is 
called the Lamb slain from the foundation or beginning of the world), but it 
does mean that the Son's fait was sealed on that day. Immediately after the 
fall, God promised the Woman that to her a Seed would be born and that that Seed 
would be bruised (in other words, die on a cross, but in resurrection change the 
nature of death for ever and everyone) but thatin so doing he would crush 
the deceiver's head (and this is forever). Therefore, I do have a very 
plausibleexplanation, which does not employ your extra-biblical term: 
"spiritual death." Why if you are unwilling to accept the eternal Son teaching, 
and thisbecause it is not a biblical term, are you nowwilling to 
continue to uphold the "spiritual death" doctrine, when it too is not a biblical 
term? This is the hermeneutical criteria that I am questioning: a criteria of 
interpretation that you will use against others but are unwilling to apply to 
yourself.


Sincerely,

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 12:49 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  I have no ideawhat you are talking about Bill. 
  First you might define what you mean by "hermeneutical criteria"
  and then tell me how I hold your feet to the fire and 
  excuse myself, because to me this is nothing but an unfounded 
  accusation. You say there is no such thing as "spiritual death". I 
  say there is and it is right under your nose in the
  book of Genesis. Why not deal with the 
  facts? Just throwing out accusationsolves nothing.
  
  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:43:31 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
Peace to you, Judy. We have been down this road 
before. I was just checking to see if you had the integrity to hold your own 
feet to the fire by employing the same hermeneutical criteria toward 
yourself that you do against those whose beliefs differ from your own. No 
surprises here, you don't. Bill

  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:27:04 -0700 "Bill 
  Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
O poor poor John,

If it will make you feel better, I will go 
so far as to say that there is no explicit scriptural support for the 
idea of "spiritual death." This idea came to us viathe wake of the 
Augustine-v-Palagius controversy. 

Not so Bill, the book of 
Genesis was written way before the Augustine v Pelagius controversy and 
this is where the idea of "spiritual death" comes from. God said 
"In the day AE ate they would SURELY die" Are you saying He 
lied and they didn't die that day?

In fact I also know that Judy, if she is 
going tobe consistent,will have to agree with me on this 
one, although on different grounds; and thisbecause she is so 
insistent on pointing out that since there is no explicit language 
stating that Jesus is

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Judy, if you want me to do this, I will. But when I 
do, are you really going to be ready to repent? I rather doubt it. But I would 
be thrilled if you are.

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 1:06 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  
  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem 
believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will remain 
unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me and the triad 
articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to 
smear us with caricatures and misrepresentations, just think of how 
you like it when others do that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do 
it, then go ahead and do it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll 
still forgive you. Your friend, 
Bill

jt: Verydramatic 
Bill.But please tell me inwhat wayI have smeared, 
misrepresented and caricatured you? BTW you are included in the triad 
along withLance, and Jonathan. Before you forgive me please tell 
me what I have done wrong. Don't you believe that all mankind is included in 
the incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven whether or not they 
overcome anything and weren't you writing about the perils of enlightenment 
thinking and how it keeps one from being able to understand scripture? 
If you don't believe these things then at least give me the opportunity to 
repent.. judyt



  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:49:40 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:So, the really important 
  thing is not the book of life but the Divine 
  Eraser. Interesting teaching. 

  
  jt: Not my "teaching" John 
  it is in the Book and the really important thing should be what God says 
  even if it does conflict with your ontological 
model.
  Unscriptural John. 
  - I would not have so written 
  if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's 
  interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of 
  Christ;s- oh, never mind ! 
  JD
  
  jt: Oh, I see. We are back to 
  this is just my interpretation and I can't know anything because of my 
  "enlightenment thinking?" Please yourself John. 
  It's your 
  future. I knew you (and the triad) wouldn't want "overcoming" on the front 
  burner since the theological theories are so much 
  easier. judyt
  __jt: Unscriptural John. How did he get born saved 
  since everyone is born into a "fallen creation" (sin) in the first Adam. 
  The scriptures teach that God saw us in Christ before the foundation of 
  the world (Eph 1:4) and everyone's name was written in the Lamb's Book of 
  Life at the beginning because Jesus was the lamb slain before the 
  foundation of the world. However, this does not negate the fall nor does 
  it insure salvation unless one keeps their name from being blotted 
  out. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Is an eternal truth So 
  rather than get so tangled up with saved, not saved, saved, not saved. 
  Wouldn't we be wiser to learn what God call's sin and stop doing 
  it? John: Interesting 
  scripture, Judy. Our names are in that book from the 
  beginning. Wow. I had forgotten this passage. Do 
  you see God erasing some of these names? I don't. 
  jt: Yes I do, only the ones who overcome 
  make it. Moses was aware that one could be blotted out (Exodus 
  32:32) and so was David (Ps 69:28). Jesus Himself says of the one who 
  "overcomes" - I will not erase his name from the book of life (Rev 
  3:5).  
  So, the really important thing is not the book of 
life but the Divine Eraser. Interesting teaching. 
Unscriptural John. 
- I would not have so 
written if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to 
Kay's interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's 
interpretation of Christ;s 
- oh, 
never mind !JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Now Bill, let's not rush to judgment here. You
have me convicted and sentenced while the jury is still out.
Are you certain that what I describe below is not you?
Can you provethat you don't believe these things and have never promoted them on this list? Let's take
care of these questions before we worry about whether I am ready to repent. You may be the one needing to repent for
accusing the brethren.

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:57:23 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Judy, if you want me to do this, I will. But when I do, are
you really going to be ready to repent? I rather doubt it. But I would be
thrilled if you are. Bill

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill
Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:

To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem
believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will remain
unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me and the
triad articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to smear us with caricatures and
misrepresentations, just think of how you like it when others do
that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do it, then go ahead and do
it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll still forgive you.
Your friend, Bill

jt: Verydramatic
Bill.But please tell me inwhat wayI have smeared,
misrepresented and caricatured you? BTW you are included in the
triad along withLance, and Jonathan. Before you forgive me
please tell me what I have done wrong. Don't you believe that all mankind
is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven
whether or not they overcome anything and weren't you writing about the
perils of enlightenment thinking and how it keeps one from being able to
understand scripture? If you don't believe these things then at
least give me the opportunity to repent.. judyt

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:49:40 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:So, the really important
thing is not the book of life but the Divine
Eraser. Interesting teaching.

jt: Not my
"teaching" John it is in the Book and the really important thing should
be what God says even if it does conflict with your ontological
model.
Unscriptural John. -
I would not have so written if it were
unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's interpretation
of my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of
Christ;s- oh, never mind !
JD

jt: Oh, I see. We are back to this is
just my interpretation and I can't know anything because of my
"enlightenment thinking?" Please yourself John.
It's your future. I knew you (and the triad)
wouldn't want "overcoming" on the front burner since the theological
theories are so much easier.
judyt
__jt: Unscriptural John. How did he get born saved
since everyone is born into a "fallen creation" (sin) in the first Adam.
The scriptures teach that God saw us in Christ before the foundation of
the world (Eph 1:4) and everyone's name was written in the Lamb's Book
of Life at the beginning because Jesus was the lamb slain before the
foundation of the world. However, this does not negate the fall nor does
it insure salvation unless one keeps their name from being blotted
out. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Is an eternal truth So
rather than get so tangled up with saved, not saved, saved, not saved.
Wouldn't we be wiser to learn what God call's sin and stop doing
it? John:
Interesting scripture, Judy. Our names are in that book from
the beginning. Wow. I had forgotten this
passage. Do you see God erasing some of these names? I
don't. jt: Yes I do, only
the ones who overcome make it. Moses was aware that one could be
blotted out (Exodus 32:32) and so was David (Ps 69:28). Jesus Himself
says of the one who "overcomes" - I will not erase his name from the
book of life (Rev 3:5).

So, the really important thing is not the book of
life but the Divine Eraser. Interesting teaching.
Unscriptural John.
- I would not have so
written if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to
Kay's interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's
interpretation of Christ;s
-
oh, never mind !JD

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




A dead 
baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's rather traumatic 
problem. People wonder where their family members GO...especially their 
childrenwhen they die. Death is a very real problem most of us have to 
deal with at one time or another. The death of a child is probably a pain so 
great that I can't even imagine it.
John 
is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever had a friend who 
miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or died from SIDS, hit by a 
drunk driver, or from their immunizations? Haven't you known a family whose 
child died in an accident? Catholics would tell you the child goes to some 
in-between place unless the infant has been baptized.

We 
don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some tools to be an 
encouragement to others so we may minister to them in empathy and love. If a 
young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a baby stillborn, would you say to 
her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my problem? I have a heavenly father whose 
nature is love..What if that young mother was a non-Believer? What do 
you think she would think/feel about a God who is love?

Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Judy 
  TaylorSent: Tuesday, 11 January, 2005 23.46To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  jt: JOHN a dead baby is not 
  my problem. I have a Heavenly Father whose nature and character is love and so 
  I
  leave all those kinds of problems with Him 
  cause I don't have to know everything. However, what aboutthe babies of 
  the Amorites and these other nations God was so 
  disgusted with? I mean the ones where Israel was told not to let even one animal live?
  
