Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
Originality Lance?? Here is a word to the wise "There is nothing new under the sun" so forget it. along with "buddying up with the Mormons" as you call it. I've got nothing against Mormon ppl and I'm sure Dean hasn't either since he lays down his life to speak truth to them in the public forum. As to your claim thathe is out of his league theologically - would that all of us would be out of league with him. Knowing God and walking in His Word is much more important - Duh!! On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:34:36 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Originality not being your strong suit Dean, you are to be commended on parroting Judy's perpetual jibe. As neither of you knows whereof you speak, we'll just smile in response. Of all things that I'd not anticipated from you, JT DM was 'buddying up' with the Mormons. You may just be out of your league as Moderator. You are out of your league theologically. Mayhap a call to DM would prove helpful prior entering the ring on this one again. You will need much more than Webster's dictionary, I'm afraid. - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 11:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/8/2006 10:56:08 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) FWIW Bill, I'd suggest that we leave Dean, DM, JT and perhaps even DH, to Amen one another on this issue.You are correct that they are flirting with a position remarkably close to the Mormons. One can 'hear' the level of certitude being expressed. cd: Well .Lance that could leave you time to work on you language-what is it called again? Dancing English? A language that changesmeaning when you want it to-which will go well with your Dancing bible and your Dancing gospel. - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 10:10 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/7/2006 10:15:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) cd: Is Jesus male or female John/Lance/Bill-If he is God as you say what is he? Jesus is a man, Dean, and he is God -- two natures in one person. Please stop confusing the two. You createGod in Adam's image, and Judy calls us earthly minded: what a joke! Have you considered how close you are getting to a doctrinewhich claims thatGod the Father came down and had physical-sexual intercoursewith Mary? You do claim he is male, don't you? That's like saying, since he has the equipment, why didn't he use it? This is ridiculous. "Male" is a physical/biological term. "Father" is a relational term, the same with "Son." You don't have to confuse the two.Yes, sometimes these terms coincide, but theyare not requited to. Please, brother,stop with the accusations and smears (what has gotten into you?!), and just consider for a moment what you are suggesting: that God, being Spirit, has to have male attributes, over againstfemale or a mixture of both -- as if he musthave something between his legsor he can't be God. My gosh, people, he is Spirit; he is neither male, nor female --nor both. Stop with the foolishness. Bill cd: I realize you guys will not accept the Webster definition for the meaning of English words- as the rest of the world does-and have developed a whole new languagebut that is what I am using. To have a masculine quality is to be a male. God doesn't have a sexual organ as one is not needed in heaven as He can createhumans from rocks or bones and still be the provider for the family as is the Father of a family. Thank you for the using words like silly-foolish and such like as you are only verifying my position in Jesus Christand building my future:-) Notice # 4 if you are able-in the English language one can be male without the organ.Hence a masculine spirit is a male spirit-What are you not getting Bill-is all that dancing around making you tired? Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas.] 1. Having the qualities of a man;
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. .. you'll reco g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. First this passage says that God created man in his image- then it goes on to say He created both males and females.I see no contradictions to me statements here-unless one believe there is no difference between males and females. He is the mescaline. I realize you cannot understand this but maybe others can John.The below says that man wa s cre ated in the image of God ,"BUT" women was is the glory of man. Clearly a difference is shown. 1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. cd: As you didn't receive this the first time-I am resending it-God has a masculine nature.Jesus had a masculine nature and a masculine body. Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas.] 1. Having the qualities of a man; strong; robust; as a masculine body. 2. Resembling man; coarse; opposed to delicate or soft; as masculine features. 3. Bold; brave; as a masculine spirit or courage.
Re: [TruthTalk] Is the list owner impervious to sanctions when baseless charges are levelled by him?
Another mentor by the name of Phil Spector Lance? Mentally insane and charged with murder and you quote his lyrics. And then you expect DM to take your over the top observations seriously??? If this ain't court Lance then why are you so busy on behalf of the "accuser?" You may not always agree with DM - but thickheaded?? Let's get real. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 06:30:55 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I see it DM owes DH a profound apology for his interminable dragging out of a most minor issue.THAT, David Miller, is the cranial denseness to which I made reference during our recent exchange.You are 'The very model of a modern major-general'. Gilbert Sullivan were describing you prior to your birth. Further DM, please spare us the tired old arguments re: that which you actually mean by 'perfection'. Phil Spector, in his song performed by the Teddy Bears alluded to DM in his lyrics 'To know, know, know him is to love, love, love him.'. So then DM, if it is simply affirmation or, as Denny Crane would say 'hug?' then, we collectively affirm and hug you. OK! shall we move on. This ain't court, DM!!
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/7/2006 10:15:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) cd: Is Jesus male or female John/Lance/Bill-If he is God as you say what is he? Jesus is a man, Dean, and he is God -- two natures in one person. Please stop confusing the two. You createGod in Adam's image, and Judy calls us earthly minded: what a joke! Have you considered how close you are getting to a doctrinewhich claims thatGod the Father came down and had physical-sexual intercoursewith Mary? You do claim he is male, don't you? That's like saying, since he has the equipment, why didn't he use it? This is ridiculous. "Male" is a physical/biological term. "Father" is a relational term, the same with "Son." You don't have to confuse the two.Yes, sometimes these terms coincide, but theyare not requited to. Please,
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
What makes the difference JD? Your opinion? Worldly systems? Great works? "Surely men of low degree are a vapor - men of high degree are a lie; if they are weighed on the scales they are altogether lighter than vapor" (Ps 62:9) "So be not highminded but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God on those who fell severity; but toward you, goodness, IF YOU CONTINUE in His goodness. Otherwise you will also be cut off" (Romans 11:20-22) Signed: God the great equalizer On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 05:00:03 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I know that DH can more than hold his own with Dean, but allow me. I Pet 1:17 addresses the impartiality of God, not the equality of man.jd From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory.Dean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
- Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/8/2006 11:23:08 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory. cd: All man are born egual-God has no respects of persons-God does not put one man above another-God will save all that come to Christ-works for me DavHDean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
cd: Great point Judy. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. ... you'll rec o g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. First this passage says that God created man in his image- then it goes on to say He created both males and females.I see no contradictions to me statements here-unless one believe there is no difference between males and females. He is the mescaline. I realize you cannot understand this but maybe others can John..The below says that man wa s cre ated in the image of God ,"BUT" women was is the glory of man. Clearly a difference is shown. 1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. cd: As you didn't receive this the first time-I am resending it-God has a masculine nature.Jesus had a masculine nature and a masculine body. Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas.] 1. Having the qualities of a man; strong; robust; as a masculine body. 2. Resembling man; coarse; opposed to delicate or soft; as masculine features. 3. Bold; brave; as a masculine spirit or courage. 4. In grammar,the masculine gender of words is that which expresses a male, or something analogous to it; or it is the gender appropriated to males, though not always expressing the male sex. -- Original message - - BR ; From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cd: Here is another Bibical spirit that is a male? 1Sa 28:8 And Saul disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they came to the woman by
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
What does pistis mean? -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. ... you'll rec o g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. First this passage says that God created man in his image- then it goes on to say He created both males and females.I see no contradictions to me statements here-unless one believe there is no difference between males and females. He is the mescaline. I realize you cannot understand this but maybe others can John..The below says that man wa s cre ated in the image of God ,"BUT" women was is the glory of man. Clearly a difference is shown. 1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. cd: As you didn't receive this the first time-I am resending it-God has a masculine nature.Jesus had a masculine nature and a masculine body. Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas.] 1. Having the qualities of a man; strong; robust; as a masculine body. 2. Resembling man; coarse; opposed to delicate or soft; as masculine features. 3. Bold; brave; as a masculine spirit or courage. 4. In grammar,the masculine gender of words is that which expresses a male, or something analogous to it; or it is the gender appropriated to males, though not always expressing the male sex. -- Original message - - BR ; From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cd: Here is another Bibical spirit that is a male? 1Sa 28:8 And Saul disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night: and he said, I pray thee, divine unto me by the familiar
