Response in green -- John
In a message dated 7/25/2004 6:21:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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.
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
jt: We don't receive understanding from God by way of logic, progressive or otherwise. Wasn't this Aristotle's forte? Also what is progressive about going back to Gregory of Nazianzus in the 4th Century and running with his revelation? We need the clear teaching of scripture. Where do Jesus, Paul, or any of the apostles speak of this "perichoresis?" Can you or Billt show it to me in scripture?.
I agree -- logic is not a final source. What is a postulate? In math, it is an essential assumption for which there is no demonstrable scientific evidence or proof. It is a truth that has never been proven wrong up to this point in time. Logic fails to give proof about something that must be true. But logic is right most of the time because truth is of that nature. When I say that Bill is moved by a progressive logic, I mean to say that he starts with the reasonableness of point A, moves to something he calls point B which leads him to C and so on. It is progressive because it takes him to a conclusion. I have read enough of Bill's theology to know that the final test is whether the conclusion is affirmed in someway in scripture. Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers all have one thing in common -- a primary aspect to their ministry is the presentation of Divine thought. As I see it, how they do this is personal preference. I do not read the Church Fathers. I have several books in my library -- just never have gotten around to that reading. But what I have read leads me to believe that even they, so many years ag0, concerned themselves with divine truth not philosophical bantering.
The scripture is true, of course, and stands on its own merits. I believe it has much to do with the discussion at hand and is the reason why we share, write, read, and listen to others. The historicity of the spititual gifts and appointed ministries is not something I am concerned with -- only the claims of one who shares the same Father and is excited enough with his (in this case, Bill T) understanding of the scriptures.
jt: Up until the Reformation there was just one corrupt system which began by uniting Church and State and by Luther's generation this system had become so bad that this man risked everything to take a public stand against this corruption. Only after his breaking free and the Protestant revolt that followed did these other systems arise along with all of the isms Calvinism vs Arianism etc. Actually it is kind of like the Balkans. Tito suppressed everything through fear and once he was gone - all hell broke loose, literally. And this is so in Church circles today. Everyone professes Christ but they are all speaking different languages and all claim to be headed for the same place which 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 will direct the sifting of the wheat from the tares.
Nothing I am saying has anything to do with systems and the inventions of man. You have described the very reason for I Co 8:1-3. Our relationship with God is primarily one of love rather than a thoughtful correctness. And we can be led astray by our own thoughts or even the thoughts of others. But if we keep coming back to scripture to varify or affirm our mental wonderings, we cannot get far from the truth. Surely God can cover the slack!!
I see Bill and Jonathan and Lance and Perry and you and me and Iz and Chris and slade and ..... doing this very thing --- returning to scripture to affirm our position.
Jesus is the one who judges. We are not. I believe your last sentence above is saying that very thing.
jt: Church discipline appears to be non-existent in our day so we must be responsible to discern between good and evil and hold fast to that which is good; Paul warned about wolves in sheep's clothing (Acts 20:28-31) and some were of their own selves.
Yes but wasn't church discipline primarily used to deal with rank immorality? The "false prophet" was a danger to the church when he pressed his dogma to the point of division.
He was to be excluded for divisivenss. I don't think you are saying that Bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing, although I have heard some strange things about his manner of dress.
jt: Loving God and loving our neighbor fulfills all the law and the prophets. Our old carnal mind will tell us this is easy until we look at love through the eyes of God and His holiness. The kind of love scripture speaks of is ONLY possible from a pure heart which is the goal of the instruction of scripture (1 Tim 1:5) along with a good conscience and unfeigned faith....
Christ summerizes His "word" when He tells us to (1) love God and (2) love our neighbor. We can do that.
Amen. Absolutely right on. I might add that growth figures in the mix as well. I am much more inclined to holiness now than I was in my twenties. And I understand my God more than I did just 5 years ago.
jt: How would you interpret John 12:48 JohnD?
To expand John 12:48 to include correct interpretation of the entire biblical text -- well, I doubt that you are saying that.
We are getting ready to visit one of the kids and my wife just walked by the office with "taht look" on her face. I will get back to you on this last question.
a brother
John Smithson
