Re: [TruthTalk] The Mind of Christ

[Judy Taylor]

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 01:04:44 -0700 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Bill is red   JT writes  >  [MacArthur] says the decree is eternal so that makes the son eternal.  I posted the Word from Strongs and it has nothing to do with eternal rather it speaks to a point in time. You have not responded to any of that.   BT: You are correct, Judy, I failed to address this concern. Please see my post to David regarding idioms and figures of speech. I believe I address your question (although not explicitly) in that post.   BT: I'll take that as a sign that you have wearied of our discussion -- "pre-adamic creation": What does that mean?!   jt: God told Adam to replenish the earth. Why would he have used that word if it had not been plenished in the path. This is just a thought, it's not set in concrete but could have been so.   BT: That's an intriguing interpretation, Judy, but not one that applies to our discussion, as it rest entirely upon speculation.   jt: So does relegating certain scriptures to  idioms and figures of speech.   BT: And Judy, you might want to check with Dake on your reading of 1 John 5:7  . . .    jt: Why? Does he say something other than that the three that bear record in heaven are the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit?   BT: I don't know. I haven't read that portion of Dake, not that I am aware of anyway (wink, wink).   jt: Careful Bill - people who wink all the time are 'up to something'   BT: On second thought, I've been reading him myself; pitch him and go with someone who knows what he's talking about. Study notes are not Scripture you know. The inspired words are supposed to be on the top of the page; 1 John 5:7 KJV has quite a background. Did you know that?   jt: Not very charitable Bill but you have to follow your own conscience such as it is.  I see nothing in OT scripture about an eternal Son bearing witness or record in heaven.   BT: Two figures passed through the pieces in the ratification of the Abrahamic covenant. Neither of them was Abraham. Yet it was Abraham and Christ to whom the promises were made; but it was Christ alone by whom the covenant was fulfilled. The pre-incarnate Christ is therefore the only one who could represent the recipient in the ratification of the covenant. Jesus Christ is the Son of God. To jump ahead a bit, since we have established the relational status of the covenant, it is therefore entirely reasonable to conclude that one of the parties who passed through those pieces had to be the pre-incarnate Christ, the eternal Son of the Father; the other being the Father to the Son.   jt: I understand the Covenant to have been between God and Abraham regardless of who passed between the pieces. Christ is the fulfillment.   BT: I would like to know how the Father was the "Father of all spirits" before he had created any of them. Or do you not believe in creation ex nihilo? Or are you suggesting that he was the Father of the Holy Spirit but that that does not in some weird way make the Holy Spirit his Son?   jt: I'm not suggesting any of those things - God has always been and the Holy Spirit is a member of the Godhead.   BT: Merry Christmas, Judy. You just got your gift from me (wink, wink). Use it, but don't wear it out too quickly. Bill   jt: What gift is this?   BT: It's the one which allows you to save face if you are wise enough to do so.   jt: You certainly are not lacking in confidence Bill