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. you'll re c o g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. First this passage says that God created man in his image- then it goes on to say He created both males and females.I see no contradictions to me statements here-unless one believe there is no difference between males and females. He is the mescaline. I realize you cannot understand this but maybe others can John..The below says that m an wa s cre ated in the image of God ,"BUT" women was is the glory of man. Clearly a difference is shown. 1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. cd: As you didn't receive this the first time-I am resending it-God has a masculine nature.Jesus had a masculine nature and a masculine body. Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas..] 1. Having the qualities of a man; strong; robust; as a masculine body. 2. Resembling man; coarse; opposed to delicate or soft; as masculine features. 3. Bold; brave; as a masculine spirit or courage. 4. In grammar,the masculine gender of words is that which expresses a male, or something analogous to it; or it is the gender appropriated to males, though not always expressing the male sex.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 12:00:04 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation I know that DH can more than hold his own with Dean, but allow me. I Pet 1:17 addresses the impartiality of God, not the equality of man. jd cd: I can agree with this John-I think DavH is more intelligent than I am but that isn't the only factor in our debates. Truth is. God's work cannot be broken if presented correctly so the playing field isn't levelas the struggle continues. But while we are on the subject-I have met many smart pastors in my life who I highly respected-but one pastor sticks out as the dumbest human being I have every ran across in that life-who should not be behind a pulpit-but due to rules of gossip as set forth by the Bible I am refrained from giving his identify. -- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory.Dean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
cd:clever:-) - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 1:05:43 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) DAVEH: Since I posted that, I rather regret my haste in doing so. Since then, I've been browsing a bit and should have noticed the next verse...[27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.the own is italicized, indicating it has been added for clarification. Therefore your original quote...in his image...may accurately reflect the message. I understand your beliefs regarding the absence of a female creator. From my LDS perspective though, it is not a possibility most LDS folks would deny.Taylor wrote: Do any of the translations use that phrase, Bill? As to your question, DaveH, good point:not that I know of. As for the rest of your post, I do not believe in any female God(desse)s, creators or not. I do believe, however, that the plural"our" can only strengthen my case. God's blessings to ya, dude. Bill in his imageDAVEH: Do any of the translations use that phrase, Bill? Here's something to consider. The KJV phrase is...in our imagewhich is plural. I realize you inferred the Triune nature of the Godhead the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit, when defining God in your below comments. However, IF deity does indeed exhibit gender, is it not possible the our refers to one of the creators who might be of the feminine gender?Taylor wrote: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
To argue that God's grace applies to all is not the same thing as saying that all "were born equal." Perhaps the difference betweenthe two of you, on this point, is due to an equality from birth !! Dean cannot give you a scripture for obvious reasons. jd -- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] DAVEH: Thank you for interjecting that, John. I agree with your understanding of vs 17. I'm not trying to battle Dean over this, but rather am interested in why he believes such. I've heard the born equal theory all my life, and can't quite figure out why people attribute it to God. I was hoping Dean (or you or any other TTers) could give me some evidence from the Bible that implies such. So far, I haven't seen it. Do you know of any, or are some folks just confusing the Constitution with the Bible?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that DH can more than hold his own with Dean, but allow me. I Pet 1:17 addresses the impartiality of God, not the equality of man. jd -- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory.Dean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
- Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 12:37:58 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation DAVEH: Thank you for interjecting that, John. I agree with your understanding of vs 17. I'm not trying to battle Dean over this, but rather am interested in why he believes such. I've heard the born equal theory all my life, and can't quite figure out why people attribute it to God. I was hoping Dean (or you or any other TTers) could give me some evidence from the Bible that implies such. So far, I haven't seen it. Do you know of any, or are some folks just confusing the Constitution with the Bible?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that DH can more than hold his own with Dean, but allow me. I Pet 1:17 addresses the impartiality of God, not the equality of man. jd cd: If God is impartial wouldn't that make all men equal, Pastor-In who,s eyes should one be equal DavH if not God in his impartiality.Or do we use man standards for the scale of equality? Think about it. -- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory.Dean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] fyi~g
a great paragraph of thought, for a number of reasons. The very last thought expressed, is a good example. One simply cannot understand the Christ without understanding Israel. jd -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "By identifying YHWH as both the creator of the cosmos and the redeemer of Israel they safeguarded all their three basic doctrines: monotheism, election and eschatology. One God, one people of God, one future for Israel and the whole world. And Paul has now written a poem in exactly this vein; but the central character is not YHWH, but Jesus. Or rather, as I think we must say, the central character is YHWH now recognized in the human face of JesusPaul has gone beyond Jewish speculation, but he is not speculating. He is drawing conclusions from the death and resurrection of the Messiah...there is no tension, for him, between Jesus being the totally human Messiah, the representative of Israel, and the one who is sent as it were from God's side, to do and be what only God can do and be. Paul, in short, seems to have held what generations of exegetes have imagined to be an impossibility; a thoroughly incarnational theology, grounded in a thoroughly Jewish worldv iew." --N. T. Wright on 1 Corinthians 8:1-6, Phillipians 2:5-11 and Colossians 1:15-20
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/7/2006 10:15:34 PM Subject: Re:
Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation
No. And I thought you said that all men were BORN equal. And I Pet 1:17 is still talking about the impartiality of God not the equality of man. - Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 12:37:58 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Interesting observation DAVEH: Thank you for interjecting that, John. I agree with your understanding of vs 17. I'm not trying to battle Dean over this, but rather am interested in why he believes such. I've heard the born equal theory all my life, and can't quite figure out why people attribute it to God. I was hoping Dean (or you or any other TTers) could give me some evidence from the Bible that implies such. So far, I haven't seen it. Do you know of any, or are some folks just confusing the Constitution with the Bible?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that DH can more than hold his own with Dean, but allow me. I Pet 1:17 addresses the impartiality of God, not the equality of man. jd cd: If God is impartial wouldn't that make all men equal, Pastor-In who,s eyes should one be equal DavH if not God in his impartiality.Or do we use man standards for the scale of equality? Think about it. -- Original message -- From: Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17DAVEH: If that's your best Biblical answer to my question Dean, I suspect you did not understand the question.or, perhaps the Bible does not have a pertinent passage that supports your theory.Dean Moore wrote: all men are born equal.DAVEH: Is that just your personal theory, Deanor do you have scriptural evidence to support your belief? cd:Here is a clearer verse DavH: 1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Dean Moore wrote: cd; To stay in perversion John will change the chemistry of the body in time but all men are born equal.Naive? I wish I had remained so on some things sir. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. you'll re c o g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
I saw the denial in the last paragraph but then you go into all this relational business about communion with creation and perichoresis between the trinity etc. which, so far as I am concerned is nothing but 3rd or 4th century speculation. How can "fallen man" understand God? We know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Word and if a "dancing god" were valid, he would have been validated to more than one generation independently. judyt On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:47:33 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
