ECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 07, 2004 23:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
In a message dated 12/7/2004 7:50:18 PM Pacific
Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
That bothers me, but until you change, there is nothing I
can do
-
From:
Jeff
Powers
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 07, 2004 16:51
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Gary is this what you were looking for?
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:52:02 -0500 "Jeff Powers" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
David
Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004
5:07
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Just a 'thought experiment':Have any ever come
accross the notion, 'sacred space'? Might Israel, prior to the 1948 decision
just
Thanks for your response. You said 'this lifetime'.
Please enlarge upon this.
- Original Message -
From:
Jeff
Powers
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 08, 2004 05:50
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
No Lance, that would be impossible, God
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
December 08, 2004 05:50
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
No Lance, that would be impossible, God
would not have blessed His chosen people had they taken matters into
their own hands. God, in the first draft (Abrahamic Covenant) promised
Obviously not if one wishes to comply with
Gods word. Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004
4:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Unilateral covenant
Just a 'thought experiment
]
Unilateral covenant
Cannot really nail it down to a specific date, but
sometime in the first half of September, 2006.
Terry
relativ to the
thred, what exegetical'data' (in th sens of Slades cncpt,
below)both supports and reconciles the underlnd commnts,
ff(?):
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:51:44 -0500 "Jeff Powers" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
||
It is through Abraham that God promises to bless all of
mankind.
attempting to eat the
cut animals?
Please
do NOT say "all of the above!!!"
--
slade
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
well, have you postd an exegetical comment on this, Slade?
(if you don't
mind, point it out, pls)
interestg comment,
but no
simply, Slade, on
the front burner here is how to get along better--it's possible, and, i suspect
we'd tend to agree more, conversely disagree/argue less, with more emphasis on
accurate analysis of texts such as Gen 15,which is onesource of
legitimate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'look
atlifetime tileroof' whiletheirbamboo walls're swayin' intwistrs
ofexegetical myth :)
What a vivid mental picture this conjures up!
Terry
following this? Have you figured out the birth of Yeshua or would you like
me to post all the juicy details for that?
Jeff
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004
17:45
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
:
[TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
interestg
comment, but no
simply, Slade, on
the front burner here is how to get along better--it's possible, and, i
suspect we'd tend to agree more, conversely disagree/argue less, with more
emphasis on accurate analysis of texts such as Gen 15
Slade Henson wrote:
P.S. If Terry and I are not getting along, then
it is quite clearly my fault. I simply did not want to waste his nor my
time.
We are getting along. We just do not agree.
That bothers me, but until you change, there is nothing I can do about
it. :-)
Terry
In a message dated 12/7/2004 3:09:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We are getting along. We just do not agree.
That bothers me, but until you change, there is nothing I can do about it. :-)
Terry
Ahh. The humility of it all !! I am sure glad I am not like you!!
In a message dated 12/7/2004 7:27:25 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ahh. The humility of it all !! I am sure glad I am not like you!!
I forgot the :-) (I just can't bring myself to say "happy face.")
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/7/2004 3:09:40 PM
Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We
are getting along. We just do not agree.
That bothers me, but until you change, there is nothing I can do about
it. :-)
Terry
Ahh. The humility of it all !! I
(..ex.e.get.i.cal.ly..in Gen 15,maybe Moses
nuancesbetw two words'offspring' and 'descendants'...
lit.er.ar.i.ly..one could argue that Moses' big ideas thererevolve
around the subtle positioningof his(two)
words..the.o.log.i.cal.ly..one short passage, two
bigideas?
beynd
that...hav
In a message dated 12/7/2004 7:50:18 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That bothers me, but until you change, there is nothing I can do about it. :-)
Terry
Ahh. The humility of it all !! I am sure glad I am not like you!!
Not like me? You mean that you are not sure of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. It is just that all us have this in common to one degree or
another -- we all think we are right and until the other(s) cahnge,
there is nothing that can be done about.
=
Ain't that the truth!
was
wondrg abt Jeff's'literary, exegetical, and theological
understndg of Gen
15?' (?)
^
well, have you
postd an exegetical comment on this, Slade?
