I sent this out too soon and it
was badly in need of editing ... Sorry 'j'
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I really should already be gone but I wanted to add a comment -- my ego constrains me!!
The reason why we include the 400 (or more) in our search for truth is rather obvious to me and Judy knows this scripture before I am able to finish the text:
Eph 4:11ff " And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers for the equipping of the saints [in] their work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ [and will do so] until we attain to the unity of The Faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man [or woman], to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fulness of Christ."
As I see it, Bill and others quote whoever for the same reason we have preachers and teachers. There is a progressive logic that presents Bill with his theological conclusions, more so than a Bible thumper such as myself, but, and it is clear to me, in the final analysis, brother Taylor insists that his conclusion measure up to the biblical message as he understands that message. In other words, he is as Bible based as any one. However, the observation still applies that when we think we know something, we do not yet know it as we ought.
I really should already be gone but I wanted to add a comment -- my ego constrains me!!
The reason why we include the 400 (or more) in our search for truth is rather obvious to me and Judy knows this scripture before I am able to finish the text:
Eph 4:11ff " And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers for the equipping of the saints [in] their work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ [and will do so] until we attain to the unity of The Faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man [or woman], to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fulness of Christ."
As I see it, Bill and others quote whoever for the same reason we have preachers and teachers. There is a progressive logic that presents Bill with his theological conclusions, more so than a Bible thumper such as myself, but, and it is clear to me, in the final analysis, brother Taylor insists that his conclusion measure up to the biblical message as he understands that message. In other words, he is as Bible based as any one. However, the observation still applies that when we think we know something, we do not yet know it as we ought.
jt: I don't know about the observation John; we've got to
know something and hopefully we are growing into our salvation.
The start is not the
finish. We have been given the "power to become" the children of
God. Neither am I convinced that the ministry
giftings have always been present when one looks at what is out there. Attend a "user friendly" Megachurch and
tell me who is responsible for and is looking out for your
soul.
Up until the Reformation there was just one
corrupt system taking souls captive which system began by uniting Church
and State. By Luther's generation this system had become so bad that
he risked everything to take a public stand against it and only after
his breaking free and the Protestant revolt did these other systems
arise along with all of the isms Calvinism vs Arminianism etc. so that today
there are many, many, people professing Christ who are all
speaking different languages (see TT) and who all claim to be headed for the
same place - this is totally mind boggling.
I'm glad it is Jesus who is in the process
of building His Church and that He is the one who is responsible
for directing the sifting of the wheat from the tares.
However, it is my personal belief that our
interpretation of God's Word is of paramount importance since all judgment
in heaven and on earth has been given over to Him and He says we will be judged
by the Word He spoke (see John 12:48) Not someone else's interpretation of the
Word He spoke.
In a message dated 7/24/2004 7:43:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jt: These are who you quote Bill and no I didn't just want to insult you; 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
