|
If what you mean by 'the truth' has to do with our
relationship with God through Christ in the power of the Spirit then, yes and,
Amen.
It is relational in nature and, ought to include TT
to some extent. John 17 ain't reflected herein. Were the Mormons to be truthful
(I just didn't wish for them to conclude:'see, I told you we weren't like
THEM-(US)) the same diversity and discord is reflected therein
also.
It's a human thingy.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: June 09, 2005 08:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha
The "duh !!" response was the
only thing I could think of at the time. Judy had once again put me in
the category of teaching the doctrine of men, for some reason, while
entering into a discussion of what she did the other night at church. She
defends this rather unusual procession of thouhgt by giving me a brief lesson on becoming comformed to the image of Christ
......................... as if my primary concern is something
other than this. Hence "duh !!"
I personally believe that we change because of our relationship with The Truth
more than because of conceptual correctness. There is the opinion
here on Tt, it seems, that God
cannot accomplish growth in an individual if there exists any sin in his/her
life. If the goal of God is to create a people who think correctly
on all matters, then He has failed if a single consideration is
wrong. But if the goal is relational in nature and
substance, God's success in our lives will be demonstrated in spite of
our sins or errant thinking. Correct?
Jd
-----Original Message----- From: Kevin Deegan < openairmission@yahoo.com> To:
[email protected]Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 21:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Apocrypha
You had implied in the past that you & yours are the only ones
capable of inteligent discussion. Was that
the OLD JD? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are saying that we are to be like Him, conformed to His
image -- I say "duh
!!!!!"
It appears, howeer that we
have regressed into monologue.
Jd
I'm talking about Truth and what the PCA have done via the Shorter Catechism is what doctrines of
men
are doing constantly - you included JD. Since His works were done
before the foundation of the world and
it is written that we are predestined to be conformed to the "image of
Christ" then it follows that this should be the 'chief end of man' doesn't
it? - That is if God's Word means anything to us at all .... and this
has everything to do with relationship with Christ = jt
I am talking about a realtionship
with Christ and you are talking about what? Sorry, but I miss
your point completely.
Jd
Interesting JD,
I've been attending an introductory class at the church we have been
attending which is PCA. They identify
with the Reformation and they like the Shorter Catechism. I can't
figure out why the first point in the Catechism does not say that the
chief end of man is to be conformed to the image of Christ - after all
this is what we have been predestined for and they believe in predestination. (Romans 8:29) jt
Not too bad of a question. Quite often growth may
appear to be vacillation. If we define new birth
as a putting on of Christ, emphasis on a
relationship, then we might suppose that the resulting
validation marking the difference between vacillation and growth is
the benefit can see in the occurring changes. If I am a
better person, growth has occurred. If I have become
more distasteful, something is wrong with the relationship.
After all, that is the way relationships work. Soooo,
"truth" can be said to exist IN THE BELIEVER if that believer becomes
more and more like Christ.
JD
From: Kevin Deegan < openairmission@yahoo.com>
JD are you Growing or
Vacillating?
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
|
