Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?

[Caroline Wong]

Yes, we all have the mind of Christ and so can make judgments about all kinds of things but am not subject to man's judgment (1 Cor. 2:15-16). John wrote that the anointing I received from Jesus remains in me and I do not need anyone to teach me. His anointing teaches me about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit, I should remain in him. (1 John 2:27)   The Person I met and who spoke to me (once audibly, many times through the bible and internally) has revealed Himself as love and the fullness of God dwells in him and He is the final revelation of God. God is Love. All our theology and thinking must submit to a person who is real, alive, and can be encountered. Countless others from simple nuns like Theresa of Avila to mathematicians like Pascal and theologians like Bonhoeffer have encountered the Living God and came to the same conclusion.   Love,   Caroline ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 6:54 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"? The difference here is between those that have been regenerated and those that have not. How does one teach a dead man? Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: David, you, Jt, and Kevin are all locked in a time capsule. You do most of your thinking/citing/interpreting from within. It (the capsule) is Greek in origin with some refurbishing done by the enlightenment rationalists. I used to believe that the one who could/should extricate himself from this static framework was David. I now see that it is 'Not gonna happen' GBSr. As Mike Myers used to say after picking a topic, any topic 'discuss amongst yourselves' ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 19:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"? For any other reason than that you cannot justify your position?  Or is your theology too high for us mere humans to understand, Lance? Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 2:02 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   I most certainly am! ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 14:21 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   You are rebuffing my repeated requests for YOUR take on His Word. Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 10:30 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   No! I'm 'rebuffing', as you put it, YOUR TAKE on His Word. ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 08:04 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   You seem to think that offering your opinion absent any scripture trumps anyone else’s opinion.  You think you can be “open” to the Holy Spirit while rebuffing His Word? You call having scriptural foundation for one’s faith “Biblical ping-pong”.  You forget how many have died martyr’s deaths so you and I can have the gift of God’s Word. To belittle it is insulting to them, as well as to the Author.  Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 6:54 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   "We"?.... Some, you among them, actually seem to think that 'Biblical ping-pong', absent any internal dynamism (openness to the Spirit), is a useful enterprise. Play on. ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 07:50 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   Typical snide remark in an attempt to dodge my valid questions regarding your scriptural basis for your beliefs.  Doesn’t work, Lance.  We can see through you like cellophane. You have chosen Humanism over Scripture. Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 6:38 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   MIGHT be?  Brighten the corner where you are, Linda. ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 07:38 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   That might be a valid criticism except for one thing, Lance: You continue to refuse to explain what the scriptures mean to you.  I have asked for your input and you have ignored my repeated requests.  I can only assume that you reject the plain words of Jesus in order to believe what you call the “larger context within which you should be reading Jesus' words.”  You are the one with the “case closed.” Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 6:28 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   Izzy says: (my interpretation of her) Anyone who does not view this matter as I have come to understand it through my reading of Scripture is simply disagreeing with God Himself. Therefore, no dialogue is necessary. One need only read my citations. Case closed. ----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: March 16, 2005 07:16 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?   ShieldsFamily wrote: DaveH and Lance, You are arguing with Jesus, not DM, Jt, Kevin and Izzy.  You condemn us for believing Jesus. DAVEH:   Excuse me, Izzy.  I've never condemned anybody for believing Jesus.  If you sincerely think I have, please explain where and how I did so.   By refusing to believe His words:  Matt 7: 13"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.      14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.    Why is this? To say the we are eager for damnation of anyone who does not agree with our particular theology is a slur (as usual.) DAVEH:   Do you believe those who do not accept Jesus as you do will be saved?  Not because they don’t accept Jesus “as I do”, but because they don’t accept Jesus as He said they must: John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”   And, if not....do you believe they will be tossed into a physical lake of fire to be physically tortured forever because they do not accept Jesus as you do, Izzy? Not because they “don’t accept Jesus as I do”, but because they don’t accept Jesus as He said you must. So believing Jesus’ words is equivalent to being “eager” for others’ damnation in your mind, DaveH?  Such logic places blame for damnation upon those who believe God’s Word, instead of upon those who refuse to accept God’s terms of salvation.  Izzy   Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!