Lance wrote: > Without once again engaging in what appears to be > your understanding of syntax vs syntactics, will > you interpret for me that additional paragraph > (by TFT).
I don't know where you are quoting from or the context of what is being said. Can you offer us some more information? It seems to me that you should yourself just tell us how you interpret what he is saying. Aren't you the student of Torrance here? Lance wrote: > I'd suggest that your framework for both thinking and > interpreting is Greek (individualistic, pagan, non-trinitarian > & relational, and possessing a 'religious' spirit'). On the contrary, my framework is reading the Scriptures and comparing spiritual things with spiritual. I think you grossly misunderstand my framework of thinking. Furthermore, I am far from individualistic. My theology is very community oriented. I see the ekklesia as the community of believers in a locality, and see the ekklesia as the body of Christ. Perhaps you confuse my reductionistic approach to problem solving with individualism. Lance wrote: > This is that upon which American society was founded. Sorry, Lance, but you would have a very hard time convincing me that American society was found upon paganism. I wonder what Pagan Wolf thinks about that idea. Go ahead and make your case if you think it is so obvious. Lance wrote: > There is indeed a 'spiritual warfare' going on here > (even in this discussion). I think we all agree with this. Lance wrote: > THE TRINITARIAN NATURE OF GOD is the center out of > which we ought to be doing all of our theologizing Why? Lance wrote: > One way of characterizing this is to contrast theological > anthropology and anthropological theology. You, I would > suggest are 'doing' the latter while Bill & Jonathan are > 'doing' the former. I strongly disagree. It seems to me that this ad hominem perspective you take just makes you feel better about your arguments because you can't deal with the Scriptures that we bring up. There has been a noticeable tendency that whenever we quote Bible, there is an inability to deal with it. In fact, it appears like you think the Bible can be used to proof text just about anything, so rather than using the Bible to understand God, it seems to me that you just invent an idea of God that you like and then try to make all teachings conform to your own personal idea of God. Isn't this why you say that the "Trinitarian nature of God is the center out of which we ought to be doing all of our theologizing"? We know that we are using the proper method of approaching Scripture because we are walking in the same tradition as Jesus and the apostles. They always peppered their discourse with references to Scripture that illustrated the concepts that they were sharing. "It is written" or "as saith the prophet" or "have ye not read" are very common instructions in Scripture. Of course, just referencing Scriptures does not in itself mean that they are being interpreted properly, but anyone who avoids the Scriptures in discussing theology is highly suspect of approaching theology from a man-centered perspective rather than a God-centered perspective. We believe that God reveals himself through Scripture, and therefore we consider it seriously in all discussions about God. 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.
