DaveH wrote:
Here's the deal, DavidM.....The T-Doctrine speaks to the oneness of God. I've tried to find out just what that means, and so far I've not found consistency with the answers in their relation to the Bible. At first, Perry objected to my use of /purpose /to define /oneness/, and then he came back with an answer that included /purpose/. I read Jn 17 and to me defining /oneness /as used there as /purpose /sure seems to make sense. Yet you and I suspect others apparently cringe when I suggest such.....WHY??? If you have a better way of defining it, what is it???
DavidH, I do not object to your using "one in purpose", I object to your reducing the relationship to "one in pupose" only. True, you do not say "only", but you never have presented any other "oneness" of the relationship than "one in purpose". However, as DaveidM points out, it is much more than just "one in purpose". "One in purpose" is a prerequisite for the Godhead. "One in purpose" is necessary for any team to acheive a common goal. Now, if you do not beleive that they are "only one in purpose", then tell us more about thier "oneness".
Perry
If you want to convince us that is is not only "purpose
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
---------- "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.
