Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: For Judy

[Judy Taylor]

You have an "OBLIGATION" as a professing 'believer' to speak the truth in love to me Lance Muir.  If you so believe then straighten me out.  SHOW ME IN THE BIBLE BY TWO OR MORE WITNESSES where I am missing it. I want to see some OT testimonies.  If it is such a BIGGIE then this should be important to you.  Is it your custom to just shove everything under the rug because your "incarnation doctrine" covers it anyway?   Tell me why Jesus has to be an "eternal Son" in your own words and from your own perspective from God's Word.    judyt   On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 12:53:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Probably every TT participant on TT is a HERETIC or a heretic. (I'm confident that you get the distinction) On this issue Judy, you classify as a HERETIC (capitalized) This is a biggie. Let's just move on shall we? IMO, it would be of no avail for anyone to make an attempt at engaging you. (you could lose a limb yet continue to function successfully so....) From: Judy Taylor   You are looking in the wrong place for repentance Lance.  I asked you for scriptural grounds for your belief which is something neither you, Jonathan, nor Bill Taylor have proferred so far.  Other men's opinions are what you feed upon and so long as this is so we will continue to go around in endless circles.  Hopefully one of these days you will realize that there is just One who has ALL truth and begin to seek Him for answers - then we will make some headway.  judyt   On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:44:55 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: So then Judy, no repentance forthcoming. Actually, this conversation took place long ago in a galaxy far, far away. JHughes, BTaylor and JTaylor went on and on and on...... It's a done deal, Judy. From: Judy Taylor   Really Lance, You need to warn Jonathan about receiving teaching from ppl such as this because it is not faith enhancing at all. This is is probably a well-meaning fellow but his teaching is full of fear and has no new argument.  All of his scriptures are NT.  Peter's proclamation, John 3:16 etc. He uses lots of words and just goes round and round with the same ol, same ol.  He accuses those who deny the "eternal" part of using carnal reasoning and then goes on to do the same himself along with some new accusations ie: those who don't subscribe to his doctrine are denying the Son and under God's wrath, and they are Socian (which is someone who denies the trinity); this man is another follower of Athanasius and the Nicene creed.   For the record God does not mind us questioning when we do not understand; he told the prophet "Come let us reason together."  And second I do not deny the Sonship of Christ nor do I have a problem with the Godhead.  I believe according to the scriptures that the second member of the eternal Godhead known as God The Word became Jesus the Son when He was born to Mary which is/was prophesied in Psalm 2:7 "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee"  So Jesus the Christ had a beginning and the word begotten is the operative one, in Strongs it is #3205 Yalad meaning "bearing young, midwife" Hebrews 1:5 validates this understanding and so does Matt 8:29 - (even the demons knew about it and feared because noone had challenged them under the Old Covenant).  There are others who God calls sons ie: the angels, Israel, and even Satan as a created being but Jesus is the only one who was "begotten" of God.   That's my foundation.  Now if you can come up with something better from the OT without all of this circular religious reasoning;  something clear from the mouths of two or more OT witnesses - I am eager to hear it.  Still waiting patiently .....   judyt     On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:34:32 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: From: "Jonathan Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The True, Proper, and Eternal Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ the  Only Begotten Son of God   http://www.the-highway.com/Sonship_Contents.html