|
Ahhhhh! This then would put JND in the position of
denying that which Bill Taylor is affirming. Allow me to suggest that if JND's
understanding were wrong then, one might come to understand better how it is
that the Brethren and, their offspring preach the 'gospel' that they do. This,
in reality, is that to which I was alluding when I addressed David Miller on the
'homosexual question'. IFF your christology is fundamentally wrong (I'm with
Bill on this one) then, the 'gospel' you preach is wrong on pretty much
everything.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: January 21, 2006 08:14
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance,
Bill, John, David?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 1/21/2006 7:17:47 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance,
Bill, John, David?
One would assume, Dean, that herein lies
something of your own understanding on the matter at hand. Why not draw that
'something' from the Darby quote, put it in your own words then, await a
reply?
cd: Christ did not lower himself to become as
the state of lost men-whom serve Satan. The divinity in Him would not allow
it.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: January 21, 2006 07:08
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance,
Bill, John, David?
cd: Bill I have condenses article written by Darby: Do
you agree with it?If not why?
This shews us the Christ standing in the midst of those who are
saved, whom God brings to glory, although at their head. It is this
which our epistle sets before us He who sanctifies (the Christ), and
they who are sanctified (the remnant set apart for God by the Spirit)
are all of one: an _expression_, the force of which is easily
apprehended, but difficult to express, when one abandons the abstract
nature of the phrase itself. Observe that it is only of sanctified
persons that this is said. Christ and the sanctified ones are all
one company, men together in the same position before God. But the
idea goes a little farther.
It is not of one and the same Father; had it been so, it could not
have been said, "He is not ashamed to call them brethren." He could
not then do otherwise than call them brethren.
If we say "of the same mass" the _expression_ may be pushed too
far, as though He and the others were of the same nature as
children of Adam, sinners together. In this case He would have
to call every man His brother; whereas it is only the children whom
God has given Him, "sanctified" ones, that He calls so. But He and the
sanctified ones are all as men in the same nature and position
together before God. When I say "the same," it is not in the same
state of sin, but the contrary, for they are the Sanctifier and
the sanctified, but in the same truth of human position as it is
before God as sanctified to Him; the same as far forth as man when He,
as the sanctified one, is before God. On this account He is not
ashamed to call the sanctified His brethren.
This position is entirely gained by resurrection; for although in
principle, the children were given to Him before, yet He only
called them His brethren when He had finished the work which
enabled Him to present them with Himself before God. He said indeed
"mother, sister, brother;" but He did not use the term "my brethren,"
until He said to Mary of Magdala, "Go to my brethren, and say unto
them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God an your
God." Also in Psalm 22 it is when He had been heard from the horns of
the unicorn, that He declared the name of a Deliverer-God to His
brethren, and that He praised God in the midst of the assembly.
He spoke to them of the Father's name while on earth, but the
link itself could not be formed; He could not introduce them to
the Father, until the grain of wheat, falling into the ground, had
died; until then He remained
alone,
|