  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:50:27 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
In a message dated 1/10/2005 11:42:20 AM Pacific Standard 
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I thinkcorrect me if I'm 
  wrong, Johnthat John is saying that a child is "saved" when he is 
  born. A newborn is not cast into hell because he wasn't "born again". A 
  child who dies goes to heaven...until he is of the age of accountability 
  and makes his decision...either for God and "heavenbound", or against God 
  and "hellbound". KayInteresting and close to what I do believe. 
Judy - is a dead baby going to heaven or hell. I 
am sure your theology allows for such -- just interested 
in how that happens. John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Allow me to give you a resent example of one of
your smears.Dependinghow you do with it, I may go further: "BTW you are included in the triad along withLance, and
Jonathan."Canyou say to me with a clear conscience and your
hand on the Bible that yoursis not a pejorative use of the word "triad"?

Now allow me to
give you an example of misrepresentation from a recent post: Don't you
believe that all mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all
headed for heaven whether or not they overcome anything. I underlined the portion of your statement which is a true
representation of things I've said. The second part is not accurate and cannot
be linked to what I actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this
because I have had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have
written more about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone
on this list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you do, but I have
written many substantive words expressing the possibility of people rejecting
Christ and damning themselves to hell. You know this, so why do you continue to
misrepresent my position?

Now let me give you and example of your caricatures
from a recent post? However, this is subject to change if anyone can show me in
the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of the "eternal son" people
have done so. While I admit
that on this occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as an example of a
caricature. I have written at length in the last few weeks explaining the
orthodox doctrine of Christ and the relational nature of ourthe triune
God. I have deliberately refrained from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck
to the exegesis Scripture to make this clear, even though there is some really
wonderful, and informative, and authoritative stuff out there from which to
draw, and I have done this because I know that you, if you are to see the light,
will only see it via an exposition of Scripture. And Judy, don't deceive
yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no excuse for
not understanding. This doctrine has stood the test of time. It is essential to
a right understanding of God. Yet you belittle that effort and shun your
heritage with your derogatory characterization of us as the"'eternal son'
people. You have been shown in Scripture the basis for this belief. It is a
strong enough basis to have convince millions upon millions of Christians over
the centuries.You have been shown the error of you theology, yet you mock
uswith words andtitles like: "'eternal Sonship' - relationship - community thing."
This is a caricature; it is
aderogatory imitationof our beliefs san the substance of
content.

By the way, if you want any references you may
check your commentsbelow. Except for the last two, they were made in
yourpost prior to thisone.

Bill

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

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:00
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Now Bill, let's not rush to judgment here. You
have me convicted and sentenced while the jury is still out.
Are you certain that what I describe below is not
you? Can you provethat you don't believe these things and have never promoted them on this list? Let's
take care of these questions before we worry about whether I am ready to repent. You may be the one needing to repent for
accusing the brethren.

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill
Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:

To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem
believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will
remain unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me
and the triad articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to smear us with caricatures and
misrepresentations, just think of how you like it when others do
that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do it, then go ahead and
do it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll still forgive you.
Your friend, Bill

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




God bless you, Kay. You are so right on with this 
one.

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Slade 
  Henson 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:31 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  A 
  dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's rather 
  traumatic problem. People wonder where their family members GO...especially 
  their childrenwhen they die. Death is a very real problem most of us 
  have to deal with at one time or another. The death of a child is probably a 
  pain so great that I can't even imagine it.
  John 
  is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever had a friend who 
  miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or died from SIDS, hit by a 
  drunk driver, or from their immunizations? Haven't you known a family whose 
  child died in an accident? Catholics would tell you the child goes to some 
  in-between place unless the infant has been baptized.
  
  We 
  don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some tools to be an 
  encouragement to others so we may minister to them in empathy and love. If a 
  young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a baby stillborn, would you say to 
  her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my problem? I have a heavenly father whose 
  nature is love..What if that young mother was a non-Believer? What 
  do you think she would think/feel about a God who is love?
  
  Kay
  
-Original Message-From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Judy 
TaylorSent: Tuesday, 11 January, 2005 23.46To: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: 
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
jt: JOHN a dead baby is 
not my problem. I have a Heavenly Father whose nature and character is love 
and so I
leave all those kinds of problems with Him 
cause I don't have to know everything. However, what aboutthe babies 
of the Amorites and these other nations God was 
so disgusted with? I mean the ones where Israel was told not to let even one animal live?

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:50:27 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/10/2005 11:42:20 AM 
  Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  I thinkcorrect me if 
I'm wrong, Johnthat John is saying that a child is "saved" when he is 
born. A newborn is not cast into hell because he wasn't "born again". A 
child who dies goes to heaven...until he is of the age of accountability 
and makes his decision...either for God and "heavenbound", or against 
God and "hellbound". 
KayInteresting and close to what I do believe. 
  Judy 
  - is a dead baby going to heaven or hell. I am sure your 
  theology allows for such -- just interested in how that 
  happens. John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?





Again I apologize for all the typos. They upset me 
very much. I know that I need to take a deep breath and count to ten, but this 
is so very important at so many levels. I told you this on my very first 
challenge of your views. To miss this, after a clear presentation of the truth, 
is a grievous error, the overall consequences too major to imagine.

Corrections below:

Bill


 Original Message - 
From: Bill Taylor 

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 7:43 
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Allow me to give you a resent example of one of 
your smears.Dependinghow you do with it, I may go further: "BTW you are included in the triad along withLance, and 
Jonathan."Canyou say to me with a clear conscience and your 
hand on the Bible that yoursis not a pejorative use of the word "triad"? 


Now allow me to 
give you an example of misrepresentation from a recent post: Don't you 
believe that all mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all 
headed for heaven whether or not they overcome anything. I underlined the portion of your statement which is a true 
representation of things I've said. The second part is not accurate and cannot 
be linked to what I actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this 
because I have had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have 
written more about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone 
on this list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you do, but I have 
written many substantive words expressing the possibility of people rejecting 
Christ and damning themselves to hell. You know this, so why do you continue to 
misrepresent my position?

Now let me give you an example of your caricatures 
from a recent post? However, this is subject to change if anyone can show me in 
the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of the "eternal son" people 
have done so. While I admit 
that on this occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as an example of a 
caricature. I have written at length in the last few weeks explaining the 
orthodox doctrine of Christ and the relational nature of ourtriune God. I 
have deliberately refrained from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to the 
exegesis of Scripture to make this clear, even though there is some really 
wonderful, and informative, and authoritative stuff out there from which to 
draw, and I have done this because I know that you, if you are to see the light, 
will only see it via an exposition of Scripture. And Judy, don't deceive 
yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no excuse for 
not understanding what I am attempting to convey. This doctrine has stood the 
test of time. It is essential to a right understanding of God. Yet you belittle 
that effort and shun your heritage with your derogatory characterization of us 
as the"'eternal son' people." You have been shown in Scripture the basis 
for this belief. It is a strong enough basis to have convinced millions upon 
millions of Christians over the centuries.You have been shown the error of 
your theology, yet you mock uswith words andtitles like: 
"'eternal Sonship' - 
relationship - community thing." This is a caricature; it is aderogatory 
imitationof our beliefs san the substance of 
content.

By the way, if you want any references you may 
check your commentsbelow. Except for the last two, they were made in 
yourpost prior to thisone.

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:00 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  Now Bill, let's not rush to judgment here. You 
  have me convicted and sentenced while the jury is still out.
  Are you certain that what I describe below is not 
  you? Can you provethat you don't believe these things and have never promoted them on this list? Let's 
  take care of these questions before we worry about whether I am ready to repent. You may be the one needing to repent for 
  accusing the brethren.
  
  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:57:23 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Judy, if you want me to do this, I will. But when I do, are 
  you really going to be ready to repent? I rather doubt it. But I would be 
  thrilled if you are. Bill
  

  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill 
  Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
  
To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem 
believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will 
remain unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me 
and the triad articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to smear us with caricatures and 
misrepresentations, just think of how you like it when others do 
that to you. Then if you want to go

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?









Jt, also I have learned that when a
certain mormon fellow (to remain unnamed) asks us to define anything it is to
get us squabbling about definitions amongst ourselves; thus avoiding him
answering any specific, uncomfortable questions himself. Izzy











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005
2:06 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose
Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



















On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 Bill Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:







To the contrary, Judy, I have no problem believing that the
names of those who do not reject the Christ will remain unblotted from the
Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me and the triad articulate our own
beliefs. When you feel compelled to
smear us with caricatures and misrepresentations, just think of
how you like it when others do that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do
it, then go ahead and do it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll
still forgive you. Your friend, Bill











jt: Verydramatic
Bill.But please tell me inwhat wayI have smeared,
misrepresented and caricatured you? BTW you are included in the triad
along withLance, and Jonathan. Before you forgive me please tell me
what I have done wrong. Don't you believe that all mankind is included in the
incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven whether or not they overcome
anything and weren't you writing about the perils of enlightenment thinking and
how it keeps one from being able to understand scripture? If you don't
believe these things then at least give me the opportunity to repent..
judyt



















On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:49:40 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, the really important thing
is not the book of life but the Divine
Eraser. Interesting teaching. 











jt: Not my teaching John it is in the Book and the
really important thing should be what God says even if it does conflict with
your ontological model.






Unscriptural John. - I
would not have so written if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might
refer to Kay's interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's
interpretation of Christ;s- oh, never mind
! JD











jt: Oh, I see. We are back to this is just my
interpretation and I can't know anything because of my enlightenment
thinking? Please yourself John. It's your future. I knew you (and
the triad) wouldn't want overcoming on the front burner since the
theological theories are so much easier. judyt





__
jt: Unscriptural John. How did he get born saved
since everyone is born into a fallen creation (sin) in the first
Adam. The scriptures teach that God saw us in Christ before the foundation of
the world (Eph 1:4) and everyone's name was written in the Lamb's Book of Life
at the beginning because Jesus was the lamb slain before the foundation of the
world. However, this does not negate the fall nor does it insure salvation unless
one keeps their name from being blotted out. The soul that sinneth, it
shall die. Is an eternal truth So rather than get so tangled up with saved, not
saved, saved, not saved. Wouldn't we be wiser to learn what God call's sin and
stop doing it?
 
