Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha

Thu, 09 Jun 2005 05:41:20 -0700

 
The "duh !!"  response was the only thing I could think of at the time.  Judy had once again put me in the category of teaching the doctrine of men, for some reason,  while entering into a discussion of what she did the other night at church. She defends this rather unusual procession of thouhgt by giving me a brief lesson on becoming comformed to the image of Christ  .........................   as if my primary concern is something other than this.  Hence   "duh !!" 
 
I personally believe that we change because of our relationship with The Truth more than because of conceptual correctness.   There is the opinion here on Tt, it seems,  that God cannot accomplish growth in an individual if there exists any sin in his/her life.  If the goal of God is to create a people who think correctly on all matters,  then He has failed if a single consideration is wrong.   But if the goal is relational in nature and substance,  God's success in our lives will be demonstrated in spite of our sins or errant thinking.  Correct? 
 
Jd
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Deegan <openairmission@yahoo.com>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 21:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha

You had implied in the past that you & yours are the only ones capable of inteligent discussion. Was that the OLD JD? 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
If you are saying that we are to be like Him, conformed to His image  --  I say "duh  !!!!!"  
 
It appears, howeer that we have regressed into monologue.  
 
Jd
 
 
 

I'm talking about Truth and what the PCA have done via the Shorter Catechism is what doctrines of men
are doing constantly - you included JD.  Since His works were done before the foundation of the world and
it is written that we are predestined to be conformed to the "image of Christ" then it follows that this should be the 'chief end of man' doesn't it? - That is if God's Word means anything to us at all ....  and this has everything to do with relationship with Christ = jt
 
On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 21:56:45 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am talking about a realtionship with Christ and you are talking about what?   Sorry, but I miss your point completely. 
Jd 
 

Interesting JD,
I've been attending an introductory class at the church we have been attending which is PCA. They identify with the Reformation and they like the Shorter Catechism.  I can't figure out why the first point in the Catechism does not say that the chief end of man is to be conformed to the image of Christ - after all this is what we have been predestined for and they believe in predestination. (Romans 8:29)  jt
 
On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:12:20 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not too bad of a question.   Quite often growth may appear to be vacillation.   If we define new birth as a putting on of Christ,  emphasis on a relationship,   then we might suppose that the resulting validation marking the difference between vacillation and growth is the benefit can see in the occurring changes.   If I am a better person,  growth has occurred.   If I have become more distasteful, something is wrong with the relationship.   After all, that is the way relationships work.  Soooo, "truth" can be said to exist IN THE BELIEVER if that believer becomes more and more like Christ.  
 
JD 
 

From: Kevin Deegan <openairmission@yahoo.com>

JD are you Growing or Vacillating?

 
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

Reply via email to