BT: You did not need to read Augustine, Judy, to be
influenced by his thought. I know this is a real hang up for you, but you
"heard" the gospel from someone didn't you? And they heard it from someone
else, didn't they?
jt: Depends what you mean by gospel. The first time
I heard that I needed to come to Jesus was at a Billy Graham rally and I
came fwd but it took another 17yrs for me to take that commitment seriously
and this was when I began to study the scriptures for myself.
Well, take that back to Augustine and you have the
source of several (I'll be kind to you) of your beliefs. I know you think
you go to the Scriptures with just you and the Spirit, but so do a lot of
other Christians -- yet I'll bet you'll all find things upon which to
disagree: Is it the Holy Spirit who is confusing you?
jt: Do I agree with the scriptures or the "other
Christians" who go to them? The Holy Spirit is not confused and He is
the one we should depend upon to lead us into All truth. I can only speak
for myself, I don't know what other Christians are up to.
The truth is, you bring things with you to your
study of Scripture, just as everyone else does, and you draw your
conclusions through that grid. Sometimes the Holy Spirit breaks through and
gets to you and corrects your assumptions, and sometimes he does not.
jt: I know you won't believe this Bill but I had no
assumptions before I began sitting under certain teachers.
Being a Medical Transcriptionist by profession I am
able to take good notes and I began to see a lot of contradictions.
This was also true in some books, the ones that had to do with
explaining what the scriptures were saying - so I layed them all aside and
started over and this is when the scriptures really began to open up and
speak to me.
It is his business as to why he doesn't bring well
meaning Christians to consensus on every theological point, but he does not,
and he does not tell us why this is so.
jt: I know why this is so Bill. It is because His
hands are tied. When we look to men rather than to God we are open to
every wind of doctrine and doctrines of men take the heart captive and blind
the eyes. They also cause division.
Allow me to give you an example of Augustine's
thought upon your own theology: I have pointed out to you on numerous
occasions that the words "spiritual death" do not appear in the biblical
text.
jt: Those exact words may not
be there but the concept is because Adam died the day he ate the fruit from
the wrong tree and we know that he didn't die physically. Why do you
have such a difficult time with this? What is "life and death are in
the power of the tongue" talking about? - physical or spiritual
death.
It is a technical term that you read into the text
in your study of Scripture, as it pertains to the human condition. If it is
a correct theological term, in that it is an accurate conclusion, you have
Augustine to thank for this: it is his term, which you are employing
now as if it were a true biblical concept. I happen to think it comes to us
as a result of the dualism he operated under, because of the Manichaeism in
his past.
jt: I don't know about Augustine and his
Manichaestic dualism but that's not where I'm at. I believe God man man a
triune being. God is Spirit and being made in His image we are also
primarily spirit beings who have a soul and who live in a body. So you see
my beliefs are not patterned after those of Augustine.
As I said before, you may read Augustine and find
that you agree with him -- I'm sure you would on certain points; however, if
you were honest in your inquiry, you would also discover that much of
what you consider to be very biblical finds its roots right there in
Augustine's arguments.
jt: Why can't I be honest with God's Word? I
don't need Augustine as a mediator. IMO this is the problem. We can
not discuss or fellowship around God's Word alone. Why is
that?
To be truthful with you, David, I have not thought about this in the
terms you are drawing to my attention. I will want to look into the meaning
of "condemnation" in the context it is used here. If that condemnation is as
I
stated above, i.e., an effect from the initial removal of A&W from
the tree of life, I believe children do suffer that condemnation with all
humanity.
jt: King David wrote "Behold I was brought forth in
(a state of) iniquity my mother was sinful who
conceived me (and I too, am sinful) (Ps 51:5 Ampl)
BT: Yes, indeed he does. And our same Bible also
says that from the fruit (and think in terms of the sperm) of his genitals,
Jesus would be born (through Mary, of course; see Acts 2.30). Why do you
also deny below that Jesus was born under the same propensities as David,
from his fathers back to Adam?
jt: I say this because Jesus was not born with an
inheritance in "iniquity" - We are all procreated on this earth, he came
down from heaven (in his own Words). He looked like us but was not
like us in any other way except during those hours on the cross when he took
our sin upon Himself. David calls him Lord ie "The Lord said to my
Lord" You are looking at natural seed. Jesus is spiritual seed
who indwelled a natural body.
Jesus himself was born under the judgment of that condemnation -- I
think, hmmmmm.
jt: I'd give this a lot of thought Bill. I
respectfully disagree. The iniquities (generational curses) come down through the Fathers and
those who spoke prophetically over him at the
temple when he was an infant along with the angel
who spoke with Mary before His birth all referred to Him as "that
holy thing"
BT: This conclusion reflects upon your
deficient understanding of the word "holy." Holy is first and formost a term
which speaks to the quality of the relationship within the Godhead, the
mutual indwelling of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is what is in
view in the above mentioned statements.
jt: No holy means undefiled, clean,
pure, set apart and sanctified. God told the Levites they were to sanctify
themselves and be holy and he gave them a list of things that they should
not defile themselves with. In fact being able to separate the holy from the
profane is what defined priests before the Lord (Lev 11:44) and what
they were about which is quite ironic considering the massive homosexuality
and pedophilia in the one structure today who claim an official priesthood
and who Augustine influenced so greatly.
What I am saying pertaining to "the judgment of
that condemnation" is that, being human, Jesus to was born under the
sentence of death, and this in part (at least) because of the post-lapsarian
(which means after the fall) exclusion of humans from the tree of
life.
jt: Jesus didn't have a sentence of death in the
same way that we do. He was the lamb slain before the foundation of
the world for our sin and in our place. Look at the object lesson we
are given under the old covenant. The sacrificial lamb was to be
young, and perfect, without spot or blemish. Noone born into the first
Adam would qualify which is why God was forced to send His ONLY begotten
son.
I also think that all humans are born with a propensity toward sin,
Jesus included, which is another result of Adam's offence.
jt: Jesus could have sinned without having to have
had a "propensity" for it The first Adam chose to
do it without any propensity.
BT: Ah, but unless you are going to deny the
effects of the fall upon Adam's posterity, you will need to explain to me
how Jesus, being the "Son of Adam," born of the Seed of Woman, the Seed of
Abraham, the Seed of David, can have escaped the fleshly propensities of
Adam's fall. You say you do not deny the fall, yet you argue like one who
does. Bill
jt: Jesus was NOT
the "son of Adam" He was the second Adam and
firstborn of the New Creation. He had no earthly father. His Father was
God. I am speaking about the spiritual Bill and seem to always
reinterpret and make it natural man in your replies. Jesus did
not have any inheritance comparable to "the iniquities of the fathers"
because God was His father and the ONLY way he was like fallen humanity was
his likeness. He had a flesh body that got tired, cold and hungry and a
human nature that could have yeilded to the lust of the eyes, the lust of
the flesh, and the boastful pride of life.
Grace and Peace,
judyt
