Hi Bill,
I agree that the Lord works in mysterious ways his
wonders to perform--there is much we don't understand that he does, and I
guess the bottom line is--whatever works, works, huh?
Advocates of BIBLE ONLY scriptures might take
offense at this, but I can't pass up this opportunity to say the BoM has led
millions to having faith in Jesus Christ--sans the traditional baggage that
usually goes with the BIBLE-IS-THE -ONLY-SCRIPTURE point of view.
(:>)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 7:31
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Strawman gets
the Bird
Hey, Blaine, No problem -- it's not my
story. I'm just telling it like I heard it. I happen to know this kid quite
well and believe he's telling it like he saw it }:>) but beyond that,
you'll have to decide. As far as being schizophrenic, I happen to know that he
has not been diagnosed as such. By the way, what is schizophrenia? Could it
just as easily be demonic? For that matter, where better to pick up a few
transient "friends" than at a GD concert, tripping on acid? The point is,
whatever the diagnosis, it brought him promptly to the Lord, who promptly
received him into the fold and continues to feed him there. Am I saying
that the best way to meet Jesus is on drugs? Should we be teaching an LSD
doctrine? Of course not. But why not let the Lord work in mysterious ways and
us marvel at his majesty? Praise the Lord!
Bill Taylor
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 6:42
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Strawman gets
the Bird
Blaine: You used the word,
"hallucinating." Was this friend a frequent hallucinator?
How old was he? People with hereditary schizophrenia have both
visual and auditory hallucinations frequently, usually starting in the late
teens or early twenties--prior to that, they most often seem quite
normal. That it happened at a concert of the Grateful Dead,
members of a group of notorius and self confessed fornicators
makes this suspect. Also, the very excitement of a rock concert is
exactly the stimulus often associated with unusual hallcinations. I
once knew a woman who hallucinated often--she was a diagnosed
schizophrenic--and she told me she tended to get that way under conditions
of stress and/or excitement. She lost a baby after a pregnancy of
6 or so months, and fell into a delerium of hallucinatory episodes that
lasted for months, which she had no control over. Otherwise, most of
the time she was able to tell the difference between her hallucinations and
reality. Not to knock your story, but . . .
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 7:03
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Strawman
gets the Bird
Read my Polanyi post and get back to
me.
As far as a "Witches Coven" I don't know.
I've not been to one. But a very good friend of mine was hallucinating at
a Grateful Dead concert, when he saw a large man with flaming blond hair
walk out on stage, bible in his hand, and point to him through the crowd
and say, "I coming for you." Then the blond haired big man started pawing
through people like they were ten-pins, coming to get him. My friend fell
on his face then and there, promptly giving his life to the Lord. He
is not sure about the big man, but he is quite sure to Whom he led
him.
I am saying, if it is truth, it is our Lord's
Truth, whatever the discloser.
Bill Taylor
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 6:36
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Strawman
gets the Bird
If you like looking for him in all the wrong places, how about
checking him out or his truth at a Witches Coven?
If you did not say he is in it, are you refering to his truth in
it?
So what is so great about Paloneys contribution to Christianity?
Was he a christian in more than name only?
Judy,
I do not know if you are aware of this,
so I won't call your behavior devious and your arguments
intellectually dishonest. Instead I will give you the benefit of doubt
and simply point out that you are committing an age-old fallacy in
several of your rebuttals. The fallacy is called a strawman argument.
You twist my words and then attack them based upon the twist. In this
way you are building a strawman and then kicking it down. Let me show
you what I mean:
You said > How did
Jesus make his career looking for God in all the "wrong"
places?
What's the strawman? I did not say
that Jesus was "looking for God." He is God, always was, always will
be. I said "I like looking for him (the Lord, Jesus) in all the
'wrong' places."
You said > During his time of ministry on this earth he was still
part of the Godhead yes, but he wasn't God the
Father.
What's the
strawman? I did not
say that Jesus was the God the Father. I said, "He is God, always was, always will be."
You said
> I agree that He
is Lord over it, but this does not ATST mean that He is in
it.
What's the
strawman? I did not
say that Jesus is in it, as if to promote some kind of
strange pantheism. I said, "I have
thoroughly bought into the truth that Jesus is Lord. He is Lord of
everything. It doesn't matter what or where, if it is in the world, he
is there."
You said > It is my belief that the Word of God can handle the
enlightenment mentality sans Polanyi. How does one put on the
mind of Christ and the mind of Polanyi at the same time?
