Re: [TruthTalk] Ad-hominem attacks was Christian Perfection

[Lance Muir]

Judy: He was wrong when he said that "short people got no reason for livin'" However when the consensus is that you are vertically challenged and you live in denial, well...Lance PS: How does it go? If the shoe fits..  ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 12, 2004 09:04 Subject: [TruthTalk] Ad-hominem attacks was Christian Perfection Izzy, it would be nice if you would take a lesson out of your own book IOW practice what you preach. I've been giving you some space in not responding to your messages but you have really gone over the top here.   Where is your kind and tender heart in any of this?  You really need to let God be God because He and He alone sees the heart and it is He who will declare who is and who is not "righteous" you may like and respect DavidM but this is not your call.  Are you aware that taking up an offence for DavidM puts you in a worse position than he is in? God gives grace to the one under attack (if this is the case) but when you revile others in taking up for him you put yourself out there with no cover/protection because vengeance belongs to God and He is the one who will repay.    Yesterday you were thanking Lance for taking up for you when he announced that someone (I forget who) owed you an apology.   Repentance is also in order for this mess.  I can't help it if you misunderstand just about everything I write but you are responsible for your reaction and this is a personal attack which if ignored by DavidM and Perry will cause them to be remiss.       judyt ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Izzy writes: Here is a lesson for us on discernment when it comes to negative, accusing, evil-speaking, reviling, hateful people:   To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. (Titus 1:15)    You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.  The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil. But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. (Matt 12: 34-36)   May God have mercy on the merciless! [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Lance,   What is “too much” for me is people like Elsman who hate David Miller because he is a truly righteous man. (Trust me, I know him personally.) Or people like Chris, who hates all Catholics, Protestants, (not just their doctrines, but them) and doctors to boot.  And people like Judyt whose elbows must be out of joint from constantly pointing out the flaws, sins, ulterior evil intents (even of the most innocent children), and incorrect doctrines of others while simultaneously patting herself on the back for her own superior “discernment”. (Have you ever heard her say anything KIND about ANYONE? And yet how eager she is to seek out and forward evil reports about anyone who is mentioned favorably by someone on TT!!!).  But you learn to expect that from certain people who project their unconscious self-hatred of their own evil onto others, and then persecute them for it.   What is really too much for me to take is when you expect something better of someone who should be above all that, and then are entirely let down.  That’s just more than I can deal with, even on a good day. I just don’t have the stomach for any of it anymore. You have to suffer through too much pride and self-aggrandizement here to enjoy the simple goodness of the sweet-but-imperfect ones.  And you know who you are. I love you.   Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 5:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Christian Perfection   Izzy:Please don't allow TT to become "too much" for you. I'd miss your tender heart in the mix. This won't lead to anyone being burned at the stake! A steak might be in order but, the kind over which differences might be disscussed and hugs might follow. Blessings, Lance ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 12, 2004 07:26 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Christian Perfection   Bill,   Funny, I thought the discussion between you and David was about Greek translations, but now I realize it was really all about you.  Guess that shows what I know.   You have no idea how shocking and hurtful your words, below, are.  I am literally crying for David Miller right now because I know how hurt he will be to read this.   I think TT is too much for me to take,   Izzy     My accuser claims I have mishandled the Word of God. Before judging me too hastily But please do not judge me before knowing my motives -- Is that too much to ask? -- because our accuser does not care about me, he does not care about us, he cares only about himself.   I have been accused of an ethical problem. My integrity has been called into question.     I am tired of hearing Christians condemning Christians.   I suggested to David that perhaps the better way to go in this discussion would be to agree to disagree and show the world that we can love each other in spite of our own limitations. He thought better of that -- but Christians can do this, you know.   May I say something to you, David? I would like to say it to Izzy and Judy as well. I do not like the quickness with which you condemn your brothers and sisters.   David, please do not be so rude.   