Wrong again, Lance. You have overlooked the very reason the Scriptures
have
been given to us. The Scriptures are profitable for reproof, for
correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may
be
perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Of course, the
Scriptures won't help if you are dealing with someone who is not a man of
God. :-)
You should consider taking up street preaching in your old age, Lance. It
would help you fulfill the following passage:
Titus 1:9
(9) Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
Going to the Bible will NOT bring the issue to resolution, Dean. Judy, DM,
Gary, Bill, John, even I, though only on the rarest of occasions, can
muster
adequate Scriptural support for a 'view'. Sometimes that 'view' is God's.
Sometimes that 'view' is one's own.
---- Original Message -----
From: Dean Moore
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 15, 2006 12:57
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
----- Original Message -----
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/15/2006 12:31:45 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
EVERY VIEW IS SUPPORTABLE, DEAN!! The better 'taught' one is, the more
comprehensive that person's presentation is. This applies equally to right
as well as wrong views. IMO, your view is a wrong view on this matter..
cd: That of course would make it wrong because it is in contrast to you
view?So how do we know which view is correct-go to the Bible-or some other
source?
----- Original Message -----
From: Dean Moore
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 15, 2006 12:21
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
cd: Lance you need to recognize that this view is made up of much study
and
that I can support it with scripture so it is not something just spoke off
of the top of my head as you seem to suppose. If one is to evaluate the
speaker then one must also consider the speakers past statements to
determine the availability of truth offer by the speaker.Which statement
do
you want me to support?
----- Original Message -----
From: Lance Muir
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/15/2006 9:13:44 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
Key:'I view'. Please take note as all conversations are similary
constructed
JT and DM.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dean Moore
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 15, 2006 09:06
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
cd: I view the word "unbelief" to portray a larger image than what has
been
stated in this discussion. To have unbelief is not only to reject the
person
of Christ but to also reject his words which very clearly points one
towards
God's law and God's grace. So if John 3:18 is correct then one must
receive
this larger image if not on new birth then later at the bidding of the
Holy
Ghost. Note and point : One sin can send one to hell if there is refusal
of
compliance to the conviction power of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:9)-so be not
deceived-but sin can also make one least in the kingdom of heaven.This
speaks of a personal judgement between the person and God.
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/15/2006 8:28:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now
If this Victor person is correct and "UNBELIEF" is the predicament
humanity
is in then why was the Holy Spirit
sent to reprove the WORLD (note this is not just God's covenant ppl) of
SIN,
righteousness, and judgment?
(John 16:8) Why didn't God send Him as an antidote to "unbelief" only if
this is the main problem??
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:50:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
----- Original Message -----
From: Debbie Sawczak
To: 'Lance Muir'
Sent: January 14, 2006 17:02
Subject: OK, done working for now
paragraph in this lecture of Victor's:
I've often said, too, that the hardest part of any service of worship for
the minister is the children's story, because nearly all the children's
stories here are moralistic bromides. It's just moralistic bromide. And
the
Gospel isn't heard because we assume that children can't understand the
Gospel. They can be taught not to steal, and they can be taught not to
swear, but they can't understand the Gospel. This is ridiculous, but keep
your eye on the Christian education wing of your church or denomination,
because that's where the Gospel goes down.
It strikes me that street preaching and children's sermons go down the
same
wrong path!
Paragraph from next lecture:
The protestant reformers maintain that the root problem is Sin and it
gives
rise to sins. But be sure you know which is which, or you will never come
to
terms with the Gospel. Morality maintains that little "s" sins plural is
the
human predicament. The Gospel maintains that capital "S" Sin singular -
unbelief - is the predicament.
This is the difference between David's understanding of repentance and
Bill's/JD's.
D
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/229 - Release Date: 1/13/2006
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
