Jonathan wrote: > You continue to help us define anthropological theology. > You define all things in God from a human standpoint > instead of allowing God's revelation in Himself to define > all things human (called theological anthropology). > You did it with your word study on 'hate' and you are > doing it again now. You project onto God your own > mythology and then call it theology.
Your indoctrination on this subject of anthropological theology versus theological anthropology might be hindering you from understanding what I do. I certainly relate the things of God to humanity, and I use human terms to approximate things of the spirit because not everyone is able to understand it otherwise. This hermeneutical principle is taught by Jesus in John 3. Nevertheless, my word study on "hate" was only a list of Scriptures showing how the word is used in Scripture, so something is wrong if you think I was somehow incorrectly projecting a human standpoint into a message from God. Furthermore, I did not do the word study to prove anything. Someone requested it and I guess because I am accustomed to doing these kinds of word studies using my Bible program e-sword, I did it for the person who requested it. I was not trying to prove anything or inject my own personal views into it. Jonathan wrote: > Please define grace as administered in the > Person of Jesus Christ and how you feel this > is logical. If we accept the premise that all men have sinned, and we accept the premise that sin results in death, and we accept the premise that God's design is to save some, and we accept the premise that the innocent can die for the guilty, then it is perfectly logical that salvation must be through grace by the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus Christ. There are many other premises and logical connections besides these such that I could probably write an entire book on this subject. I could write out these postulates using mathematical symbols and developing a mathematical presentation, but I don't think that is the kind of analysis you are asking for. Jonathan wrote: > Consider that if all truth will align with reason > and logic then you may be equating logic with > Jesus Christ (Jesus being the Truth). Well, I'm not sure about "equivalency," but certainly I am drawing a correspondence between Jesus Christ, truth, and logic. The word "logic" ultimately comes from the Greek word "logos" which is sometimes translated as "reason" in the KJV (e.g., 1 Peter 3:15, Acts 18:14). This is the same Greek word used in John 1, "in the beginning was the logos ... and the logos was God... and the logos was made flesh and dwelt among us." By the way, I find it very unexpected and fascinating that many of you think that Jesus Christ and truth is sometimes irrational and illogical. I hope you all continue to express your perspective on this idea. I have heard this articulated by college students many times, but it never occurred to me that some faithful believers in Christ seriously embraced this idea. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "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.
