Judy writes > Yes,
Nathan was the prophet and his words were inspired by God since this
was the anointing for his ministry - fourfold restitution was what
is required under the law of Moses. So what is the problem Bill? . . .
BT >
The problem is, Judy, you have evidently missed the point.
Without some "non-biblical" input to place my answer in
context, you misunderstood my use of Scripture to say to
you what "God says using God's words." No problem, I will add
some commentary of my own to try to help you with the
context.
jt: No
Bill the problem is yours. God is not saying these words to
me. You are saying them and this is your judgment, not
His.
You are guilty of
doing the very thing you expect others not to do.
jt: Oh
really? So now I am an adulterer and a murderer like David?
Well when I will wait for God to send the prophet Nathan to
speak the truth to me. Let's face it Bill. I am no king
and you are no prophet.
The pertinent
statement in my use of the Nathan/David account was this: "You are
the man!" Yes, David could have had Nathan killed -- but he
didn't. Instead, not playing insinsate, he got the point of Nathan's
parable and repented of his wrong doing; that is, he was quilty as
charged; he knew it; and rather than skirt the
issue, he took responsibility for his
actions.
How does this pertain
to you? You have yet to take responsibility for
yours. Concerning the use of non-biblical terminology to
speak to biblical concepts, you make the following claim: "You
may all do this Bill but one speaking as the 'oracles of God' says
what God says using God's Words . . . Reaping what we sow is God's
righteous judgment."
Judy, you are complicit in doing the same
thing; e.g., you have written concerning the Godhead, "They
were one in all aspects and operated like a symphony," and "I would
demonstrate the Godhead this way: God the Father has the thought;
God the Word speaks it into existence; and God the Spirit carries it
out. So you see the Godhead as one working in harmony, like a
symphony."
jt:
Jesus said "I and the Father are one and it is written that he was
given the spirit without measure" I used the word symphony as an
object lesson since this is the way it appears to me. I am not
writing legalese or doctrine which you seem to interpret it as - nor
do I come to TT as a "teacher" professer. I am an ordinary every day
believer sharing who I am in Christ. For this I take responsibility
- but not for your wild flights of fancy Bill.
Debbie wrote
this to you: "When talking about God or what he is
saying to us in the Bible, I am sure I use terms which are not in
any translation or manuscript of Scripture." As do
you, Judy, as witnessed above. Hence, with her, why do you not
also "find it strange and arbitrary to make a
rule of avoiding doing so"? You do not apply your own rules to yourself.
jt: I
don't recall ever having made a rule Bill. The scriptures
themselves say that if any man speaks he should speak as the oracles
of God. If you are going to represent Him then you should say
what He says about himself. Your doctrine of
"perichoresis" is alien to anything I have read in
scripture. Where do you find this dance and
relationship? The Godhead is one - so is God dancing with
Himself?
And as I said before, nor ought
you have to. The problem here is not with the language you
use; it is with your unreasonable expectation concerning the
language of others, whether it be mine or Debbie's or anyone
else's. In other words, you need to change your
standards. They are untenable --
not even you can meet them.
jt: It
is God's standard for those who claim to represent Him
publicly. What I am doing here is my own private
testimony. You are constantly quoting doctrines and teachings
constructed by men that have little to do with what God says
about Himself and when anyone questions them it makes you
angry.
And so, the question is, are you going to continue to
skirt the issue, or are you going to drop the attack on others, take
responsibility for your actions and change your standards?
jt: The
attack is all in your head Bill. Noone is immune to questioning on
this list - you should know that by now and if what you are holding
on to is truth then you don't need to fear, it will
stand.
Bill
(By the way, DaveH and G: I am preparing responses to
your requests. I will get them out when this conflict is resolved --
if, that is, it can be resolved)
ni
, from sumph
, sound. 