John: Interesting scripture, Judy. Our names are in that book from
the beginning. Wow. I had forgotten this passage. Do
you see God erasing some of these names? I don't. 

jt: Yes I do, only the ones who overcome make it. Moses
was aware that one could be blotted out (Exodus 32:32) and so was David (Ps
69:28). Jesus Himself says of the one who overcomes - I will not
erase his name from the book of life (Rev 3:5). 
 







So, the really important thing is not the book of life but the Divine
Eraser. Interesting teaching. 

Unscriptural John. - I would not have so
written if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's
interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of
Christ;s -
oh, never mind !


JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:31:07 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  A 
  dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's rather 
  traumatic problem. People wonder where their family members GO...especially 
  their childrenwhen they die. Death is a very real problem most of us 
  have to deal with at one time or another. The death of a child is probably a 
  pain so great that I can't even imagine it.
  
  jt: 
  True Kay but what point is there in borrowing trouble. I trust the Lord to 
  give me the grace to deal with it if and when the time 
  comes.
  I 
  understand that people question these things. My own mother has been asking 
  why my sister was taken at 60yrs for the past 16yrs and she just had her 99th 
  birthday. However, if you told her the truth she wouldn't receive it. 
  Yes thepain is great but pulling a rabbit out of a hat to make them feel 
  better is no long term solution.
  
  John 
  is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever had a friend who 
  miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or died from SIDS, hit by a 
  drunk driver, or from their immunizations? Haven't you known a family whose 
  child died in an accident? Catholics would tell you the child goes to some 
  in-between place unless the infant has been baptized.
  
  jt: 
  I have miscarried myself and yes, I know how that is but John does not know 
  everything and it's OK to be honest and admit it.
  
  We 
  don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some tools to be an 
  encouragement to others so we may minister to them in empathy and love. If a 
  young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a baby stillborn, would you say to 
  her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my problem? I have a heavenly father whose 
  nature is love..What if that young mother was a non-Believer? What 
  do you think she would think/feel about a God who is love? 
  Kay
  
  jt: 
  Of course I wouldn't say that to someone who is grieving Kay but neither would 
  I give them false hope. I see it as an opportunity to encourage them to seek 
  God's answers in His Word for themselves. Too many peoplelook to 
  others for all the answers. Helping and encouraging them is one 
  thing.
  

jt: JOHN a dead baby is 
not my problem. I have a Heavenly Father whose nature and character is love 
and so I
leave all those kinds of problems with Him 
cause I don't have to know everything. However, what aboutthe babies 
of the Amorites and these other nations God was 
so disgusted with? I mean the ones where Israel was told not to let even one animal live?

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:50:27 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  In a message dated 1/10/2005 11:42:20 AM 
  Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  I thinkcorrect me if 
I'm wrong, Johnthat John is saying that a child is "saved" when he is 
born. A newborn is not cast into hell because he wasn't "born again". A 
child who dies goes to heaven...until he is of the age of accountability 
and makes his decision...either for God and "heavenbound", or against 
God and "hellbound". 
KayInteresting and close to what I do believe. 
  Judy 
  - is a dead baby going to heaven or hell. I am sure your 
  theology allows for such -- just interested in how that 
  happens. John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/11/2005 11:52:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I have no idea what you are talking about Bill. First you might define what you mean by "hermeneutical criteria"
 and then tell me how I hold your feet to the fire and excuse myself, because to me this is nothing but an unfounded accusation. You say there is no such thing as "spiritual death". I say there is and it is right under your nose in the
 book of Genesis. Why not deal with the facts? Just throwing out accusation solves nothing.


Judy - what Bill is saying (IMO) is that you reject the conclusions he draws by comaring scripture to scripture while allowing the very same process in the drawing of some of your conclusions. I would think this to be rather OBVIOUS.

John

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




I 
guess you understood what I was trying to say. I'm not the greatest of 
writers.

Thank 
you, Bill.

Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Bill 
  TaylorSent: Wednesday, 12 January, 2005 09.46To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  God bless you, Kay. You are so right on with this 
  one.
  
  Bill
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Slade 
Henson 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:31 
AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

A 
dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's rather 
traumatic problem. People wonder where their family members GO...especially 
their childrenwhen they die. Death is a very real problem most of 
us have to deal with at one time or another. The death of a child is 
probably a pain so great that I can't even imagine it.
John is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever had 
a friend who miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or died from 
SIDS, hit by a drunk driver, or from their immunizations? Haven't you known 
a family whose child died in an accident? Catholics would tell you the child 
goes to some in-between place unless the infant has been 
baptized.

We 
don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some tools to be an 
encouragement to others so we may minister to them in empathy and love. If a 
young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a baby stillborn, would you say 
to her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my problem? I have a heavenly father 
whose nature is love..What if that young mother was a 
non-Believer? What do you think she would think/feel about a God who is 
love?

Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Judy 
  TaylorSent: Tuesday, 11 January, 2005 23.46To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
  are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  jt: JOHN a dead baby is 
  not my problem. I have a Heavenly Father whose nature and character is 
  love and so I
  leave all those kinds of problems with Him 
  cause I don't have to know everything. However, what aboutthe babies 
  of the Amorites and these other nations God was 
  so disgusted with? I mean the ones where Israel was told not to let even one animal live?
  
  On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:50:27 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  
In a message dated 1/10/2005 11:42:20 AM 
Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I thinkcorrect me if 
  I'm wrong, Johnthat John is saying that a child is "saved" when he is 
  born. A newborn is not cast into hell because he wasn't "born again". 
  A child who dies goes to heaven...until he is of the age of 
  accountability and makes his decision...either for God and 
  "heavenbound", or against God and "hellbound". KayInteresting and close to what I do 
believe. Judy - is a dead baby going to heaven or 
hell. I am sure your theology allows for such -- 
just interested in how that happens. John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:54:55 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  The hermeneutical criteria that I am 
  questioningis the criteria of interpretation that you use against others 
  but are unwilling to apply to yourself. Let me state it in different words. At 
  the beginning of our debate over the Sonship of Christ, you sent a series of 
  posts stating that no where in Scripture are the words 
  "eternal Son" used. 
  
  jt: It is true that thesetwo 
  words are not used together in scripture Bill and that this is a theological 
  construct which has been made by the so called Church Fathers (how ironic 
  whenJesus tells us not to call anyone on earth Father becausewe 
  have justONE (spiritual) Father) .
  
  You therefore used that to 
  draw the conclusion that the Son of God was not the eternal Son of God. 
  Do you remember this, or would you like me to dig up those posts? 

  
  jt: This is just one of the things that leads me 
  to this conclusion Bill. If I could see the eternal son concept in 
  scripture I would consider it but I don't even see that. To me it is akin 
  tothe RCC's obsession withMary and the eternal baby Jesus keeping 
  him an infantand calling Mary the Mother of God. So you see Bill I am 
  not the ONLY one who is busy with the misunderstandings and 
  mischaracterizations here but you don't question them because they are 
  "orthodox" so that makes me the heretick - right?
  
  Judy, the words "spiritual 
  death" do not appear in Scripture. The concept of 
  spiritual death is a theological construct that you and many others 
  have built, based upon less than explicit statements in the Bible. This in 
  itself is not a bad this, if in fact the Bible does set forth this doctrine in 
  its non-specific language. I do not believe it does that. 
  
  jt: It does in fact do that Bill. 
  The Bible is basically a spiritual book. You may not find those exact 
  wordsbut the concept is there and it needs notheological 
  constructing at all. "As in Adam ALL die even so in Christ shall all be made 
  alive" (1 Cor 15:22). You will probably reply that this refers to the 
  resurrection - but that makes no difference because if we were not spiritually 
  deadwe would need no resurrecting. When we become born of the Spirit or 
  born again we receive the earnest of our inheritance in Christ which is the 
  indwelling Spirit and pass from death to life.
  
  If in Genesis God had said, On the day you eat of it, you will surely die a spiritual 
  death, then I would have no recourse to argue against your concept of 
  spiritual death. But God did not say that; he said "On the 
  day you eat of it, you will surely die." There is nothing explicit 
  about that death,no mention as to how they would die or what kind of 
  death that it would be, just that they would die. 
  
  jt: Well we know that Adam did die 
  that day just as God in His Omnipotence said he would and we know that he did 
  not die a physical death because he did not die physically for 960 more years 
  so what kind of a death did he die that dayBill?
  
  I believe that rather than 
  allowing them to die on that day, God substituted his own Son on their 
  behalf. This does not mean that the Son died on that day (although he is 
  called the Lamb slain from the foundation or beginning of the world), but it 
  does mean that the Son's fait was sealed on that day. 
  
  jt: Oh so God changed His mind 
  without telling anybody. The Lamb's fate was sealed "before the foundation of 
  the world" Bill which was before any of the activity written about 
  in the book of Genesis took place and yes He diddie to reverse the curse 
  placed on humanity that day... because death reigned from Adam to 
  Moses. 
  
