Hi Judy, I�d like to refer you to Bill�s statement: "If words, being what they are, were arrows, they could not "strike" us because they have no substance in and of themselves. The ontological status of words is not in the words themselves but in that to which they refer." I really couldn�t have said it better myself. If we�re both off base I hope Lance will clear it up for us. Sherrie
Hi Sherrie, I understand Satan's fall to be pride and rebellion; a series of "I will's" and yes he was taken with himself.. but I had no problem with Bill's description below. However, I still don't know what Lance was talking about. What is the significance of "words becoming arrows" and where does that come from? In the parable of the sower Jesus uses seed. Am I missing some great revelation that you are privy to here? Shalom judyt From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] David wrote these words to Judy: "Bill and Lance sometimes are as if they are �speaking in tongues� around you because you do not understand their words. Therefore, they should try and explain their words in a way that you can understand it." Please help me if I've missed something, but I do not see the problem as a lack of effort on the part of Bill and Lance to explain their terminology; they are both quite willing and adept to do this; instead it is a lack of openness on the receiving end to recognize it as having any value. I see it as being not about "speaking in tongues," but about having ears to hear. I�ve copied and pasted a couple of examples from Bill- and Lance�s posts below: "To say that evil has no ontological status is to say that it has no status in and of itself. That is to say that evil is a perversion of that which is already good and does have ontological status in Christ. This is true at whatever level, even if we go all the way back to the beginning of evil. Lucifer's sin was a perversion of his beauty: He saw that he was beautiful (good) and became proud and violent (evil). Without the good (beauty) there was no occasion for evil (�iniquity was found within you� -- Eze 28.15)." These were Bill's words to Judy. Lance wrote to Judy, "If 'ontology' were to be applied to the contingent world then words themselves might have a kind of ontological status. However, it's safe to say that if words were arrows few of us are in much danger of being 'struck.'" Sherrie ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 11:12 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] The Being and Nature of the Unborn Child > Judy wrote: > > Bill at what point does discussion become ridiculous? > > It goes without saying that our 21 month old grandson > > does not read nor does he speak full sentences; however, > > he is a spirit being and so responds emotionally to love > > and has demonstrated anger on occasion.. What does this > > have to do with the subject? > > I think the point is that your grandson must learn language and grow in > knowledge in order to understand and appreciate the Scriptures. If > there are words that he does not know, the passage cannot have relevance > and meaning to him unless he learns the words, even though they come > directly from the Bible. The problem is not with the Bible or the > message, but with your grandson's limited understanding. > > In the same way, your lack of understanding of some of the words that > Lance and Bill use is not because they are "unbiblical," nor is it > because they cannot be a source to bless someone. Rather, it is your > lack of knowledge and understanding. You are kind of like your 21 month > old grandson trying to read the Bible. :-) > > However, there is a side of this that deserves consideration. Bill and > Lance sometimes are as if they are "speaking in tongues" around you > because you do not understand their words. Therefore, they should try > and explain their words in a way that you can understand it. They > should "interpret" what they say that you do not understand. At the > same time, you should not think that their message has no ability to > bless you because they are rooted in some kind of philosophy that uses > words you have not found in your Bible. Let those who have knowledge > among us condescend to those without knowledge and help them understand, > but also let those who lack knowledge not despise those who have > obtained it. > > Am I making any sense to you, or did I only muddy the waters more? > > 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. > --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ---------- "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. --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ---------- "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.
