I do not understand your refusal to support your claims against the incarnation. Challenging Lance to make the "first move" is a clear indication that you are not ure as to this teaching -- yet, you are perfectly willing to condemn it as a teaching of man!! THAT is incredible.
JD
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:15:24 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Seeming inconsistancy
Holier than thou attitude eh Lance? I have not "villified" anything so far. What I am doing is challenging your belief system which is what this list is all about. OTOH you frequently criticize and challenge ppl over who they are which is much, much, worse. If your sacrosanct "incarnational doctrine" is too holy to be up front and open in the light of day - then keep it secret. I don't have time to be chasing down all of your theologians and buying their books. I already have THE BOOK and it's safer to stick with the Word Himself. jt
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:58:14 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So Judy, you had to wait for this to commence identifying 'holes'? Just acknowledge the truthfulness of this and, we'll move on. Why do I ask? IMO you've no idea at all what this 'incarnational system' is and, you breathed a sigh of relief at my having provided you with an opening.Look Judy, I'm quite prepared to move on should you wish not to speak of this further. However, when you villify something that is important to me and, with such certainty on your part, I assume you've actually got something to say. IFF you do not then, kindly refrain from so speaking.From: Judy TaylorFirst hole Lance, you will not find an "eternally preexisting SON" in scripture. He is the Word of God ie "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" In Proverbs He is the Wisdom of God .. and in other places "the angel of His Presence" He was the Rock that followed Israel in the Wilderness and no mention of Him being the "eternal preexisting son" there. So who declared this to be so? At the end in the book of Revelation He is called the Lamb and The Word. So the root of this belief is in rcc creeds. jtOn Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:40:51 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:The Son of God, eternally preexisting, took on, via an act of the Holy Spirit in His mother, Mary (virginal conception) humanity so as to Redeem us. Now, if not true, that's what I'd call 'science fiction'!From: Terry CliftonLance Muir wrote:================================================================Earth to Terry:It is no more GOOFY than the Christian understanding of the Incarnation.That (the Incarnation) were it not real and absolutely true is the stuff of science fiction.
If you would give me your definition of incarnation, I might be able to grasp what you are saying.
Terry
