No SHOUTING!! from my end, David. I see you as someone who, for whatever
reason, needs to be right about things. I also see you as someone not much
open to correction. Both of these are denied by you. Where does one go
from
here? One cannot show you David, if you will not be shown.
>I am not pushing MY truth, Lance. I believe that we are
constantly
>changing
> into the image of Christ. You seem to see
me and everybody else as static.
> I do not. I am constantly
changing and modifying the way I think,
> building
> upon the
foundation that has been established.
>
> Victor and you do not
illustrate in any way how my theological
> understanding
> is off
the mark. I'm not disagreeing with either of you that my
>
theological
> understanding is off the mark. It probably is
because I am not trained in
> theology like you guys are. I'm
asking you to explain what in my
> theological understanding is
off. Is it because I believe James 4 is
> talking about
repentance? Is it because I believe that the culture of
> Luther
had a sinful mindset centered on penance and indulgences as
>
solutions
> to deal with sin? Is it because I do not think
repentance and joy go hand
> in hand? Is it because I believe that
the church had a business going in
> indulgences and the role of priests
to bring forgiveness? Is it because I
> believe we are to move
past repentance and onto perfection? Neither of
> you
> are
explaining what is disagreeable. You both are just shouting that I
am
> wrong. I'm asking how. Explain. Let's discuss
this.
>
> David Miller
>
> ----- Original Message
-----
> From: Lance Muir
> To:
[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Fw: repentance & sin and everything
>
> I know Victor
personally and well, David. In this post you simply confirm
> that which
I had to say re: plurality/pluralism and THE TRUTH. Even were
>
it
> the case that YOUR truth were NOT the truth, I have every
confidence, from
> reading you the last couple of years, that you would
not change. I've
> always
> 'read' you as a believer. I've also
'read' you as a believer who has
> constructed his own theology on some
important matters. Some of your own
> theology is thoroughly unbiblical
and, will not stand in 'that day'. Fear
> not as fire will burn it
away.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David
Miller
> To:
[email protected]>
Sent: February 21, 2006 14:26
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: repentance
& sin and everything
>
>
> This coming from someone who
reasons with "First" and "Two" instead of
> "First" and "Second" or
"One" and "Two"?
>
> 1. Please ask Victor to elaborate on
how my theological understanding is
> wholly wide of the mark.
Such a statement does not convey to us any
> greater
>
understanding of the issues here. What is repentance? I suspect
this man
> Victor and I define it differently. He probably views
repentance as
> simply
> being a life that is constantly humble
and devoted to God. I would ask
> him
> to explain James
4:8-10 as something other than repentance.
>
> Check out the
following link, which is an article that I think comes from
> the fruit
of this "theology" you had quoted:
>
http://www.greentreewebster.org/Articles/All%20of%20Life%20is%20Repentance.pdf>
>
This article to me is like puke. There is no understanding of the value
> of
> the kind of repentance described in James 4. The
Anabaptists didn't have
> it
> all wrong and Luther was wrong to
think them to be fanatics.
>
> David Miller
>
> -----
Original Message -----
> From: Lance Muir
> To:
[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 10:29 AM
> Subject: Fw: [TruthTalk] Fw:
repentance & sin and everything
>
>
>
> -----
Original Message -----
> From: Victor Shepherd
> To: Lance
Muir
> Sent: February 21, 2006 09:44
> Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Fw: repentance & sin and everything
>
>
> First, who is
David Miller? His theological understanding is wholly wide
>
of
> the mark.
>
> Two, Debbie is a surer
guide.
>
> Victor
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
Lance Muir [
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
Sent: February 21, 2006 9:34 AM
> To: Victor Shepherd
> Subject:
Fw: [TruthTalk] Fw: repentance & sin and
everything
>
>
> Victor:
>
> Please read on
through to Debbie's comments. Would you offer up a couple
> of
>
thoughts?
>
> Lance
> ----- Original Message -----
>
From: David Miller
> To:
[email protected]>
Sent: February 21, 2006 09:29
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: repentance
& sin and everything
>
>
> I think Martin Luther and
many of the reformers were wrong in their
> concept
> of sin and
repentance. This was the cultural mindset then, that the
>
depravity of man was so great that nothing could be done about it.
