cd: Judy is what Bill say in the below true-do you view Christ as being made of a special kindof flesh?
- Original Message -
From: Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/18/2006 10:25:23 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Jesus , neither God nor Man
Certainly I think Jesus was
cd: Think you just answered my question Judy. I don't see Jesus in the fallen state either-If so whom could He believe in for salvation-himself-who was fallen? I do however disagree with the statement of "Ours is fallen."More like "Ours was fallen" whichI think you meant to say so no problem.
No I most certainly don't Dean; those are Bill's words
and Bill's concepts. Not mine. What I believe is that
he was not born by procreation like
the rest of us since he had no human father. Mary may
have
contributed an ovum butthe male determines
achild's gender and his spiritual
- Original Message -
From:
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/18/2006 11:39:15 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] TT's ??
Dean writes:
cd: The word tempted also means to test or try/prove-when used by God it is to test-when used by Satan is it an
- Original Message -
From: Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: 1/18/2006 11:08:50 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Jesus , neither God nor Man
Hebrews 2.11-18.
(11) For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed
'I read this to be saying'!! May we put that other
matter to bed once and for all, DM/JT?
- Original Message -
From:
Dean
Moore
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19, 2006 08:42
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Jesus , neither
God nor Man
'Once you've thrown away language you've thrown
away a world.'
cd: To help us understand each other better: What part do you not agree with the below written by Darby. By the way I just found this.
Heb 2:1-18 -
This is the reason why it is so much the more needful to hearken t the word spoken, in order that they should not let it pass away form life
Jesus is neither unambiguously human with our
humanity nor unambiguously God with God's divinity. This would make Jesus some
'third thing'. (Arianism)
Sometimes you will hear people say 'Jesus is human
all right but, he's more than human. That which is more than human isn't human.
That
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:36:45 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I
know nothing about special kinds of flesh; I do know of two different kinds of
nature though, one fallen and the other
holy and pure. Ours is fallen. Jesus' was not. His was pure
and holy from birth. This
Help me out Judy. Are you meaning to say that if
Jesus is wholly human and wholly divine simultaneously then, he is a Mormon
Jesus?
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19, 2006
Isn't this a form of what the Mormon Church teaches
Lance?
Theirs is a flesh religion and theyhave
noproblems with purity and holiness
Same with the so called "Church fathers" or patriarchs
who came up with the pronouncements
this generation mindlessly parrots. By the time
they began
Then he's a Mormon Jesus ... who has a problem with
that??
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:19:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jesus is neither unambiguously human with our
humanity nor unambiguously God with God's divinity. This would make Jesus some
'third thing'. (Arianism)
NO!
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19, 2006 10:09
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Something to
think about
Isn't this a form of what the Mormon Church teaches
Lance?
They do, their stance is that man is progressing toward
godhood as they do what the church says and
that basically God is a man from the planet
Kolob. Where in the Bible are we told that
JESUS IS WHOLLY GOD AND WHOLLY HUMAN
SIMULTANEOUSLY.
This is a human construct; the scriptures
Yes. And, sometimes I think that we go too far in talking about the THREE in One. From our very limited perspective, there are three !! BUT, they are so presented in the biblical account, are they?
I think Bill's discussion of Christ being both YHWH and Messiah is brilliant (mostly because I
I assure you (perhaps a Mormon could intervene on
Judy's behalf) that the statement in caps is NOT the Mormon position. It is, in
reality, the position held by believing Christians for some 2,000
years.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To:
Being wholly human and god ATST is a Mormon
construct.
Whereas it would be against the God of the Bible's ways
to be "fallen" and wholly God ATST
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:43:13 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assure you (perhaps a Mormon could intervene on
Judy's behalf)
The God of the earth, the Mormon God of this earth, is some guy who made it on another planet and was given this planet as a reward! Where, in all that, Judy, do you see even a similarity between that view and the one that declares Christ to be both YHWH and Messian ??? If you truly believe
No !! As man is, God once was. As God is, man shall become. There is no claim for Christ to be YHWH ( the God of all things) and MESSIAH and MAN at the same time in the Mormon doctrine of God.
jd
-- Original message -- From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Being wholly
I'm speaking of one aspect ONLY JD and that is the
"exactly like us" part.
This tells me that those who make and profess such
doctrines have no understanding or
spiritual discernment and do not walk in the fear of
God..
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:45:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The
OK -- so why not say it that way? When you say "Then he's a Mormon Jesus - who has a problem with that?" you are not speaking of a single aspect of the Mormon Jesus. You are equating Lance's teaching with Mormonism AND THE ASSOCIATED BIAS THAT EXISTS ON THIS FORUM. You are simply trying to win
Excellent point JD
And we should do the exact same thing with God's Words
- that is, let Him be God and refrain from adding
our meaning to His Word, or subtracting His meaning
from His Word as has been done in the past and is
ongoing today. His Word says that He hates
mixture. His Word says
I say again, Judy, NOT IT IS NOT!! It is, in
REALITY, a thoroughly Christian construct.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19, 2006 11:45
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Something to
And you are the only one who beleives what you believe.
Why not deal, specifically with Bill's most recent presentation. But you don't.
The fact remains that you do not allow for the Bible to simply says what it says.
"Flesh" does not mean what everyone else thinks it means. There is an
My but it does become difficult at times, Judy,
believing that you don't know what you're doing when you write like
this.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19, 2006 12:31
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Something to
You add your meaning to God's Word, Judy, 'almost'
(I included this so as not to be identified by David as a blasphemer) every time
you cite Scripture. How is that everyone on TT knows this while you do
not?
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To:
Why would I not be aware of what I am writing
Lance? I believe it to be scriptural - If God was concerned
enough about sin to curse his creation at the start
then why would he send a Redeemer who is under the
curse to take care of things? Does not even make
common sense.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006
So Lance IYO every time I cite Scripture it is in
error?
One of us is wrong and sadly we will have to wait until
we are deceased to find out which one it is.
I see yor doctrine as no different than the doctrine of
Balaam which is in effect that ppl will make it with or without
sin.
There is
I can't help myself Judy! When I re-read our
correspondence, I invariably think of George Burns Gracie Allen so, 'say
goodnight Gracie'.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: January 19,
Judy wrote:
If God was concerned enough about sin to curse
his creation at the start then why would he send
a Redeemer who is under the curse to take care
of things? Does not even make common sense.
1 Corinthians 1:18-19
(18) For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness;
In a message dated 1/19/2006 8:13:01 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't this a form of what the Mormon Church teaches
Lance?
Theirs is a flesh religion and
theyhave noproblems with purity and holiness
Same with the so called "Church fathers" or
Yes I probably am Blaine. Sorry about that
and forgive me please.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:36:41 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 1/19/2006 8:13:01 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't this a form of what the Mormon Church teaches
In a message dated 1/19/2006 8:34:35 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They do, their stance is that man is progressing
toward godhood as they do what the church says and
that basically God is a man from the planet
Kolob. Where in the Bible are we told
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
Bill says that the incarnate Christ was holy because He was God on earth.
Judy says He was not God on earth and His holiness came from the fact that He had no earthly faither. Apparently her "generational curse" theoryteaches that this curse is continued only through the father.
She ignores
36 matches
Mail list logo
