john in this color
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 07:55:04 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:You quote scripture that appeals to your bias and conveniently leave off those passages that demand a broader opinion of sin and sinning than the one you insist upon. And there is a host of scripture , not to mention the personal testimonies of lives lived (even here on TT) and the "unrepented" sins of so many in the scripture .. men of faith such as Noah, Abraham, Isass, Samson, Peter and Paul. You ignore the fact that a carnal believer is a "babe in Christ " (and, hence, alive in Christ) or that the old man is still present as the new man increases (Eph 4:20-24) or that we all are falling short of the glory of God or that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners -- a statement that enhances the teaching that Christ did not come for t he "righteous."What do we have above JD, six excuses? To begin with there is no such thing as a "carnal believer" that isthe construct of doctrines that do not conform ppl to godliness and holiness. Why did Paul turn that man inCorinth over to the devil for the destruction of the flesh? After all he was probably just a baby believer ... Theflesh is to be reckoned dead and there are/were no righteous for Christ to come for so that is a moot point.actually, it was much of the church that was carnal, Judy. Might try reading I Cor 3:1. The guy you are talking about is not the church I am talking about.You ignore your own rebellion (as per the Adamic reality) and preach a gospel devoid of hope for those who are lost. You have nothing to say to the addicted and that has been made clear time and time again , here on TT.I deal with my own Adamic reality daily JD. I hate ALL sin and this includes me. Jesus has a lot to say to theaddicted and he is their ONLY hope even though AA may buy them a brief stay of execution. My comment , above, remains .Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? When was the last time someone confused your teaching with that questioning? I know the answer . Never !! And when was the last time someone asked me that question, in one way or the other? It happens often --I have asked you this question in the past JD, but you don't receive it in the same way because of your bias. Yes you have ask the question of me. I guess you just miss the point of my comment in regards to that questioning. I will move one.which tells me that I am on the same page as Paul. They confused his doctrine of sin and grace with license.The doctrine of sin and grace you promote is all yours JD, please don't put it off on Paul because you aremost definitely not on his page. He wrote Eph 2:1-6 and the sin is always past tense - they WERE children ofwrath who walked in the lust of the flesh fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind (just like addicts do)Judy, there are two things going on in the plan of salvation .. 1) God reconcils us wholly and completely to Himself, and, 2) we now work to be reconciled to Him."... God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespassess to them and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now that we are ambassadors for Christ , as though God were pleading through us, we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God ..." (II Cor 5:19-20).That never happens with your teaching, Judy . And why? Because your teaching is nothing like Paul's !!!Think about it...If we are not fighting the same battles as Paul, for example, we are not teaching the same thingsas Paul.Paul is teaching the same thing as Jesus and the apostle Peter; he does not have a new message JD.It is your message that is the aberration, sin is an enemy that should not be tolerated in any form or fashion.Like I said, the question of Ro 6:1 will never be asked of your theology -- clear evidence to me (at least) that your teaching is different from that of Paul's.jd
