New Testament Church Proliferation Digest


Spreading the Gospel via House Churches



NT Church Proliferation Digest Monday, July 1 2002 Volume 02 : Number 113
Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???
[NTCP] conversations with daughters
Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???
Re: [NTCP] conversations with daughters
Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???
Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???
Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 01:52:09 EDT
From: TheologusCrucis * cs
Subject: Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

Jay,

Had to respond, despite myself ;o)

You wrote:

>>If the list is willing, I think that this is a legitimate subject for
discussion. I also believe that it is a very important one. I do not
believe that they refer to the same thing, because that is not what the
old creation teaches me, and if I do not learn from that, then I am
without excuse.

Adoption is a legal matter, a new birth is a matter of impregnation.<<

You are, IMHO, only partly right. You are correct in that adoption is a legal
matter -- so much of our relationship with God is. Our justification is a
declared righteousness.

However, new birth is NOT a matter of "impregnation!" God is transcendent --
He is apart from His creation -- even us who are created in His image. The
life that He gives us does come from Him, but it is not divine. We partake,
we do not become.

This is very heretical imagery, Jay. Like propagates like, species after
their own kind -- and we are not part of God or God, we will never share His
nature, attributes, or essence. Our image of Him is in mind, emotion, and
will plus body to correspond God's ability to act. Although we have life, we
are not privy to the Three-in One Godhead. When we shall will be like Him,
when we will be change from fallen to unfallen, we will be without sin -- we
will not be omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, etc., ...

This is one ingredient of an old heresy -- it is an aspect of ancient and
modern Gnosticism, i.e., that in us is the divine that is actually part of
the uncreated, part of God. As He is, we shall become is an old mantra. Not
that I am saying that you are Gnostic, but this isn't one of the better
worded posts.

However, I would agree with you that adoption and regeneration is not the
same thing, although they are part of the same action on God's part.

Blessing to you Jay,

TC


------- <><><> -------


Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 02:23:27 -0400
From: David Anderson <david * housechurch>
Subject: [NTCP] conversations with daughters

>You and David seem to have forgotten that I am only referring to the
>image, the parable, not the reality.
>If we are going to understand the parables, then we have to deal with
>them. Please, for God's sake, don't get so hung up on the plumbing that
>you can't understand what God is saying. Are we so fallen in Adam that
>we cannot talk about parables, and images without foaming at the mouth?
>God Help us!
>
>Yours in Christ,
>
>Jay

First, Jay, I love you in Jesus. We surely have much more in common than
not. I foam because I love. :-E

I have no doubt that you and I are seeking to know him and his will. The
joy and purpose of life is to do all things to his glory and to see his
hand in all things. A favorite saying of mine from a puritan writer
(Flavel, I believe - possibly Brooks): whoso studies providences will
have providences to study.

It was the unrighteous ones who would not retain God in their knowledge
and were thus given over to a reprobate mind and sexual impurity, too. I
am more than confident that YOU are NOT in this category. Me neither,
thanks to our mutual Friend.

Allow me to bend the dialogue in another direction. A long time back you
mentioned a 12 hour conversation with your daughter. Could you give me
some advice about nurturing daughters? I have 4. Oldest is 16, youngest
is 3.

Some may think that daughter-talk is off-topic for a list as ntcp - but
not really. An elder must have his own domestic situation under control...

David Anderson


------- <><><> -------


Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 06:14:14 -0400
From: jferris <jferris154 * mac>
Subject: Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

TheologusCrucis * cs <mailto:TheologusCrucis * cs> wrote:

> Jay,
>
> Had to respond, despite myself ;o)

> However, new birth is NOT a matter of "impregnation!" God is
> transcendent -- He is apart from His creation -- even us who are
> created in His image. The life that He gives us does come from Him,
> but it is not divine. We partake, we do not become.

Dear TC,

"Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the
Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another
with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed,
but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for
ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower
of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof
falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is
the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." 1 Peter 1:22-25

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the
ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much
fruit." John 12:24

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons
of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God." John 1:12,13

Is The Lord just playing with our minds here? I don't think so, we're
the ones who use words loosely, not God, He creates with Words, and He
reproduces with His uncreated Word.

Yours in Christ,

Jay

P.S. Does this make me a Gnostic wanabe?


------- <><><> -------


Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 06:24:31 -0400
From: jferris <jferris154 * mac>
Subject: Re: [NTCP] conversations with daughters

David Anderson wrote:

>>You and David seem to have forgotten that I am only referring to the
>>image, the parable, not the reality.
>>If we are going to understand the parables, then we have to deal with
>>them. Please, for God's sake, don't get so hung up on the plumbing that
>>you can't understand what God is saying. Are we so fallen in Adam that
>>we cannot talk about parables, and images without foaming at the mouth?
>>God Help us!
>>
>>Yours in Christ,
>>
>>Jay
>>
>
>First, Jay, I love you in Jesus. We surely have much more in common than
>not. I foam because I love. :-E
>
Dear David,

Good retort!

On the way to Damascus, I rather think Paul's foam had a different source.

