Re: [TruthTalk] One of the "greatest voices"

[knpraise]

jd in red.   

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:48:03 -0500
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] One of the "greatest voices"

 

 

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:38:23 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Judy, Bill has correctly cast the shadow  --   you believe that you are one of the few who is not doing theology !!!   Barth's reverence and high regard for faith as the "x" factor that brings all The Faith together is the most startling concept presenting itself as one reads Barth for the first time  (that would be me).  There is simply nothing that has been presented on TT that evidences Barth as a "liberal."   In fact,   he specifically opposed the liberal theology of the day,  using that very word in his criticism.  

 

And the "x" factor comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God - not by wading through theological writings such

as his.  What he opposed was religious naturalism and possibly there were theologians in his day more liberal than he 

Still he is numbered with the "postmodern" crowd.    Barth is a teacher set in the church by God.   Your argument is with the almighty.   

 

To simply argue whether Barth is this or that is - like Bill  -  not of interest to me.   But,  if a quotation is taken out of context and this gives me the opportunity to read what I have not read before,  then I intend to share that with  TT.   Or personal reading as per this mornings reading and sharing.   Barth's theology of the continuance of scripture  (i.e. the Bible) is perfectly in line with Jere 31: 33-34.   

 

I don't think so JD; you must not understand the New Covenant promise then yourself. Why would one with God's Law written on their heart need German theologians to to "unfold the revealed work attested in the scriptures"  Wonder if

the Bereans of Acts 17:11 had this type of assistance when they were checking on Paul.

What if in that group of Bereans there was a teacher or evangelist ??   But how could that be?   Your theology tells us such is not needed in the "new covernant." 

 

 

 

 

What you have done with your brand of theology, is to fashion an argument (that the Holy Spirit inspires your mind as you read the scriptures) that cannot be wrong and must be accepted if unity is to be accomplished.   If enough of you could grab the power that is intrinsic in Church leadership,  we would have ex-cathedra of the Church rather than liberty in the spirit. --  Judy style. 

 

Hey don't put the burden of your hang ups on me JD.  You are the one who is all taken with being a pastor/bishop

whatever!!  Is it because you see it as a place of intrinsic power?  God can not be conned and no flesh gets to glory in His presence.  His power anoints what He says not what you or Barth or any other self professed prophet comes up

with.

 

God does not need the gymnastics of your theology to make clear what it is that we are to believe.   He would have simply said  (God speaking ex-cathedra !!)  believe this and do not believe that  -  the impact of this doctrine is this and you are hell bound if you believe that.   He spoke that way in Torah  -   why not now?  

 

I don't have the "gymnastic type" Greek word, verb, phrase theology JD.  That is all yours, Bills and whoever else

immerses themselves in it and ex cathedra is a religious rcc term. God is in the business of doing or not doing. He

is not impressed with lip service, never was.   If course not.  

 

Evangelicals know that their doctrine of verbal/plenary only effects the original documents.   We do not have those documents, of course, so now what ??  !!  We are left with Barth's notion  -  a very conservative effort at dealing with the problem without delving into mythology  -   and his assertion that the living God providentially supervises (or whatever word you desire) not only the preservation of holy scripture but the reading and understanding of same as the text is visit AND REVISITED by the disciple and the larger church.   No point revisiting scripture if you can get it right the first time, right Judy?  And "getting it right" has much more to do with the maturity of the disciple than "getting it right," I hasten to add.   

 

No it has to do with the ministry of the Eternal Spirit - the same One who inspired the prophets who spoke for God.

The scriptures can be either a "dead letter" or a "living Word" depending on how we receive them.    I am talking about the work of the Spirit, Judy.  

 

New Testament scriptures have been given to us  and continue to be the Living Word of God, in part, because of God's continuing association with them.   They are worthless if not found in your hands and heart...........................which reality validates Barth's  assertion of divine accompaniment in the first visit and the revisiting of scripture.  

 

Don't know what he is talking about "visit and revisit"  We are supposed to live there ie "If you abide in Me and My Words abide in you"    My comment above is flawless  !!!  Thank you very much.

 

I have no reason to consider Gal 3:26, 27 again, for example,  if this revisiting of the text does not provide me the opportunity to hear the voice of the Living God work in my heart as I consider the biblical message, yet, again. 

 

jd

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 09:32:24 -0500
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] One of the "greatest voices"

JD why do you think Barth is correct?

Have you ever asked yourself why a God who promised through the prophet Jeremiah 2631yrs ago and later through the prophet Ezekiel 2602yrs ago that He would make a New Covenant with His ppl and that this New Covenant would include writing His Law in their inward parts so that they would not need a man to teach them because they would all know Him  which promise was again validated sometime before 70 AD in the book of Hebrews?

 

Makes no common sense or any other kind of sense to me in light of the above - (along with the Promise of the Holy Spirit  sent on the day of Pentecost to lead us into ALL truth) -  that He (the Omniscient God of the Universe) would find out later that He also needed a German theologian (who has been dead 37yrs) and his four volume Dogmatic (involving more than 9,000 pages) to unfold the Word He has already placed in the hearts of Believers.

 

There is something wrong with this picture...  judyt

 

 

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 08:52:46 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 This is a very good understanding, in small part, to what I see in Barth  -   and I think Barth is correct:

 

From 1932 to 1967 he (Barth) worked on his Church Dogmatics, a multivolume work that was unfinished at his death. It consists of 13 parts in four volumes, running altogether to more than 9,000 pages. Although he changed some of his early positions, he continued to maintain that the task of theology is to unfold the revealed word attested in the Bible, and that there is no place for natural theology or the influence of non-Christian religions. His theology depended on a distinction between the Word (i.e., God's self-revelation as concretely manifested in Christ) and religion.

 

 

From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bill writes: "It will take many years, I'm sure, before Barth will be allowed to speak for himself to the conservative community. In the meantime Evangelical Christians will be missing out on one of the greatest voices the Church has ever known.

I'm curious about what you find so great Bill...  What does Barth say in the more than 9,000 pages of his Dogmatic that we can not learn through the grace and mercy of God from His Own Word?  Was Barth inspired or misguided in his belief that the "task of theology is to unfold the revealed word attested in the Bible" when Jesus' own Words teach us that this is the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of those who believe and follow Him?

 

The very size of the Dogmatics.

Mascall said that it takes so much time to read this theologian of the word that no time is left to read the Word itself. His (Barth's) style is majestic, and difficult.

 

 

From 1932 to 1967 he (Barth) worked on his Church Dogmatics, a multivolume work that was unfinished at his death. It consists of 13 parts in four volumes, running altogether to more than 9,000 pages. Although he changed some of his early positions, he continued to maintain that the task of theology is to unfold the revealed word attested in the Bible, and that there is no place for natural theology or the influence of non-Christian religions. His theology depended on a distinction between the Word (i.e., God's self-revelation as concretely manifested in Christ) and religion.

                                         judyt        & amp; nbsp;           & nbsp;                  
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)