|
Judy wrote > no I didn't just want to insult you; I
am sharing my thoughts here, have never been into ad hominem attacks on
TT.
Well then you obviously need to be a little more
selective in your wording, Judy, because you are offensive, very much so, and
sometimes you are called on it, like this time. I forgive you now and will pray
the grace to forgive you many more times.
I'll tell you what: I know that I have goaded you
on occasion -- I admitted doing that even last night. I should not do that and I
will stop. Will you please try to extend to me some decency? You know quite well
that I do not go to the Scribes for my wisdom. Why suggest that I do, if not to
stir up strife? I do not appreciate those kind of remarks, just as you do not
like being goaded. Let's not do that.
Also, Judy, in a different post you talk about how
you would just like to challenge me. Well, that is fine -- if you will do
it honestly. But I am not willing to patronize any longer your spin. You
are an intelligent person and well equipped to challenge me straight on. No one
can carry on a conversation with a politician -- he is too shifty, too evasive,
too enamored with his own talking points to be open to true
exchange. You, I am sure, do not want to be associated with this
sort. Please stop twisting my words and dodging my questions: address what
I say, without the spin, or leave me alone.
If you believe what you wrote about TT, "We are discussing Truth here,
right?" then let's do it with integrity
and respect -- or let's not do it at all. I am opened to this. Are
you?
Sincerely,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 8:41
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] God Hates
Blaspheming
jt: These are who you quote
Bill and I am sharing my thoughts here, have never been into ad hominem
attacks on TT. We are
discussing Truth here, right?. Could we just stay with the issues and
leave off the personal offenses? (that is taking or giving personal offense)
If you are a sincere seeker after Truth you should not be offended to
have some of these ideas challenged.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I do not look to the Scribes for wisdom, Judy;
neither do I look to Charles Ryrie. On this occasion I agree with the Scribes
over Ryrie. How did you miss that from what I wrote? Oh, I get it:
you just wanted to insult me.
Bill
I may have unfairly
jumped to a conclusion concerning your concept, Slade, thus lumping you
into a group in which you do not fit. If this is so, please forgive me.
When you wrote, "see the miracles of Yeshua," I was
thinking Yeshua would need to be visibly present to be seen working the
miracles; that is all. I did not intend to imply that you interpret
the passage this way in order to rid yourself and others of the
threat. I saw that only as a result of this interpretation of the
passage. I certainly do believe miracles still happen; each time a person
comes to faith, it is a testimony to the greatest of miracles and
demonstrates the ongoing miraculous work of God in Christ through the Holy
Spirit.
Why would Jesus need to be
seen?. God the Father was not seen when He was doing works through Jesus but
at least one man came to him and said "noone could do the works he
did unless God was with Him" and this was before the cross. People did
not get Born Again until the Spirit was sent at Pentecost. Being Born
Again is a work of the Spirit in a person's heart but it is not a working of
Miracles.
Allow me to quote Charles Ryrie from his Study
Bible to give you an idea of why I may have prematurely evaluated what you
were saying: "Technically, according to the Scribes,
blasphemy involved direct and explicit abuse of the divine name.
Jesus here teaches that it also may be the reviling of God by attributing
the Spirit's work to Satan. The special circumstances involved in this
blasphemy cannot be duplicated today; therefore this sin cannot now
be committed."
Why look to the scribes for
wisdom? Weren't they the ones who hung out with the Chief Priest and
Pharisees all the time? Even the common people knew they didn't speak with
authority (Mark 1:22) and most of them didn't recognize Jesus as the Word of
God when he was speaking truth right to their face because of the
condition of their hearts.
I tend to agree with the
Scribes over the limited view of Ryrie: blasphemy is
a deliberate abuse of the divine name, a twisting of the identity
of Christ, which renders him less than Lord (Yahweh) and Savior, the effect
being a denial of the name of Jesus (Yahweh saves). And so the blasphemy of
the Holy Spirit, as I understand it, is a refusal to yield to the
present, personal testimony of the Spirit to the person and work of
Jesus Christ. In the Hebrews passage that I mentioned, and you mentioned as
well, the preacher includes in his warning these words: "Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be
thought worthy who has ... insulted the Spirit of grace?" (10.29) What is
this insult (which is certainly blasphemous) if it is not the rejection of
Jesus Christ, a blatant trampling underfoot the Son of God through
counting the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing
(in other words, nothing at all) and not the absolute and wondrous life
giving miracle that it was?
The insult could be
promoting "another Jesus" an anti Christ, in the sense of (in place of) and
this is what we are warned against. Israel did it all the time. They
followed their own wayward hearts and their own ideas. Being obdurant, stiff
necked, and refusing to allow the Spirit through God's Word to lead us into
ALL truth is blaspheming the Holy Spirit because there is no other way to be
saved. I wonder if God will be pleased with 400+ different theologies
and systems all claiming to lead people to Him.
|
