Not the God you appear to subscribe to. 
I serve the One who says what he means and means what he says....
 
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 01:43:39 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I've been there and back, Judy; that's how I got my understanding.
I'll tell you, though, you ought to go. Who knows? There's a possibility that God could
maybe even break through to you, slight though it is.
 
Bill
 
Better to take your own counsel first Bill before you try to foist it on others.  Bye
 
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 18:20:08 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hey Judy, I've got an idea: Why don't you go to the desert for about forty years. 
We'll see if when you get back, you've gained some understanding. 
 
Bye now. Bill 
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 16:02:57 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 
[I'm quite excited because in the course of writing the second paragraph below, I became aware of knowing something important.]
 
From what I've read of the exchange, it's hard to tell what Judy really believes about Jesus. To me it seems that she does not respond to what is being said so much as to who is saying it: all she knows is that she must disagree with JD and Bill. This is what I mean when I characterize her as disingenuous.
 
Believe me Debbie Sawczak this is not "all she knows" - This is just what you think is all she knows because you have no frame of reference for what she writes.
 
How indefensible her statement to the effect that if something is beyond our human comprehension--in terms of logical deconstruction--it can't be true, that this is what is meant by "God gives understanding". It is in fact just the opposite. Through logic, ideas are entailed by, ultimately contained in, other ideas already in our heads. There would never be any need for revelation, nor any knight's moves, and ideas would have priority over persons. 
 
I did not make any such statement so what is indefensible is a figment of your own imagination Debbie. I was referring to the habit
of the Church Fathers - who always called what they could not explain a "mystery" -  this is a tradition that has carried through
and appears in the rcc as well as some other denominations today as opposed to the Promise of the Father which is the Spirit who
will lead us into ALL Truth.
 
The tone of the whole Bible is otherwise. This is the Tree, you see, and the whole Bible is about knowing God versus eating from the Tree.
 
Not so Debbie; the whole Bible is about which tree one chooses to eat from; also there is no way for us to KNOW GOD aside from abiding in Him and His Words (from the tree of life) abiding in us.  So you are hooked to one tree or the other whether or not you are
presently aware.
 
We come back to the book I just bought ("Relational logic"--as opposed to Greek logic!) and to McGrath's intellectual shift having so much to do with "getting to know" Torrance. It has come up before in conversations you and I have had about changing one's mind: it always has to do with relationship. You know things by opening yourself to a person. Persons have priority over ideas. Hey, that is Polanyi, too!! Wow, this all meshes!! Just composing this paragraph made some connections obvious to me.   D
 
So you are all into Torrance and Polyani and human relations/relationships.  Oh well!!  I guess you will become like your teachers ... "For what person perceives (knows and understands) what passes through a man's thoughts except the man's own spirit within him?" 1 Cor 2:11(Amp).  But you don't get to learn God's thoughts which are higher than mans, or His ways which are so much wiser.  He never trained Moses relationally, he had to spend 40yrs on the far side of the desert before he was fit for ministry.  Same with the educated Pharisee of the Pharisees Saul.  It took up to 14yrs out in the desert alone after being knocked from his donkey before he was fit to go out and he clearly says that he did not confer with flesh ....
 
 
 

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Plains.Net, and is
believed to be clean.
 

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Plains.Net, and is
believed to be clean.
 

Reply via email to