cd: Thanks Judy-I do care about the Mormon that is why I fight so hard against what I know to be wrong within that belief-but I have been noticing a change towards the Bible with them in a positive light-I also get a lot of nod of agreement when I preach in front of the Temple from the Mormons. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:01 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Originality Lance?? Here is a word to the wise "There is nothing new under the sun" so forget it. along with "buddying up with the Mormons" as you call it. I've got nothing against Mormon ppl and I'm sure Dean hasn't either since he lays down his life to speak truth to them in the public forum. As to your claim thathe is out of his league theologically - would that all of us would be out of league with him. Knowing God and walking in His Word is much more important - Duh!! On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:34:36 -0500 "Lance Muir" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Originality not being your strong suit Dean, you are to be commended on parroting Judy's perpetual jibe. As neither of you knows whereof you speak, we'll just smile in response. Of all things that I'd not anticipated from you, JT DM was 'buddying up' with the Mormons. You may just be out of your league as Moderator. You are out of your league theologically. Mayhap a call to DM would prove helpful prior entering the ring on this one again. You will need much more than Webster's dictionary, I'm afraid. - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 11:14 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/8/2006 10:56:08 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) FWIW Bill, I'd suggest that we leave Dean, DM, JT and perhaps even DH, to Amen one another on this issue.You are correct that they are flirting with a position remarkably close to the Mormons. One can 'hear' the level of certitude being expressed. cd: Well .Lance that could leave you time to work on you language-what is it called again? Dancing English? A language that changesmeaning when you want it to-which will go well with your Dancing bible and your Dancing gospel. - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: February 08, 2006 10:10 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/7/2006 10:15:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) cd: Is Jesus male or female John/Lance/Bill-If he is God as you say what is he? Jesus is a man, Dean, and he is God -- two natures in one person. Please stop confusing the two. You createGod in Adam's image, and Judy calls us earthly minded: what a joke! Have you considered how close you are getting to a doctrinewhich claims thatGod the Father came down and had physical-sexual intercoursewith Mary? You do claim he is male, don't you? That's like saying, since he has the equipment, why didn't he use it? This is ridiculous. "Male" is a physical/biological term. "Father" is a relational term, the same with "Son." You don't have to confuse the two.Yes, sometimes these terms coincide, but theyare not requited to. Please, brother,stop with the accusations and smears (what has gotten into you?!), and just consider for a moment what you are suggesting: that God, being Spirit, has to have male attributes, over againstfemale or a mixture of both -- as if he musthave something between his legsor he can't be God. My gosh, people, he is Spirit; he is neither male, nor female --nor both. Stop with the foolishness. Bill cd: I realize you guys will not accept the Webster definition for the meaning of English words- as the rest of the world does-and have developed a whole new languagebut that is what I am using. To have a masculine quality is to be a male. God doesn't have a sexual organ as one is not needed in heaven as He can createhumans from rocks or bones and still be the provider for the family as is the Father of a family. Thank you for the using words like silly-foolish and such like as you are only verifying my position in Jesus Christand building my future:-) Notice # 4 if you are able-in the English language one can be male without the organ.Hence a masculine spirit is a male spirit-What are you not getting Bill-is all that dancing around making you tired? Masculine M`ASCULINE, a. [L. masculinus, from masculus, mas.] 1. Having the qualities of a man; strong; robust; as a masculine body. 2. Resembling man; coarse; opposed to delicate or soft; as masculine features. 3. Bold; brave; as a masculine spirit or courage. 4. In grammar,the masculine gender of words is that which expresses a male, or something analogous to it; or it is the gender appropriated to males, though not always expressing the male sex.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
cd: What you wrote below is no doubt true ( with the exception of Kant who was a God hater and as such was limited to the base things of the world)-but yet we are told to "...be ye Holyfor I am Holy". This therefore remains to be done.I believe that as one grows into God's light there is a continued understanding of what holiness isin an ever deeperdefining of that understanding which gives one power "to be ye holy" to even a deeper understand.Understand?:-) Below is written by a Catholic Matthew Henry whom I am in agreement with.-It is good reading-be he can get rather involved. 1Pe 1:13-23 - Here the apostle begins his exhortations to those whose glorious state he had before described, thereby instructing us that Christianity is a doctrine according to godliness, designed to make us not only wiser, but better. I. He exhorts them to sobriety and holiness. 1. Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, etc., 1Pe_1:13. As if he had said, "Wherefore, since you are so honoured and distinguished, as above, Gird up the loins of your mind. You have a journey to go, a race to run, a warfare to accomplish, and a great work to do; as the traveller, the racer, the warrior, and the labourer, gather in, and gird up, their long and loose garments, that they may be more ready, prompt, and expeditious in their business, so do you by your minds, your inner man, and affections seated there: gird them, gather them in, let them not hang loose and neglected about you; restrain their extravagances, and let the loins or strength and vigour of your minds be exerted in your duty; disengage yourselves from all that would hinder you, and go on resolutely in your obedience. Be sober, be vigilant against all your spiritual dangers and enemies, and be temperate and modest in eating, drinking, apparel, recreation, bus iness, and in the whole of your behaviour. Be sober-mined also in opinion, as well as in practice, and humble in your judgment of yourselves." And hope to the end, for the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. Some refer this to the last judgment, as if the apostle directed their hope to the final revelation of Jesus Christ; but it seems more natural to take it, as it might be rendered, "Hope perfectly, or thoroughly, for the grace that is brought to you in or by the revelation of Jesus Christ; that is, by the gospel, which brings life and immortality to light. Hope perfectly, trust without doubting to that grace which is now offered to you by the gospel." Learn, (1.) The main work of a Christian lies in the right management of his heart and mind; the apostle's first direction is to gird up the loins of the mind. (2.) The best Christians have need to be exhorted to sobriety. These excellent Christians are put in mind of it; it is required of a bishop (1Ti_3:2), of aged men (Tit_2:2), the young women are to be taught it, and the young men are directed to be sober-minded, Tit_2:4, Tit_2:6. (3.) A Christian's work is not over as soon as he has got into a state of grace; he must still hope and strive for more grace. When he has entered the strait gate, he must still walk in the narrow way, and gird up the loins of his mind for that purpose. (4.) A strong and perfect trust in God's grace is very consistent with our best endeavours in our duty; we must hope perfectly, and yet gird up our loins, and address ourselves vigorously to the work we have to do, encouraging ourselves from the grace of Jesus Christ. 2. As obedient children, etc., 1Pe_1:14. These words may be taken as a rule of holy living, which is both positive - "You ought to live as obedient children, as those whom God hath adopted into his family, and regenerated by his grace;" and negative - "You must not fashion yourselves according to the former lusts, in your ignorance." Or the words may be taken as an argument to press them to holiness from the consideration of what they now are, children of obedience, and what they were when they lived in lust and ignorance. Learn, (1.) The children of God ought to prove themselves to be such by their obedience to God, by their present, constant, universal obedience. (2.) The best of God's children have had their times of lust and ignorance; the time has been when the whole scheme of their lives, their way and fashion, was to accommodate and gratify their unlawful desires and vicious appetites, being grossly ignorant of God and themselves, of Christ and the gospel. (3.) Persons, when converted, differ exceedingly from what they were formerly. They are people of another fashion and manner from what they were before; their inward frame, behaviour, speech, and conversation, are much altered from what they were in times past. (4.) The lusts and extravagances of sinners are both the fruits and the signs of their ignorance. 3. But as he who hath called you, etc., 1Pe_1:15, 1Pe_1:16. Here is a noble rule enforced by strong arguments: Be you holy in all manner of conversation. Who is sufficient for
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
- Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 12:06:40 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? cd: That is the very reason I am here Bill-if my propositions fall then they are not of God andI learn. Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. cd: Actually other supporting verses do come in handy for this conclusion.But yes this can stand alone without support. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. cd: To cry is also a male action-is it not?God is comparing His dept of pain to the severity of a women's pain inchildbirth- He is not saying that this pain is only a female quality.If I stabbed myself with a knife in the stomach andI say:L" This hurts as much as having a Baby"-I am not being feminine by any means-Iwould beonly stating thatthis really hurts.Pain is a universal feeling.If I were you I would focus on what make God cry in that manner-sin? When did his nature change to where he no longer reacts to sin in such a manner Bill? Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. cd: I believe God to be showing a deeper love by using the love of a mother as an example-which I have found to be deeper than my love for my Children.I wish my mother was like this.This also does not make God feminine-but does show he has the greater love. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. cd: Are you suggesting God gave birth to us as a women does from the open womb?Or do you think He may be speaking of His creative handiwork? So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not.. cd: True, God did not appear inthese forms and we aren't to make images of those forms but if what you say is truewhy isn't there a "she" in the Bible for usage to God if all thing are equal?IfGodcould go either way why is the "He" ,"Himself", "Father"..etc, there? Surely you must see this gives weight to the Masculine identity? I feel more safe referring to Him as a He than a She-you are the one who should be careful as you are only one step away from be in this situation below. Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows. Jer 44:26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth. Jer 44:27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve DAVEH: I hope you don't mind me jumping into your exchange with JD, Judy. Do you have any Biblical evidence to support your above theory? If not, then can you explain how. 1) A Chinese person born 2,000 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as did somebody born in Jerusalem at the same time? 2) Or, a Chinese person born 100 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as somebody born in the Bible Belt? 3) Or a person born in China who was born 100 years before Jesus had the same equal opportunity to choose as one who lived in Jerusalem at the time of Christ? IOW.How as a Christian well rooted and having the knowledge of Christ readily available from the time you were born, and perhaps relatives to guide your in your walk in his footsteps, do you think the above mentioned examples of the Chinese guy born in a non-Christian society really do have equal opportunity to choose who they will serve? To me it seems there is a definite inequality in the circumstances in which people are born, and in having an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve to even hear Jesus' name, let alone accept him as their Savior, or choose to follow and serve him when they do not have the opportunity to hear the gospel. I can see where you might think Jesus would accept all men equally, but to say that all men are born into the world with equal opportunity seems a bit of a stretch. Is it theory, or is it Biblical doctrine? Judith H Taylor wrote: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