  "So also it is written"the 
  first man Adam became a livingsoul, the last Adam became a life giving 
  Spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the 
  spiritual. The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from 
  heaven. As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the 
  heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. And just as we have borne the 
  image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly" (1 Cor 
  15:45-49)
  
  Immediately after the 
  fall, God promised the Woman that to her a Seed would be born and that 
  that Seed would be bruised (in other words, die on a cross, but in 
  resurrection change the nature of death for ever and everyone) but 
  thatin so doing he would crush the deceiver's head (and this is 
  forever). Therefore, I do have a very 
  plausibleexplanation, which does not employ your extra-biblical 
  term: "spiritual death." Why if you are unwilling to 
  accept the eternal Son teaching, and thisbecause it is not a biblical 
  term, are you nowwilling to continue to uphold the "spiritual death" 
  doctrine, when it too is not a biblical term? This is the hermeneutical 
  criteria that I am

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:02:00 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Kay...in this shade: Judy 
  in this shade
  
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 
08:31:07 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  A dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's 
  rather traumatic problem. People wonder where their family members 
  GO...especially their childrenwhen they die. Death is a very 
  real problem most of us have to deal with at one time or another. The 
  death of a child is probably a pain so great that I can't even imagine 
  it.
  
  jt: True Kay but what point is there in borrowing trouble. I trust 
  the Lord to give me the grace to deal with it if and when the time comes. 
  I understand that people question these things. My 
  own mother has been asking why my sister was taken at 60yrs for the past 
  16yrs and she just had her 99th birthday. However, if you told her the 
  truth she wouldn't receive it. Yes thepain is great but 
  pulling a rabbit out of a hat to make them feel better is no long term 
  solution.
  
  This was not the 
  context of the discussion, Judy, nor the question John asked.There 
  was nothing about borrowing trouble. The discussion was about being born 
  in sin...would that affect salvation...what about a baby who doesn't get 
  much of a life, who can't make the choice between God or not of God? John 
  said: Judy - is a dead baby going to heaven or hell. I am 
  sure your theology allows for such -- just interested in 
  how that happens. You answered by saying a dead 
  baby is not your problem. Now you say there's no point in borrowing 
  trouble. I think it's a simple yes or no answer. Is a baby going to 
  heaven? Is a baby going to 
  hell?

  jt: 
  Taking on questions I don't know the answer to is IMO "borrowing trouble" 
  Kay. John is asking me to make 
  a
  judgment or 
  determination that neither he or I know the answer to.
  
  John is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever 
  had a friend who miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or died 
  from SIDS, hit by a drunk driver, or from their immunizations? Haven't you 
  known a family whose child died in an accident? Catholics would tell you 
  the child goes to some in-between place unless the infant has been 
  baptized.
  
  jt: I have miscarried myself and yes, I know how 
  that is but John does not know everything and it's OK to be honest and 
  admit it.
  
  It has nothing to do 
  with what John knows or doesn't know.The discussion iscentered 
  on salvationwho has it and who 
  doesn't.
  
  jt: Those who have it 
  should haveassurance by way of the indwelling Spirit. If you can 
  find the answer to John's
  question in scripture 
  - please tell me where it is at. I know that King David was sure the child 
  he had with Bathsheba waswith the Lord 
  -even though David had sinned/repented, he was a son of the 
  Covenant. I am not so sure about
  the offspring of 
  idolators. Do you think the firstborn of the Egyptians who God 
  allowed to be killed went to be with Him and if your 
  answer is yes -what do 
  you base this on?
  
  We don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some 
  tools to be an encouragement to others so we may minister to them in 
  empathy and love. If a young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a baby 
  stillborn, would you say to her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my problem? 
  I have a heavenly father whose nature is love..What if that 
  young mother was a non-Believer? What do you think she would think/feel 
  about a God who is love? Kay
  
  jt: Of course I wouldn't say that to someone who 
  is grieving Kay but neither would I give them false hope. I see it as an 
  opportunity to encourage them to seek God's answers in His Word for 
  themselves. Too many peoplelook to others for all the answers. 
  Helping and encouraging them is one thing.
  
  How does false hope 
  come into the picture?What if the mom is illiterate and simply CAN'T 
  read what the Word says? What if mom's reading/comprehension skills are 
  lacking and she doesn't understand the difficult words in Scripture? 
  Kay
  
  jt: It's impossible 
  tostand on "what if?" - that's a Henny Penny philosophy. If one 
  determines to seek God with their whole heart He will make a way for 
  them. My FIL was illiterate but he could read the Bible - (KJV) and 
  had no problem with difficult words, apparently he got the concept and he 
  understood enough to be assured of his own salvationand believe me, 
  he walked the walk daily

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Do you 
really not get it or are you faking it?

Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Judy 
  TaylorSent: Wednesday, 12 January, 2005 13.04To: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgCc: 
  TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  
  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:02:00 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
Kay...in this shade: Judy 
in this shade

  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 
  08:31:07 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  writes:
  
A dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many people's 
rather traumatic problem. People wonder where their family members 
GO...especially their childrenwhen they die. Death is a very 
real problem most of us have to deal with at one time or another. The 
death of a child is probably a pain so great that I can't even imagine 
it.

jt: True Kay but what point is there in borrowing trouble. I 
trust the Lord to give me the grace to deal with it if and when the time 
comes. I understand that people 
question these things. My own mother has been asking why my sister was 
taken at 60yrs for the past 16yrs and she just had her 99th birthday. 
However, if you told her the truth she wouldn't receive it. Yes 
thepain is great but pulling a rabbit out of a hat to make them 
feel better is no long term solution.

This was not the 
context of the discussion, Judy, nor the question John asked.There 
was nothing about borrowing trouble. The discussion was about being born 
in sin...would that affect salvation...what about a baby who doesn't get 
much of a life, who can't make the choice between God or not of God? 
John said: Judy - is a dead 
baby going to heaven or hell. I am sure your theology allows for 
such -- just interested in how that happens. 
You answered by saying a dead baby is not your 
problem. Now you say there's no point in borrowing trouble. I think it's 
a simple yes or no answer. Is a baby going to heaven? Is a baby going to 
hell?
  
jt: 
Taking on questions I don't know the answer to is IMO "borrowing 
trouble" Kay. John is asking me to make 
a
judgment or 
determination that neither he or I know the answer to.

John is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you ever 
had a friend who miscarried or lost their baby to being stillborn, or 
died from SIDS, hit by a drunk driver, or from their immunizations? 
Haven't you known a family whose child died in an accident? Catholics 
would tell you the child goes to some in-between place unless the infant 
has been baptized.

jt: I have miscarried myself and yes, I know how 
that is but John does not know everything and it's OK to be honest and 
admit it.

It has nothing to do 
with what John knows or doesn't know.The discussion 
iscentered on salvationwho has it and who 
doesn't.

jt: Those who have 
it should haveassurance by way of the indwelling Spirit. If you 
can find the answer to John's
question in 
scripture - please tell me where it is at. I know that King David was 
sure the child he had with Bathsheba 
waswith the Lord 
-even though David had sinned/repented, he was a son of the 
Covenant. I am not so sure 
about
the offspring of 
idolators. Do you think the firstborn of the Egyptians who God 
allowed to be killed went to be with Him and if your 
answer is yes -what 
do you base this 
on?

We don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have some 
tools to be an encouragement to others so we may minister to them in 
empathy and love. If a young mother just had a miscarriage, or had a 
baby stillborn, would you say to her.Gee, your dead baby isn't my 
problem? I have a heavenly father whose nature is love..What 
if that young mother was a non-Believer? What do you think she would 
think/feel about a God who is love? Kay

jt: Of course I wouldn't say that to someone who 
is grieving Kay but neither would I give them false hope. I see it as an 
opportunity to encourage them to seek God's answers in His Word for 
themselves. Too many peoplelook to others for all the 
answers. Helping and encouraging them is one thing.

How does false hope 
come into the picture?What if the mom is illiterate and simply 
CAN'T read what the Word says? What if mom's

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






jt: I don't "fake" stuff Kay, what am I supposed to be 
getting that I don't get? All anyone can have is an
opinion about this question - unless you have some 
hidden insight and if you do then please share.. judyt

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:13:55 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  Do 
  you really not get it or are you faking it? Kay
  
Kay...in this 
shade: Judy in this 
shade

  
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 
08:31:07 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

  A dead baby may not be your problem, Judy, but it's many 
  people's rather traumatic problem. People wonder where their family 
  members GO...especially their childrenwhen they die. Death 
  is a very real problem most of us have to deal with at one time or 
  another. The death of a child is probably a pain so great that I can't 
  even imagine it.
  
  jt: True Kay but what point is there in borrowing trouble. I 
  trust the Lord to give me the grace to deal with it if and when the 
  time comes. I understand that people 
  question these things. My own mother has been asking why my sister was 
  taken at 60yrs for the past 16yrs and she just had her 99th birthday. 
  However, if you told her the truth she wouldn't receive it. Yes 
  thepain is great but pulling a rabbit out of a hat to make them 
  feel better is no long term solution.
  
  This was not the context of the discussion, 
  Judy, nor the question John asked.There was nothing about 
  borrowing trouble. The discussion was about being born in sin...would 
  that affect salvation...what about a baby who doesn't get much of a 
  life, who can't make the choice between God or not of God? John said: 
  Judy - is a dead baby going to heaven or hell. 
  I am sure your theology allows for such -- just 
  interested in how that happens. You answered 
  by saying a dead baby is not your problem. Now you say there's no 
  point in borrowing trouble. I think it's a simple yes or no answer. Is 
  a baby going to heaven? Is a baby going to 
  hell?

  jt: Taking on questions I don't know the answer to is 
  IMO "borrowing trouble" Kay. John is asking me to make 
  a
  judgment or determination that 
  neither he or I know the answer to.
  
