Wrong again, Lance. You have overlooked the very reason the Scriptures have been given to us. The Scriptures are profitable for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Of course, the Scriptures won't help if you are dealing with someone who is not a man of God. :-)
You should consider taking up street preaching in your old age, Lance. It would help you fulfill the following passage: Titus 1:9 (9) Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. David Miller. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lance Muir To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 1:05 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now Going to the Bible will NOT bring the issue to resolution, Dean. Judy, DM, Gary, Bill, John, even I, though only on the rarest of occasions, can muster adequate Scriptural support for a 'view'. Sometimes that 'view' is God's. Sometimes that 'view' is one's own. ---- Original Message ----- From: Dean Moore To: [email protected] Sent: January 15, 2006 12:57 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now ----- Original Message ----- From: Lance Muir To: [email protected] Sent: 1/15/2006 12:31:45 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now EVERY VIEW IS SUPPORTABLE, DEAN!! The better 'taught' one is, the more comprehensive that person's presentation is. This applies equally to right as well as wrong views. IMO, your view is a wrong view on this matter.. cd: That of course would make it wrong because it is in contrast to you view?So how do we know which view is correct-go to the Bible-or some other source? ----- Original Message ----- From: Dean Moore To: [email protected] Sent: January 15, 2006 12:21 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now cd: Lance you need to recognize that this view is made up of much study and that I can support it with scripture so it is not something just spoke off of the top of my head as you seem to suppose. If one is to evaluate the speaker then one must also consider the speakers past statements to determine the availability of truth offer by the speaker.Which statement do you want me to support? ----- Original Message ----- From: Lance Muir To: [email protected] Sent: 1/15/2006 9:13:44 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now Key:'I view'. Please take note as all conversations are similary constructed JT and DM. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dean Moore To: [email protected] Sent: January 15, 2006 09:06 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now cd: I view the word "unbelief" to portray a larger image than what has been stated in this discussion. To have unbelief is not only to reject the person of Christ but to also reject his words which very clearly points one towards God's law and God's grace. So if John 3:18 is correct then one must receive this larger image if not on new birth then later at the bidding of the Holy Ghost. Note and point : One sin can send one to hell if there is refusal of compliance to the conviction power of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:9)-so be not deceived-but sin can also make one least in the kingdom of heaven.This speaks of a personal judgement between the person and God. ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: 1/15/2006 8:28:37 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: OK, done working for now If this Victor person is correct and "UNBELIEF" is the predicament humanity is in then why was the Holy Spirit sent to reprove the WORLD (note this is not just God's covenant ppl) of SIN, righteousness, and judgment? (John 16:8) Why didn't God send Him as an antidote to "unbelief" only if this is the main problem?? On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:50:35 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie Sawczak To: 'Lance Muir' Sent: January 14, 2006 17:02 Subject: OK, done working for now paragraph in this lecture of Victor's: I've often said, too, that the hardest part of any service of worship for the minister is the children's story, because nearly all the children's stories here are moralistic bromides. It's just moralistic bromide. And the Gospel isn't heard because we assume that children can't understand the Gospel. They can be taught not to steal, and they can be taught not to swear, but they can't understand the Gospel. This is ridiculous, but keep your eye on the Christian education wing of your church or denomination, because that's where the Gospel goes down. It strikes me that street preaching and children's sermons go down the same wrong path! Paragraph from next lecture: The protestant reformers maintain that the root problem is Sin and it gives rise to sins. But be sure you know which is which, or you will never come to terms with the Gospel. Morality maintains that little "s" sins plural is the human predicament. The Gospel maintains that capital "S" Sin singular - unbelief - is the predicament. This is the difference between David's understanding of repentance and Bill's/JD's. D -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/229 - Release Date: 1/13/2006 ---------- "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.
