OK Vincent and DavidM, I accept the verdict (I didn't consciously use
logic); if you say that's what it is - what can I say? Guilty?? Hope
it doesn't make you want to throw out all of it ...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Therefore, you made an inference, which is using logic. David
Miller's comment ab
A few Black hairs, make a difference?
Irrespective of whether you see it or not, there is a difference.
Lev 20:25 Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any man
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Judy wrote:> So far as the 'sacrifices' were concerned they
> couldn't have any physical blemish they had > to be
perfect.
The law is spiritual, but your reading here is staying in the
natural.Just as the law forbid eating pigs and shellfish, so it g
From: "Wm. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Judy: Adam and Eve were tempted
by the lust of the eye; the lust of the
flesh; and the boastful pride of life also - does this
mean that they had a
fallen nature residing in their human flesh
also?
Great question, Judy.
The answer is No. Yet that doe
The law is spiritual, but your reading here is staying in the natural.Just as the law forbid eating pigs and shellfish, so it gave physicalrequirements concerning sacrifices. Think about it. What is the point?Do a few black hairs forming a spot on an otherwise white lamb reallymake it "unholy" befo
Therefore, you made an inference, which is using logic. David
Miller's comment about you having used logic still stands.
vincent j fulton
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:39:51 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Judy wr
Judy wrote:
> So far as the 'sacrifices' were concerned they
> couldn't have any physical blemish they had
> to be perfect.
The law is spiritual, but your reading here is staying in the natural.
Just as the law forbid eating pigs and shellfish, so it gave physical
requirements concerning sacrif
at is why Christ
had to have a human mind, so that he could defeat sin at its
root.
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 8:26
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] The
Incarnation
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Judy:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Judy wrote:
Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh is in the blood"
Since the life of man is in his blood and man must die because of sin,
it can be stated that there is death in the blood.
I'm not sure about your l
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jt: No he couldn't have. Even lambs, bulls, and goats, had to be spotless
and without blemish. A leavened or blemished sacrifice would not have
been acceptable before a Holy God.
I was under the impression that sin is a blemish. Which scripture
tells us that a sinful
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:22:32 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Judy wrote:
Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh is in the blood"
Since the life of man is in his blood and man must die because of sin,
it can be stated that ther
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:22:32 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
jt: No he couldn't have. Even lambs, bulls, and goats, had to be spotless
and without blemish. A leavened or blemished sacrifice would not have
been acceptable before a Holy God.
I was under the impression that sin
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:26:57 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
judy: Adam and Eve were tempted by the lust of the eye; the lust of the
flesh; and the boastful pride of life also - does this mean that they had
a
fallen nature residing in their human flesh also?
vince:
They did a
I did my homework Davidm:
Is this what you are talking about?
Surprise Professor Soothill said: "What is really extraordinary and
was a great surprise to me is that there is a lot of free-floating foetal DNA in
pregnant women's blood. "Probably the cells in the placenta break and release
th
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Judy
wrote:Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh is in the
blood" Since the life of man is in his blood and man must die because of
sin, it can be stated that there is death in the blood.
I'm not sure about your logical process here
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Judy: Sin is a
spiritual problem; our mortal flesh (body) can show theevidence and ravages
of sin but an inanimate body is basically not the problem.
vince: Yes, sin is a spiritual problem. We can be tempted to sin by
thedevil, by the world, or by our own sin
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:31:38 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Judy:
Sin is a spiritual problem; our mortal flesh (body) can show the
evidence and ravages of sin but an inanimate body is basically not the
problem.
vince:
Yes, sin is a spiritual problem. We can be temp
Judy wrote:
> Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh
> is in the blood" Since the life of man is in his blood
> and man must die because of sin, it can be stated that
> there is death in the blood.
I'm not sure about your logical process here that arrives at this
conclusion, but
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jt: I want to know if Vincent is aware that there are
two kinds of flesh;so it is not the physical body only even though it is the
same Greek word
for both and the same # in Strongs
Concordance.
vince: Are we not discussing the physical body
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Judy
Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes: Leviticus
17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh is in the bloodSince the
life of man is in his blood and man must die because of sin,
OK so far.
it can be stated that there is death in the blood.
I can't stretch my
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:23:00 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
jt: I want to know if Vincent is aware that there are two kinds of flesh;
so it is not the
physical body only even though it is the same Greek word for both and the
same
# in Strongs Concordance.
vince:
Are we not d
No, he was not talking about suicide.
How is that relevant to a sinful nature residing in human flesh?
Does my answer to your question prove that our Adam-generated flesh is
inherently without sin? What about all of the scriptures which I cited;
don't they show that the notion that fles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes: (All scripture citations below are from RSV) judyt: vince gave you 11 scriptures
(and there are two or three times that many).
You seem to have disposed of them fairly easily by quoting one
scripture.
Rather than back quoting any script
In a message dated 3/13/2004 8:16:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(All scripture citations below are from RSV)
judyt: vince gave you 11 scriptures (and there are two or three times that many). You seem to have disposed of them fairly easily by quoting one scripture. R
Vincent: When Paul wrote: "I have crucified the flesh with it's
passions
and desires (Galatians 5:24) was he talking about killing himself,
committing suicide?
judyt
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Judy
Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes:
> Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life > of the flesh i
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:45:40 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life
> of the flesh is in the blood
> Since the life of man is in his blood
> and man must die because of sin,
OK so far.
> it can be stated that there is death in the blood.
Leviticus 17:11,14 states for the life of the flesh is in the blood Since
the life of man is in his blood and man must die because of sin, it can be
stated that there is death in the blood.
