Re: [TruthTalk] Christ - incarnate God (Judy)

[Judy Taylor]

I don't really trust your statistics Lance, you are generalizing by using what your memory tells you The Mormon boys use a lot of scriptures to refute what they think comes against their teachings Scriptures wrested out of context don't count, nor do scriptures used solely for the purpose of refuting my apprehension though I don't recall most of those.  So what point are you alluding to and where does your and their scriptural interpretation differ from what the Spirit has shown me??     On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 09:10:11 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ReVIEW the posts of BT, JD and DM over the last couple of YEARS on this matter. Scriptures refuting your apprehension abound. You 'see' those Scriptures differently than they. THUS MY POINT! This is THE POINT I've been making for a couple of years. Your SCRIPTURAL INTERPRETATION on this matter differs from the one The Spirit has shown THEM..  From: Judy Taylor   Refutations abound, I agree but only as opinions.  I want to see where I am wrong IN GOD'S WORD rather than by men's opinions or some theology which distorts other parts of God's Word which are what abounds around here.  I am not blind to them, they just hold no weight.  I see them as cisterns without water.  If you can show me where I am missing it in His Word  in balance and in context then you will have my full attention.    On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 08:44:52 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Indeed, Judy, you have not. However, I have. Refutations abound but, you've failed, thus far, to 'see' them. IMO you'll continue to be 'blind' to them. Once again, I don't know why? From: Judy Taylor   I have never ever said anything about "interpreting or unpacking" scripture The scriptures are spiritually discerned Lance... and God the Holy Spirit is the one appointed to lead us through them.  Not one of you so far has refuted anything I have written by scripture except Gary who was on the ball and noted that I added a donkey to the scenario in Acts 9:4.   On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 08:15:31 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Scripture is NOT self-interpreting. No matter what you may think, Judy, the meaning/interpretation YOU draw from Scripture is not always the correct one. NOT you nor DM nor anyone else has been promised otherwise. From: Judy Taylor   On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 05:45:55 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Because He said it and since you hold Him in such high esteem yourself, I would think that you would find this an important point also.   Things can be said, Judy, and have more than one possible meaning.   So what other meaning do you ascribe to John 14:28 Bill? The Amp Version even adds 'mightier' - so the Father is "greater and mightier"  I can not see why you have a problem with this since Jesus came to serve rather than to be served and stated clearly that the words he spoke were those of the Father and the works he did were the Father's works.  It is written of Him "Lo I come in the volume of the book, it is written of me to do thy will O God" (Heb 10:7)  How can you argue with the scriptures?   Ours is to decide which of those meanings is correct.   So it is what you decide which determines truth regardless of what is written?   You have used the "greater than I" verse to diminish Jesus' divinity, at the very least, on numerous occasions. You know that and I know that.   I am not diminishing anything Bill. I am agreeing with what is written and known as the Word of God.    And that is why it is surprising for us to then read you calling him equal in divinity to the both the Father and Holy Spirit.   The conflict is in where your faith is rooted Bill; the patristic fathers and the scriptures do not agree. Accepting and believing the Word of God makes him no less divine.  It is best to accept what God says about Himself than to make him into something he is not.  You apparently do not understand the 'mystery of godliness'   I read the same verse and conclude that Jesus is addressing something other than his divinity because I already know that he is fully divine, hence equally divine (I could go into what I think he meant but that is beside the point). Don't assume that because I do not read it and come away with the same meaning as you that I read it and conclude, therefore, that it is not meaningful or important at all.    At this point I don't know what to believe - about you and your doctrines - that is.... other than they don't agree with scripture.   Bill From: Judy Taylor   On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:36:39 -0700 "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I believe he has equal status in the Godhead with the other two members. God is ONE - remember?   That is good, Judy. And yes I do remember that. Why then do you make such an issue out of Jesus' statement that the Father was greater than he?   Because He said it and since you hold Him in such high esteem yourself, I would think that you would find this an important point also. His time spent on this earth as a man was for a purpose.  He came to demonstrate for us how to live as well as to lay down His human life so that we could live by being reconciled to the Father.   Correction, she writes as one who knows the One who knows all truth   I was only trying to be respectful of your position, Judy. Just yesterday you criticized the early fathers for not being able to fully understand the incarnation, pointing to "the Promise of the Father which is the Spirit who will lead us into ALL Truth." [emphasis your own] Do you see why I might misunderstand you from time to time?   No Bill I don't ... when all I am doing is quoting what has already been written and is sealed in heaven.   Bill From: Judy Taylor From: "Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Y]ou guys keep constructing straw men arguments, claiming they are her's, and then when it finally comes out that she doesn't believe what you have been arguing all along that she believes, you think she has changed her perspective.   Well, David, I am not one of the "you guys" you mention, as I've been asking questions and weighing her answers in view of things she's stated elsewhere.   Sure you are Bill; you are constantly trying to set me up with your questions and whatever answer I come up with is never good enough, never the right one so far as you are concerned..  This is not what I call dialogue   On the question of the nature of Christ and his status in the "Godhead," Judy has been quite elusive and, when not, contradictory. I've asked her a very specific question. We'll see if she addresses it or takes the winding road yet again.   I believe he has equal status in the Godhead with the other two members. God is ONE - remember?   By the way, you're right about the kinder, gentler approach.   Just a civil, respectful  approach would be much appreciated   Though she writes as one who knows all truth,   Correction, she writes as one who knows the One who knows all truth   she is ignorant of most of this and needsto be taught and brought along with patience. I'll try to be better.   Sorry Bill you are not the One I had in mind .....   Anyway, till next time, Bill   ---------- "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.   -- 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.