  John is simply saying babies aren't accountable. Haven't you 
  ever had a friend who miscarried or lost their baby to being 
  stillborn, or died from SIDS, hit by a drunk driver, or from their 
  immunizations? Haven't you known a family whose child died in an 
  accident? Catholics would tell you the child goes to some in-between 
  place unless the infant has been baptized.
  
  jt: I have miscarried myself and yes, I know 
  how that is but John does not know everything and it's OK to be honest 
  and admit it.
  
  It has nothing to do with what John knows or 
  doesn't know.The discussion iscentered on salvationwho 
  has it and who doesn't.
  
  jt: Those who have it should 
  haveassurance by way of the indwelling Spirit. If you can find 
  the answer to John's
  question in scripture - please tell me where 
  it is at. I know that King David was sure the child he had with 
  Bathsheba waswith the Lord 
  -even though David had sinned/repented, he was a son of the 
  Covenant. I am not so sure 
  about
  the offspring of idolators. Do you 
  think the firstborn of the Egyptians who God allowed to be killed went 
  to be with Him and if your answer is yes -what do you base this 
  on?
  
  We don't have to know everything, but we can certainly have 
  some tools to be an encouragement to others so we may minister to them 
  in empathy and love. If a young mother just had a miscarriage, or had 
  a baby stillborn, would you say to her.Gee, your dead baby isn't 
  my problem? I have a heavenly father whose nature is 
  love..What if that young mother was a non-Believer? What do 
  you think she would think/feel about a God who is love? 
  Kay
  
  jt: Of course I wouldn't say that to someone 
  who is grieving Kay but neither would I give them false hope. I see it 
  as an opportunity to encourage them to seek God's answers in His Word 
  for themselves. Too many peoplelook to others for all the 
  answers. Helping and encouraging them is one thing.
  
  How does false hope come into the 
  picture?What if the mom is illiterate

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

I hear you Izzy - seems like I can also recall going
through this procedure before and I've not been around
TT as long as you ...

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:12:15 -0600 "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:

Jt, also I have
learned that when a certain mormon fellow (to remain unnamed) asks us to
define anything it is to get us squabbling about definitions amongst
ourselves; thus avoiding him answering any specific, uncomfortable questions
himself. Izzy

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:48:12 -0700 "Bill Taylor"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:

To the contrary, Judy, I have no
problem believing that the names of those who do not reject the Christ will
remain unblotted from the Lambs Book of Life. How about if you let me and
the triad articulate our own beliefs. When you feel compelled to smear us with caricatures and
misrepresentations, just think of how you like it when others
do that to you. Then if you want to go ahead and do it, then go ahead and do
it. You don't bother me so much anymore;I'll still forgive you. Your
friend, Bill

jt:
Verydramatic Bill.But please tell me inwhat wayI
have smeared, misrepresented and caricatured you? BTW you are included
in the triad along withLance, and Jonathan. Before you forgive
me please tell me what I have done wrong. Don't you believe that all mankind
is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven
whether or not they overcome anything and weren't you writing about the
perils of enlightenment thinking and how it keeps one from being able to
understand scripture? If you don't believe these things then at least
give me the opportunity to repent..
judyt

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:49:40
EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:So,
the really important
thing is not the book of life but the Divine Eraser. Interesting
teaching.

jt: Not my
"teaching" John it is in the Book and the really important thing should be
what God says even if it does conflict with your ontological
model.

Unscriptural John. -
I would not have so written if
it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might refer to Kay's
interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's interpretation of
Christ;s- oh, never mind !
JD

__jt: Unscriptural John. How did he get born
saved since everyone is born into a "fallen creation" (sin) in the first
Adam. The scriptures teach that God saw us in Christ before the foundation
of the world (Eph 1:4) and everyone's name was written in the Lamb's Book
of Life at the beginning because Jesus was the lamb slain before the
foundation of the world. However, this does not negate the fall nor does
it insure salvation unless one keeps their name from being blotted
out. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Is an eternal truth So
rather than get so tangled up with saved, not saved, saved, not saved.
Wouldn't we be wiser to learn what God call's sin and stop doing
it? John: Interesting
scripture, Judy. Our names are in that book from the
beginning. Wow. I had forgotten this passage. Do
you see God erasing some of these names? I don't.
jt: Yes I do,
only the ones who overcome make it. Moses was aware that one could
be blotted out (Exodus 32:32) and so was David (Ps 69:28). Jesus Himself
says of the one who "overcomes" - I will not erase his name from the book
of life (Rev 3:5).

So, the
really important thing is not the book of life but the Divine
Eraser. Interesting teaching.
Unscriptural
John. - I would not
have so written if it were unscriptural, JudyT. You might
refer to Kay's interpretation of my interpretation of some of Paul's
interpretation of Christ;s
- oh,
never mind
!JD

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-12 Thread Terry Clifton





Bill Taylor wrote:

  
  
  
  
  Now let me give you and example of
your caricatures from a recent post? However,
this is subject to change if anyone can show me in the scriptures that
I am in error and so far none of the "eternal son" people have done so.
  While I
admit that on this occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as
an example of a caricature. I have written at length in the last few
weeks explaining the orthodox doctrine of Christ and the relational
nature of ourthe triune God. I have deliberately refrained from doing
a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to the exegesis Scripture to make
this clear, even though there is some really wonderful, and
informative, and authoritative stuff out there from which to draw, and
I have done this because I know that you, if you are to see the light,
will only see it via an exposition of Scripture. And Judy, don't
deceive yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way.
You have no excuse for not understanding. This doctrine has stood the
test of time. It is essential to a right understanding of God.

=
You probably feel that this is an accurate statement, Bill. There is a
long shot possibility that you have nailed it, but another reason why
she cannot understand your viewpoint may very well be that you value
your own opinion too highly and are actually in error. After all, if
you were correct, wouldn't David and I agree with you?
Terry

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

2005-01-12 Thread David Miller

Bill Taylor wrote:
 The hermeneutical criteria that I am questioning
 is the criteria of interpretation that you use against
 others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.
 ... you sent a series of posts stating that no where
 in Scripture are the words eternal Son used. You
 therefore used that to draw the conclusion that the
 Son of God was not the eternal Son of God.

I think you are missing a whole bunch concerning the hermeneutic criteria 
used by Judy.  She does not reject the concept simply because of the silence 
of Scripture.  She is simply making the statement that there is no direct 
contradiction of her concept of son applying to the birth of Yeshua.  Judy 
then mentioned several Scriptures which link the concept of son to the 
physical birth.  For you to argue that she uses only this point of the lack 
of the phrase eternal son to draw her conclusion is either dishonest or a 
misunderstanding of her argument.  I think you have simply misunderstood 
her.

Bill Taylor wrote:
 I believe that rather than allowing them to die
 on that day, God substituted his own Son on
 their behalf.

If this explains why they did not die on that day, then why did they die 
later?  If the substitution stopped them from dying on that day, then why 
not forever?

It seems strange to me to take the day when sin and death entered the world, 
and to turn it into the day when salvation from death also took place.

Are you sure that spiritual death is not a more plausible explanation?  If 
the dualistic view of man is offensive to you because you do not recognize 
that man has a spirit as part of his makeup, then perhaps it might be better 
understood that perhaps incipient death took hold that day, but was not 
fully manifested as complete physical death of the body until many years 
later?

Bill Taylor wrote:
 Why if you are unwilling to accept the eternal Son teaching,
 and this because it is not a biblical term, are you now willing
 to continue to uphold the spiritual death doctrine, when it
 too is not a biblical term? This is the hermeneutical criteria
 that I am questioning: a criteria of interpretation that you will
 use against others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.

I have understood Judy to be saying that she is willing to accept the 
eternal son doctrine if it could be shown to make sense in light of all the 
Scriptures that might be brought to bear on the matter.  Therefore, she IS 
willing to accept the term, and she does not reject it outright just because 
the term is not used in the Bible.  Her constant reminder that it is not a 
Biblical term is primarily to help keep those who confuse doctrines of men 
with doctrines of Scripture to remember this distinction.  If the Bible did 
use the term eternal son, this would argue forcefully for the doctrine, 
but if it does not, then one must not be so eager to embrace it when other 
passages seem to contradict the idea.

Peace be with you.
David Miller. 


--
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] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




From: Bill Taylor 

  Allow me to give you a 
  resent example of one of your smears.Dependinghow you do with it, 
  I may go further: 
  
  "BTW 
  you are included in the triad along withLance, and 
  Jonathan."
  
  Canyou say to me 
  with a clear conscience and your hand on the Bible that yoursis not a 
  pejorative use of the word "triad"? 
  
  jt: I don't swear on 
  anything Bill, my yes or no should be enough and I can say with a clear 
  conscience that I was not intentionally being "perjorative" in using the word 
  triad whichhas become a kind of internet shorthand for you, Lance, and 
  Jonathan, kind of like an endearing emoticon - I don't consider them 
  perjorative. Do you?.
  
  Now allow me to 
  give you an example of misrepresentation from a recent post: 
  
  
  Don't you believe that all 
  mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for 
  heaven whether or not they overcome anything. 
  
