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. 
