Re: [TruthTalk] Lance, TFT, Promises etc

Sun, 19 Mar 2006 06:57:10 -0800

The 'knowing colleague' to whom I made reference was David Miller. You and he seem to believe that the two of you apprehend the Scriptures in a way that I, along with others over the years on TT, simply don't believe. IMO, you and he believe that you've been promised that such, misapprehension of meaning, cannot happen.
Sent: March 19, 2006 09:44
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Lance, TFT, Promises etc

 
And who is the 'knowing' colleague Lance?  George Burns and Gracie Allen?
Please speak with lucidity and give up the riddles.  What is the nonexistent promise?
You can at least tell us that much
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 09:38:02 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Repetition, thy name is ...well Judy....well David!
Even David, your 'knowing' colleague in all of his lucidity could not make known to you some things.
That was my point, Judy.
 
Only we are not talking about me Lance
The subject is you and your mentor. If you know something that eludes me - then lay it out.
Also you need to tell DavidM and I what nonexistent promise we lay claim to.
The above is your duty as a professing believer who sees a brother/sister in a fault
I'm waiting to see the LOVE ....
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 09:16:15 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George Burns used to close his act with his wife Gracie Allen by saying 'Say goodnight Gracie!, to which Gracie Allen would reply, 'Goodnight Gracie'
 
As to your homework on various topics along with your conviction and sincerity Judy, you get better and better. Many meanings elude you but, IFO have never thought it intentional thus, my use of the word 'elude' eh.
 
Why would you be embarrassed about torrance being identified with Reformed
theology and John Calvin when you personally inform the list as follows and torrance
quotes these doctrines in his own writings?
 
Judy:  Why indeed! Because he knew the works of Knox thoroughly. He also knew the works of Calvin
thoroughly as he was editor of the 22 volumes of Calvin's NT commentaries. Like all of redeemed humanity
Judy, some of what persons say is worthwhile.
 
Also Lance you are still remiss concerning the following; please explain. What promise?
 
One can only be appreciative of the contribution made by yourself and David Miller as to my point of
longstanding concerning 'illumination/interpretation'. You both lay claim to a nonexistent promise
and, thereafter exhibit the opposite in your writing.
 
 
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 08:52:45 -0500 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Speak of him all you wish, Judy. What you were doing was akin to Kevin stating that
DH believes in the same Trinitarian God that he (Kevin) does. Thus 'embarrassment'! 
 
Sorry Kevin - I guess it is only myself who is not permitted to speak about torrance;
seems to be OK for Lance and those he approves/respects ... you may not be on
the "forbidden" list?

From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Demonstrate that you and Torrance are 'as one' on this point, David. My
goodness but you esteem yourself highly ("I don't expect you to be able to
understand this point', 'you are not hearing me on this last post') IFF you,
David, were who you think yourself to be then, Bill, Caroline, Debbie,
Jonathan et al would've never left. I really do think you've got better
things to do with your time, David. You certainly are not, in some important
areas, leaving a good impression on TT.
 
Lance, I am so tired of hearing about Bill, Caroline, Debbie, and Jonathan
You talk like their absence is some great loss. It was their choice to leave
and I wish them well but why do you keep bringing them up constantly. If I am
forbidden to discuss torrance then I would put the same restriction on you
regarding these four.
 
As to the "impression left by DavidM on TT" - even Jesus could not please
all of the people all of the time.  IMO he may not be a perfect man just yet
one who has fully attained but he is well on the way and he is a godly man ...
who are you to personally  judge another man's servant Lance Muir?
 

From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No, Lance.  You are misapplying things you have read.  Based on my reading
> of Torrance, I'm with him on this one.  I believe God operates with logic,
> not against it, yet logic alone cannot lead us into all truth.  I don't
> expect you to be able to understand at this point, but you should know
> that
> you are not hearing me in this last post.  I make some subtle distinctions
> that would help you understand me better if you would take the time to
> hear
> them.
>
> David Miller
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 8:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
>
>
> We've been here before have we not? IFF you believe that the laws of logic
> to which you subscribe are those out of which God operates then, David.
> you
> deceived. What you are practicing is anthropological theology as against
> theological anthropology.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org>
> Sent: March 19, 2006 07:53
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is the day in Genesis literal or figurative?
>
>
>> Lance wrote:
>>> David:Or, the Holy Spirit is not a rationalist.
>>
>> If you define "rationalist" in the more esoteric sense of the idea that
>> reason is the source of truth, then I do not believe the Holy Spirit is a
>> rationalist.  By this definition, I am not a rationalist either.
>> However,
>> I
>> do believe that the Holy Spirit is rational.  He also does not lie or
>> employ
>> deception to mislead others.  The Holy Spirit uses rational thought to
>> speak
>> to us, and he expects us to include rationality as a basis of belief and
>> action.
>>
>> The position that Genesis 1 is the Holy Spirit not being rational is just
>> a
>> cop out, in my opinion.  It is just as bad as the Creationist who uses
>> the
>> cop out explanation for an observation, "God did it" to stop further
>> research and investigation.  The truth is not afraid of logical thinking,
>> nor does it contradict logic at any time.
>>
>> David Miller
>>
>> ----------
>> "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.
>>
>
>
> ----------
> "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.
>
> ----------
> "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.
>
 
 
----------
"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.
 
 
 
 

Reply via email to