Charles Perry Locke wrote:
>DAVEH: I've previously wanted to discuss these Perry, but so far I don'tDAVEH: I've got no problem with that, Perry. I have often given my definition for words as I see them just so TTers wouldn't be confused. All I ask in return is that TTers tell me how they define them, so we can carry on a reasonable conversation about them.
>recall anybody wanting to have a serious discussion. Are you willing to do
>so? If you don't like how I defined them, please offer your definition and
>we can chat about our contrasting views.My goal in pointing out the LDS meaning v. the Christian meaning is to
remind people that when LDS use words, they often mean something different
than what Christians mean when they use them.
I do not want Christians whoDAVEH: LOL.....Nonsense, Perry. Have I not said that I believe being one with God refers to purpose? And, have I not said that it is the ultimate goal of our eternal progression to become like God.....as in, becoming a God? Do you think there are any TTer who thinks I've been trying to hide my beliefs about these definitions? Long before you came to TT, Perry, I've tried to make a point of defining my terms so that there would be as little confusion as possible in TT about what I believe. My past posts speak for themselves.
do not know the LDS meanings to be mislead into thinking that the Mormons
think or believe the same way Christians do. Call me protective, but I feel
it is my duty, if I know that someone is being mislead by words, to correct
that. You certainly aren't going to tell them that you mean something
different.
And, if you want "my" definition, use the Bible and a good dictionary.DAVEH: I see. Could this mean you don't want to discuss them with me?
Strong's, Vine's, and Zhodiates' come to mind.
I am a bit of a disadvantage here Perry, as I don't have any of the reference sources you mentioned above......excepting the Bible. And as I read Jn 17, purpose certainly seems to be the underlying message of the oneness of God with his Son and ourselves. However, I do have a non-LDS work, THE INTERPRETERS ONE-VOLUME COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE. May I assume that meets with your approval? Let me in part quote from it in reference to Jn 17......
"But the last and the eternally continuing prayer of Jesus is that the unity of love AND PURPOSE he has with his Father will be reflected in the unity of the church in himself, and that the mission he received and fulfilled from his Father will be the same mission of all who find joy fulfilled in his discipleship throughout all times and ages." pg 724
I'm at a bit of a loss how to proceed from here, Perry. The above commentary clearly describes purpose as being an integral definition of the oneness described by the Lord in ch 17. If you disagree, please explain why?
Perry>From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [TruthTalk] Like God and One With God
>Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:23:15 -0800
>
>
>
>Charles Perry Locke wrote:
>
> > MORMON REDEFINITION ALERT!
> >
> > DAVEH wrote: Eternal progression is the evolution from our spiritual
>birth
> > to eventually becoming one with God, and like God. To do that, I
>believe it
> > was necessary for the fall of Adam to take place, and the grace of the
>Lord
> > to provide a pathway to salvation.
> >
> > 1. "one with God" means "one in purpose".
> >
> > 2. "like God" means "become a god", not "godlike".
>
>DAVEH: I've previously wanted to discuss these Perry, but so far I don't
>recall anybody wanting to have a serious discussion. Are you willing to do
>so? If you don't like how I defined them, please offer your definition and
>we can chat about our
>contrasting views.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