What's the strawman?
I
did not say that one should put on the mind of Polanyi, nor did I
suggest it. I have never said something so ludicrous. I
said, "Why shun Polanyi? Why not thank
our Lord that he raised him up at the time he did and
equipped him to speak to the problems present
in Enlightenment mentality?" Judy, this is
an egregious mistake. Please do not put blasphemous words in my
mouth. I have always kept Christ in the center of my theology and
conversations, and I have always put whomever I am speaking of,
whether it be Polanyi or Torrance or Calvin or Athanasius or
Kruger, in the periphery and soundly in submission to Christ. Please
be a little more careful with your words.
You said > Jesus didn't speak the words of any philosopher, he only
said what he first heard the Father say - He spoke God's Words and we
are to do the same because he left us an example that we should follow
in His steps. Not the steps of Polanyi.
What's the
strawman? I
did not say that Jesus spoke the words of any philosopher; I said he
spun the philosophy of his day, and did so in a way to radically alter
its intent. Please read my words: "Long before Christ walked the
earth, Confucius instructed his followers with these words: 'Do not
do to other people what you would not have them do to you.' I
think it's just too great a coincidence to imagine that Jesus was
unaware of Confucius when he told his followers, 'Do unto others
what you would have them do to you.' My point is this: Jesus
took the philosophy of his day, no doubt a popular convention,
and spun it just enough to radically alter its intent. One could
be completely passive in life, spending every day doing
nothing, and still satisfy Confucius' demand; -- not
so with Jesus. It takes action to please him: "Do
unto others
..."
What's the
strawman?
Secondly, I did not say to follow in Polanyi's steps; I did say, "I
do not worship Polanyi. I worship Jesus Christ. But I do
admire Polanyi's contribution, just like I admire others for their
contributions."
Judy, this is
ridiculous. These are all in just one of your posts. Look
over some of your others. In other words:
Silly woman, scarecrows are for
birds. Your strawman is lazy; he's sleeping on the job. Ravens
are roosting on his shoulders. He needs to get the boot.
Promptly.
Bill Taylor
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004
12:59 AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] Confucius,
Polanyi etc.
I said > I
like looking for our Lord in all the "wrong" places. It doesn't
surprise me to find him working in strongholds normally given to the
other side. Jesus made it his career doing
this.
jt said
> How did Jesus make his career looking for God in all
the "wrong" places?
First
of all, I did not say that Jesus was
"looking for God." He is God, always was, always will be.
jt: During his time of
ministry on this earth he was still part of the Godhead yes, but he
wasn't God the Father.
I said I like looking for
him (the Lord) in all the "wrong" places. By that I mean places not
commonly frequented by highly stuffy religious types, places like
university lecture halls and science forums. I am always amazed,
when I go to those places, to find that Jesus is already there,
laying the groundwork for the sharing of the Gospel. I think he
thinks he would grow old waiting for most high brows to meet him at
"church."
jt: I'm glad you believe
you find him there Bill because I sure can't see him in much that
comes out of those places.
Judy,
I guess what I'm really saying is that I have thoroughly bought into
the truth that Jesus is Lord. He is Lord of everything. It doesn't
matter what or where, if it is in the world, he is there.
jt: I agree that He is
Lord over it, but this does not ATST mean that He is in it.. He was
Lord over those who crucified Him.
That's what disturbs me about your attitude.
Why in the world should Christians be content to concede any
strongholds to the devil? There's just no getting around it, as long
as we are in this world philosophy and science are going to be major
players in shaping the way people think (Christian
people included). I say, why be afraid?
jt: I'm not saying to
concede any ground God wants to take, nor do I advocate fear which
in itself is sin but there was a time when Jesus told his followers
to "leave them alone, they be blind leaders of the
blind"
Go there and be amazed to
discover that our Lord can hold his own in any climate. Start
changing the tide. Why shun Polanyi? Why not thank our Lord
that he raised him up at the time he did and equipped him to
speak to the problems present in Enlightenment mentality?
jt:
It is my belief that the Word of God can handle the enlightenment
mentality sans Polanyi. How does one put on the mind of Christ
and the mind of Polanyi at the same time?
I
think if you will bear with me a while, you'll begin to realize that
your thoughts are not as genuinely biblical as you imagine. They too
have been influenced by philosophy. If I'm wrong, you lose nothing
but a little time. If I'm right, well, you'll know what you've
gained.
jt said
> Was [Jesus] a student of any kind of
philosophy that you know of?