DAVEH: DeanThanx for using a blue highlight in your reply. It makes you much more readable and discernible than before, when your replies would tend to blend in to the points to which you were responding. Dean Moore wrote: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? cd: That is the very reason I am here Bill-if my propositions fall then they are not of God andI learn. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
- Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 7:42:49 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill cd: He is also saying that he can get no masculinely out of the biblical reference for God- Judy. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/7/2006 10:15:34 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) cd: Is Jesus male or female John/Lance/Bill-If he is God as you say what is he? Jesus is a man, Dean, and he is God -- two natures in one person. Please stop confusing the two. You createGod in Adam's
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
cd: You go girl:-) - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 9:19:24 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) I saw the denial in the last paragraph but then you go into all this relational business about communion with creation and perichoresis between the trinity etc. which, so far as I am concerned is nothing but 3rd or 4th century speculation. How can "fallen man" understand God? We know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Word and if a "dancing god" were valid, he would have been validated to more than one generation independently. judyt On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:47:33 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
- Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 9:58:09 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) DAVEH: DeanThanx for using a blue highlight in your reply. It makes you much more readable and discernible than before, when your replies would tend to blend in to the points to which you were responding. cd: Thank you for the thank you-Davh:-)Dean Moore wrote: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? cd: That is the very reason I am here Bill-if my propositions fall then they are not of God andI learn. -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness. Abraham lived in Ur of the Chaldees which was every bit as pagan as China, they worshipped the moon goddess Nana there God's Word tells us that we can know by the "creation" around us that there is a God. The decision to seek and/or trust rests with us. I happen to believe that God's call was to all ppl in all generations. Abraham responded. I expect to hear some balking from the Calvinists but this is the understanding given to me judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 06:54:33 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serveDAVEH: I hope you don't mind me jumping into your exchange with JD, Judy. Do you have any Biblical evidence to support your above theory? If not, then can you explain how.1) A Chinese person born 2,000 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as did somebody born in Jerusalem at the same time?2) Or, a Chinese person born 100 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as somebody born in the Bible Belt?3) Or a person born in China who was born 100 years before Jesus had the same equal opportunity to choose as one who lived in Jerusalem at the time of Christ? IOW.How as a Christian well rooted and having the knowledge of Christ readily available from the time you were born, and perhaps relatives to guide your in your walk in his footsteps, do you think the above mentioned examples of the Chinese guy born in a non-Christian society really do have equal opportunity to choose who they will serve? To me it seems there is a definite inequality in the circumstances in which people are born, and in having an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve to even hear Jesus' name, let alone accept him as their Savior, or choose to follow and serve him when they do not have the opportunity to hear the gospel. I can see where you might think Jesus would accept all men equally, but to say that all men are born into the world with equal opportunity seems a bit of a stretch. Is it theory, or is it Biblical doctrine?Judith H Taylor wrote: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
discovering mutually subtlyour comprehensive ignorance of the Holyrequires the biblical Fellowshipbanishedby the _aac_ ( _american anti-intellectuals club_ :) On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 10:01:50 -0500 "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: You go girl:-) - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 9:19:24 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) || jtWe know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Wordjt
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
So Judy now thinks that if she doesn't believe it, it an't true. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I saw the denial in the last paragraph but then you go into all this relational business about communion with creation and perichoresis between the trinity etc. which, so far as I am concerned is nothing but 3rd or 4th century speculation. How can "fallen man" understand God? We know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Word and if a "dancing god" were valid, he would have been validated to more than one generation independently. judyt On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:47:33 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. Bill - Original Message - From: Dean Moore To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. jd If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine reference. The fact of the matter is bound to scripture -- namely Gen 1:27. . you'll r e c o g ni ze that reference because it is the one you and Judy keep ignoring. There, we have a clear (to most) revelation concerning a small aspect of "God's image." Since one cannot be both "male and female," since Adam AND Eve both are the image of God, "the image of God" has little to nothing to do the gender. jd cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. First this passage says that God created man in his image- then it goes on to say He created both males and females.I see no contradictions to me statements here-unless one believe there is no difference between males and females. He is the mescaline. I realize you cannot understand this but maybe others can John..The below says that m an wa s cre ated in the image of God ,"BUT" women was is the glory of man. Clearly a difference is shown. 1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
One reasoned excuse after another. - Original Message - From: Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 12:06:40 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? cd: That is the very reason I am here Bill-if my propositions fall then they are not of God andI learn. Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. cd: Actually other supporting verses do come in handy for this conclusion.But yes this can stand alone without support. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. cd: To cry is also a male action-is it not?God is comparing His dept of pain to the severity of a women's pain inchildbirth- He is not saying that this pain is only a female quality.If I stabbed myself with a knife in the stomach andI say:L" This hurts as much as having a Baby"-I am not being feminine by any means-Iwould beonly stating thatthis really hurts.Pain is a universal feeling.If I were you I would focus on what make God cry in that manner-sin? When did his nature change to where he no longer reacts to sin in such a manner Bill? Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. cd: I believe God to be showing a deeper love by using the love of a mother as an example-which I have found to be deeper than my love for my Children.I wish my mother was like this.This also does not make God feminine-but does show he has the greater love. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. cd: Are you suggesting God gave birth to us as a women does from the open womb?Or do you think He may be speaking of His creative handiwork? So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not... cd: True, God did not appear inthese forms and we aren't to make images of those forms but if what you say is truewhy isn't there a "she" in the Bible for usage to God if all thing are equal?IfGodcould go either way why is the "He" ,"Himself", "Father"..etc, there? Surely you must see this gives weight to the Masculine identity? I feel more safe referring to Him as a He than a She-you are the one who should be careful as you are only one step away from be in this situation below. Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows. Jer 44:26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth. Jer 44:27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
God is no respecter of any man's person - and we are all given the same opportunity - Paul made the right choice and counted all you list below "dung" compared to the knowledge of Christ. PS: God's love is one one side of the scale with his justice on the other. One is incomplete/partial without the other. Eve being deceived had the best of intentions; her heart was deceived and God does not change. Lesson 1. Those who fell in the wilderness because they presumed upon God's grace... judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:04:35 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. jd If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said?
