|
No 'knows'rings here, Dave. Why don't you more
actively enter the conversation by offering your own summary of what's been said
thus far. Then, please let me know your opinion/thoughts.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: June 02, 2005 09:58
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs
DaveH
Lance Muir wrote:
DH asks:
1. Did Jesus' ...By some, yes. Your counterpart
would be:The reindentification of 'who jesus is' by JS. One need not extend
this thinking far to conclude that either the LDS are the 'true christians'
or those that reflect the teaching of Nicea. You do see this do you
not? DAVEH: Yes....however, it is also
possible that neither are correct.
ONCE IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT WE DO NOT WORSHIP, PREACH, TEACH....THE
SAME JESUS THEN, ONE OF US FOLLOWS A FALSE GOSPEL. You do see this do you
not? DAVEH: OK......I'm following you so far,
Lance.
I would like to follow this conversation, tired or not, through to it's
conclusion, should you permit me to do
so. DAVEH: Thank you for leading me by the nose,
Lance......please continue.
thanks,
Lance
Sent:
June 02, 2005 01:56
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: I'm a little too slow (and too tired) to
ascertain your intended message, Lance. If you want me to understand
what you are trying to convey, put it in more simple terms for this
dunderhead.
Did Jesus' theology nullify who God
is as perceived by the Jews? As he said....he didn't come to destroy
the law, but rather fulfill it.
FWIW.......It
seems to me the Jews could say something similar to you as to what you are
saying to me.......
YOU CANNOT PREACH THE
GOD YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF GOD'S CHOSEN IN ANY HISTORIC
SENSE
.............You do realize this, do you
not?
Lance Muir wrote:
DaveH:I just re-read my question(s) and,
find them rather clear. Please try telling me what YOU THINK I'm asking.
Your analogy breaks down as it has to do with Older/Newer Testaments and
the Incarnation of Christ. What you've (LDS) done is to have taken
orthodox theology and nullified it with a superceding revelation as to
WHO THIS JESUS IS. You then, answer the question posed by Jesus Himself
in Lk 16 differently than every genuinely Christian group on the face of
the earth.YOU DO KNOW THAT, DON't YOU? YOU CANNOT PREACH THE JESUS
YOU PREACH AND CALL YOURSELF CHRISTIAN IN ANY HISTORIC SENSE. YOU KNOW
THIS ALSO DO YOU NOT? I fear poor old CPL might've thought I was
confused as to who you actually are. I'M NOT!!
Why not take another run at it just for my
sake.
Sent:
June 01, 2005 10:06
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Perry vs DaveH
DAVEH: I'm not exactly sure of your question,
Lance.....But as I view it, the position of many TTers is analogous to
the Jews of Bible times. In the OT, Scripture gave them a
perception of God to which the staunchly held. So firm in their
convictions (as are many TTers), they had trouble acknowledging the
Lord when he finally appeared....why....because he was more like them
than they expected I suppose. Nor did they buy into additional
Scripture being added to Canon, which is another similarity shared by
TTers. Many also failed to accept new commandments or recognize
the NT prophets, rather stubbornly holding fast to the eye for an eye
prophets of the past.
So.....is there really
much difference between the closed minds of the Jews of the Bible in
contrast to the way many TTers are receptive to anything outside what
they believe Scripture offers?
Lance Muir wrote:
Who are your teachers? What are their authorities? What
'teaching' concerning the nature/gospel of God issues from these
teachers and their teaching sources? Just how 'ultimate' IYO is the
James 1 experience?
IMO that which transpires herein (TT) is somewhat comparable to
the 1st and, early centuries between the various factions who set
out to answer such questions as those concerning the canon of
Scripture and, the nature of the Person of Christ.
IMO there exists sufficient similarity between the Christ
believed/lived/preached on the part of the 'camp' of the non-Mormons
for them/us to be identified with the historic 'orthodox' wing of
Christianity. The Mormon 'camp', having taken on board supplementary
'scriptures' and, a new line of 'prophets' commencing with Joseph
Smith, cannot but fall within a 'non-orthodox' wing of
Christianity.
Other than reversing my designations of orthodox/non-orthodox,
just how might you disagree with what I've said? I should much like
to hear from Dave and Blaine, along with any 'lurkers' on
this.
thanks,
Lance
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
|
