John wrote: > What David does in this response is clear; he manifests > his lack of concern for either myself or the actual discussion.
Lighten up, John. I care about you. John wrote: > This comment "This is the crux of our difference then: doubt and > unbelief concerning the reality of the kingdom of God" is not an > honest attempt at dialogue for it was not written with me in mind. > Rather, it was written with David's audience in mind. Smithson > must be stopped -- his gospel of "humanism" (apparently words > with more than four letters have definitions that often escape David's > comprehension). He knows, full well, that I do not agree with his > statement (above.) Only an idiot would think this statement would > carry merit with me -- and we all know that David is no idiot. > So what is left. David protecting his church kind of like the Apostle > Peter or the Apostle Paul -- we have the Apostle Miller. > Correct me if I am wrong - seriously. You are very wrong. You seem to assume that discussions must start with some point of agreement. Our point of agreement is that the Bible is a source of truth. Where we depart is how we apply the Bible to our lives. I hope that pointing out the disconnect between following the Bible and then disbelieving certain teachings of the Bible as being applicable to us would give you pause to reconsider your position. John wrote: > The notion that David walks in the apostles doctrine to > a degree that I do not is both untrue and arrogant. Then why did you say that their teachings do not include us and that their relationship to the Christ is different from ours? Clearly we walk in the doctrine differently. John wrote: > His need for repentance is clear. What do you want me to repent of? John wrote: > The "Great commission" was given to His apostles - > the 12. Ditto for John 20:22-23 -- we know this to > be the case because the text is specific as to whom it > is He is talking to (syntax, David -- like it?). The text also commands them to teach us to walk in all those things that he taught them. John wrote: > Anyway - I share the gospel message because of what > I have learned in the letter to the Romans. Chapter one - > the gospel is God 's power in saving man and, again in > chapter ten .... how shall the hear without an evangel. > More than that -- we are all given to the ministry of > reconciliation. The "Great Commission" per se has little > to do with you and I. Speak for yourself, John. Some of us believe that the "Great Commission" has meaning for us too. John wrote: > Acts 2:38ff tells us the promised spirit is for all. The indwelling > of the spirit is evidenced by any number of gifted manifestations > from love, joy, peace, kindness, gentleness to prophecy, the > speaking in tongues and even hospitality. > JD > Pastor of the New Perichoretic Church of the First Born > California Branch > Bs, Ma and , well ..... BS again > Please note: this new Christian Denom will have no congregations > in the area of Compton unless and until hell freezes over. Oh, so you accuse me of usurping apostolic authority while you create a new Christian denomination? Sorry you got upset, John. Maybe we can get back to the discussion some day about whether or not the teaching of the apostles include us. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