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
No Judy believes that "a man without understanding is like the beasts that perish" and you can take that to the bank On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 15:57:25 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So Judy now thinks that if she doesn't believe it, it an't true. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I saw the denial in the last paragraph but then you go into all this relational business about communion with creation and perichoresis between the trinity etc. which, so far as I am concerned is nothing but 3rd or 4th century speculation. How can "fallen man" understand God? We know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Word and if a "dancing god" were valid, he would have been validated to more than one generation independently. judyt On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:47:33 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
Like I said : I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. We will never agree, Judy. You are a work's salvationist in addition to the cultish orientation of your thought process. I have made my point. You have done whatever it is that you just did. That's pretty much it. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] God is no respecter of any man's person - and we are all given the same opportunity - Paul made the right choice and counted all you list below "dung" compared to the knowledge of Christ. PS: God's love is one one side of the scale with his justice on the other. One is incomplete/partial without the other. Eve being deceived had the best of intentions; her heart was deceived and God does not change. Lesson 1. Those who fell in the wilderness because they presumed upon God's grace... judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:04:35 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. jd If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us the language of a masculine God, David. I am surprised you made the same intellectual mistake as Dean. jd cd: So God directing the writing of Moses with the first five book had nothing to do with what was written?Is this what you are saying Lance. -- Original message -- From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dean rightly understood that your premise was that the Jewish CULTURE attributed masculinity to God. Dean made a most excellent response to your position. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? cd: This makes no sense at all to me John-The culture decided what God is?Can they now decide he is a women? What if they decide He is a calf? Good move, Dean !!! Don't deal with the arugment presented claiming ignorace of my intent. And what faith should I have in further explanation in view of the fact that you did not unde rstand what I wrote in the first place? Why is it that you cliam to understand the biblical message but cannot understand what I have said? Amazing. Intellectually, we are not on the same planet. You, of course, being much my superior. See ya, jd- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk Cc: Dean Moore Sent: 2/8/2006 12:31:57 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female?Keep on ignoring Gen 1:27 , Dean. There is no sex with God. He is neither male or female in a sexual sort of way. And why is the masculine used? Ever heard of "cultural demands?" Since God is not an "it," since He is a person, we must use either maculine or feminine. The culture of the Jew gave us the masculine
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
We agree. No Judy believes that "a man without understanding is like the beasts that perish" and you can take that to the bank On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 15:57:25 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So Judy now thinks that if she doesn't believe it, it an't true. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] I saw the denial in the last paragraph but then you go into all this relational business about communion with creation and perichoresis between the trinity etc. which, so far as I am concerned is nothing but 3rd or 4th century speculation. How can "fallen man" understand God? We know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Word and if a "dancing god" were valid, he would have been validated to more than one generation independently. judyt On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:47:33 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Judy, I patiently wait for you to actually read one of my posts for what it says.You may never agree with it, but you ought to at least try to deal with its meaning. I have in no way denied that God is "Father" throughout, nor have I argued that he is a mother.How ridiculous! I cannot help but think itdisingenuous of you to suggest that I have. If you could be honest here, you would realize that I do not get "female gender" out of any of it, and that that is the point of my argument. Bill - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:14 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill it is not "creating anything in our own image" to say what God says about Himself and He calls Himself a FATHER, never a mother. How anyonecan get "female" gender out of that I will never know. Using similes to explain love and caring doesn't change anything. The sad thing is how far we have fallen in not being willing to accept His Truth as is. judyt On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:18:17 -0700 "Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dean insists To have a masculine quality is to be a male. Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test? Isaiah 42.13 says that"the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does thisverse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities tohim:after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him toa mighty man and a man of war.If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male. But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse:" I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor. Or how aboutthis:"As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13).Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities. Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18).Dean, the verb (chayal) used ofGod's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor. So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it doesnot. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality buthis relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the otheris to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image:" Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too,lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not. Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not. When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 10:55:34 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) discovering mutually subtlyour comprehensive ignorance of the Holyrequires the biblical Fellowshipbanishedby the _aac_ ( _american anti-intellectuals club_ :) cd: Gary-Did you just call me a ignorant hick and that the brethren were going to throw me out of the church because I am a ignorant hick? Consider the Ad. Hom rules before replying. On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 10:01:50 -0500 "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cd: You go girl:-) - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 9:19:24 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) || jtWe know nothing except what the Spirit reveals by way of The Wordjt
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
- Original Message - From: Dave Hansen To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 9:55:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serveDAVEH: I hope you don't mind me jumping into your exchange with JD, Judy. Do you have any Biblical evidence to support your above theory? If not, then can you explain how. cd: DavH, pardon my interruption,but I have asked Judy if I could answer these questions-and Judy, being the kind heartedsaint that she is, has graciously allowed me to do so:-) If my answers are unsatisfactory,or anyone feels something should be added-then you are at liberty to discuss the issue further.See answer below.1) A Chinese person born 2,000 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as did somebody born in Jerusalem at the same time?2) Or, a Chinese person born 100 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as somebody born in the Bible Belt?3) Or a person born in China who was born 100 years before Jesus had the same equal opportunity to choose as one who lived in Jerusalem at the time of Christ? IOW.How as a Christian well rooted and having the knowledge of Christ readily available from the time you were born, and per haps relatives to guide your in your walk in his footsteps, do you think the above mentioned examples of the Chinese guy born in a non-Christian society really do have equal opportunity to choose who they will serve? To me it seems there is a definite inequality in the circumstances in which people are born, and in having an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve to even hear Jesus' name, let alone accept him as their Savior, or choose to follow and serve him when they do not have the opportunity to hear the gospel. I can see where you might think Jesus would accept all men equally, but to say that all men are born into the world with equal opportunity seems a bit of a stretch. Is it theory, or is it Biblical doctrine? cd: I see all the above questions as one and the same question DavH. Do people from different times, places ,and cultures have the same equal opportunity with God and salvation,-even if they have never been taught of Jesus Christ-as those who have been exposed to God's word? I hope this is a fair assessment? The only wayI know to answer this question is to: (1) Showhow God gives all men an equal chance at obtaining heaven,and (2) Show how God and Him alone decides whom to to invite to heaven. (1) God gives all men the equal chance at obtaining salvation by writing His laws into the hearts of all men.All know good and evil-rightor wrong. It is not the knowing of Christ that condemns one.Itis sin that brought corruption and condemned us already John 3:18. Receiving Christ removed the condemnation that sin placed there.All men have the equalopportunity to not sin.or to sin. Hence all men are equal.The passage of"choose you this say whom you will serve" is saying: Will you be good this day and serve God or will you do evil (sin) this day and serve Satan. Regardless what the dancing Calvinist say one cannot do both and live. (2) All man are not equal in that God decides whom to call (invite)to salvation.Menhave removed themselves so far from God as they can not find their way back to Him on their own.This is called total depravity. The wall of sin is too great for us to breach alone. Is this fair of God to call some and allow others to go onward into hell? Yes as God will give mercy to whom He will. Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. May advice is not to boast by saying I already have a paid ticket to heaven-so if I sin I have nothing to fear-because God had mercy on our poor ,miserable souls and He could leave us as He did the other children whom thought they also had it made because they were son's of Abraham and believed that God owed then something too. Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Hope this answer you question DavH. As this is my belief. -- Judith H Taylor wrote: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
