Re: [TruthTalk] Reality vs Imagination

Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:27:12 -0800

It rather reflects your connection to reality Lance; I am still right on target. This thread began with reality vs imagination and I am still right there in spite of your attempt to veer off into a Q & A session with you supplying both questions and answers along with some of the same old accusations.
 
Yesterday at our Bible Study we sang a hymn based on (2 Tim 1:12) titled "I Know Whom I Have Believed" written by Daniel W. Whittle (1804-1901).  And this old saint knew what he was about. The words to the 3nd stanza read "I know not how the Spirit moves, convincing men of sin, revealing Jesus through the Word, creating faith in Him" - I submit that this is the ONLY way Jesus is and has ever been revealed because "Faith comes by hearing and hearing, by the Word of God (Romans 10:17), and if we are justified before God we are justified by faith (Romans 5:1,2).
 
To have faith in a figment of your own imagination has no foundation in God, in fact we are instructed to "Cast down imaginations and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God and to bring EVERY thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor 10:5); the ppl who God gives over to their own destructive ways in Romans 1 had become "vain in their imaginations" so it is nothing to take lightly.  for Karl Barth's teachings to pass muster they would have to undergo the searchlight of scripture - and so far they have a failing grade.   jt
 
 
 
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:06:01 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Am I the only one to have noticed that Jt's responses to posts function on a sliding scale? The 'scale' reflects a diminishing connection to the content of the post, the more responses there are. If it were a tactic, it'd be a good one should avoidance be the objective.  Jt:You actually don't see it do you? Should you ever wish to understand why some just cry 'enough' then, that's part of the reason.  Why not ask questions when you just don't understand? YOU ABSOLUTELY DID NOT UNDERSTAND GARY OR BILL! If David's out there 'lurking', he just might have. Terry did not. Linda surely did not. Kevin COULD NOT.  Also Judy, why not leave off taking 'pot shots' at that which you think you're supposed to disagree with even when you don't apprehend the meaning of what's being said (meant)?  
 
Not a claim Lance; I made a comment having to do with conjuring up some kind of Jesus by using one's imagination which you apparently see as normal christianity and which to me is divination.  jt 
 
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:07:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
These are not demands. You make a claim on your own behalf. You are asked to back up this claim. You say that you won't do it.I believe that what just happened here is in need of little in the way of interpretation. It is certainly not ironic.
 
 Lance I've got to go out and won't be back until later today lest you misinterpret my silence. I find it ironic that you - the one who comes in with the one liner and then retires until the noise dies down would make these kinds of demands.  You who normally speak in obscure unintelligible sentences (to those who don't spend all of their times watching movies that is).  jt 
 
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 07:48:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jt's 'slip slidin' away' once again. When your asked ANYTHING with some specificity, you just turn the tables thus, critiquing the one who asks you a genuine question. Will you:
1. Demonstrate my meaning?
2. Address the issue therein?
Please put up or...... 
 
From: Judy Taylor On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 07:18:32 -0500
"Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
When you, David, Kevin et al SELECT TEXTS which you deem appropriate for any issue under discussion, you are interpreting, teaching, imagining..God's own answers to that which is being spoken of. I do not believe that you've ever 'seen' that, nor do I believe that you ever will 'see' that. IMO it's not complicated.
 
jt: You don't have to "believe me" Lance since I'm not looking for followers. However, I do think it tragic that you know so much about movies and lines in movies and so little about the Word of God which shows me clearly which type of wisdom has your full attention.  Obviously you are not involved with taking thoughts captive to the obedience of Christ but rather walking in the counsel of the ungodly and sitting in the seat of the scoffer (with regard to DM anyway)  jt 
 
I don't demonize any part of the body per se Lance but without spiritual discernment everyone is open to deception.  Look at how the adversary uses the "imagination" and John Lennon's song is a perfect example.  God does not reveal Himself to mankind through their fallen imaginations. Nor does He reveal His Word to us in this way.  Faith imagination is a misnomer.  How do you know the Jesus you conjure up is not the "angel of light?"  God  will either hide or reveal Himself to whomsoever He wills - and He hides Himself from the proud but gives grace to the humble.  jt
 
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:20:09 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jt:'I don't want a Jesus of my own imagination..'
1. Please don't demonize the imagination. It comes into play in all of our thinking (theologizing).
The kind of 'interpreting' that you, David et al do on a regular basis.
2. Therefore, like it or not, YOU DO HAVE A JESUS OF YOUR OWN 'IMAGINING'. 
 
G, you sound just like my mother who, last time I was with her was in total unbelief and I have no reason to believe things have changed since then.  She told me one would have to have a good imagination to believe the Bible.  This is the fruit of liberal unbelieving scholars and clergy on the radio and in her Church which BTW has lost it's candlestick and is getting ready to close the doors and auction the building.  God will not be mocked and ppl always reap what they sow.  I don't want a Jesus of my own imagination who would just be another antichrist figure.  judyt
 
 

Reply via email to