Judy writes > Yes, Nathan
was the prophet and his words were inspired by God since this was the
anointing for his ministry - fourfold restitution was what is required
under the law of Moses. So what is
the problem Bill? . . .
BT > The
problem is, Judy, you have evidently missed the point. Without
some "non-biblical" input to place my answer in context, you
misunderstood my use of Scripture to say to you what "God says
using God's words." No problem, I will add some commentary of my own to
try to help you with the context.
jt: No Bill
the problem is yours. God is not saying these words to me. You are
saying them and this is your judgment, not His.
You are guilty of doing
the very thing you expect others not to do.
jt: Oh
really? So now I am an adulterer and a murderer like David? Well
when I will wait for God to send the prophet Nathan to speak the
truth to me. Let's face it Bill. I am no king and you are no
prophet.
The pertinent statement
in my use of the Nathan/David account was this: "You are the man!" Yes,
David could have had Nathan killed -- but he didn't. Instead, not
playing insinsate, he got the point of Nathan's parable and repented of
his wrong doing; that is, he was quilty as charged; he knew it; and
rather than skirt the issue, he took responsibility
for his actions.
How does this pertain to
you? You have yet to take responsibility for
yours. Concerning the use of non-biblical terminology to speak to
biblical concepts, you make the following claim: "You may all do
this Bill but one speaking as the 'oracles of God' says what God says
using God's Words . . . Reaping what we sow is God's righteous
judgment."
Judy,
you are complicit in doing the same thing; e.g., you have written
concerning the Godhead, "They were one in all aspects and operated like
a symphony," and "I would demonstrate the Godhead this way: God the
Father has the thought; God the Word speaks it into existence; and God
the Spirit carries it out. So you see the Godhead as one working in
harmony, like a symphony."
jt: Jesus
said "I and the Father are one and it is written that he was given the
spirit without measure" I used the word symphony as an object lesson
since this is the way it appears to me. I am not writing legalese or
doctrine which you seem to interpret it as - nor do I come to TT as a
"teacher" professer. I am an ordinary every day believer sharing who I
am in Christ. For this I take responsibility - but not for your wild
flights of fancy Bill.
Debbie wrote this
to you: "When talking about God or what he is saying to us
in the Bible, I am sure I use terms which are not in any
translation or manuscript of Scripture." As do you, Judy, as
witnessed above. Hence, with her, why do you not also "find
it strange and arbitrary to make a rule of avoiding doing
so"? You do not apply
your own rules to yourself.
jt: I don't
recall ever having made a rule Bill. The scriptures themselves say
that if any man speaks he should speak as the oracles of God. If
you are going to represent Him then you should say what He says about
himself. Your doctrine of "perichoresis" is alien to anything
I have read in scripture. Where do you find this dance and
relationship? The Godhead is one - so is God dancing with
Himself?
And as I said before, nor ought you
have to. The problem here is not with the language you use; it
is with your unreasonable expectation concerning the language of others,
whether it be mine or Debbie's or anyone else's. In other
words, you need to change your standards. They are untenable -- not even you can meet them.
jt: It is
God's standard for those who claim to represent Him publicly. What
I am doing here is my own private testimony. You are constantly
quoting doctrines and teachings constructed by men that have
little to do with what God says about Himself and when anyone
questions them it makes you angry.
And so, the question is, are you going to continue to
skirt the issue, or are you going to drop the attack on others, take
responsibility for your actions and change your standards?
jt: The
attack is all in your head Bill. Noone is immune to questioning on this
list - you should know that by now and if what you are holding on to is
truth then you don't need to fear, it will stand.
Bill
(By the way, DaveH and G: I am preparing responses to your
requests. I will get them out when this conflict is resolved -- if, that
is, it can be resolved)
ni
, from sumph
, sound. 