You are probably right that we will never agree JD but not for the reasons you give. I am no "works" salvationist. I believe we are "saved by faith" but that "professed faith aside from corresponding actions" is as dead as a doornail. Nor do my thought processes have any kind of cultish orientation. My belief is in having one's mind renewed by the Word of God. Strange that you would find this "cultish" Just shows how "far out" once can get following traditions and doctrines of men On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 17:07:48 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Like I said : I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. We will never agree, Judy. You are a work's salvationist in addition to the cultish orientation of your thought process. I have made my point. You have done whatever it is that you just did. That's pretty much it. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] God is no respecter of any man's person - and we are all given the same opportunity - Paul made the right choice and counted all you list below "dung" compared to the knowledge of Christ. PS: God's love is one one side of the scale with his justice on the other. One is incomplete/partial without the other. Eve being deceived had the best of intentions; her heart was deceived and God does not change. Lesson 1. Those who fell in the wilderness because they presumed upon God's grace... judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:04:35 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I.Q., culture, social statis, educational opportunities, geneaologies, ethnicity, religion and the child's government. After birth, all of the above plus life's experiences. jd If God's love is not big enough to take all that into consideration when He jusges for the intentions of the heart, that God is too small. jd -- Original message -- From: Judith H Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 4:21:06 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? WRONG!!! JDS - God inspired all of it; the Holy Spirit did not expire after Moses penned the Pentateuch and God is a FATHER all the way through the Bible. Father in Hebrew means Father and guess what? Father in Greek also means Father. On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:43:05 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, this time it is John, not Lance !! Using your example below, do you know the difference between the Hebrew text and the English translation of that text? God "inspired" the Hebrew text, Dean, not the English translation of that text. That is clearly and obvioiusly what I am saying. You need a lexicon , NOT A DICTIONARY. jd (or maybe it is Lance) - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org;TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Cc: D Sent: 2/8/2006 5:20:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? The culture gave us
Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator
If you think ad hominem remarks should be encouraged, then you are on the wrong list. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator Of course they should. -- Original message -- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone has their own moderating style. Let's give Dean a chance and see what he does with the list. Nothing is wrong with him encouraging threads that are profitable and discouraging threads that are not. I do note, however, that Lance made several ad hominem style references, such as attributing cranial denseness to me. Whatever that means, I don't think it was meant to be flattering. Do you think such remarks should be encouraged? David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator Dean -- are you going to micro-manage all our discussions? I am interested in Lances point of view on this and want to see more - from Lance and DM an DH. DM -- is this the purpose of the Moderator - to micro-manage our discussion and decide when a particualr discussion needs to move along? jd - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/8/2006 6:31:04 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Is the list owner impervious to sanctions when baseless charges are levelled by him? As I see it DM owes DH a profound apology for his interminable dragging out of a most minor issue.THAT, David Miller, is the cranial denseness to which I made reference during our recent exchange. You are 'The very model of a modern major-general'. Gilbert Sullivan were describing you prior to your birth. cd: Lance I will decide who owes whom an apology. As I see it this issue was settled. Let not repeat mistakes of others by bringing this back up thanks. Move alone folks- nothing to see here. Further DM, please spare us the tired old arguments re: that which you actually mean by 'perfection'. Phil Spector, in his song performed by the Teddy Bears alluded to DM in his lyrics 'To know, know, know him is to love, love, love him.'. So then DM, if it is simply affirmation or, as Denny Crane would say 'hug?' then, we collectively affirm and hug you. OK! shall we move on. This ain't court, DM!! -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
JD wrote: David, your comment below is but the first of several paragraphs addressed to me in your effort to defend perfectionism as you understand it. I'm not defending perfectionism or any other -ism, John. I'm simply discussing what the author of the text means to communicate to us. JD wrote: I am going to give my response some serous thought. But I do want to address this paragraph before leaving -- something I can do without having to study my response. In Greek 101, something I actually took in college, we learn that mood is the relationship of the verb to reality, and in this case, indicative denotes something that IS rather than something that might be. Ok. JD wrote: It has little to do with the action of the verb in time. That's debateable. JD wrote: The present tense is [almost] always continuous action with no end in sight. Whether the action goes on forever is not necessarily a part of this grammatical function. Please note your use of almost. What you mean by almost also is debateable. JD wrote: I am walking to the store simply does not picture the journey as completed. The aroist tense does. Ok. JD wrote: If you have Mounce, go to p 133 and there you will see the English translation of luo in its different present-tense forms (indicative mood) as I am loosing, you are loosing, he is loosing and so on. My copy of Mounce is at home right now, so I can't consult it just yet. Nevertheless, I'm not sure about your point. JD wrote: That Christ is cleansing us from our sins is the most common application of the grammatical rule that is present indicative active. I have consulted 30 translations, and not one of them translates this passage as is cleansing. You are the only person I have found to translate it this way. Can you reference for me some other translator who translates the passage this way? JD wrote: You write: The Present Tense in the Indicative Mood represents contemporaneous action, as opposed to action in the past or the future. I have no idea what you think you see in this quote, but zodiates clearly does NOT contradict Mounce or any other grammarian on this issue. You cut off the quote early. I was trying to point out the latter part of what he said. In moods other than in the indicative mood, it refers only to continuous or repeated action. Notice how he points out that it is in moods OTHER THAN the indicative that it refers only to continuous or repeated action. In the indicative, there is room for it to refer to non-continuous action. Context tells us how to read it. Your comments insist that present indicative indicates continuous action. That is wrong and it leads to bad exegesis of this passage. JD wrote: Do you know what comtemporaneous means? Yes. We don't differ on this point. JD wrote: In this case , it is action THAT IS CURRENTLY ON GOING. It is action that is existING or accurING or originatING during the same time. Well, maybe we do differ on this point. :-) JD wrote: If I am walking . He is cleansing. I am not saying that the cleasing is a repeated action, David. Rather, I am saying that it is continuous action with no end in sight and so I write keeps on cleasing as opposed to saying cleases us over and over again. In this passage, I am NEVER away from this continual flow. I realize that, John, but the ei ending on the verb gives it a present indicative form, and you are reading a participle type construction into the word. You are forcing an -ing English ending on the word that is not warranted by the Greek construction. JD wrote: The task is not completed, in this passage. Fine... nobody is saying that it is. JD wrote: The end of this cleansing is not in view. Right. Nothing is said one way or the other about the end of this cleansing. JD wrote: If you need a reference for this, ask Dean !! He is the one with the Websters. look up contemporaneous. The definition does not help your cause. I don't have a cause, JD. You do. I'm just reading the text and don't want those who are ignorant of Greek to be deceived by your comments. JD wrote: You obviously went to Zodiates to find a way out -- No, I quoted him because I figure you respect him more than me. I could quote Robertson for you as well, as I have done in the past, but it seems to do little to change your thinking. Some professor got something in your head about present tense being continuous action and you can't seem to see it any other way. JD wrote: because you know full well that if what I say is true, here in I John, No, I know you are blowing smoke, claiming the Greek says something that it does not. You can remain in your ignorance if you like, but I will speak up for the sake of others who have not studied Greek. JD wrote: your theory of perfectionism as you understand it is simply WRONG. I don't have any theory of perfectionism. I simply teach the
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
I never called Bonhoeffer an atheist! What are you talking about? I quoted from the preface of the dictionary you objected to Dean using because I think such a quote should give you enough pause in your accusation that Webster was an atheist to actually do a little of your own research. Now you claim that God directed you to write that Webster was an atheist? You should not be surprised if some people on the list conclude that they do not follow the same God that you do. May the Lord have mercy upon you that when you are dead and buried that others do not smear your name and reputation, claiming that you were an atheist and not worthy to be consulted for the meaning of anything that has to do with the Bible. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:18 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) I wrote no more irresponsiblby than you when speaking of Bonhoeffer or Dean when prestending to know of Karl Barth. There is not a wit's worth of difference. Plus, I thought the very style of my response might seem familiar to Dean - a style he uses quite often. Your quote, by the way , does not mean Webster was a Christian any more than some of the statements of Abraham Lincoln. By the way -- I fully intend to write as God directs !! . I am sure you will do the same. jd -- Original message -- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] JD wrote: a dictionary writen by an atheist carries more weight than the exegetical studies of other ... John, please do not make such irresponsible statements. Webster was no atheist, and your other comments were just as irresponsible. From the Preface to the 1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language: In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
I don't know about a Greek Lexicon. I wouldn't be surprised if he did, but Webster did produce his own Bible translation. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:22 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Did he write a greek lexicon?? -- Original message -- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] JD wrote: We don't accept Webster for Greek definition. Let's get that right. Why not? Noah Webster was a much better Greek scholar than you, John. Webster mastered 20 languages, including both Hebrew and Greek, and he was a strong believer in Christ and the Bible. Upon what basis do you dismiss him as a reference? 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.