Bill                      ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 9:24 PM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Christian Perfection   > Bill wrote: > > I bring my knowledge of these truths from the > > Gospels of Christ with me to my translation of > > John's epistle. I do not apologize for that. > > Yes, it does seem to me that you let your theology force itself upon the > passage.  We all bring such with us, but we should try to let the > passage speak for itself.  I certainly do not disagree with the theology > you bring, but when it blinds you to other issues being brought forth, > that is troublesome to me. > > Bill wrote: > > And so you or any Greek scholar are welcome > > to disagree with my rendering of these Greek > > words. I ask only that you be honest enough > > to consider what you are bringing with you > > when you go to the same text and begin > > to translate. > > I think I am well aware of what I bring with me, but if not, it seems > like nobody will step up to the plate and tell me about it.  Seems like > too many think it too rude to tell David Miller that he is wrong about > this and why he is wrong. > > Look, you never addressed my main question.  I never objected to word > order at all, but you gave a long lecture about how word order does not > matter.  Fine.  No problem there.  My problem was with how you perceived > "pas" to be modifying "oidamen."  I have been taught and have observed > in the Greek Bible that adjectives always agree in case, gender, and > number with the words they modify.  So if this word was being used to > modify "oidamen" as you say, it should be plural instead of singular. > In other words, the word would have been rendered "pantes" instead of > "pas."  Therefore, I reject your translation on this basis.  If you say > fine, and leave it at that, then I guess life goes on.  However, I think > a truly honest discussion would consider this point and attempt to help > me understand my error, or you would recognize that you have brought too > much of your theology into play here and are missing the aspect that > John is bringing out here, and that is how Christ becomes incarnated > within us, how we partake of his divine nature, and how it finds > _expression_ through us.  We truly receive power to become sons of God, as > John mentions in his gospel.  > > I also asked you to show some passages which use "pas" as a modifier in > the way that you suggest, but your response offered none.  This is a > very common word, used more than 1200 times.  I have checked many and I > can't find any.  I can only assume from your silence that you have never > seen it either.  I have brought to you other passages that have used > "pas" in connection "ho" and seems to translate it well as "whosoever." > No comment from you about that.  > > In this last post, you seem to want to force "pas" as a modifier and do > not realize that adjectives often stand alone.  Mounce terms this being > either "adjectivally" or "substantivally."  Obviously I take the > position that "pas" is used substantivally here, but you seem to see no > option for that. > > I presented the interlinears, hoping for you to provide your own, and > perhaps from there lead to a translation that is appreciative of the > words used in the text.  I was a little confused by your reference to > "transliteration" when it seemed that you perhaps meant the interlinear > translation.  You seemed to agree with the interlinears I provided, yet > your translation strays very far away from it.  You claim liberty to do > this because a transliteration is not a translation.  Ok.  How about > then providing me with other Greek scholars fluent in Greek who would > translate this passage as you have.  I have searched dozens of > translations and I can't find one.  Many do try and mangle this verse to > keep it from saying what it obviously says.  Their theology, which is > similar to yours, is obviously being pushed into their translations, yet > none of them are so bold as to translate this first phrase as speaking > about Christ rather than all of us who are born of God through faith in > Christ. > > You may be tired of this whole thing and if so, no big deal.  I'm ready > to move on too, but if we leave it at this, I must admit to being a > little dissatisfied.  At the very least, you should say something about > how an adjective in the singular can be used to modify a word that is > plural.  Why use "pas" instead of "pantes"? > > I don't know if you have Mounce's grammar, "Basics of Biblical Greek." > I decided to pull it off my shelf and take a look because you had > mentioned that you had met Mounce and appreciated him.  Anyway, in > chapter 9 on adjectives, Mounce says in 9.8, "An adjective has case, > number, and gender, and will always have the same case, number, and > gender as the noun it modifies."  I realize that this is kind of being > technical with one authority here, but if what Mounce says is true, on > what basis do you claim that "pas" in 1 John 5:18 modifies "oidamen"? > Do you think Mounce is wrong, or is there some other explanation? > "Oidamen" is plural while "pas" is singular.  If you could at least > consider this one important point, I would appreciate it. > > Peace be with you. > David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. > > ---------- > "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. > >