  I underlined 
  the portion of your statement which is a true representation of things I've 
  said. The second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to what I actually 
  believe and have stated. I am confident (and this because I have had to defend 
  and clarify myself so many times) that I have written more about the potential 
  of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone on this list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you do, 
  but I have written many substantive words expressing the possibility of people 
  rejecting Christ and damning themselves to hell. You know this, so why do you 
  continue to misrepresent my position?
  
  jt: There you go Bill, 
  doing exactly what you are accusingme of. I want you to go as far 
  back as you can and find someone I have damned to hell either on or off this 
  list. And as for the second part of what I wrote above. I can say with a 
  clear conscience that I don't remember any fo the "substantive words" you have 
  written about anyonedamning themselves to hell 
  either.
  
  Now let me give you an example of your 
  caricatures from a recent post? 
  
  However, this is subject to change if anyone 
  can show me in the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of the 
  "eternal son" people have done so. 
  
  While I admit that on this 
  occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as an 
  example of a caricature. I have written at length in the last few weeks 
  explaining the orthodox doctrine of Christ and the 
  relational nature of ourtriune God. I have deliberately refrained 
  from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to the exegesis of Scripture to 
  make this clear, even though there is some really wonderful, and informative, 
  and authoritative stuff out there from which to draw, and I have done this 
  because I know that you, if you are to see the light, will only see it via an 
  exposition of Scripture. 
  
  jt: "Outsourcing" 
  Bill? Sounds like problems US trade is having right now. I agree that you have 
  tried to explain the above but I 
  don't see the Godhead as three ppl all fixed and relating to one another 
  throughout eternity, neither do I accept what you term as the "orthodox" 
  doctrine of Christ - He has been, is, and will beso much more 
  ...
  
  And Judy, don't deceive 
  yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no excuse for not understanding what I am attempting to 
  convey. This doctrine has stood the test of time. It is essential to a 
  right understanding of God. Yet you belittle that effort and shun your heritage with your derogatory characterization 
  of us as the"'eternal son' people." 
  
  
  jt: Bill just because 
  something is old does not make it either good or true. I don't know that I 
  don't understand what you are saying. I do know that I don't accept that Jesus 
  is locked in to being an "eternal son"
  
  You have been shown in 
  Scripture the basis for this belief. It is a strong enough basis to have 
  convinced millions upon millions of Christians over the 
  centuries.
  
  jt: I don't 
  believe I have been given a scriptural basis for this belief Bill - 
  and 
  do you really believe thatthese millions upon millions of Christians 
  over the centuries did their own homework? Or have they 
  beentaughtcreeds and even at times given 
  ultimatums?
  
  You have been shown the 
  error of your theology, yet you mock uswith words andtitles like: 
  "'eternal Sonship' - 
  relationship - community thing." This is a caricature; it is aderogatory 
  imitationof our beliefs san the substance of 
  content.
  
  jt: I am sorry that you 
  feel this way Bill. I'm not against relationship, community, orin 
  sonship - if they are in the right balance and 
  context.
  
  By the way, if you want any references you may 
  check your commentsbelow. Except for the last two, they were made in 
  yourpost prior to thisone. Bill
  
  jt: Thank you Bill for this 
  response... and I plead "not guilty" as charged..

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 4:56:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

O poor poor John,


yes, that's me. :-)

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 4:56:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Even though we do not all affirm your view concerning a lack of a fallen nature, there are at least a couple of us who will affirm the absence of a concept of "spiritual death" in the biblical narrative.
 
Now, does that make you feel better?
 
Bill


yes .

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 4:56:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


jt: JOHN a dead baby is not my problem. I have a Heavenly Father whose nature and character is love and so I
 leave all those kinds of problems with Him cause I don't have to know everything. However, what about the babies of the Amorites and these other nations God was so disgusted with? I mean the ones where Israel was told not to let even one animal live?
 


No theological statement in your defense? Why? Because there is no such thing .. unless you believe that Amorite dogs will join me in the lake of fire. If you don't believe the above places animals in hell, may I suggest neither does this passage place Amorite children there, either. 

I am coming to the point in time when such discussions will not be enjoined by me. To think that I feel the need to make a statement about Amorite animals is illustrative of just how silly my discussion with has become. 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Yeah, that's pretty funny, Terry.

Do I value my opinion too highly? I hope not! The 
truth is that I spend most of my time feeling very inadequate about my thoughts 
and opinions;I feellike I have failed to communicate what I really 
wanted to say.I place this burden upon myself; Ifeel responsible for 
your lack of understanding. O if I could just say it better, you would 
understand.And so I write it out again from a slightly different starting 
point, hoping that this time I will get it said. But again I am misunderstood. 
The truth is, Terry, you can say what you want, and you can draw your own 
conclusions. And if you want to poke a little fun at me, that is fine; I'll 
laugh along with you. ButI would like to respectfully challenge you on 
this one, because there has been no failure on my part or the part of John 
Smithson and others to set this teaching forth in clear and cogent language. If 
you do not understand; it isbecause you do not want to understand. If you 
cannot see it; it is because you do not want to see it. The burden for this one 
is on your shoulders: Why are you so bent on going against that which has been 
upheld and set forth and cherishedas orthodoxy by the church throughout 
the centuries of its existence? What reason do you have that is good enough for 
you to do that?

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Terry Clifton 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:20 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  Bill Taylor wrote: 
  




Now let me give you and example of your 
caricatures from a recent post? However, this is subject to change if anyone 
can show me in the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of the 
"eternal son" people have done so. While I admit that on this occasion the infraction is 
slight, it does stand as an example of a caricature. I have written at 
length in the last few weeks explaining the orthodox doctrine of Christ and 
the relational nature of ourthe triune God. I have deliberately 
refrained from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to the exegesis 
Scripture to make this clear, even though there is some really wonderful, 
and informative, and authoritative stuff out there from which to draw, and I 
have done this because I know that you, if you are to see the light, will 
only see it via an exposition of Scripture. And Judy, don't deceive 
yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no 
excuse for not understanding. This doctrine has stood the test of time. It 
is essential to a right understanding of 
God.=You 
  probably feel that this is an accurate statement, Bill. There is a long 
  shot possibility that you have nailed it, but another reason why she 
  cannot understand your viewpoint may very well be that you value your own 
  opinion too highly and are actually in error. After all, if you were 
  correct, wouldn't David and I agree with 
you?Terry

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 5:42:02 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


The soul that sinneth, it shall die -- is not a true statement for those who are in Christ. 

JD, then by your theology there will be very few in hell, and most everyone in heavencorrect? Izzy 


1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21- 

Oh, sorry, Izzy, I am busy trying to come with any some sort of believeable answer. As sonn as I do, I will continue our discussion...'Course, when I get through with counting the saved, I will have to count the lost over all time AND then make some kind of reasonable projection for the future: 22-2-3-24-25-26-27-28- 

 JD - out!

On second thought, why don't you count out the saved. You seem to have a better handle on that. I will take number and the rest should be easy.

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 11:42:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

After all, if you were correct, wouldn't David and I agree with you?
Terry



lol

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?











jt: I don't fake stuff Kay,
what am I supposed to be getting that I don't get? All anyone can have is
an





opinion about this question - unless you
have some hidden insight and if you do then please share.. judyt



Speaking of such, I am of the opinion
(have I ever been taught this???) that we are born with a propensity to sinnot actually
already condemned by sin (since we havent yet). So, in that case,
anyone who dies prior to actually sinning is not under Gods judgment,
and does not go to hell. Is there some scriptural reason for not
believing this anyone? izzy

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?











And Judy, don't deceive yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. 



=
I guess thats
why Terry, jt, DavidM, and I still dont get it??? Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

If this explains why they did not die on that day, then why did they die
later?  If the substitution stopped them from dying on that day, then why
not forever?


Genesis 3:22-23a Then the LORD God said, Behold, the man has become
like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and
take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever--therefore
the LORD God sent him out of the garden

The thought of letting them -- and thus humanity -- eat of the tree of life
and live forever in a fallen state was too horrible to contemplate; in fact
it was too horrible even to express. Bullinger is quite helpful in this
instance. The figure of speech employed here is called an aposiopesis, or
sudden-silence (152-153). It is the sudden breaking off of what is being
said (or written), so that the mind may be the more impressed by what is too
... awful for words. Adam and Eve could not be fixed in the state they
were in; it would take a re-creation to do that; thus they were graced with
the necessity of dying, that they might be raised anew in Christ's
resurrection. The same holds true for us. Adam and Eve would not have died
at all had they eaten (or continued to eat) of the tree of life. Bullinger
states, Here the exact consequences of eating of the tree of life in his
fallen condition are left unrevealed, as though they were too awful to be
contemplated: and the sudden silence leaves us in the darkness in which the
Fall involved us. But we may at least understand that whatever might be
involved in this unspoken threatening, it included this fact:-- I will drive
him away from the tree of life!

Bill

- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?


 Bill Taylor wrote:
  The hermeneutical criteria that I am questioning
  is the criteria of interpretation that you use against
  others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.
  ... you sent a series of posts stating that no where
  in Scripture are the words eternal Son used. You
  therefore used that to draw the conclusion that the
  Son of God was not the eternal Son of God.

 I think you are missing a whole bunch concerning the hermeneutic criteria
 used by Judy.  She does not reject the concept simply because of the
silence
 of Scripture.  She is simply making the statement that there is no direct
 contradiction of her concept of son applying to the birth of Yeshua.
Judy
 then mentioned several Scriptures which link the concept of son to the
 physical birth.  For you to argue that she uses only this point of the
lack
 of the phrase eternal son to draw her conclusion is either dishonest or
a
 misunderstanding of her argument.  I think you have simply misunderstood
 her.