Re: [TruthTalk]
Before I stick my foot in my mouth, can you tell me if you are being sarcastic here? David Miller. - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy's a touch too subtle for me, David. We do the best we can with what we've got. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 11:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] ROTFLOL. Judy, what a poignant point, but I wonder if Lance will understand what you just said. David Miller. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] There you have it back up what YOU say rather than adjust yourself to what God says by gaining understanding and having your own mind renewed by His Word. judyt On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:54:09 -0500 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can't we all though, Dean? EVERYONE (even Lance when pressed) can back up that which she/he says that the Bible says. Please tell me that you know that, Dean? -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
Bill wrote: In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image: Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female. We need to be careful, too, lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not.. Nice passage for this discussion, Bill. cd: True, God did not appear in these forms and we aren't to make images of those forms but if what you say is true why isn't there a she in the Bible for usage to God if all thing are equal? Hey Dean, have you ever considered Jeremiah 33:16 on this? Jeremiah 33:14-16 (14) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. (15) In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. (16) In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith SHE shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. Compare this with: Jeremiah 23:5-6 (5) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. (6) In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby HE shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. There are other ways to read the passage, but some might make the argument that Jer. 33:16 is an example of the kind of passage that you suggest does not exist. 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.
Re: [TruthTalk]
I am, David. - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 09, 2006 14:58 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Before I stick my foot in my mouth, can you tell me if you are being sarcastic here? David Miller. - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy's a touch too subtle for me, David. We do the best we can with what we've got. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 11:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] ROTFLOL. Judy, what a poignant point, but I wonder if Lance will understand what you just said. David Miller. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] There you have it back up what YOU say rather than adjust yourself to what God says by gaining understanding and having your own mind renewed by His Word. judyt On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:54:09 -0500 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can't we all though, Dean? EVERYONE (even Lance when pressed) can back up that which she/he says that the Bible says. Please tell me that you know that, Dean? -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk]
DM - I never expect much more than this from someone who gives more time to SNL, Monty Python, Phil Spector and other secular venues and quotes them much more than the Word of the Living God. Don't forget that he also works on behalf of the accuser when he calls God's servants thickbrained On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 15:07:54 -0500 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am, David. - Original Message - From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 09, 2006 14:58 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Before I stick my foot in my mouth, can you tell me if you are being sarcastic here? David Miller. - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy's a touch too subtle for me, David. We do the best we can with what we've got. - Original Message - From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: February 08, 2006 11:29 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] ROTFLOL. Judy, what a poignant point, but I wonder if Lance will understand what you just said. David Miller. - Original Message - From: Judith H Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] There you have it back up what YOU say rather than adjust yourself to what God says by gaining understanding and having your own mind renewed by His Word. judyt On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:54:09 -0500 Lance Muir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can't we all though, Dean? EVERYONE (even Lance when pressed) can back up that which she/he says that the Bible says. Please tell me that you know that, Dean? -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
Dean wrote: If my answers are unsatisfactory, or anyone feels something should be added- then you are at liberty to discuss the issue further. On the subject of God extending mercy, I often wonder why God chose to reveal himself to me. There is little doubt in my mind that God has revealed himself to me in ways that has not been afforded other people. Why? Paul was knocked off his horse with a bright shining light and a voice from heaven. Why? How many people have had experiences like this? Surely this had much to do with his turning in faith to Jesus Christ and receiving God's mercy. Why does Paul get an experience like this while others do not? This is not an easy question. Does such happen in order to make things equal, or does God simply have his own reasons and equality is not necessarily part of his consideration? 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator
David/Lance -If the subject area has the word Moderator in it reply in private. You can of course e-mail each other privately from the address list on your computer.Thank you Dean Moore, Moderator [Original Message] From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 2/9/2006 3:00:02 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator If you think ad hominem remarks should be encouraged, then you are on the wrong list. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator Of course they should. -- Original message -- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Everyone has their own moderating style. Let's give Dean a chance and see what he does with the list. Nothing is wrong with him encouraging threads that are profitable and discouraging threads that are not. I do note, however, that Lance made several ad hominem style references, such as attributing cranial denseness to me. Whatever that means, I don't think it was meant to be flattering. Do you think such remarks should be encouraged? David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Moderator Dean -- are you going to micro-manage all our discussions? I am interested in Lances point of view on this and want to see more - from Lance and DM an DH. DM -- is this the purpose of the Moderator - to micro-manage our discussion and decide when a particualr discussion needs to move along? jd - Original Message - From: Lance Muir To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/8/2006 6:31:04 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Is the list owner impervious to sanctions when baseless charges are levelled by him? As I see it DM owes DH a profound apology for his interminable dragging out of a most minor issue.THAT, David Miller, is the cranial denseness to which I made reference during our recent exchange. You are 'The very model of a modern major-general'. Gilbert Sullivan were describing you prior to your birth. cd: Lance I will decide who owes whom an apology. As I see it this issue was settled. Let not repeat mistakes of others by bringing this back up thanks. Move alone folks- nothing to see here. Further DM, please spare us the tired old arguments re: that which you actually mean by 'perfection'. Phil Spector, in his song performed by the Teddy Bears alluded to DM in his lyrics 'To know, know, know him is to love, love, love him.'. So then DM, if it is simply affirmation or, as Denny Crane would say 'hug?' then, we collectively affirm and hug you. OK! shall we move on. This ain't court, DM!! -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
[Original Message] From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 2/9/2006 3:23:16 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God female? Dean wrote: If my answers are unsatisfactory, or anyone feels something should be added- then you are at liberty to discuss the issue further. On the subject of God extending mercy, I often wonder why God chose to reveal himself to me. There is little doubt in my mind that God has revealed himself to me in ways that has not been afforded other people. Why? -- I cd: I can tell you why he did and why he did not. He revealed himself to you for a good work for His glory and not because of any good in you. Paul was knocked off his horse with a bright shining light and a voice from heaven. Why? How many people have had experiences like this? Surely this had much to do with his turning in faith to Jesus Christ and receiving God's mercy. Why does Paul get an experience like this while others do not? This is not an easy question. Does such happen in order to make things equal, or does God simply have his own reasons and equality is not necessarily part of his consideration? - cd: While I believe God reveals Himself to people in many ways-I suspect his way with Paul was due to a sure sign for others to believe He sent Paul as for Paul acceptance for a good work. This is not to say He doesn't provide miracles today. He does- I have seen miracles. 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
cd: David do you think the Webster Dictionary might be a translation from the Greek meaning of words? [Original Message] From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 2/9/2006 3:00:02 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) I don't know about a Greek Lexicon. I wouldn't be surprised if he did, but Webster did produce his own Bible translation. David Miller. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org ; TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:22 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Did he write a greek lexicon?? -- Original message -- From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] JD wrote: We don't accept Webster for Greek definition. Let's get that right. Why not? Noah Webster was a much better Greek scholar than you, John. Webster mastered 20 languages, including both Hebrew and Greek, and he was a strong believer in Christ and the Bible. Upon what basis do you dismiss him as a reference? 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. -- 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
[Original Message] From: David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 2/9/2006 3:07:28 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) Bill wrote: In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image: Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female. We need to be careful, too, lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not.. Nice passage for this discussion, Bill. cd: True, God did not appear in these forms and we aren't to make images of those forms but if what you say is true why isn't there a she in the Bible for usage to God if all thing are equal? Hey Dean, have you ever considered Jeremiah 33:16 on this? Jeremiah 33:14-16 (14) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. (15) In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. (16) In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith SHE shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. Compare this with: Jeremiah 23:5-6 (5) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. (6) In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby HE shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. There are other ways to read the passage, but some might make the argument that Jer. 33:16 is an example of the kind of passage that you suggest does not exist. cd: I still suggest that David-Look within the clause where she is placed and notice the word Jerusalem-This is referring to God as a she but it is speaking of Jerusalem being a she.Here is another passage to support my point David. Isa 40:2 Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the LORD's hand double for all her sins. Same with the next passage (Jer, 23:5-6) Israel is refered to as a He-this is within the clause also. -- 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.