The very fact that sin affected the blood of man (his life) necessitated the
virgin birth of Christ if
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
> DavidM wote: Some Mormons try to say that God provided the sperm,
>
> DAVEH said: Who have you heard say that, DavidM??? I'm not saying that
> there are not any LDS who may have believed such, but I have never met any.
> The only people I've ever heard say they b
DavidM wote: Some Mormons try to say that God provided the sperm,
DAVEH said: Who have you heard say that, DavidM??? I'm not saying that
there are not any LDS who may have believed such, but I have never met any.
The only people I've ever heard say they believe that are those who are
criti
David Miller wrote:
> The
> Scriptures say that Jesus WAS of the seed of Abraham and David, but you
> argue that seed means male sperm and there was no male sperm involved in
> the birth of Jesus. You leave us with skepticism and disbelief in the
> Scriptures because the Scriptures do say that
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So your idea is that Jesus was created in the same condition as the first
Adam? Here are some problems with this idea:
1. If Jesus was in the same condition as the first Adam BEFORE the fall,
then having never sinned, Jesus would be immortal and incapab
David Miller wrote:
>> So your idea is that Jesus was created in the same
>> condition as the first Adam? Here are some problems
>> with this idea:
>>
>> 1. If Jesus was in the same condition as the first
>> Adam BEFORE the fall, then having never sinned, Jesus
>> would be immortal and incapa
Kevin wrote:
> All cults believe in the Peccability of Christ
> He must OVERCOME the temptation, just like they
> must Struggle, OVERCOME & work out their own
> salvation.
Jesus Christ did overcome temptation, even as we are overcomers.
Jesus said:
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit wi
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Judy wrote:
> why can't he be the same species as the first Adam
> before the fall and when faced with the same temptations
> overcome leading to life and hope for the rest of us
> rather than fall into sin and disobedience
So your idea is that Jesus
Judy wrote:
> why can't he be the same species as the first Adam
> before the fall and when faced with the same temptations
> overcome leading to life and hope for the rest of us
> rather than fall into sin and disobedience
So your idea is that Jesus was created in the same condition as the
TED]>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:24 PMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Incarnation of Christ> Kevin wrote:> > It is Blasphemous to deny the incarnation and> > since Jesus was God manifest in the flesh to> > attribute the ability to sin and
gainsaying, probably. (:>)
- Original Message -
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:24 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Incarnation of Christ
> Kevin wrote:
> > It is Blasphemous to deny the i
Dean Moore
Fear God and keep His commandments/ trust Jesus
>
> I believe it is helpful for us to take a long hard look at the humanity
> of Christ. If we are to walk like he walked and purify ourselves as he
> is pure, that would seem to be impossible if he did not inhabit the same
> kind of
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm not looking for a debate. I'm looking for some kind of agreement
that Jesus was a human being. If Jesus was not human, then the logical
inference from that is that you do not believe in the Incarnation (God
clothed in humanity). If Jesus was not of th
Kevin wrote:
> Would you describe yourself as Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian?
> I think the latter, but this I surmise from reading your
> posts on other subjects.
I'm not Pelagian in the least. I consider Pelagianism to be a false
teaching. Pelagianism denies original sin and gives too much credit
I am not so sure you are looking for agreement.
It seems to me you create a definition and then stick me in it.
I can tell you we do not agree on this, I think you already know that.
Would you describe yourself as Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian?
I think the latter, but this I surmise from reading your
Kevin wrote:
> First you imply that I do not believe in the
> Incarnation, now you imply I believe in an
> Alien god Why do you keep making up such drivel?
> Do you need a debate that bad?
I'm not looking for a debate. I'm looking for some kind of agreement
that Jesus was a human being. If Jes
First you imply that I do not believe in the Incarnation, now you imply I believe in an Alien god
Why do you keep making up such drivel?
Do you need a debate that bad?
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kevin wrote:> I am not here to debate the IMPECCABILITY of ChristIf you do not care to dis
Kevin wrote:
> I am not here to debate the IMPECCABILITY of Christ
If you do not care to discuss what we mean when we describe Christ as
impeccable, that is your choice. However, if you do not believe that
Jesus Christ was human, that might create some problems. My Jesus was
human, and is now a
I am not here to debate the IMPECCABILITY of ChristDavid Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kevin wrote:> It is Blasphemous to deny the incarnation and > since Jesus was God manifest in the flesh to > attribute the ability to sin and a sin nature > to Jesus is to attribute the same to God.The incarn
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Kevin wrote:
> It is Blasphemous to deny the incarnation and
> since Jesus was God manifest in the flesh to
> attribute the ability to sin and a sin nature
> to Jesus is to attribute the same to God.
DavidM:
The incarnation means that Jesus had qualities
Kevin wrote:
> It is Blasphemous to deny the incarnation and
> since Jesus was God manifest in the flesh to
> attribute the ability to sin and a sin nature
> to Jesus is to attribute the same to God.
The incarnation means that Jesus had qualities of both man and God.
Therefore, Jesus had attrib
It is Blasphemous to deny the incarnation
and since Jesus was God manifest in the flesh to attribute the ability to sin and a sin nature to Jesus is to attribute the same to God.
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kevin wrote:> Just for those that BLASPHEMOUSLY attribute > a SIN nature to Jesu
Kevin wrote:
> Just for those that BLASPHEMOUSLY attribute
> a SIN nature to Jesus
The real blasphemy is denying the incarnation of Christ.
Jesus was made sin for us, and those who deny this are the ones who
blaspheme the truth of Christ.
Peace be with you.
David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
49 matches
Mail list logo