(if you don't mind,
point it out, pls)
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004
: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry -- the proof read version
Lance wrote:
DAVID: ARE YOU A PROPHET? You speak as if you
occupied such an 'office'. It would help me if you would
answer yes/no then, supplement that with an accompanying
explanation. I ask because if you are so seen
DavidMs prophetic
office?you've never askd for one--how much does it
cost?
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:40:45 -0500 "Lance Muir"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:[DavidM:]
individuals havealready published that they
reject my prophetic office
||
David:What series of questions would you ask and answer of yourself on
behalf of a novice like myself to serve to keep this short?
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 04, 2004 14:09
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
addressing you in future.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 02, 2004 10:48
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry -- the proof read version
David Miller wrote:
God obviously does not see things
the way we mortals
Lance wrote:
DAVID: ARE YOU A PROPHET? You speak as if you
occupied such an 'office'. It would help me if you would
answer yes/no then, supplement that with an accompanying
explanation. I ask because if you are so seen by God, yourself
and, others I should like to take this very seriously into
David Miller wrote:
God obviously does not see things
the way we mortals do.
John Smithson wrote:
Seems like you do not include yourself in that
first sentence. Can you see why I woould [sic]
think this is a problem?
I do include myself in this first sentence. You put too much confidence in
Hmmm let's see here..
It seems that only a few were deemed righteous in Genesis and I don't remember
his name being on the roster. Now, there are righteous people not listed in the
Genesis account, but I don't recall the man doing anything terrible in the
Genesis account,
DavidM:(I can) see (by trying) through God's eyes. Sorry, you just answered
my last post.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 30, 2004 23:09
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry -- the proof read version
Terry
DavidM:As you used with such frequency the expression 'speak evil of a man
favored by God', would you kindly elucidate. Thanks
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 30, 2004 20:57
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry
Terry wrote:
Sorry, but you cannot explain that any other way than that God may favor
one of His creations over another.
There is no doubt that God favors some over others. The question is why.
Unfortunately, we can't seem to agree among ourselves that God favored
Abraham over Abimelech in the
Terry wrote:
He had what we would call a motive, David.
I agree that the text shows that he had motive.
Terry wrote:
He was more motivated to keep his head
than he was to keep his wife.
This is where I start to part ways. I am not convinced that he ever
expected to lose his wife.
Let me ask you
Amen. The voice of wisdom, David. Izzy
-Original Message-
I don't know all the answers, but I am careful not to speak evil of a man
favored by God.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
--
Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you
Oh, no, Dave. I NEVER claimed Avimelekh was righteous.
I indicated He obeyed the voice of God when that voice was revealed to him, and
I said, Kudos!
-- slade
-Original Message-
From: David Miller
Some here blame Abraham
and shake the finger of shame at him,
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
Sorry, but you cannot explain that any other way than that God may
favor one of His creations over another.
There is no doubt that God favors some over others. The question is
why. Unfortunately, we can't seem to agree among ourselves that God
favored Abraham
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
He had what we would call a motive, David.
I agree that the text shows that he had motive.
Terry wrote:
He was more motivated to keep his head
than he was to keep his wife.
This is where I start to part ways. I am not convinced that he ever
expected to lose his
Slade wrote:
Oh,
no, Dave. I NEVER claimed Avimelekh was righteous.
I indicated He obeyed the voice of God when that voice
was revealed to him, and I said, Kudos!
I was thinking of you when I said, some praise Abimelech, but I was
thinking of Jonathan when I said, and
Terry wrote:
At the same time, he [Abraham] is one of the last people that I would pick
to be my hero. To me, he was just a nobody from nowhere with little
talent for anything beyond being a shepherd.
I can understand your perspective, which is what makes God's favor toward
Abraham so
I am not out to crucify Abraham. At the same time, he is one of the
last people that I would pick to be my hero. To me, he was just a
nobody from nowhere with little talent for anything beyond being a
shepherd.
Terry
How many other men offered to sacrifice
their only beloved son
In a message dated 11/30/2004 7:58:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was thinking of you when I said, "some praise Abimelech," but I was
thinking of Jonathan when I said, "and declare him righteous." Of course,
Jonathan was speaking about this particular situation. So
In a message dated 11/30/2004 8:12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
God obviously does not see things the way we
mortals do. From God's point of view, Abraham's faith stood out in a very
extraordinary way, just like a man who was 100 foot tall would stand out to
us.