I do
not think I would characterize Jesus as a "student" of philosophy,
just like I do not characterize myself in that way. I do know this,
however, that Jesus did not shy away from opportunities to challenge
the conventions of his day. Allow me one example. Long before Christ
walked the earth, Confucius instructed his followers with these
words: "Do not do to other people what you would not have them do to
you." I think it's just too great a coincidence to imagine that
Jesus was unaware of Confucius when he told his followers, "Do unto
others what you would have them do to you."
jt: Hey a stopped watch
is correct twice a day and Satan has been around a long time and he
has heard a lot also. He puts a little poison on a lot that is
true. Do you believe that what is true is the same as truth
when it comes by way of the father of lies?
My point is this:
Jesus took the philosophy of his day, no doubt a
popular convention, and spun it just enough to radically
alter its intent. One could be completely passive in life, spending
every day doing nothing, and still satisfy Confucius'
demand; -- not so with Jesus. It takes action to
please him: "Do unto others ..." Here's the short of it:
Jesus was not intimidated by philosophy. Why should we
be?
jt: No, Jesus does not
manipulate, nor does he spin anything. The Kingdom he came to
present is entirely new and "if any man be in Christ he is part of a
new creation". Not just a rehash of the old. The old has
been judged. The new has come and we need to learn the new
language.
Instead, he stood it on
its head. He did not say, Oh my gosh, Confucius said so and so,
and so I'd better stay away from there. No! He took
him on and set him straight. With Christ as our Lord, we can be
doing the same thing today. Thanks to people like Polanyi, some of
us are.
jt: Jesus didn't speak
the words of any philosopher, he only said what he first heard the
Father say - He spoke God's Words and we are to do the same because
he left us an example that we should follow in His steps. Not the
steps of Polanyi.
judyt
"Man in his pomp is like the beasts that perish"
Your question was prompted by a comment I
had made to Judy, pointing out the Aristotelian nature of her
holiness doctrine. She didn't recognize Aristotle's influence on
her thought. My guess is that neither did you. But I did, and I
pointed it out to her.
jt: Bill
sanctification/holiness is scriptural and the NT was not
around in the days of Aristotle.
I did this not to attack her or to belittle
her but to help her to maybe begin to realize that one does not
need to study philosophy to be captivated by its lure. It is
just as often the unsuspecting one who is hurt by philosophy as
it is the one who makes it his prerogative to know. The
point is, however, that I was not promoting philosophy over the
Bible when this all began; instead I was awakening a sister to
the silent whispers of Greek thought, when you wrote me to
inquire about the philosophical underpinnings of my own
theology.
jt: Could be that
western thought is influenced by the Romans and Greeks; however,
we are to die to all that and put on the mind of
Christ.
I said,
"if I were to say I adhere to a philosophy, I would look to the
breakthroughs of Michael Polanyi." Why did I say that? I said it
because I understand Polanyi and I know what he has done to
free all thought, and especially Christian thought, from
Enlightenment rationalism.
jt: The mind of
Christ will do just as much to free us from Enlightenment
rationalism so why do we need to come by way of
Polanyi?
I
wrote to the best of my ability, and I wrote for you and your
fellow TTers to read. Please, get your dictionary out, put
it beside you, and begin to work your way through it. It won't
hurt you. And if you learn a new word or two, then, so what,
that won't hurt you either.
jt: Thanks for being
well meaning Bill; but can we justify the use of our time this
way?
Beyond
that, I do not worship Polanyi. I worship Jesus Christ. But
I do admire Polanyi's contribution, just like I admire others
for their contributions. I know I must "work out" my own
salvation (to quote Judy, and partially quote Scripture),
jt: Hey! don't give
me credit for that, I got it from the apostle Paul who wrote "So
then mty beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my
presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your
own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at
work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
(Phil 2:12,13)
but
I am not so enamored as to think I have to do it all
myself. Nor am easily I intimidated -- I like looking for our
Lord in all the "wrong" places. It doesn't surprise me to find
him working in strongholds normally given to the other side.
Jesus made it his career doing this. Why should it
stir you to discover the same?
jt: How did Jesus
make his career looking for God in all the "wrong" places?
Was he a student of any kind of philosophy that you know
of?
Grace and
Peace,
judyt
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center - File online. File on
time.
|