Not "necessarily." "areas I do not agree with him are minimal," "Some things I put on the shelf." "on spiritual issues I MAINLY have an inner Amen." Wow, what a statement of endorsement! Kinda, mostly, sorta, not necessarily, mainly. Don't you see, Judy Taylor my friend and sister, that your honesty will not let you say what you WANT to say !!?? You want to say," John, you are as wrong as wrong can be." I dare say, that you hope you leave that impression -- but you cannot actually say it. You and DM may agree more than , say BT and DM, but that is in part because you have chosen to allow him to speak as a pastor in your regard. The fact is this: you do not fully agree with DM, even in matters of spiritual importance. And that is my point.
JD
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:19:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:John 16:13,14
Not necessarily either; I find what DM writes to be interesting and informative and the
areas I do not agree with him are minimal. Some things I put on the shelf to check later but on the
spiritual issues I mainly have an inner Amen and do not understand what all the brouhaha is about.
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:38:46 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And when Judy and DM disagree -- which is the purveyor of demon doctrines??
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
Lance's interpretation of DM and JT = A figment of Lances very active imagination and is linked withabout as much reality as Monty Python and Cheech & Chong.On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 10:52:05 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:Jt's interpretation of Scripture=the doctrines of men DM's interpretation of Scripture=the doctrines of menFrom: Judy TaylorBelieving in them is one thing - of course no one will confess to believing in them, while ATST many are blindlyfollowing them. Any time the clear teaching of God's Word is rejected or reasoned away in favor of somedoctrine or other this is taking place. In fact I experienced it just yesterday in a class where I saw a videoexplaining why the denomination I attend baptizes babies. It can't be justified by God's Word and they twista scripture or two to try and lay the foundation. I don't understand why we can't just dedicate the babieslike Mary & Joseph. Take them to the temple (?) and consecrate them to God since they can't understandthe meaning of baptism and noone can commit their lives for them. judytOn Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:16:50 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:We (here on TT) have gone a long way in proving that unity based on "true" doctrine is not the pathway to unity. All of the issues listed below were discussions over what the Bible has to say about those particular concerns. Not one person on this site believes in "doctrines of men." All are trying to approximate the truth. If we cannot allow for "unity" to found in the commonality of our search for truth, there will be no unity in Christ.JD
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
We lay aside doctrines of men and everything that does not conform us to godliness andholiness and we receive with meekness the "engrafted word" which is able to save our souls.Think about it; if we do not unite and gather around the truth of His Word - we will never agree onwhich spirit is the "holy one" because we will have no frame of reference. judytHow do we continue when there are so many differences?Eternal SonshipTrinityWord v Holy SpiritInspired interpretationsworks v unmerited gracethe place of water baptismtongues as an evidence of the infillingContinuance of apostles and prophetsThe place and function of the Church FathersWhat is "unity."What the hell is an ad homHoliness and the indwellingHoliness as a gifted considerationThe works of James v the works of PaulWhat is proof textingThe Word of GodChrist as the King of the JewsThe Incarnate ChristChrist as God v a representative of GodThe narrow roadThe place of the apostles in the churchHonoring the claim of discipleshipThe use of contextHermeneuticsI would continue but I am watching "The Quiet Man" and the greatest big screen fight of all time is about to be shown (John Wayne and company).JD
