Don’t feel bad about that, jt.
Liberals think the US Consitution is a “living, breathing” document
as well (so they can change the original intent/meaning of it as well as the
Bible’s.) Izzy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Judy Taylor
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004
12:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [TruthTalk] WHAT IS SIN?
I'm not seeking a pat on the back
Lance, John is the disciple, not me. You and I don't even speak the same
language and don't forget I'm on the
static understanding side ...
Jt:What a surprisingly pleasant post. Well done, young lady.
Forgot to mention that
being on the "static side" does not preclude change. The
changes of expanding, and growing, however, are in us rather than on
God's side because His Truth does not ever change. Jesus is and has been
the same yesterday, today, and forever and God says "I am the Lord, I
change not"
Trying to spiritualize
differences which most often is the adversary sowing discord and
strife is calling evil good. Spiritual growth should never cause division in Christ
because someone who has a heart for truth is able to recognize it even
when they do not fully understand it .. We all press on together
to aprehend Christ.
Let me take at shot at this
one. If I am right, then Lance's comment is not veiled in any kind
of mystery.
A "dynamic understanding of the Nature of God and His
Gospel" tells me that Lance's view is one that is in flux, changing,
expanding, growing. The use of the wording "dynamic understanding" would demand a difference of position and
opinion among believers and if this dynamic is of God, a
differenc of opinion and teaching will exist within the assembly of
Saints. We should expect
differences. They
are of God and are not necessarily evil or even
undesirable. A static
positioning is a closed system, fully understandable by all of (I
assume) an honest heart.
Those with this understanding will argue that we can AND MUST be of the same
mind and speak the same things on all points of import within the
Gospel of Christ.
How did I do? Smitty
jt:
Has Lance given you a grade yet John. How did you do? I know
you are weighing a lot of things right now. This dynamic understanding
was neither taught nor promoted by the writers of the NT. In fact they
taught "static understanding" exclusively. You can find it in
all of the following:
1 Corinthians
1:10, 2 Corinthians 13:11, 1 Peter 3:8, 1 Peter 4:1, Romans 12:16-18,
Philippians 2:2.
The reason we must be
of the same mind and speak the same thing is that we should have the "mind
of Christ" 1 Corinthians 2:16. which mind is the "same yesterday,
today, and forever" which sounds pretty static to me. This is the
ONLY way that we will grow into Him in all things. jt
From: "Lance
Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jt:I'm drawing a distinction between a dynamic understanding of the Nature of
God and God's Gospel and a static understanding (yours, I believe). Read the three
points again with that in mind then, tell me your understanding. thanks
It might be better if you explain your definition of dynamic vs
static. Are you saying that your gospel has signs following, that is, the
signs Jesus spoke of (the works He did and greater); my
understanding of a dynamic gospel is one where the power of God is evident.
Static is a form of godliness that denies the power. I
doubt we are 'as they say' on the same page. jt
|