I
Terry wrote:
God is God. He can make exceptions to His
rules any time He wants to,
David Miller wrote:
If we come to an understanding that God has bent the
rules for someone, that is a warning flag to me that there
are some false assumptions being held.
Terry wrote:
Your warning flag may be
treatment.(based on a parable)
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 29, 2004 11:24
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Terry wrote:
God is God. He can make exceptions to His
rules any time He wants to,
David Miller wrote:
If we come
Slade wrote:
Does God preemptively punish us for sins that
we might/will do in the future? Then refer
to Gen 12.15-19.
I don't think God preemptively punishes anyone for possible future sin,
Slade. If anything, this suggests to me that Pharaoh took Sarah against
Abraham and Sarah's will. Then
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
God is God. He can make exceptions to His
rules any time He wants to,
David Miller wrote:
If we come to an understanding that God has bent the
rules for someone, that is a warning flag to me that there
are some false assumptions being held.
Terry wrote:
Your
Do you agreethat there is nothing
in the text that says that Abraham was willing for men to sleep with
his wife? The text only says that he was willing to define his
relationship to her as brother and sister.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
In a message dated 11/29/2004 10:06:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Miller wrote:
... the text tells us that Abraham in league with God
was able to stop men from sleeping with his wife.
John Smithson wrote:
There is nothing, as in "not a word" in the biblical
are doing the former, some the latter.Though good
conversations are to be had with either, one leads only to an impasse.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 27, 2004 23:11
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Terry wrote:
2
DAVID:
I haven't changed anything about what I said. I caution you about
surmising evil motives on the part of Abraham that are not established by the
text. Making false charges against a man who is in covenant with God is
dangerous.SLADE: Making
false charge against a man is
I went to the http://www.fixedearth.com/ website. I, of course have not been
able to read everything there. Very interesting. I'm sure it could create some
great debate. I find it interest to discover that the author calls me to be a
Christian Zionist. In fact, there's a possibility that he
How bizarre! Wouldn't the fact that we have sent men to the moon and back
kinda confirm that the earth was moving Izzy
-Original Message-
Please see http://.fixedearth.com/ A young man came into the store one week
ago espousing this position. He further spoke to the THEORY of
004 8:01
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Please see
http://.fixedearth.com/ A young man
came into the store one week ago espousing this position. He further
spoke to the THEORY of evolution and, the THEORIES of general and
special relativity. Guess which word he believed operative in all of the
above?
Do you understand why I included this as an
illustration? Surely you've encountered a WQ this high previously!?
- Original Message -
From:
Jeff
Powers
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 28, 2004 10:11
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Lance
Don't YOU consider SOME of the views you've encountered on TT bizarre? I
shan't identify which but, I do.
- Original Message -
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 28, 2004 10:13
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
How bizarre! Wouldn't
] Unilateral covenant
Don't YOU consider SOME of the views you've encountered on TT bizarre? I
shan't identify which but, I do.
- Original Message -
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 28, 2004 10:13
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
How
Jeff, dont let the turkeys get you down. At
least he isnt flying planes into buildings (yet). Izzy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeff Powers
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004
9:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Unilateral
It was a first for me.
- Original Message -
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 28, 2004 10:47
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Maybe strange, but this is a new weirdness! Kind of like deciding that
gravity doesn't really exist
yes
- Original Message -
From:
Lance
Muir
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004
10:13
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Do you understand why I included this as an
illustration? Surely you've encountered a WQ this high
not really there are many that belive the space program to be a hoax
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:13
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
How bizarre! Wouldn't the fact that we have sent
Izzy,
the operative word here is "yet"
Jeff
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004
10:48
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Jeff, dont let the
turkeys get you down. At leas
And the Holocaust. Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Powers
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 11:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
not really there are many that belive the space program
exactly
- Original Message -
From: ShieldsFamily [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 14:07
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
And the Holocaust. Iz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
- Original Message -
From: "ShieldsFamily" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:13
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
How bizarre! Wouldn't the fact that we have sent men to the moon and back
kinda confirm that the earth
In a message dated 11/25/2004 9:48:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The principle here, if your teachers would have had better understanding to then teach you, is the Second Temple hermeneutical principle called Kol v'Chomer which means Light and Heavy.
these Temple
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
How bizarre! Wouldn't the fact that we have sent men to the moon and back
kinda confirm that the earth was moving Izzy
Did you know that the people who first thought of these ideas were considered
liberals in their day?
