Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] What is sin

[Judy Taylor]

What point is this Lance?  That I will not to understand?  I understand what you and JD are saying, I just don't believe it is scriptural.  As for the Pope .. well too much has been said about him already.  They will saint him as soon as they come up with a few "miracles"  Never mind his unceasing worship and promotion of the "black madonna" patron saint of Poland who he gave all glory for saving him from the assassins bullet.  I find the theories of Athanasius and Gregory of Nyz(?) every bit as far out.  Why not go to the Bible and open your heart to the Holy Spirit?   jt     On Mon, 23 May 2005 07:31:17 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Another example of the point I've been making. I suspect that David and Izzy would go along with you on this. (I don't 'count' the K-man anymore. He's altogether too loopy) From: Judy Taylor Pure speculation JD - Since the Pope is already massively deceived believing himself to be the alter Christus why quote him?  You can use all these big theological words but plain fact is Eve was deceived and Adam chose to go with her.  He chose the voice of the adversary over obedience to the voice of God.   This is your own personal gospel which says you can be as deceived as you like and make all the wrong choices and yet still make it because all that matters is some kind of perverted love ... while truth continues to perish in the streets.   jt From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . sin--the disobedience of a prideful autonomy which impaired the human capacity to  ..... John Paul II     Think about it  !!!  Reconciliation is a done deal, accomplished in the body of His flesh, at His death and inclusive of all of creation (Col 1:17ff),  but there remains those who are "lost" and "saved,"   All are reconciled  -  some are saved. - a problem .   Perhaps the demand on us is to change our thinking about those concepts.  They cannot have in view the same circumstance as "reconciliation,"  as I see it.   If reconciliation has a practical application, would that not include a partnership with God, as the Father, giving assistance (i.e. Philip 2:12-13) to those who are His while allowing us (all) to make decisions that are harmful to us on an ontological scale?   The reward we receive  for the practice of "salvation" would be "heaven."   The punishment we might experience as a result of refusing this partnership is not so much an assignment as it is a reasonable conclusion to the autonomy we have decided to persue?   As in the story of the prodigal  -  heaven (the home) was simply the end of the journey.   If that son had decided to remain in the pen,  his "reward" would have been that reality   --   the Father neither sending him there or DECIDING to reward if he returned.     The definition above, from the thinking of John Paul, seems to be an excellent contribution to this subject.      JD