|
1. Yes
2. I'd call them 'Christian' heretics,
Dean.
3. We speak of Jesus Incarnating as A man
but, in reality, he was a baby to begin with so, yes a child can understand what
Bill Taylor is teaching.
4. That would be like me saying to DM
'practicing homosexuals are believers who fall a little short. Thereafter, I'd
ask him to read the balance of what I said.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: January 21, 2006 09:06
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance,
Bill, John, David?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 1/21/2006 8:26:24 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance,
Bill, John, David?
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.
cd: But if I am right them the opposite is
also true and yours is therefore wrong ? True? If so why do we have to jump
to others being non Christian heretics because they fail to understand
the deeper meaning of scripture-could a child understand what we are
discussing Lance? No? Yet a child can be saved-so cut it out and be
nice. Read the words of Darby below and notice what I have
underlined-Heck why not read the entire short artical-I first gave
the longer form because Darby explains this well for understanding this
topic?
----- 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,
|
