Yes, that is correct, Bill -- but now that he mentions it -- ..................... nay.
Jd
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 19:48:51 -0600
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Works and the Book of James
David writes: Oh, great! One of the guys who thinks I am too loose with my definition of sin is encouraging me to take drugs and enjoy life for a change! No thank you, John. It amazes me that intelligent people cannot see how your doctrine encourages sin.
Get a job, Miller. You're yankin' our chains, right? Do you expect any intelligent person to buy that garbage? It amazes me that you cannot see how John's statement is figurative; in other words, take a chill pill and mellow out a bit! He's not encouraging anyone to sin.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Works and the Book of James
> > I never saw the Presbyterian post !!
> > Did that ever occur to you?
> > Take a pill and enjoy life for a change.
>
> Oh, great! One of the guys who thinks I am too loose with my definition of
> sin is encouraging me to take drugs and enjoy life for a change! No thank
> you, John. >
> Judy has mentioned her church affiliation many times. Back in February you
> participated in a thread (meaning same subject line) where she very clearly
> outlined her affiliation there, using both the PCA acronym and using the
> word "Presbyterian." More recently, last month, you directly responded to
> posts where she mentioned it using her normal acronym of PCA. So no, it did
> not occur to me that you never saw the post, but it does occur to me that
> you did not comprehend the post, just like you do not u nderstand most of her
> posts or mine. I suspect that both Lance and Bill Taylor understood that
> she attends a Presbyterian church.
>
> I'll tack that correspondence below for your consideration. She mentions
> PCA (Presbyterian Church of America) twice.
>
> I hope you consider what is below in the sense of realizing that you read
> posts much too superficially and fantasize all manner of stereotypes that
> are completely inaccurate.. You think you know me, but your characterization
> of me is about 5% accurate, just like it was of Judy. Please consider
> talking about what you do know on this list, not about what you don't know.
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha
>
> 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
>
> On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 21:56:45 -0 400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 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
>
> On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:12:20 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> JD are you Growing or Vacillating?
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with g race, 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.
>