 Bill Taylor wrote:
  I believe that rather than allowing them to die
  on that day, God substituted his own Son on
  their behalf.

 If this explains why they did not die on that day, then why did they die
 later?  If the substitution stopped them from dying on that day, then why
 not forever?

 It seems strange to me to take the day when sin and death entered the
world,
 and to turn it into the day when salvation from death also took place.

 Are you sure that spiritual death is not a more plausible explanation?
If
 the dualistic view of man is offensive to you because you do not recognize
 that man has a spirit as part of his makeup, then perhaps it might be
better
 understood that perhaps incipient death took hold that day, but was not
 fully manifested as complete physical death of the body until many years
 later?

 Bill Taylor wrote:
  Why if you are unwilling to accept the eternal Son teaching,
  and this because it is not a biblical term, are you now willing
  to continue to uphold the spiritual death doctrine, when it
  too is not a biblical term? This is the hermeneutical criteria
  that I am questioning: a criteria of interpretation that you will
  use against others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.

 I have understood Judy to be saying that she is willing to accept the
 eternal son doctrine if it could be shown to make sense in light of all
the
 Scriptures that might be brought to bear on the matter.  Therefore, she IS
 willing to accept the term, and she does not reject it outright just
because
 the term is not used in the Bible.  Her constant reminder that it is not a
 Biblical term is primarily to help keep those who confuse doctrines of men
 with doctrines of Scripture to remember this distinction.  If the Bible
did
 use the term eternal son, this would argue forcefully for the doctrine,
 but if it does not, then one must not be so eager to embrace it when other
 passages seem to contradict the idea.

 Peace be with you.
 David Miller.


 --
 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know how you ought to answer every man.  (Colossians 4:6)

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?



















You have been shown the error of your
theology, yet you mock uswith words andtitles like: 'eternal Sonship' - relationship - community
thing. This is a caricature; it is aderogatory
imitationof our beliefs san the substance of content.









In
Lances terminology, I think that would be thingy.
Izzy

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Thanks, David, for attempting to articulate Judy's position. Perhaps you
have stated it correctly.

Bill

PS My position against the concept of spiritual death does not necessitate a
non-reductionistic, non-dualistic understanding of personhood, nor does it
grow out of that understanding. My holistic understanding of personhood
coincides with my position and supplements it, but it does not condition it.
I may set this forth at some point in the future, but not at this time.


- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?


 Bill Taylor wrote:
  The hermeneutical criteria that I am questioning
  is the criteria of interpretation that you use against
  others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.
  ... you sent a series of posts stating that no where
  in Scripture are the words eternal Son used. You
  therefore used that to draw the conclusion that the
  Son of God was not the eternal Son of God.

 I think you are missing a whole bunch concerning the hermeneutic criteria
 used by Judy.  She does not reject the concept simply because of the
silence
 of Scripture.  She is simply making the statement that there is no direct
 contradiction of her concept of son applying to the birth of Yeshua.
Judy
 then mentioned several Scriptures which link the concept of son to the
 physical birth.  For you to argue that she uses only this point of the
lack
 of the phrase eternal son to draw her conclusion is either dishonest or
a
 misunderstanding of her argument.  I think you have simply misunderstood
 her.

 Bill Taylor wrote:
  I believe that rather than allowing them to die
  on that day, God substituted his own Son on
  their behalf.

 If this explains why they did not die on that day, then why did they die
 later?  If the substitution stopped them from dying on that day, then why
 not forever?

 It seems strange to me to take the day when sin and death entered the
world,
 and to turn it into the day when salvation from death also took place.

 Are you sure that spiritual death is not a more plausible explanation?
If
 the dualistic view of man is offensive to you because you do not recognize
 that man has a spirit as part of his makeup, then perhaps it might be
better
 understood that perhaps incipient death took hold that day, but was not
 fully manifested as complete physical death of the body until many years
 later?

 Bill Taylor wrote:
  Why if you are unwilling to accept the eternal Son teaching,
  and this because it is not a biblical term, are you now willing
  to continue to uphold the spiritual death doctrine, when it
  too is not a biblical term? This is the hermeneutical criteria
  that I am questioning: a criteria of interpretation that you will
  use against others but are unwilling to apply to yourself.

 I have understood Judy to be saying that she is willing to accept the
 eternal son doctrine if it could be shown to make sense in light of all
the
 Scriptures that might be brought to bear on the matter.  Therefore, she IS
 willing to accept the term, and she does not reject it outright just
because
 the term is not used in the Bible.  Her constant reminder that it is not a
 Biblical term is primarily to help keep those who confuse doctrines of men
 with doctrines of Scripture to remember this distinction.  If the Bible
did
 use the term eternal son, this would argue forcefully for the doctrine,
 but if it does not, then one must not be so eager to embrace it when other
 passages seem to contradict the idea.

 Peace be with you.
 David Miller.


 --
 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] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?














The soul that sinneth, it shall die -- is not a true
statement for those who are in Christ. 

JD,
then by your theology there will be very few in hell, and most everyone in
heavencorrect? Izzy 



1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21- 

Oh, sorry, Izzy, I am busy trying to come with any some sort of
believeable answer. As sonn as I do, I will continue our
discussion...'Course, when I get through with counting the saved, I will
have to count the lost over all time AND then make some kind of reasonable
projection for the
future:
22-2-3-24-25-26-27-28- 


JD - out!

On second thought, why don't you count out the saved. You
seem to have a better handle on that. I will take number and the
rest should be easy. 



JD, I
dont need to count it myself. Jesus already told us. Izzy

Matt 7:13Enter through the
narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to
destruction, and there are many who enter through it.  
14For the gate is small and
the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

JT wrote I
want you to go as far back as you can and find someone I have damned to hell
either on or off this list.

Does the name Newbigin ring a bell?

Bill

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

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 12:51
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are
Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

From: Bill Taylor

Allow me to give you a
resent example of one of your smears.Dependinghow you do with
it, I may go further:

"BTW you are included in the triad along withLance, and
Jonathan."

Canyou say to me
with a clear conscience and your hand on the Bible that yoursis not a
pejorative use of the word "triad"?

jt: I don't swear
on anything Bill, my yes or no should be enough and I can say with a clear
conscience that I was not intentionally being "perjorative" in using the
word triad whichhas become a kind of internet shorthand for you,
Lance, and Jonathan, kind of like an endearing emoticon - I don't consider
them perjorative. Do you?.

Now allow me
to give you an example of misrepresentation from a recent post:

Don't you believe that all
mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for
heaven whether or not they overcome anything.

I underlined
the portion of your statement which is a true representation of things I've
said. The second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to what I
actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this because I have
had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have written more
about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone on this
list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you
do, but I have written many substantive words expressing the
possibility of people rejecting Christ and damning themselves to hell. You
know this, so why do you continue to misrepresent my
position?

jt: There you go Bill,
doing exactly what you are accusingme of. I want you to go as
far back as you can and find someone I have damned to hell either on or off
this list. And as for the second part of what I wrote above. I can say
with a clear conscience that I don't remember any fo the "substantive words"
you have written about anyonedamning themselves to hell
either.

Now let me give you an example of your
caricatures from a recent post?

However, this is subject to change if anyone
can show me in the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of the
"eternal son" people have done so.

While I admit that on
this occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as an example of a caricature. I have written at length in
the last few weeks explaining the orthodox doctrine of
Christ and the relational nature of ourtriune God. I have
deliberately refrained from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to the
exegesis of Scripture to make this clear, even though there is some really
wonderful, and informative, and authoritative stuff out there from which to
draw, and I have done this because I know that you, if you are to see the
light, will only see it via an exposition of Scripture.

jt: "Outsourcing"
Bill? Sounds like problems US trade is having right now. I agree that you
have tried to explain the above but I don't see the Godhead as three ppl all fixed and
relating to one another throughout eternity, neither do I accept what you
term as the "orthodox" doctrine of Christ - He has been, is, and will
beso much more ...

And Judy, don't deceive
yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no excuse for not understanding what I am attempting
to convey. This doctrine has stood the test of time. It is essential
to a right understanding of God. Yet you belittle that effort and shun your heritage with your derogatory
characterization of us as the"'eternal son'
people."

jt: Bill just because
something is old does not make it either good or true. I don't know that I
don't understand what you are saying. I do know that I don't accept that
Jesus is locked in to being an "eternal son"

You have been shown in
Scripture the basis for this belief. It is a strong enough basis to have
convinced millions upon millions of Christians over the
centuries.

jt: I don't
believe I have been given a scriptural basis for this belief Bill -
and do you really believe thatthese millions upon
millions of Christians over the centuries did their own homework? Or
have they beentaughtcreeds and even at times given
ultimatums?

You have been shown the
error

RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




JOHN
I hope 
you haven't stopped the discussion completely, because there are alot of 
questions and discussions we could all have regarding Whose Names are Written in 
the Lambs Book of life...

Kay

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, 12 January, 2005 
  15.37To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: 
  [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of 
  Life?I am coming to the point in time 
  when such discussions will not be enjoined by me. To think that I feel 
  the need to make a statement about Amorite animals is illustrative of just how 
  silly my discussion with has become. John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Vaguely but I don't remember "damning Newbigin to hell" 
and since you claim that I did this Bill then you
need to show me in my own words what I said. This 
is a very serious accusation. judyt

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:43:05 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  JT wrote  I 
  want you to go as far back as you can and find someone I have damned to hell 
  either on or off this list.
  
  Does the name Newbigin ring a bell?
  