John
Are you
Terry wrote:
2. God is God. He can make exceptions to His rules any time He wants to,
I have trouble seeing it this way. It seems to me that God is not
capricious. Capriciousness is the way of the false Roman and Greek gods,
not the Hebrew God.
One glaring example is Jesus dying on the
David Miller wrote:
Terry
wrote:
2. God is God. He can make exceptions to His
rules any time He wants to,
I have trouble seeing it this way. It seems to me that God is not
capricious. Capriciousness is the way of the false Roman and Greek
gods, not the Hebrew God.
TC: No
David Miller wrote:
... the text tells us that Abraham in league with God
was able to stop men from sleeping with his wife.
John Smithson wrote:
And why do you present this last idea? If you are going
to answer with more supposition, take a pass.
I am not interested in suppositional
In a message dated 11/27/2004 8:11:31 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He can make exceptions to His rules any time He wants to,
I have trouble seeing it this way. It seems to me that God is not
capricious.
Central to the idea of capriciousness is the notion of
In a message dated 11/27/2004 8:38:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Smithson wrote:
And why do you present this last idea? If you are going
to answer with more supposition, take a pass.
I am not interested in suppositional considerations.
I say this because we know the
Good morning, and happy thanksgiving everyone. I trust we are all thankful
to the great and gracious Lord God of heaven for the life and abundance of
good things that he gives unto the people of his covenant.
Concerning the Abraham / Abimelech incident of Gen. 20:
Although virtually every
in the
flesh, I live WITHIN THE FAITHFULNESS OF THE SON OF GOD, who loves me and
gave himself for me.
Let's keep the focus where it ought to be.
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry -- the proof read version
Jonathan wrote:
In fact, it is Abimelech who is declared righteous (God
All 'right standing with God' issues from CHRIST'S FAITHFULNESS.
- Original Message -
From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 25, 2004 07:49
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Good morning, and happy thanksgiving everyone. I trust we
Lance Muir wrote:
I HAVE BEEN CRUCIFIED WITH THE MESSIAH . I am, however, alive--but it isn't
me, IT'S THE MESSIAH WHO LIVES IN ME. And the life I do still live in the
flesh, I live WITHIN THE FAITHFULNESS OF THE SON OF GOD, who loves me and
gave himself for me.
Let's keep the focus where it
Is it not Christ's obedience that benefits Abraham's descendants?
- Original Message -
From: Slade Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 24, 2004 19:14
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
DAVE -- Quite frankly, Slade, sometimes I think I am more
TERRY SAID: God is God. He can make exceptions to His rules any time He wants
to, and none of us are qualified to question that.
SLADE SAYS: If I understand you correctly, I think Scripture would support your
postulate. While berating some of the Pharisees about tithing mint and dill,
Yeshua
Scripture makes that clear. And here's where the wonder dichotomy arises.
Obedience also provides benefits.
-- slade
-Original Message-
From: Lance Muir
Sent: Thursday, 25 November, 2004 10.32
Is it not Christ's obedience that benefits Abraham's descendants?
--
Let your speech
November 25, 2004 5:49
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
Good morning, and happy thanksgiving everyone. I trust we are
all thankful to the great and gracious Lord God of heaven for the life
and abundance of good things that he gives unto the people of his
covenant. Concerning the A
'you should do' is
a suggestion phrase requiring obedience to nothing--and, the suggestion is to
'some Pharisees' whosereligious tradition died 'without neglecting the
weightier things of the Torah' whichrequires obedience to nothing--JC is
focused on the truth like ancrocadile on the corn
In a message dated 11/25/2004 7:31:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mornin' David. Here is how I see it.
