When you preach/teach/write, do you employ language that is other than biblical? Do you esteem any credal statements? What latitude do you tolerate within your own 'flock' prior to believing that some 'corrective teaching' is important? Do you recognize that, without intending to draw attention to yourself, you have achieved a measure of notoriety and yes, even popularity?
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: July 01, 2005 08:28 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Christ > Judy wrote: > >> My personal description of how I understand the Godhead > >> is just that - personal and subject to change if and when God > >> shows me I am wrong. I have not yet constructed a Virginian > >> Creed; changed the title of any member of the Godhead or > >> threatened any person with excommunication & heresy who > >> will not conform and measure up to my light. > >> > >> Can you understand what I am saying and do you see the difference? > > Bill wrote: > > No and No. To me it looks like hypocrisy. > > I think the problem here, Bill, is that you are changing the context of > Judy's statements when you critique them as evidence of hypocrisy. Judy is > trying to bring back that context in her paragraph above. > > It seems to me that Judy basically does not believe in creeds at all, but > you do. By the word creed, I mean some statement of belief that is meant to > be authoritative and unalterable. When a person speaks from such a position > of unchangeableness, she believes that it would be wise to use Biblical > words. This is a debateable point I suppose, but this is how I understand > her position. > > Judy has no problem with you or others using words other than Biblical to > express your viewpoint, as long as your perspective is open to modification > when others bring up problems with how you have expressed yourselves. In > the context of our discussion, if she speaks about the "symphony" within the > Godhead, she is open to other ways of stating that. In contrast, when you > guys use the word "Trinity" or "Eternal Son of God" in regards to the > Godhead, there is this sacredness to it that cannnot be changed. In fact, > if someone were to suggest not using the word Trinity, or even worse, argue > that it is not a good word for describing the Godhead, well, it is like > World War IV is starting up. There is no room at all for not embracing the > Trinity. One might as well lay aside Christianity if he does not embrace > it. Hence we see some members calling others heretics, not over the > unBiblical words they don't want to embrace, but over creedal words that > they are reluctant to embrace. > > Do you understand her point any better now? > > [ I just had the thought: maybe if I can do some mild interpretation for > Judy and Debbie can interpret Bill, Lance, John, and Gary, we might actually > make some progress in understanding one another! :-) ] > > 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. ---------- "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.