  Bill
  
From: Judy Taylor 

From: Bill Taylor 

  Allow me to give you 
  a resent example of one of your smears.Dependinghow you do 
  with it, I may go further: 
  
  "BTW you are included in the triad along withLance, 
  and Jonathan."
  
  Canyou say to 
  me with a clear conscience and your hand on the Bible that yoursis 
  not a pejorative use of the word "triad"? 
  
  jt: I don't 
  swear on anything Bill, my yes or no should be enough and I can say with a 
  clear conscience that I was not intentionally being "perjorative" in using 
  the word triad whichhas become a kind of internet shorthand for you, 
  Lance, and Jonathan, kind of like an endearing emoticon - I don't consider 
  them perjorative. Do you?.
  
  Now allow 
  me to give you an example of misrepresentation from a recent post: 
  
  
  Don't you believe that all 
  mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for 
  heaven whether or not they overcome anything. 
  
  I 
  underlined the portion of your statement which is a true representation of 
  things I've said. The second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to 
  what I actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this because 
  I have had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have written 
  more about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone on 
  this list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, 
  you do, but I have written many substantive words expressing 
  the possibility of people rejecting Christ and damning themselves to hell. 
  You know this, so why do you continue to misrepresent my 
  position?
  
  jt: There you go Bill, 
  doing exactly what you are accusingme of. I want you to go as 
  far back as you can and find someone I have damned to hell either on or 
  off this list. And as for the second part of what I wrote above. I 
  can say with a clear conscience that I don't remember any fo the 
  "substantive words" you have written about anyonedamning themselves 
  to hell either.
  
  Now let me give you an example of your 
  caricatures from a recent post? 
  
  However, this is subject to change if 
  anyone can show me in the scriptures that I am in error and so far none of 
  the "eternal son" people have done so. 
  
  While I admit that on 
  this occasion the infraction is slight, it does stand as an example of a caricature. I have written at length 
  in the last few weeks explaining the orthodox doctrine 
  of Christ and the relational nature of ourtriune God. I have 
  deliberately refrained from doing a lot of outsourcing. I have stuck to 
  the exegesis of Scripture to make this clear, even though there is some 
  really wonderful, and informative, and authoritative stuff out there from 
  which to draw, and I have done this because I know that you, if you are to 
  see the light, will only see it via an exposition of Scripture. 
  
  
  jt: "Outsourcing" 
  Bill? Sounds like problems US trade is having right now. I agree that you 
  have tried to explain the above but I don't see the Godhead as three ppl all fixed and 
  relating to one another throughout eternity, neither do I accept what you 
  term as the "orthodox" doctrine of Christ - He has been, is, and will 
  beso much more ...
  
  And Judy, don't deceive 
  yourself: I have stated it in a coherent and cogent way. You have no excuse for not understanding what I am 
  attempting to convey. This doctrine has stood the test of time. It 
  is essential to a right understanding of God. Yet you belittle that effort 
  and shun your heritage with your derogatory 
  characterization of us as the"'eternal son' 
  people." 
  
  jt: Bill just because 
  something is old does not make it either good or true. I don't know that I 
  don't understand what you are saying. I do know that I don't accept that 
  Jesus is locked in to being an "eternal son"
  
  You have been shown in 
  Scripture the basis for this belief. It is a strong enough basis to have 
  convinced millions upon millions of Christians over the 
  centuries.
  
  jt: I don't 
  believe I have been given a scriptural basis for this belief Bill -

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 1:54:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


JOHN
 I hope you haven't stopped the discussion completely, because there are alot of questions and discussions we could all have regarding Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of life...
 
Kay


I was kind of slapped back into some kind of reality, this morning. Result -- I want to be involved in discussions that are going somewhere. You know what I mean? Those who continue to key on personal slurs and judgments play no benefisical role to me. In my review of this mornings posts, I found some humor and noted that. Some of what Bill and Kay (that would be you) were good as well. Actually, Dave H and Perry are at least not getting down and dirty --- so maybe things are not that bad. But I do not plan on continuing to even review posts from those who only contribute acrimony. 

I just posted about Ninevah in an effort to change the discussion a bit. I just want to get away from the personality oriented stuff. 

John

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

In a message dated 1/12/2005 2:04:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

JOHN
I hope you haven't stopped the discussion completely, because there are alot of questions and discussions we could all have regarding Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of life...
 
Kay


Actually, you are right about the above, too. If I were Calvin, this passage would be a big one for me. What are the implications of this visionary relaity? If obedience determines salvation's destiny for each of us, why are our names already written. 

Yeah -- could be good. But the personal thingy's of a couple could go the way of the wind, in my opinion. 

Jd

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Judy wrote: "Newbigin must be an unbeliever also 
because the mind is not the home of faith. Faith resides in the heart... One may 
have a heart of faith or an evil heart of unbelief."

Judy,where do those unbelievers with evil 
hearts spend eternity? You knew at the time you wrote this that Newbigin was 
dead; that he waseither in heaven or hell. Where does your judgment place 
him?

Bill

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Judy 
  Taylor 
  To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:51 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?
  
  Vaguely but I don't remember "damning Newbigin to 
  hell" and since you claim that I did this Bill then you
  need to show me in my own words what I said. 
  This is a very serious accusation. judyt

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?




Bill is this what you do when you study scripture? 
ie:put words in the mouths of others and take off running?
What I wrote concerning Newbigin's writingwas an 
observation from scripture which contrasts a heart of faith with an
evil heart of unbelief. I don't remember what I was 
commenting on and you don't include that but I assume Newbiginwrote 
something to the effect thatthe mind isthe home of faith which is wrong. I have no who 
the
man is or what he did sothis is definitely not my personal assessment of his eternal 
destiny. One which I am not qualified to make since I 
am not the Judge. Also how can you beso sure that I knew at the 
timeNewbigin was 
dead? It's news to me


On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:15:08 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Judy wrote: "Newbigin must be an unbeliever also 
  because the mind is not the home of faith. Faith resides in the heart... One 
  may have a heart of faith or an evil heart of unbelief."
  
  Judy,where do those unbelievers with evil 
  hearts spend eternity? You knew at the time you wrote this that Newbigin was 
  dead; that he waseither in heaven or hell. Where does your judgment 
  place him?
  
  Bill
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Judy 
Taylor 
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:51 
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

Vaguely but I don't remember "damning Newbigin to 
hell" and since you claim that I did this Bill then you
need to show me in my own words what I said. 
This is a very serious accusation. judyt

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

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

  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 3:28 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are 
  Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

  Bill is this what you do when you study scripture? 
  ie:put words in the mouths of others and take off running?
  What I wrote concerning Newbigin's writingwas 
  an observation from scripture which contrasts a heart of faith with 
  an
  evil heart of unbelief.

  Well duh! Judy. I didn't think you were judging by 
  anything other than what you thought the Scriptures taught.

  I don't remember what I was commenting on and 
  you don't include that but I assume Newbiginwrote something to the effect thatthe 
  mind isthe home of faith which is wrong. 

  No he did not. He had actually written the opposite 
  of that, which I had already stated in our correspondence, as well as from a 
  direct quotation from him. You jumped to your conclusion without reading 
  carefully what he said and came back with your judgment. I have the post 
  printed off but it is not still on my hard-drive. If you would like the dates 
  and such, I will send them to you and you can look it up in the 
  archives.

  I have no who the
  man is or what he did sothis is definitely not my personal assessment of his eternal 
  destiny. 

  To the contrary, Judy, at the time of your judgment 
  you did know of his background and that he had died. You may not have intended 
  it as such, but your judgment of him, in the context of how it was made, did 
  very much come across as an assessment of his eternal destiny. You even admit 
  that in a private correspondence between us. That conversation is also in the 
  archives because you mistakenly posted it on TT.

  One which I am not qualified to make since I am not the Judge. Also how can you beso 
  sure that I knew at the timeNewbigin was 
  dead? It's news to me

  It may be news to you now, Judy. But it was fresh in 
  your memory at the time, as this too is part of the public 
record.

  Judy, I will accept your statements as truth and move 
  on. Please forgive me if I have offended you.

  Blessings,

  Bill

  On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:15:08 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Judy wrote: "Newbigin must be an unbeliever 
also because the mind is not the home of faith. Faith resides in the 
heart... One may have a heart of faith or an evil heart of 
unbelief."

Judy,where do those unbelievers with evil 
hearts spend eternity? You knew at the time you wrote this that Newbigin was 
dead; that he waseither in heaven or hell. Where does your judgment 
place him?

Bill

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

  Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org 

  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 
  2:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names 
  are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

  Vaguely but I don't remember "damning Newbigin to 
  hell" and since you claim that I did this Bill then you
  need to show me in my own words what I 
  said. This is a very serious accusation. judyt

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?






On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:37:50 -0700 "Bill Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
To the contrary, Judy, at the time 
of your judgment you did know of his background and that he had died. You 
may not have intended it as such, but your judgment of 
him, in the context of how it was made, did very much 
come across as an assessment of his eternal destiny. You even admit that 
in a private correspondence between us. That conversation is also in the 
archives because you mistakenly posted it on TT.

jt: I would be interested in seeing what the publicly 
posted private correspondence says Bill so if you wouldn't mind could you 
sendme those dates. However, I think you are reading your 
understanding into what I said because I just don't think along the lines of 
saved, lost, saved, lost, in my own life and I most certainly am not assessing 
others constantly to the point of damning them to hell (your words). I 
think you must have a good imagination and I wonder why you do so 
muchaccusing. judyt

Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?