Re: [TruthTalk] FELLOWSHIP (was Dialogue with Mormons)

[Wm. Taylor]

Wrong. He fellowshipped with them and then they made a commitment to him, then they loved him. I John 4.18-19 -- "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love. We love Him because He first loved us." The movement is always, God>manward. Was Jesus not God? Did he not always do the will of his Father? Why would his dining with tax collectors and harlots be anything less than his love and demonstration of that perfect love for them; and that being the reason for the change of their heart/attitude for him?    Bill Taylor ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 5:59 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] FELLOWSHIP (was Dialogue with Mormons) He ate with them but ATST was separate from them, fellowship and relationship involve trust and commitment..   "Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men and needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man" (John 2:24) and   "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens (Hebrews 7:26)   Jesus fellowshipped with those who had first made a total (left all) commitment to him.  jt.   From: "Wm. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and this is not the standard Jesus and the First Century Church left to us.    Do you mean that Jesus did not really dine with tax collectors and harlots? From: Judy Taylor John wrote: I don't want to speak for Blaine, but I see nothing in Mormonism that prevents either of us to fellowship with non-LDS Christians.  Perhaps I don't understand fellowship quite the same way you do though.  Fellowship.  I do think that fellowship is bigger than denominational boundaries but limited  by a true sense of mutuality and purpose.  A lexical view of koinonia reveals a number of nuances, to wit  (old guys say that a lot, "to wit"):  fellowship, association, community, communion, joint participation, intercourse.  Note the progression.   It was part of the routine of the first church (Acts 2:42).   jt: Scripture defines "fellowship" as "walking in the light as HE is in the light"  This is the only way we can have true fellowship (light also meaning truth) and this is when the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us.  When we compromise with the mixture we are fellowshipping with devils and this is not the standard Jesus and the First Century Church left to us.    john: My experience with the Mormon church has been one that is the  witness to a degree of exclusion which goes beyond sectarian or denominational bias.  It seems to me that this exclusiveness is the surrounding halo of a  world religion.   If that is the case, we have no fellowship or brotherhood.   I don't like saying that.  I have only my instincts about this issue. If Blaine and I are brothers (or Dave and I),   to what eventuality can we point as the defining factor which presents us with the same Parent? Or is there more to brotherhood than divine genetics?       jt: The fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man are taught by Freemasonry and the mystic cults, it's part of the OLD religion. God created all men but today Jesus defines the brethren.  He said "who is my mother and who are my brethren? and he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Matthew 12:48).  This is an impossible feat if we are holding on to 'doctrines of devils'   judyt