|
Jt:OUR UNITY IS IN HIM NOT, I REPEAT NOT, IN OUR
AGREEMENT!!
What unity? There is no strife
or disunity in Christ and He is not divided so how can one be saying "I am
of Torrance" and another "I am of Polyani"?
Is Christ now divided? Was
Torrance crucified for you, were you baptized in the name of
Polyani?
If I twist the
scriptures, you wrote the book on that activity. And what is
accomplished in this particular exchange? Nothing. What
I just said is as shameful as your accusation.
jt: I wrote it as a statement
of fact not as a personal accusation John and if you received
something other than my intent and refuse me grace then you are
responsible for your own response - why do you insist on including me in
this problem?
What you see as "twisting" is, in reality,
an honest but perhaps failing effort on my part to either express what I
believe or to actually understand what God intends to be saying to me
now. As I see it, the question does not center itself around "what
is honest," but "what is dishonest." It is dishonest to
assume that one is right to the exclusion of the possibility of being
wrong. That is dishonest.
jt: If I am wrong John, you
(and others of your persuasion) are free to study it out and present me
with appropriate scripture showing where I err in balance and
context. You've not done this so far. You get angry and lose
it - Bill takes his ball and goes home. Lance retreats behind sarcasm
and pithy one liners and it appears as though Jonathan has
retired.
It is dishonest to deny the very heart of
the gospel messsage -- that we all continue to possess sin and
and that the blood continually flows in dealing with this
problem. That is heresy.
jt: I have not ever denied that we
sin or that it very easily besets us John however I don't claim to
own/possess it. I am in the process of separating myself from sin and
putting on Christ because I am now part of a New Creation in Him.
Where we differ is in how we deal with the situation. You claim
there is blood that continually flows which I haven't found anywhere
in scripture; whereas I boldly approach the throne of grace looking for
help in time of need (Heb 4:16)
It is blatantly dishonest to deny the Lord's
concern for unity.
jt: I don't deny the Lord's desire
for unity, only this kind of unity (being of one mind and one heart) is
impossible when we will not agree on the teaching or doctrine of
Christ.
He would be in tears over what happens on
this sight among those who claim to be disciples. Can he save
in spite of all this failure?
Absolutely.
jt: He wept
over Jerusalem and He presently intercedes for those who are
His so that we might overcome - However, when he returns he will
be wearing another hat so to speak. It will be the Day of the Lord or the Day of Jacob's
trouble and too late to change or repent - so this is life or
death.
but soteriological realities do not mean that we are
brethren ----------------- something that I have
recently learned.
jt: Salvation
realities? Why not? Jesus Himself said his family are the ones who do the will of His Father in heaven. He
didn't mention those who have a good understanding of Greek words -
obeying Him is where it's at.
The prodical and his brother did not have much in common,
did they. Both were equally immature and in need of the
Father's love and patience -- a lesson that completely
lost to most who read that
passage.
jt: You and your mentors place so much importance on that
family relationship until your whole theology rests on it - but what
about the "Sower sows the Word?" I don't see anyone pondering that
parable - What are the different kinds of seed? - Why does one produce
wheat and the other tares - Is one English and the other
Greek?.
In a message dated 2/4/2005
10:49:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You are free to think whatever you like - it's not unusual
for people twist God's Word every kind of way. jt
JD: We
have nothing in common Judy -- your little slurs not
withstanding.
jt: Surprised you
would say this Jn, what about the "incarnation?" Nothing I write to you or
anyone else is written as a slur per se; because it is important to me to
walk in love so you are reading something into the text which was never
intended by the author.
I do not believe a word
of the above paragraph. I counsel couples often who justify
their angry or otherwise worthless speech with the phrase, "this is not my
intent."
jt: But you are not my counselor
John - we are on equal turf here and just because this was your experience
with
troubled ppl who come to you for
help why transpose their problem on to me?
As a counselor, I get absolutely nothing
accomplished [with couple's reconciliation] if I allow that
explanation. Nothing. I have to look that person
in the eye and disagree. What we do ON A CONSISTENT
BASIS - AS A WAY OF LIFE, AS A PRACTICE, is a near perfect
representation of what we truly believe.
jt: That is not scriptural
discernment Jn. It is "out of the abundance that fills the heart that the
mouth speaks" You can locate a person by what comes out of their mouths -
(if you are walking in the light yourself that is).
