|
What do matters of difference between BT and DM have to
do with "understanding"
the gospel Lance? To me the point of the conflict
sounded something like "God hides
things from the 'wise and prudent' and reveals them to
babes.
Main point from Dean: A child can 'understand'.
To some extent a child CAN understand. However,
Judy/Dean a child does NOT have the capacity to
sign on TT and resolve matters of difference say,
between Bill Taylor and David Miller. Don't make
something mean more than it can.
Lance it amazes me that so many think they know
exactly what God would and would not do - Yet
their ideas are diametrically opposed to His
Ways. What was the main thrust of your point to Dean
that I missed?
You've worded this in such a way as to
suggest that God wouldn't 'use' those things I mentioned. He does.
You appear to have missed the main thrust of
my point to Dean. That's OK.
Correction!! Study helps do not give
"understanding" Lance. Only the Holy Spirit can give
"understanding"
Historical background is not "understanding"
per se. One can know all ABOUT something and be
completely
void of "understanding" or spiritually ignorant just like the
scribes and pharisees of Jesus' day..
By the way Dean, if a child can understand it then, would you say that Judy doesn't need her 'study helps' and DM
doesn't require skills in ancient languages, logic
etc.?
cd: I think this is good
advice and I am trying to do just that Lance. My advice to you is to
forget all the different "isms" in these other views as they have
IMO lead you into confusion.God wrote in a language so simple that
even a child could understand-what you hold for truth is a doctrine
of complexity that even a collage graduate would fall short
understanding-and you or Satan has placed people around
yourself that is supporting this complex error. Simply read the
Bible for your self and draw you own conclusions from those written
words and-as you say live by those
words-respectfully.
Sent: 2/24/2006 5:58:24 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Plurality vs Pluralism - Who is believing/teach THE TRUTH?
Dean says to Lance "their is only ONE
TRUTH...the Bible wording supports OUR TRUTH" Further, "I
have tried to teach you...(the Bible truth, the One truth, our
truth.. concerning sin)"
I posted the course notes on
Christology for you to see the diversity, Dean. In Mad Magazine it
was Spy vs Spy whereas on TT, in the churches and, in life it is
ideaology vs ideaology, religion vs religion, belief vs belief
and, yes Dean, even SCRIPTURE VS SCRIPTURE.
I suggest that you live out that
which you believe God has shown you.
Original Message -----
Sent: February 24, 2006
05:33
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Plurality vs Pluralism - Who is believing/teach THE TRUTH?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 2/22/2006 7:18:44
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk]
Plurality vs Pluralism - Who is believing/teach THE
TRUTH?
Look 'em up. I'm for the former
and, agin' the latter. It seems to me that each believes their
understanding of the truth to be THE understanding of
the truth. Each attempts to demonstrate the foregoing by
employing means generally acceptable to all participants. When
arriving at an impasse, persons just agree to disagree
or, think of those with whom they disagree as
unwilling/unable to SEE their (read THE) TRUTH. Persons also
testify to the presence of their truth in their lives. Persons
suggest some variation on illumination/enlightenment/Divine
confirmation of their truth.
cd:The problem I see with your
reasoning Lance - Respectfully- is that the Bible wording
supports our truth (ie. And there is only one truth). We can
back up what we say with the word of God with harmony through
the entire Bible- these others you mentioned cannot. I
have tried to teach you about sin and the consequences of sin
even on a believer. Can you use the Bible to teach me once
saved always saved?
How and, in what ways have I
mischaracterized TT since its
inception?
|
