Fw: Re: [TruthTalk] Was Jesus of God's Nature?

[Judy Taylor]

From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm not caught up on reading, but I just have to say, Judy, that you are not hearing Bill properly.    I don't agree David.  Bill wrote: It is rebellion to deny the physical lineage of Christ. He is the second Adam precisely because he is of Adam's blood: through Eve to Seth, and Noah, and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Judah, and David to Jesus through Mary. To deny this is to deny that Christ came in the flesh at all. John tells us that it is anti-Christ to hold and promote such a belief; indeed, it is the spirit of rebellion.   None of the above is so.  Jesus is not the second Adam for any of the reasons above What's more he did not come to resurrect the old creation. He came to institute a new one.  I have never denied that Christ came in the flesh so the above accusation is that of a lying spirit. Also I am weary of constant accusations of heresy.   He did answer your question.  Many heresies sprang up and those who wrote in the first few centuries after the Biblical writers addressed these heresies.  You personally don't understand this because you are not well read in the church fathers.   So did Paul, he warned that wolves would spring up in sheep's clothing even from the people he was addressing and that they would get a following. No I have not read the writings of the church fathers extensively but I have read enough to know that they conflict not only with the word of God but with each other - IMO they are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.  I am not promoting gnosticism or any other ism.  Everything I write can be cross checked in God's Word for those who want to take the time and trouble.   Also, the Biblical writers were not negligent about the relationship of Jesus and the incarnation.  There is at least as much about that as there is about his Divinity.  That is why Christianity divided so much over exactly who Jesus was:  God or man.  Well... he was BOTH!  Duh.   I can't accept that he was both in the way that Bill, JD, and others describe. He could not have a fallen Adamic nature and be a fitting sacrifice for sin.  How can one born in iniquity atone for same?  Why is this so difficult to grasp?   Everybody is just describing two sides of the same coin and trying to claim that the other side is lying about what the coin actually looks like.  Hold a coin up right now, Judy.  Describe its face to yourself.  Then have your husband describe the tail side.  Do this while you both are looking at the same coin.  Do you both describe it the same way?  No.  Why?  You are both looking at different sides.  That's what you and Bill are doing in this conversation.    They are totally different coins David.  One flesh the other spirit. They always lust one against the other.   Please TRY to hear what Bill is saying.  He is using Bible. Deal with that.   I am using Bible also David which fact is totally ignored.   David Miller.   ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Was Jesus of God's Nature?     Your sweetness once more overflows Bill just like the orthodox fathers..... It's a valid question - why not be honest and say you don't have an answer? The text says "for God was WITH him".   On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:34:14 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Why was he so negligent about the sperm of David and the incarnation?   Because he was not addressing heretics.   Bill From: Judy Taylor     On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:32:56 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: His death was the victory not His life.   Why then all the fuss about his human nature?   Beats me - You ppl are the ones smaking such a big deal out of his "humanity" and I believe the rcc teaches the same especially since one of their fathers came up with the wholly God, wholly man statement.  Now we have to adjust all doctrine to fit that don't we?  Lord forbid making Tertullian look like a false prophet even if God's own Word contradicts him.   Would it have mattered if he had sinned while living in the flesh? Of course it would. The Christ of Scripture is the whole package, brother: his life, death, and resurrection -- not just a slab of meat hanging on a tree.   He is not a package Bill.  He is a person - one few of you seem to know personally it appears.  Why did Paul tell ppl he ministered to "I determined to know nothing among you but Jesus Christ and Him crucified?"  Why was he so negligent about the sperm of David and the incarnation?   May I suggest that you purchase and read Gustaf Aulen's Christus Victor? The tyrants were plural, Dean: sin, death, and the devil. Leave one of them out and Christ is not the Victor you imagine. Bill   Hate to challenge the good Gustaf .. but the tyrant was the prince of this world and his children.  Satan held the keys of death and he has the power over sin.  Jesus came to do good and to heal all who are oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.  Funny wording that - you would think the apostle would have said "for he was fully man and fully God". ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: truthtalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 4:16 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Was Jesus of God's Nature?       Amen! Now this is good doctrine.  Thank you Dean, what a blessing you are in the Lord...   From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, I think I will stay the course Bill. The Law mentioned was only weak in our flesh not Christ's flesh-He came in the "likeness of that flesh" but the law worked in Him who was not weak. This supports my view-disagree?   Then here's another verse to help.   Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.   His death was the victory not His life.         > From: Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> > Date: 1/29/2006 2:05:34 PM > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]  Was Jesus of God's Nature? > > Christ came in the lower state for death on the cross thereby defeating > Satan-for victory-not to spend His life warring against sin in His members- > for victory. > > You might want to rethink that one, Dean: > > "For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God > did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of > sin: He condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom 8.3).   cd:No, I think I will stay the course Bill. The Law mentioned was only weak in our flesh not Christ's flesh-He came in the "likeness of that flesh" but the law worked in Him who was not weak. This supports my view-disagree? Then here's another verse to help. Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. His death was the victory not His life. >     ---------- "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.     -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Plains.Net, and is believed to be clean.     -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Plains.Net, and is believed to be clean.   ---------- "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.