[TruthTalk] Greek Present Indicative
John, a couple of passages for you to consider. 1. In Mat. 13:44,a man sells all that he has and buys a field. The word for "buyeth" is present indicative, but we do not understand from this that he continually keeps buying the field over and over again forever with no end in sight. 2. In Mat. 26:63, the high priest adjures Jesus by the living God, to tell him whether he is the Christ. The word for "adjures" is present indicative.We do not understand from this that he keeps continually adjuring Christ into the future forever with no end in sight. My point is that the present indicative alone is not enough to make a case for continuous type action. David Miller.
[TruthTalk] Moderator
Hello TT's-I have suspended John from this site for three days for a cooling off period per his agreement to keep the "Moderator "subject private. I realize some of you guys are in the mist of a debate with him but I think you should be able to resume at that time. If some of you think I have gone power crazy that is not the case. In the last few months I have seen some long time members of TT leave this site mostly due to the constant insults and personalmocking..etc and that is to our great loss.I am trying to get this list under control and then invite some of them back. I realize most here -including me have broken the Ad. Hom rule but there must be some limits set or chaos reins; therewill also be roomto express you feeling when angry.Work with me and I will work with you? Yours in Christ, Carroll Moore
Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)
nope--you'll have to suspend your own self for that comment, Bro On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 13:07:53 -0500 "Dean Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 2/9/2006 10:55:34 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd) discovering mutually subtlyour comprehensive ignorance of the Holyrequires the biblical Fellowshipbanishedby the _aac_ ( _american anti-intellectuals club_ :) cd: Gary-Did you just call me a ignorant hick ..? ||
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
I happen to believe that God's call was to all ppl in all generations. DAVEH: The examples you mentioned below were obviously to people to whom the Lord sent messengers to preach. I find it a bit hard to think the Chinese were afforded the same opportunity. Do you believe that God sent prophets to preach the gospel to the Chinese a thousand years ago, Judy? Do you really believe that all people born in the world in times past were aware of Jesus, and had the opportunity to believe in him, and have faith in himand to hear the gospel message? Judith H Taylor wrote: Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness. Abraham lived in Ur of the Chaldees which was every bit as pagan as China, they worshipped the moon goddess Nana there God's Word tells us that we can know by the "creation" around us that there is a God. The decision to seek and/or trust rests with us. I happen to believe that God's call was to all ppl in all generations. Abraham responded. I expect to hear some balking from the Calvinists but this is the understanding given to me judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 06:54:33 -0800 Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve DAVEH: I hope you don't mind me jumping into your exchange with JD, Judy. Do you have any Biblical evidence to support your above theory? If not, then can you explain how. 1) A Chinese person born 2,000 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as did somebody born in Jerusalem at the same time? 2) Or, a Chinese person born 100 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as somebody born in the Bible Belt? 3) Or a person born in China who was born 100 years before Jesus had the same equal opportunity to choose as one who lived in Jerusalem at the time of Christ? IOW.How as a Christian well rooted and having the knowledge of Christ readily available from the time you were born, and perhaps relatives to guide your in your walk in his footsteps, do you think the above mentioned examples of the Chinese guy born in a non-Christian society really do have equal opportunity to choose who they will serve? To me it seems there is a definite inequality in the circumstances in which people are born, and in having an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve to even hear Jesus' name, let alone accept him as their Savior, or choose to follow and serve him when they do not have the opportunity to hear the gospel. I can see where you might think Jesus would accept all men equally, but to say that all men are born into the world with equal opportunity seems a bit of a stretch. Is it theory, or is it Biblical doctrine? Judith H Taylor wrote: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve. along with the opportunity to grow in wisdom and grace - or in deceit and darkness... judyt What do you believe separates ppl at birth JD? judyt On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:01:15 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought Dean was saying that all men are born equal. That, of course, is not true. Some are way more stupid than others, growing up without understanding nor the ability to comprehend the deeper things of life. God loves them all, of course, but that does not make then "equal." jd -- ~~~ 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.
Re: [TruthTalk] God female?
DavH, pardon my interruption DAVEH: Welcome to the discussion, Dean. all the above questions as one and the same question DavH. DAVEH: Correct. I tried to give a variety of hypothetical cases so that depending on the answer, I wouldn't have to repeat the question later with minor modification. even if they have never been taught of Jesus Christ-as those who have been exposed to God's word? I hope this is a fair assessment? DAVEH: Yes...that is pretty much what I am asking. To expand on that, some folks (like the Chinese) are born into cultures that either ignore Christianity, or even condition their people to eschew Christianity. And even more prevalent are the cultures that have substituted their own religious notions that can be contrary to Christian principles.witness Muslimism. Then there are the Buddhists, ShintoI think you get the point. Can a kid growing up in an anti-Christian environment a thousand years ago or so, have an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve??? Or can they be too brainwashed by their culture/religion to recognize right from wrong? God gives all men the equal chance at obtaining salvation by writing His laws into the hearts of all men. DAVEH: Does not salvation by your standards require faith in Jesus, and repentance? Can His laws be the motivating factor for one gaining salvation without even knowing the name of Jesus? What passages do you believe is evidence of such? All know good and evil-rightor wrong. DAVEH: Do you believe knowing rightor wrong is required for salvation? It is not the knowing of Christ that condemns one. DAVEH: I'm not speaking of what condemns one, but rather what saves one. If one does not know Christ, can one be saved? From my time on TT, I thought you folks (darest I say, Protestants) believe that only those who know Christ can be saved. Is that incorrect, Dean? All man are not equal in that God decides whom to call (invite)to salvation. DAVEH: That sounds confusing to me. I thought you were previously telling me God gives all men the equal chance at obtaining salvation...what am I missing here, Dean? Is this fair of God to call some and allow others to go onward into hell? Yes as God will give mercy to whom He will. DAVEH: Hmm.doesn't sound quite so fair to me. You are making it sound like God is a respecter of some persons, and not others. Dean Moore wrote: Everyone is born into this world withan equal opportunity to choose who they will serve DAVEH: I hope you don't mind me jumping into your exchange with JD, Judy. Do you have any Biblical evidence to support your above theory? If not, then can you explain how. cd: DavH, pardon my interruption,but I have asked Judy if I could answer these questions-and Judy, being the kind heartedsaint that she is, has graciously allowed me to do so:-) If my answers are unsatisfactory,or anyone feels something should be added-then you are at liberty to discuss the issue further.See answer below. 1) A Chinese person born 2,000 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as did somebody born in Jerusalem at the same time? 2) Or, a Chinese person born 100 years ago would have had the same equal opportunity to choose as somebody born in the Bible Belt? 3) Or a person born in China who was born 100 years before Jesus had the same equal opportunity to choose as one who lived in Jerusalem at the time of Christ? IOW.How as a Christian well rooted and having the knowledge of Chri st readily available from the time you were born, and per haps relatives to guide your in your walk in his footsteps, do you think the above mentioned examples of the Chinese guy born in a non-Christian society really do have equal opportunity to choose who they will serve? To me it seems there is a definite inequality in the circumstances in which people are born, and in having an equal opportunity to choose who they will serve to even hear Jesus' name, let alone accept him as their Savior, or choose to follow and serve him when they do not have the opportunity to hear the gospel. I can see where you might think Jesus would accept all men equally, but to say that all men are born into the world with equal opportunity seems a bit of a stretch. Is it theory, or is it Biblical doctrine? cd: I see all the above questions as one and the same question DavH. Do people from different times, places ,and cultures have the same equal opportunity with God and salvation,-even if they have never been taught of Jesus Christ-as those who have been exposed to God's word? I hope this is a fair assessment? The only wayI know to answer this question is to: (1) Showhow God gives all men an equal chance at obtaining heaven,and (2) Show how God and Him alone decides whom to to invite to heaven. (1) God gives all men the equal chance at obtaining salvation by writing His laws into the hearts of all men.All know good and