Their
> thinking was that everybody sins even when they are unaware of
it. This
> actually was good business for them, given the position
of the church in
> relation to the people. They practiced confession to
priests and even the
> selling of indulgences. While Luther saw
the evil in the selling of
> indulgences, his culture hindered him from
understanding the greatness of
> the righteousness that Jesus imputes to
those who believe. You have to
> understand that perceiving that
we are justified by faith was a huge
> revelation for him in
itself. If that concept was a big deal to him, how
> could he
possibly understand all the benefits that come with faith, such
>
as
> the prophetic gift, miracles, healing, and
sanctification?
>
> One of the greatest hindrances to
sanctification is the knowledge that we
> are sinners. It is the
knowledge of sin, the consciousness of being in
> sin,
> that
paralyzes a person. Such a person has no boldness to stand before
> God,
> much less enter the throne room of heaven. He can
do nothing but be in a
> mournful state of repentance. James
teaches repentance, however, as being
> a
> process with an
end. What does he say? "He [the Lord] shall lift you up"
>
(James 4:10). If we really were suppose to be in a constant state
of
> repentance, this last phrase has no meaning. Is such were so,
we should
> then all be sad, mourning, without joy. No, I'm sorry,
but this is not
> the
> purpose of the Lord Jesus Christ, to keep
us in a state of perpetual
> repentance. Rather, his purpose is to
clear our conscience of all guilt,
> so
> that we feel as if we
have never sinned, and can say like Paul, "receive
> us;
> we
have wronged no man." His purpose is to give us a heart of joy, that
> we
> might walk in a state of righteousness, peace and joy,
knowing that we
> have
> been delivered and cleansed of all
sin. To think otherwise is the
> manifestation of doubt and
unbelief.
>
> David Miller.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lance Muir
> To:
[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 6:25 AM
> Subject: [TruthTalk] Fw:
repentance & sin and everything
>
>
>
> -----
Original Message -----
> From: Debbie Sawczak
> To: 'Lance
Muir'
> Sent: February 20, 2006 22:43
> Subject: repentance &
sin and everything
>
>
> I came across this section on the
first of Luther's 95 theses and thought
> of
> the sinless
perfection discussion:
>
> We commit the same error nowadays, with
the superficial difference that we
> have changed penance into a
psychological or emotional work of
> self-purgation. Luther insisted
that although repentance is something we
> will for ourselves, we can do
so only because God has first willed it for
> us
> and in us.
Moreover, it is to be lifelong and “lifewide”, inasmuch as sin
>
is
> lifelong and lifewide; repentance is not an atomistic act we
perform to
> compensate for an atomistic sin. Even in our hearts as
believers there is
> a
> residual depravity so deep that we
cannot see it. We have an inkling as to
> when and how we have sinned,
but it is only an inkling. In fact, our whole
> existence is tinged with
this residual sinfulness, hence our whole
> existence
> must be
repentant.
>
> Luther’s view contrasted not only with the Roman
understanding, but also
> with that of the Anabaptists, the radicals of
the Reformation. According
> to
> the Anabaptists, unbelievers
needed to repent, certainly, but not
> believers,
> because to
become a believer was ipso facto to be wholly sanctified. To be
>
a
> Christian meant you were perfect and sinless. Both the Roman and
the
> Anabaptist, according to Luther, had a shallow and inadequate view
of sin,
> and both needed to know repentance as a lifelong exercise in
grace.
>
> Luther was an Old Testament scholar first of all, and
repentance in the
> Old
> Testament always has the sense of a
180-degree turn. The Hebrew Bible uses
> three major images of
repentance. One is the unfaithful wife returning to
> her husband:
having disgraced herself and violated her husband, she
>
returns
> to longstanding love, patience, and acceptance. The second is
the idolater
> turning from the worship of idols to the worship of the
true and living
> God.
> On the one hand, idols are nothing—the
Hebrew word for them is literally
> “the nothings”—but on the other hand
they have great power, just as a
> vacuum
> has power to suck
everything into it and a false rumour has the power to
> destroy a
person. The idolater who repents turns from nothing to
>
something,
> from unreality to the reality that is the Holy One of
Israel. And in the
> third image of repentance, rebellious subjects
return to their rightful
> ruler. They have brought chaos upon
themselves and the wider world, and as
> they turn back to proper
authority, the chaos within and around them is
>
dispelled.
