|
Sorry to have riled you, Judy. I thought my
comments would be so obviously tongue-in-cheek as to be inoffensive. They
obviously were not. Hence my apologies,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 11:32
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
You are wrong Bill. I don't think along these
lines and since ppl on TT are all professing believers
(whether or not I think they act/talk like it)
I wonder why any one here would categorize
another as an
idiot/fool in light of
Jesus' words about calling a brother 'raca' (or
fool).
As for you, from my perspective every time we get to
discussing anything serious, it does not take
long for Lance to
step up to the plate and put some kind of a 'mojo' on you and then you retreat
back into silence.... Rush
Limbaugh quite obviously does
not have the mind of
Christ, so I don't
pay him any mind; he is not a disciple of the same
Master.
I am thinking about what you said in regards to
Rush. There's little doubt about whom Judy considers the "idiot" in our
conversations. And so it's always a question of whether I want to open my
mouth and remove all doubt :>) I think this time I'll remain silent and
only thought a fool. Bill
Ah. Now I see. Why the
race? Well, i guess I should defer to
Bill, although I think I understood the point.
From: Judy Taylor < jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
Do you presume to have finished the race, while
waiting for the likes of Paul to catch up?
and it got a hearty laugh out of my
otherwise demonical countenance.
RACE. What is that
about? ....how do you
get a race out this? I
remain confused. -----Original
Message----- From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
[email protected]Cc: [email protected]Sent:
Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:05:16 -0500 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
I know what you are commenting on JD;
However, Bill's statement is way out there someplace and has nothing
at all to do with Hebrews 10:14
where this thread began. Bill
has gone from Greek verbs to some race none of which have anything to
do with 'being sanctified' as per Hebrews
10:14. The 10th Chapter of Hebrews juxtaposes animal sacrifice
against the once for
all sacrifice of Christ. Now how do you get a race
out this? You are lost because you
are off on the same
tangent as Bill. judyt
Sorry , Judy, you have lost me entirely. I am
committing on Bill's statement below and you are doing
what ?????? This is a great question: Do you presume to have finished the race, while waiting for
the likes of Paul to catch up? and it got
a hearty laugh out of my otherwise demonical
countenance.
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
Your drift is incomprehensible JD
and there is no "death blow" because FYI
Hebrews 10:14 does not refer to any race ...
Oh what a tangled web we weave...
Vs.14 here relates to Hebrews 10:9,10 ie:
"Then He (Jesus) said "Behold I have come
to do Your will, O God" He takes away
the first that He may establish the second. By
that will we have been sanctified
through the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ once for all"
So where is this race......????
Not laughting at you , David, but I am
laughing at the quetion !!!
Out of compassion and reason comes the death blow
---------------- if you get my drift.
:-)
jd -----Original
Message----- From: Taylor < wmtaylor@plains.net> To:
[email protected]Sent: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:19:14
-0700 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/ revisor
You highlight the problem with
leaving off the present passive aspect of this participle, David;
hence loosing track of the unfinished- or incompleteness of it. Do
you presume to have finished the race, while waiting for the likes
of Paul to catch up?
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 24,
2005 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Bill wrote:
> Per this verse, it is our
sanctification
> which is not yet
complete.
How do you read this into the
text? Nothing in this passage indicates that our present
sanctification is somehow incomplete. Granted, our
sanctification may be ongoing, but to argue that a present tense
indicates incompleteness is going beyond what is indicated by this
text.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November
23, 2005 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Well actually, "by one offering" is
a prepositional phrase and not the subject of the sentence. The
third person singular aspect of teteleioken conveys the subject of the
sentence: "he"; but I don't expect you to agree with that, and I
certainly don't expect you to be able to
understand it.
Nevertheless, nothing I have said
should lead you to the conclusion that I believe the one
offering is not complete. Per this verse, it is our
sanctification which is not yet complete. But I don't expect you
to understand that either.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November
23, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
The subject of the sentence 10:14 is the
ONE OFFERING so Bill is saying it is "Not yet
Complete" Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com> wrote:
I don't speculate on all that Bill
because in my understanding the active part of
sanctification requires
the cooperation of the one being
sanctified; the kind of cooperation an unbeliever would be unable
to
give.
That's fine, Judy, but who in
this discussion has argued that to sanctify does not mean
the same as to set apart? That is not even a point of
contention. Do you agree that this participle in Heb 10.14 reflect
a sanctification which is passive (i.e., the action
is being performed by someone other than the subject) and
not yet complete? Bill
I have no idea what you are
talking about Bill. However I do understand
Hebrews 10:14
and the word "sanctified" in
this instance means "set apart" in the same way that an
unbelieving
wife is "set apart" in 1 Cor
7:14 which is "set apart in the sense that she is become
the object of
focus because of the faith and
influence of her husband. It would be impossible
for her to be
sanctified in any other sense
because she remains unregenerated and
dead in her trespass and
sin.
Fair enough. Do you
accept the present passive thrust of this verb? My
impression is that you do not.
Bill
Are you living in some kind
of delusion Bill?
My understanding of that
text remains the same as it was, so please let's
deal with reality here
rather than
presumption. jt
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
|
