\o/ !HALALU
Yah! \o/
Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua !
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 07/23/2004 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson, Taylor
and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
Not offended in the least, Chris, just a bit slow.
Thanks for the clarification -- it makes great sense now. The Trinitarian
doctrine of God does not, as I see it, exclude from the Faith once
delivered people as yourself who do not ascribe to it, not as long as you are
not denying the full deity of Jesus in the process. The concern I have about
your view of God is a relational one and not one that necessarily throws
you out of Christian fellowship (and I hope that is not offensive to you
either).
Good to read this from you ...
and what followed as well.
"Great peace have they which love
Thy Torah and NOTHING shall offend them." (Psalm 119:165)
... and OH how I do LOVE Thy
Torah, it is my meditation all the day. That's King David in Psalm 119:97 and
this servant of YHVH
today.
William Penn was jailed precisely
because he refuted the trinitarian doctrine in his 'The Sandy Foundation Shaken'
and was therefore accused of denying God. [Editorial note: There
were three subtitles. The first was, 'Of One God, subsisting in three
distinct and separate persons, Refuted'. Marlin Halverson had a
friend/acquaintance that attacked me on this list denying this very simple
truth. I have a copy in front of me from a VERY old book with 'The Sandy
Foundation Shaken'.]
Penn answered from his prison cell in the Tower of London with 'Innocency with Her open Face' that he
did not deny God, but rather affirmed that The Saviour is the Only God
there is. That writing was his 'Get out of jail' free
card.
William Penn and I
agree,
As also does The
Almighty,
Say then those who adhere to
trinity,
Does that then make us five or
three?
It may surprise you to learn that
a strong part of my belief on this matter is precisely due to the matter of my
view of The Almighty as a relational one.
More on this later.
Ahava b' YahShua
(Love in The
SAVIOUR)
Baruch YHVH,
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 07/23/2004 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson, Taylor
and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
Not offended in the least, Chris, just a bit
slow. Thanks for the clarification -- it makes great sense now. The
Trinitarian doctrine of God does not, as I see it, exclude from the
Faith once delivered people as yourself who do not ascribe to it, not as long
as you are not denying the full deity of Jesus in the process. The concern I
have about your view of God is a relational one and not one
that necessarily throws you out of Christian fellowship (and I hope that
is not offensive to you either).
I once heard a sermon, the theme
being "Everything God does, he does for himself." I would be glad to
go into the details if you wish but that should not be necessary to make my
point. When we as people do things only for ourselves, we think of it in
terms of psychosis, a unhealthy self-preoccupation: selfish, self-centered,
self-serving, egotistical, the list is long. We are not whole and complete and
healthy unless we are other-centered in our thoughts and service. In other
words, Christians believe we (humans) must be relational in our activities or
we cannot love God with all our being and our neighbors as
ourselves.
When we say that everything God does he does for
himself, we must interject into that statement some sort of relational element
within the Godhead or, it seems to me, we have projected onto God what we
consider sick about ourselves; either that, or we have no basis to think
poorly of those around us who do live for and love
only themselves. Having been created in the image of God, they are
the healthy ones. We call the excessive love and admiration of oneself
narcissism and hardly think of it as a godly attribute. How wrong we
are! It is we who sadly suffer low self-esteem. The empathy we feel
for others is but a symptom of our own deep psychosis.
I know you have never thought of it in these
terms (or at least I suspect you have not). But it seems to me we cannot call
God a relational being unless he is relational within the properties of his
own being (I would say essence but Judy wouldn't understand). If he is one in
terms of a singularity instead of unity (as I understand the Hebrew to mean)
then he had to create in order to relate; for with whom was there to
relate when all there was was God? Yet we are taught in Scripture that God's
desire is for relationship with us.
On the other hand, the heart of God, as I see it,
is the other-centered love the Father has for the Son and the Son for
the Father both in and through the Holy Spirit. The early church called this
relationship perichoresis, likening the give and take between the
Three to a dance. Here we have a God whose heart it is to share his love with
others and to bring his creation into that dance. This does not change the
nature of God or make him dependant upon his creation; for he is relational in
his own essence (I know, I know, but I just couldn't help
myself) and the nature of love, being healthy, is always and still
other-preoccupied.
Anyway, I didn't mean to ramble, but thought you
may be interested in any thoughts sparked by your comments.
Blessings,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 7:43
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson,
Taylor and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
Greetings in the
Matchless Name of YahShua
!
Taylor is held in high regard by the
Canucks, and would seem to be the resident trinitarian scholar as well, so I
thought to include you. Thought the story might be of interest or a
note of amusement to you.
My apology if you were
offended.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 07/23/2004 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson,
Taylor and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
Thanks Chris, tell us though: What does
Taylor have to do with the Canucks. Taylor is from the high plains of
eastern Colorado. He once worked one very cold winter in the taconite
mines of Northern Minnesota, replacing burned out bricks in very hot
furnaces and wind ducts, and so he knew a few Canucks, but that is
his only immediate connection with the bunch -- oh and the Avalanche were
once Canadians but not Canucks. So, tell him, sir, what's the
connection?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 9:07
PM
Subject: [TruthTalk] Smithson,
Taylor and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
Greetings in the
Matchless Name of YahShua
!
I have never been
much of one for listening to preaching tapes. The exceptions to
that have been Robert Bayer (sometimes called "the Walking Bible" for
his command of Scripture all committed to memory) and John
Ekstadt. Bayer I have seen many times, and spent some considerable
personal time with as well. John Ekstadt I never
met.
John Ekstadt was a
peculiar treasure of The Almighty.
Smithson may have
some particular appreciation for him. Ekstadt became a UPC
preacher that UPC preachers often loathed as he taught with Scriptural
authority against their pet rapture doctrine as well as many other pat
pet pablum standard fare of UPC.
However, he was not
always a UPC preacher.
Upon his death
several UPC ministers reportedly were heard chuckling as another said in
a mocking tone, "Well, the old prophet is dead."
Eckstadt was a
Canuck from eastern Canada (Nova Scotia if memory serves). He was
an unruly terror as a boy and as a young man -- full of
fight. He came by it natural as his father was the
same.
Eckstadt began to go
to a Baptist church which his father tolerated though with much
mocking. He also was warned not to go too far with religion and
especially to stay away from the holy rollers.
Making a long story
short he was baptized in The Holy Spirit with the Assemblies of God but
kept it from his father. One day his father came home quite early
from work very unexpectedly to come upon his son in the loft praying in
tongues.
"That's IT", his
father exclaimed and threw all his belongings out the upstairs window
crying out, "Praise The Lord and pass the ammunition"!
Ecstadt became a
preacher for the AG. He was a terror to the UPC, as he preached
against Oneness and baptism in The Name with such fervor and authority
that he converted many away from UPC to the AG.
Then as with The
Apostle Paul the bright Light of the World shined down. The Word
revealed Himself to Eckstadt, he was baptized in The Name, and
preached with the result that even more were converted to Oneness
than he ever had converted to the trinity.
On one tape set he
preached the trinity in such a convincing manner that he warned Oneness
listeners as he began that they should not listen unless they would
immediately follow it with the next tape that gave answer with Oneness,
for fear that their faith would be shaken.
UPC tolerated him
due to the strength of The Anointing upon him and his command of
Scripture though they did not herald him much in their ranks. I
have found it so with UPC that the grandest of their preachers as far as
anointing and command of Scripture are not heralded, while those they
herald I have found to generally be as Bill Shakespeare wrote, "Much Ado
About" not all that much.
I have found UPC to
stand most accurately for Union of Pentpolitical
Churches.
|