1.There is no question that God rewards faith. Sometimes He even does
it here and now as well as in the sweet bye and bye. In the old
testament, many of the promises
: Thursday, 25 November, 2004
12.18To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
'you should do'
is a suggestion phrase requiring obedience to nothing--and, the suggestion is
to 'some Pharisees' whosereligious tradition died 'without neglecting the
weig
Abe
himselfwas not blind to the point/s, below
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:34:13 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
In a message
dated 11/25/2004 7:31:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:God.can make exceptions to His rules any time He
wants to..
[John:]
I do not
Jesus
(is)focused on the truth
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:47:59 -0500 "Slade Henson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
The
principle here, if your teachers would have had better understanding to
thenteach you..
, alive--but it isn't
me, IT'S THE MESSIAH WHO LIVES IN ME. And the life I do still live in the
flesh, I live WITHIN THE FAITHFULNESS OF THE SON OF GOD, who loves me and
gave himself for me.
Let's keep the focus where it ought to be.
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry -- the proof
: Thursday, November 25, 2004 6:32
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant sorry
-- the proof read version
DM spoke of having a bias 'to justify Abraham and David'.
Galatians 2:15-21 'We are Jews by birth, not 'Gentile sinners.' But we
know that a person is not declared 'righteous
In a message dated 11/24/2004 9:20:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"blast you into the next judgment"? LOL. I think you are getting a little
excited here. Context, John.
Read you response to me, DAvid. Context is what I have. Implying that I am in danger from a wrathful
Yeah...?
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, 25 November, 2004
12.52To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Jesus
(is)focused on the truth
On Thu, 25 Nov
then tithg
dillis (continues as)a cultural pref, has nothin' to do w/
Godliness; obedience (to Christ)is rootd in (e.g.) meekness, or a certain
spirit drivn character,not in particulrizd compliance/s per se,
as he himselfteaches
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:47:59 -0500 "Slade Henson"
[EMAIL
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Slade Henson
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 10:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral covenant
Scripture makes that clear. And here's where the wonder dichotomy
arises.
Obedience also provides benefits.
-- slade
disobedience(?)--have you ever thought about it
:)
e.g., the Roman
soldiers seald JCs tomb with Caesar's seal then stood guard in perpetuity to
prohibit even tresspassg near his grave...howevr, when angels overpowerd the
guards--blew 'em away--androlled away the tombstone, people could see
This is awesome, G. And you are right. I wonder
what kind of rebuke you have fostered?
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 10:20
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
disobedience
In a message dated 11/25/2004 7:07:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is only possible if we have faith that we can walk in His righteousness every day. We cannot do this if we assume we are going to be "sinners every day".
Actually, the two concepts are not related.
In a message dated 11/25/2004 9:27:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
e.g., the Roman soldiers seald JCs tomb with Caesar's seal then stood guard in perpetuity to prohibit even tresspassg near his grave...howevr, when angels overpowerd the guards--blew 'em away--and rolled
Lance,
O Cullmann books. give me a price for all that you can get plus shipping.
Smithson
What, pray tell, do you find 'interesting' at both levels?
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 23, 2004 22:30
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
In a message dated 11/23/2004 9:16:13 PM Central
: November 23, 2004 16:24
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
Covenant?
Sometimes the imagination can also be overrated. We have Christians and
Jewish people who read all sorts of "spiritual truths" into passages and claim
these "spiritual interpretations" are b
If I read you aright, I agree.
- Original Message -
From:
Slade
Henson
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 23, 2004 16:21
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Unilateral
covenant
David M was getting frustrated with me because I wouldn't give him a
"straight a
Slade wrote:
(1) did Avraham have a participation in the
construction of the Covenant?
(2) Was he a participant in the particulars of
the agreement (i.e., was there something for
Avraham to do once the covenant was cut)?
The answers from slade's perspective is
(1) NO. (2) YES.
In regards to number
In a message dated 11/24/2004 5:55:31 AM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What,
pray tell, do you find 'interesting' at both levels?
The preschool level gets the same point across but in words that little
guys can understand. Here is the text of the little take home board
John S. wrote:
Abraham was willing to have his wife sleep with men of power,
on two different occasions to protect himself. Faith in God?
Hardly.
It is one thing for you to assign evil motives to me, but it is quite
another to ascribe evil motives to men like Abraham and David. Do you not
1 - 100 of 210 matches
Mail list logo