>I have no doubt that you and I are seeking to know him and his will. The
>joy and purpose of life is to do all things to his glory and to see his
>hand in all things. A favorite saying of mine from a puritan writer
>(Flavel, I believe - possibly Brooks): whoso studies providences will
>have providences to study.
>
Thank you for making me a fellow participant in some of your favorite
insights.

>It was the unrighteous ones who would not retain God in their knowledge
>and were thus given over to a reprobate mind and sexual impurity, too.
>
Please note that they were given over to sexual confusion, not that
inordinate heterosexual activity gets any points with God.

>I am more than confident that YOU are NOT in this category. Me neither,
>thanks to our mutual Friend.
>
Thanks for the vote of confidence. By His grace, sexual confusion has
not been one of my problems.

>Allow me to bend the dialogue in another direction. A long time back you
>mentioned a 12 hour conversation with your daughter.
>
Wow! I didn't think any one was paying any attention, let alone
remembering what I wrote.

>Could you give me some advice about nurturing daughters? I have 4. Oldest is 16, youngest is 3.
>
>Some may think that daughter-talk is off-topic for a list as ntcp - but
>not really. An elder must have his own domestic situation under control...
>
I am inclined to think that the content of such a conversation is not
something to put on public display.
So I will respond to your request off list.

Yours in Christ,

Jay


------- <><><> -------


Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 05:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vanessa DiDomenico <van3hijos * yahoo>
Subject: Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

I'm not sure if I understand this discussion well, but I DO know one
thing: ALL adults should be responsible for ALL children. If only everyone
who has the means would adopt one or 2 kids, even war might disappear from
this world!

And I don't see how adoption or actual birth have much to do with church
planting, BUT I do know one thing: all those rich people who are spending
millions on infertility treatments would do much better to donate that
money to poor children, and then adopt one or two.

Vanessa from Venezuela


------- <><><> -------


Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 19:29:29 -0400
From: jferris <jferris154 * mac>
Subject: Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

Vanessa DiDomenico wrote:

>I'm not sure if I understand this discussion well, but I DO know one
>thing: ALL adults should be responsible for ALL children. If only everyone
>who has the means would adopt one or 2 kids, even war might disappear from
>this world!
>
>And I don't see how adoption or actual birth have much to do with church
>planting, BUT I do know one thing: all those rich people who are spending
>millions on infertility treatments would do much better to donate that
>money to poor children, and then adopt one or two.
>
Dear Vanessa,

I'm with you! If we would only allow Jesus to be Lord of relationship,
perhaps we would stop trying to do our own.

Yours in Christ,

Jay


------- <><><> -------


Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 02:02:52 EDT
From: TheologusCrucis * cs
Subject: Re: [NTCP] made in his sexual image ???

- --part1_8a.1aa631af.2a514a8c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jay,

I failed to see where the Scriptures you have given me in reply to my last
post support your position that we will be God after we die or after His 2nd
coming, or are God thru being born again now.

>>"Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the
Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another
with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed,
but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for
ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower
of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof
falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is
the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." 1 Peter 1:22-25<<

We are indeed flesh -- the power of the Spirit in the Word does live and
abide forever. The source of our new life is God, but He doesn't make us God
incarnate. Or do you think He does, that we are just as much an incarnation
as Jesus was?

>>"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the
ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much
fruit." John 12:24<<

As Christ has done -- He is the first fruit of all who will be resurrected.
But He will still be Christ, a member of the Trinity, and I will still be me
- -- glorified, but still me.

>>"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons
of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God." John 1:12,13<<

I'm pretty sure John isn't the Platonist that your giving him credit for
being. The life we have is from God, but that life doesn't make us part of
God or God Himself. We are considered "born again" because God gives us life
much like our mothers do when we were born, not because God literally gave
birth to versions of Himself!

>>Is The Lord just playing with our minds here? I don't think so, we're
the ones who use words loosely, not God, He creates with Words, and He
reproduces with His uncreated Word.

P.S. Does this make me a Gnostic wanabe?<<

No, Jay, He isn't. I very much believe in the fact that the Scriptures are
clear and understandable. Anyone responsibly interpreting Scripture comes
from a foundational knowledge of God's Transcendence. He is so Other that He
could never be comprehended without the incarnation as revelation.

Without Plato there would have been no such thing as Gnosticism as the Church
father Origen found out to his own undoing. He also blended Platonism with
Christianity as well as allegorically interpreting Scripture -- which reminds
me very strongly of someone's posts on this list, Jay!

You are by no means a "wannabe" when it comes to Gnosticism, Jay ;o)

TC

PS

Believe it or not, this stuff does matter to planting HCs, because in the
Great Commission God calls us to teach, to make disciples, of all the
nations. The first 10 centuries of Church history is the Church trying to
work it's way thru God's revelation of Himself thru Christ. This is why we
ignore the three ecumenical creeds (Apostle's, Nicea, and Chalcedon) at our
own peril. We are not to place the creeds above Scripture, but they were
written by people in the midst of controversies that we will needlessly
reinvent if we chose to remain ignorant. We must not only worship God with
all our hearts, but with all our minds as well!
 


End of New Testament Church Proliferation Digest V2 #113 < Previous Digest Next Digest >

house church eldership servanthood lord's day lord's supper world missions