Re: [TruthTalk] TOE revisited

[Lance Muir]

Iff both you and I believe alike as to both Man & God then, I've misunderstood you. I read you as saying that HK 'had' a 'spirit' and a 'soul'. As to Gregory, you are correct. There's no contradiction here that I can see.   What 'tools' you ask? David, I believe some software package(s). You, I understood to have a concordance and, some 'language aids'.   As to 'words', you've totally lost me. We both (all) employ them. They have meaning. Our understanding of those words ESPECIALLY IN SCRIPTURE differs.    I am still waiting for YOUR response to the matter of understanding being partial and provisional AND that what you speak (teach) on some matters might be 1. a little bit incorrect 2. quite a bit incorrect 3. completely wrong?   From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: December 20, 2004 08:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] TOE revisited On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:48:30 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I've always admired the research 'tools' used by David & yourself. This would be an excellent opportunity for you to employ them. Many, Judy, believe as you do on the nature of HK..(one, bipartate, tripate) I allign myself with 'monism'. God is One and we are One.   jt: What are the "research tools" used by David and myself that you admire Lance? You've never said anything like this before. I also believe that God is One and man is one - this is what I have been saying but I understood you to be a follower of those who have been influenced by and follow the writings of Gregory of Nyzantius(?) and his idea of Perichoresis or the Godhead in a divine dance which would of necessity take more than One.   Thus endeth the lesson ('til you engage in some linguistic homework)   jt: Linguistic?? I don't see the problem as being one of language. In fact, we are warned against striving over words  in scripture Why can't we agree to use the words we have been given in scripture and pray to God for understanding. Would this be acceptable with you?   jt: Can you show me your foundation or basis for these emphatic pronouncements about humankind Lance?   On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:27:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: HK is a living, while breathing, soul. HK does not HAVE a soul but IS soul.HK is not spirit nor do we possess A spirit. May I, preemptively, suggest that on this very important topic, language (original) matters. Hebrew 'monism' is our template here. Paul, in no way disagrees with this. On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:59:37 -0500 "Slade Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Essence "Spirit, Soul, Body (Triune Being)" has nothing to do with he "Us" in the Creation narrative. Essence has nothing to do with God being "One." jt: Of course it does Slade. God is Spirit and Man is spirit; being made in His image is what differentiates mankind from the animals.     The Hebrew text (as a rule) deals strictly with action,i.e., verb forms as opposed to static "To Be" forms. For instance, Echad (One) in Deuteronomy 6:4 is a VERB. -- slade   jt: How IYO would the above change the fact that God is Spirit and so is Man?