-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]com>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]innglory.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]innglory.org
Sent: Sun, 29 May 2005 05:24:16 -0400
Subject: [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
I am totally different from you JD in many areas; in fact at times I think the only thing we have in common is the
name of Jesus itself but with totally different concepts. Fancy me quoting from a Dake Bible and a Strongs
Concordance. Wow! That is major - while you OTOH have all those years of indoctrination and pastoring in the CofC Movement followed by Aimee Semple McPherson and now your seemingly total embrace of Lance and Bill's aberrent "incarnational" theory so that when God's Word says black to me it says white to you. You may have book, chapter, and verse for everything you believe JD but so does every cult out there. Nor do I believe it is just me and the Word; there are a lot of ppl who believe the way I do but they are not following me and I don't follow them. jt
I agree with your opening thought, Judy. We are very different. You play down the influences of those whom you read while making those whom I enjoy much more the force in my life than is true. If truth as it regards John /smithson important to you? Are you aware that I have left behind the Church of Christ? Ae you aware that my thinking is so different from those people, that the last three or four years within that fellowship found me disfellowship by a seminary, a church in Texas where I served effectively (I might add) as youth pastor, the entire Central Valley of Churches of Christ (a valley in which I continue to live)? Are you aware that I have never read Aimee Simple about anything? Cults do not have b, c and v for all that they believe. At least, I have not
encountered one to date. Is the fact that we share the name of Jesus and serve Him and no other, is that enough to claim that we are in the same family?
JD
On Sun, 29 May 2005 01:24:37 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is no reason for rejecting thoughtful consideration of the revealed text. But you seem to be afraid of such. "Hermeneutic" is not an evil word -- even your mentor, DM, would agree with this. I have book, chapter and verse for everything I believe in matters religious ---------------everything. You are as much influenced by "outside" thoughts as anyone. It is not just you and the Word. You have quoted too many writers (Dake, Strong and several others) for any of us to believe otherwise. You are not different for us.
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]com
Meaningless religious mumbo jumbo Gary; I don't have any such "hermeneutic" in fact I totally reject the Gk god Hermes along with the dualistic philosophy of Plato that you have accused me of endlessly. If you would follow hard after God and seek Him with your whole heart rather than give Him some kind of religious lip service then these things would not be such a mystery. How sad that you and JD focus so much on what you "think" other are saying and categorizing them rather than on God and His living and eternal Word. jtOn Sat, 28 May 2005 22:25:42 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:good question; ftr, tt evidence suggests parallelism betw his hermeneutic and (e.g.) jt's; the/ir bed rock is philosophical while the Bible is evaluated (conformed to) dualistic bias which yields a religious ideology..biblical theology has no priority with them, no native respect given to it for its demolition of philosophical religion which is the worldly prerequisite: antiChrist, it calls itOn Sat, 28 May 2005 20:56:25 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:By the way, [DavidM] -- what is your hermeneutic?||
