Re: [TruthTalk] Take I Cor 3:1ff and put that in perspective

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:23:52 -0800

Why do you have to post for JD?
 
The question is not the problem.
I have posted at least 10 times asking JD to post his summary of my belief that he has a problem with.
JD does not clearly understand what I am saying
 I believe JD just has to have this theology of carnal believers for personal reasons.
 
I do not think JD has any clue else he could easily type a one sentence summary, of what he is arguing against (as in my belief)
Since he does not know what that may be, he has not posted such.
 
At this point I am pretty tired of the game & have no desire to chase my tail to argue a straw man errected by JD
 
 
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kevin, I think I understand John's question, so I am going to try and rephrase it and hope you will answer it.
 
It seems to me that John thinks you do not allow for baby Christians who might be considered carnal.  In other words, if a Christian is found to be weak and a little dense spiritually, do you kick them out, or do you change the way you talk to them, condescending to their lower estate, and speaking in a way that can be received by them?
 
David Miller
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Take I Cor 3:1ff and put that in perspective

Your position will be clear after you answer the question.  Fit the verse into your theology, Kevein  --   whatever that will be after you perform the requested function.  The "trap" is already sprung,  Kev.   The fact is  -  you cannot answer this question.   Case closed.  End of "discussion"  [apparently.]   Thanks for your time. 
 
jd
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Please give a summary of my position for all of TT to read
Simple request for the (LOST COUNT see the thread below) time.
I am not going to argue against things to which you misrepresent & I do not hold
This is why the answer is not forth coming.

The reason why your answer is not forthcoming is because you can not with out tipping your stacked hand simply state my position in a sentence or two.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Take I Cor 3:1ff and put that in perspective with your expressed theology on sin and continuing with those who are carnal.   You know the question and we all know of your theology on the matters cited above.   But no one knows how you fit I Cor 3:1ff into a present time theology.  So,   is it a secret?     Be responsible for your beliefs and put it out there.    jd  - previously posted
 
Kevin  --  I missed your answer to this.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.   It is not in the archives.  Hmmmm. 
 
jd
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
STILL WAITING
Good thing I do not hold my breath.......

Stop playing you switch a roo game.
Stop with the straw men

Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Take I Cor 3:1ff and put that in perspective with your expressed theology on sin and continuing with those who are carnal. 
 
The reason you can not make a simple statement of my belief that you are arguing against is because you misrepresent me AND you don't have a clue just what my REAL beliefs are.
 


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Take I Cor 3:1ff and put that in perspective with your expressed theology on sin and continuing with those who are carnal.   You know the question and we all know of your theology on the matters cited above.   But no one knows how you fit I Cor 3:1ff into a present time theology.  So,   is it a secret?     Be responsible for your beliefs and put it out there. 
 
jd
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Go ahead a short little one sentence, a restatement of what my belief is on this matter . As you see it.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I already did this  --  in a post to David Miller.  Just this afternoon, sometime. 
I think David believes you can answer the question  --  I do not.  Prove me wrong.  I would have no problem with that. 
 
 
jd
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why don't you restate my theology JD
Then we can go from there.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Undersanding that such language allows for the believer to be alive in Christ while growing out of his/her carnality  --  yes.,  I do not beleive Kevin can say this.  Again  --   I am simply asking how this verse fits into his theology without throwing it out with the bath water.  To date, it does not appear that he can. 
 
jd
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Interesting take here, JD. It appears that you think Kevin would never say
> to the brethren with whom he is in fellowship, "I, brethren, could not speak
> unto you as spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ."
> Is that really what you think?
>
> I'm not reading this in Kevin. I guess I need to go back and review some of
> his posts. Better yet, Kevin, can you inform us about this. Have you ever
> told fellow believers that they were so carnal that you had to go over the
> a, b, c's? I suspect you have found yourself in this position quite often.
>
> David Miller
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: Mo nday, M arch 13, 2006 5:29 PM
> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is a Mormon a Christian?
>
> Two things: First, if you reference David's comments - I happen to agree
> with David.
>
> Secondly -- I think a theology that cancels out such scriptures as I Cor
> 3:1ff is a theology from the Accuser. Such thinking mocks the written word
> and renders the application of scripture to be left to the whim of the
> competing disciples. Perhaps this cannot be avoided - but such thinking
> demands that outcome.
>
> My theology, a biblically based thinking, allows me the freedom to speak
> the very words written in I Cor 3:1 -- those who disagree relegate this
> passage to history and give it no modern day application. Sad.
>
> jd
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "ShieldsFamily"
>
> > I'd like to hear jd's response to this post. He keeps acting like h is one
& gt; > little loophole verse not only contradicts, but overrules, the entire rest
> > of the Bible. iz
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Miller
> > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 12:22 PM
> > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is a Mormon a Christian?
> >
> > Kevin wrote:
> > > Do you see Jesus & Paul using your
> > > Dictionary definition of Christian?
> >
> > Jesus never used the term Christian and never even heard the term
> > "Christian." Paul was known as a Nazarene (Acts 24:5) and he offers us no
> > definition for the word Chris tian. I see the word as refering to those
> > who
> > profess to follow the teaching of Christ. People can argue about whether
> > others actually do f ollow Chris t or n ot, but that seems to me to be
> > another
> > debate. When more than 80% of people in the United States identify
> > themselves as being a Christian, it seems to me that it would not be very
> > productive to spend our time trying to argue with them that they are not
> > really Christian at all. Does being a Christian save anybody? No. Faith
> > in the person of Jesus Christ is what saves. I think that gets lost when
> > we
> >
> > focus too much on the sect of Christianity and its rightful definition.
> >
> > Do you think that there is something holy or special about the word
> > "Christian" for the Bible believer?
> >
> > As for Anti-Christs being Christian, well, of course that will be the
> > case.
> > Judas Iscariot was a Nazarene and look how he turned out. Should we expect
> > Christianity to be pure and void of any Judas Iscariots? I don 't think so .
&g t; >
> > David Miller
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kevin Deegan
> > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 3:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is a Mormon a Christian?
> >
> >
> > Do you see Jesus & Paul using your Dictionary definition of Christian?
> >
> > Under this definition then, a decieved one who follows ANTI Christ is
> > truly
> > a Christian!
> >
> > 1) He truly Believes he is worshipping Jesus Christ
> > 2) He truly believes the one he is following was sent by God
> > 3) He follows his teachings and example
> >
> > But in reality he is a hell bound sinner.
> > Help me contextualize, this apparent contradiction
> >
> > David Miller wrote:
> > Judy wrote:
> > > What reason would a nyon e on TT have
> > ; > to assume that a lifelong Mormon is also
> > > a Chr istian?
> >
> > Following is how my dictionary defines a Christian:
> >
> > Chris.tian
> > noun (plural Chris.tians)
> > 1. believer in Jesus Christ as savior: somebody who believes that Jesus
> > Christ was sent to the world by God to save humanity, and who tries to
> > follow his teachings and example
> >
> > If we accept the secular definition of believer as somebody who believes
> > in
> > the teachings of a particular religious faith, then from my perspective ,
> > Mormonism falls into this category of Christian. This does not mean that
> > they have the right belief system, or that any of them will be saved. It
> > simply places them in the Christian category, as a religious sect that is
> > centered on the idea that Jesus Christ is the Savior sent by God to save > ; > human i ty. There are false sects within Christianity, and I think the
> > Mormon
> > sects are among them.
> >
> > David Miller.
>
> ----------
> "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.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

 
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

 
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Reply via email to