>
> Luther was familiar with all of these images. In
saying that Jesus willed
> the entire life of believers to be one of
repentance, he was acknowledging
> repentance as reorientation to the
love and service of Jesus Christ, as
> that
> resetting of the
compass we must will for ourselves every single morning
> when our feet
hit the cold floor. Without it, we blunder farther down the
> wrong road
every day.
>
> Earlier this evening I was thinking of sins of
omission, and also of the
> whole web of corporate, systemic sin in
which we exist and are complicit.
> The other night after watching
Constant Gardener we talked about this
> too--about how a "garden" can
be our refuge from knowing about the evil in
> which we're enmeshed,
because knowing produces a responsibility we almost
> cannot bear and
cannot adequately discharge. How can we deny that we share
> in this
corporate responsibility, and does that not also count as sin?
>
>
And that's apart from our very subtle rationalizations of personal,
>
individual sin. To what degree is our will involved in that? Unconscious
> is
> not the same as involuntary. This thought was raised by
something from CSL
> on the Narnian this aft, about the small act
committed between one swallow
> of beer and the next, the smile or word
whereby we seek admission into the
> circle and close the door behind
us, silencing the qualm. Then my thought
> went to what JD has been
saying about God's complete freedom, similar to
> what TFT said about
Christ's complete integrity, as compared to our lack
> thereof. Until
our total selves are restored we do not have that freedom
> and
>
integrity. We live, though, knowing we are headed there, anticipating
it
> even as he begins to grow it in us, and that is a source of
tension.
>
> It reminded me of a conversation I had with Cas
tonight. Apparently one of
> his teachers admitted to wondering
sometimes if everything he believes is
> false. We talked about how
certainty is simply not within the grasp of
> humans in any belief
system, and that for us who have put confidence in
> Jesus Christ, the
moment of recognizing that we do not know might as well
> be
> a
lifetime. Our whole life, our whole self is in that moment--every
>
time--and we can respond in terror and despair or in trust.
Similarly--I
> find this hard to articulate--our whole life and self are
there in the
> instant of sinning; it might as well be a lifetime,
ontologically. There
> is
> no point saying we are only a little
bit sinful, even if we are David and
> sin only every third or fourth
day. But we need not respond in despair and
> defeat. The alternative to
a claim of sinlessness is not defeatism.
>
> Is that
intelligible?
>
>
D
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Lance Muir [
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 5:55 PM
> To: Debbie Sawczak
>
Subject: Re: quasi-adventure
>
>
> OK then, I've got season
2 and, the Pledge.
>
> L
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Debbie Sawczak
> To: 'Lance Muir'
> Sent: February
19, 2006 17:02
> Subject: RE: quasi-adventure
>
>
>
What?? What are you saying? Don't trifle with my feelings!
>
>
D
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Lance Muir [
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 4:46 PM
> To: Debbie Sawczak
>
Subject: Re: quasi-adventure
>
>
> MI-5 vol 2????????????
See it? Not see it? Keep watching this site for
> further
updates.
>
> Lance
> ----- Original Message -----
>
From: Debbie Sawczak
> To: 'Lance Muir'
> Sent: February 19, 2006
12:33
> Subject: quasi-adventure
>
>
> In the last
kilometre or so of our trip to the MH, the van began making a
> hideous
noise whenever we turned, which Jan said was the steering going at
>
last. So rather than risk driving back with it, he called a tow truck
near
> the end of the service, and when it was over he stayed with the
van while
> the rest of us had to come home by cab. (I'm not sure
whether our Canadian
> Tire Gold Card, which covers towing over enormous
distances, covers the
> cab,
> but I hope so!) We know two other
Georgetown parties who go to the
> Oakville
> MH, but neither was
there today, unfortunately.
>
> Little thing--we were standing in
the lobby watching all the people come
> out
> and looking for
our friend in order to ask for a ride, when Jan decided to
> locate him
by calling on his cell phone. Turned out he was out in the
> Beaches in
Toronto. The funny thing was, while Jan was talking on the
>
phone
> his eyes continued to search the crowd of exiting & milling
MH-goers, till
> finally he said into the phone, "What am I doing, I'm
still looking for
> you
> here even though you've told me you're
in Toronto! I guess I can stop
> looking now!" It seemed to me to be a
parable for something...
>
> D
>
> ----------
>
"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.
>