I have no way of
evaluating your performance as a "counselor" John or the
results. I have some Christian friends who had marriage
problems and the wife told me that they had been counseled
to "act like" they love one another the feelings
would follow. Well this proved to be a band-aid fix since they are
now divorced. It takes wisdom from above along with a lot of love, time, patience,
and spiritual discernment to get to the root of these problems, all
we see is fruit. The problem is spiritual, it's an issue of the
heart.
Where it does not
rise to the level of justification, it is
the only avenue for meaningful reconciliation between
couples. I do not accept this as an explanation
-- "I did not intend ..." That is
the incorrect response. The correct
response, by the way, is "I am sorry and I will commit to trying
much harder to respect not only your feelings but your very person [in
Christ or in this marriage]."
jt: I respectfully disagree;
judging responses and trying to fix them will do nothing to change
the underlying problem and our whole lives and every response can not be predicated
upon how it might be received by those around us who are just as paranoid
and wounded? Where's the freedom in that? This causes even more
bondage and is why some (especially women) try to fabricate some
personality and act in a way that is pleasing to everyone around them or
else they become extremely controlling. Did you ever see a movie
called "The Stepford Wives" John?
If a marriage has a
partner that will not come to this point in the conversation, you
have a marriage that has already failed. The percentage figures for success in such cases
-- marital success -- is zero. That is what
I tell them in session. And that is what I am telling
you.
jt: When someone is only
doing the right thing to get a certain response from the other party the
person always knows and
this is not the ministry of
Christ who set captives free by putting the finger of God on the
problem rather than judging the situation by outward appearance and
applying religious bandaids to their wound. If this is pastoral
counselling then no wonder the statistics for divorce in the Church
replicate those out there in the world.
JD: The fact of the matter
is this: under Miller's leadership or lack thereof, this forum is
grossly embedded in tension and cultisms.
jt: I wouldn't blame DavidM for every problem here - He's
only the List Creator/Owner. Do you hold God personally responsible for
everything that has gone wrong with His Creation?
You equate God and
Miller? You deny leadership accountability? Whatever.
jt: There are some parallels - DM did create and he does
sustain the TT list. As for accountability - ultimately we are all
accountable to the one from whom it is impossible to hide and if we
refuse to obey from the heart His hands are tied ....
DM has about the same option other than
becoming dictatorial and micro managing.
Not one thing has improved
under his leadership, upon his return. Facts are facts.
jt: He never went anywhere
Jn. He has been here all along - always giving loving oversight - which is
usually criticized before it is rejected.
Miller was off list for
two or three months.
jt: He was quiet for 2-3 months; are you certain that he was
gone? He has said that he is busy and Perry was
moderating.
And pearls before swine thing --
well, the knife cuts both ways, my dear.
jt: Not for the redeemed. I am one of the redeemed
(by His grace) and I am saying so...
Well, there you have
it. Judy says she is part of the redeemed and thats that. The
judgment with which you judge others is the very judgment you will and are
experiencing. That is biblical.
jt: I know it is John and it's also Biblical that the One
who is my Judge will be using "righteous judgment" IOW He will not be
judging by "what the eyes see or the ears hear" (Jn 7:24) So His
judgment and yours are entirely different. Phew! What a
relief! Thank you Lord.
I will pray for
you, Linda, poor undereducated Deegan and mIller.
jt: Thanks but no thanks
(for me anyway) - you would be praying contrary to God's will for
me.
I do not pray for your
approval.
jt:
And obviously you do not respect my desires (what is it you say to the
troubled marriage ppl again?).
There is a great deal of potential in your allance and
in each, individually.
jt: I'm
not sure what you mean by the above since you believe we are all such a
mess.
This is not "I am right
and you are wrong." We are both a mess. But, of
course, your comments above were only about continuing the
debate. i meant what I said and will be happy to explain at an
appropriate time.
Your
immersion into the Christ of grace will be my prayer. JD
jt: I don't want to be
immersed into what you've become part of John, so far as I can tell it
is a downhill slide, you were much nicer when you first joined TT or
at the start.
Sorry you feel this way. Really.
But being nice and being honest is no longer an option for
me. You, Shields, Miller and Deegan are quick to
challenge one's unique thinking on this forum as heretical, blind,
blasphemous, corrupt, of the flesh
----------------------- all your words at one time or
another. You have never been nice. And so we
will deal with each other in the future as opponents, openly and
honestly. The cultish attitudes and teachings of the four of
you is something that needs to be on the table. And
there it is. Its kind of maddening being on the
defensive, isn't it Judy?
|
