|
Surprise! Surprise! Lance finally makes a
statement I can agree with.
All theologians are theologically weak ... Great
day!!
On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 06:30:50 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> I do not seek your respect, David. Homeless man anecdote aside, you > are > deluded on this matter. All David, are theologically weak. You > however, > happen to have landed on a 'biggy'. > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Lance wrote: > >> Don't you remember his position on this > >> issue? I do! In the end he couldn't join you > >> on the 'yellow brick road'. > > > > LOL. I'm not on the yellow brick road to Oz, but nice try. :-) > I > > understand that Bill does not agree with my teaching on holiness, > but I do > > not think he is so way out there in left field as to claim that > everybody > > is > > incomplete in Christ and all believers will sin every day. I > could be > > wrong > > in giving him the benefit of the doubt here. Why don't you let > Bill > > answer > > for himself? > > > > It is one thing to say you don't believe the holiness of Christ > is > > obtainable, it is quite another thing to affirm that you know for > a fact > > that it is impossible. > > > > I was talking with a homeless man the other day who stayed with > me, and we > > were discussing the resurrection. He did not see how it could be > possible > > for bodies to rise from the graves. However, he expressed it as a > > > disbelief > > coupled with amazement that anyone would believe such rather than > > > affirming > > that there is no way it could ever happen or that those who > believed in > > the > > resurrection were delusional or deceived. I can somewhat respect > is > > incredulity because it is an amazing concept, but if he had been > mocking > > and > > conceited to the point of thinking me delusional for believing > such, that > > would be another matter. > > > > In the same way, I can respect the position of those who find the > concept > > of > > holiness difficult to believe. It is an amazing concept. > However, those > > who are so arrogant as to declare it impossible, or to presume to > speak > > for > > all of humanity as if they know it all, well, I have little > respect for > > that. > > > > 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. > > |
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, Spirit Judy Taylor
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... Lance Muir
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... Judy Taylor
- [TruthTalk] God is a Relational God: Father, Son, Spiri... Judy Taylor
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... Terry Clifton
- RE: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... knpraise
- Re: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... knpraise
- RE: [TruthTalk] God is a relational God: Father, Son, S... ShieldsFamily

