SITE NOTICE | MORE..Photo Album Improvements! The photo albums feature has been improved for all members to now include the ability to upload multiple photos via drag-and-drop with our new Media Uploader tool! .. click for more info!
Even though Esau had the sign of the covenant, he was not saved. He was rejected and therefore not given the grace to believe. He was not one if the elect of God. This shows that the sign does not save but the sign is made effective by salvation.
Romans 4:9-11 KJV  Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only , or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.  How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.  And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Great Sermon! It's so wonderful that you are bringing Truth to the forefront in this politically correct world we live In! Keep it coming Pastor! Also for your next conference PLEASE speak more on how the sinners pray make False Converts! Thank You & God Bless You! We Love You!
Yes, that is what I believe, although you have to define "had the sign". Had the sign of what? Surely not the sign of the covenant of grace? Could not be.
We have been informed by one here that the covenant mentioned in Gen 17:7 was the covenant of grace. Could not have been.
Why not? Because everyone within the confines of the covenant of grace are brought to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ - every one - without fail - none lost - all.
R. K. Borill writes, No one is saved apart from grace. Esau had the OT sign of the Abrahamic covenant which points toward the NT covenant. All of the signs types and shadows of the OT point toward the covenant of grace on Jesus Christ. The OT saints were saved believing in Messiah to come for their righteousness. They were born again by the same Holy Spirit of the NT. Saved by the same grace provided in the NT.
John 14:6 KJV  Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Hebrews 11:13 KJV  These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them , and embraced them , and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
Both sons are hard working and everybody has the same amount of time in the day and choose whatever they want to do with that time. Its ok with me however you spend your time or whatever you eat or even what religion you choose to woship in, I'm sure you don't need people telling you what to eat as well. Have a good day and good eating.
Since you have not stated your argument, but pointed to this, I can only assume that you have the standard argument of the promise is to your children, therefore let's read in covenant and assume that Peter meant baptize because of this.
So let's look closely at the passage. What does it say? Firstly, no covenant is mentioned anywhere. So, let's park that. What it says is "Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost". What no baptism without repentance? Certainly not!
So THAT was the promise cited to the crowd. But it does not stop there. The promise is to them, their children and to those who are far off. Does the promise suddenly change when it goes down to the children? No! It is the same promise viz, that upon repentance they too will receive the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Also look at the end of the sentence at verse 39 viz, "..even as many as the Lord our God shall call"! Really? Does there have to be a call? What sort of call are we looking at here RK? I would say an effectual call because only such will come to repentance.
Infants called through the gospel who repent, baptize but o/w NO baptism!
All these Baptist parents who don't love their children enough to bring them into Covenant with Christ. All because of their "partial biblical" ideology. What kind of parent? What kind of Christian? What kind of person alienates their own child from the promise and sacrament of God and Christ?
Baptism obviously doesn't mean very much to the Baptists. Else why would they neglect this grace from their children?
The grace of baptism provided and commanded by Christ who died for such as these - Is thrown out by Baptist ideology and tradition as so much dishwater!!
AND They call themselves "Baptists"????
Jesus states "suffer the little children to come unto me" "Some hope" states the Baptist Tradition!!!
Jesus states "for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven" "Not unless they get passed us first" say the Baptists.
1Cor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but NOW THEY ARE HOLY. = This is one of the verses the Baptists have deleted from their Bible.
Unfortunately, probably not, Chris. One might want to remember, Another look at Egypt Air (990) crash. Mr Farah, emphasized conspiracies too much in this article--especially the wrong ones, but Wikipedia didn't like my golden oldie tablet.
Quote #1 "Because of the Affordable Care Act, he doesnâ€™t have health insuranceâ€”and heâ€™s now on the hook for more than $100,000 in bills." Quote #2 "The only reason our other insurance became expensive is when the Affordable Care Act came into play,â€ť he told me. â€śI would still have the same health insurance if Obamacare had not been around.â€ť"
Isn't this ACA Jim Lincoln's favourite subject? Sounds as though the "Independents" are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
We have been told time and again that circumcision of the flesh is the sign and seal of the covenant of grace God made with Abraham and that Christ was the mediator of that covenant and it is extant till the end of days. We have also been told that the sign and seal was changed from circumcision to baptism in the NT but strangely have never seen the change documented with proof texts.
Gal 5:2-4 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Paul didn't mince words here and if the Presby assertions are true, Christ no longer mediates the covenant of circumcision. Neither does He profit anyone who bears the sign and seal of that covenant but instead, all who bear that sign and seal are debtors to do the whole law of works.
Seems strange that a sign and seal of a covenant of grace in Abraham's day would become a sign and seal of a curse in Christ's day. Or put another way, that which was once good has been made evil.
Surely such a dramatic reversal of the sign and seal would be spoken of somewhere besides the WCF. Where?
What will you do if you get stuck somewhere? How will you forage and cook your own food in the wilderness? You can cook in an outdoor grill. People here use the barbie all the time and itdoesn't take long either. People take longer in the shower than cooking some meals plus it's delicious and makes you feel good. Good food makes you feel healthy and well.
Going from one false religious house to another is no big deal. Pentecostal charismatic religious pandemonium, babble and heresies such as salvation by works is not a huge step away from the papal antichrist and his confused and gullible religious ideologies. So it is no great loss to any serious Biblical Christian church that this guy crosses over to the popish idolatries.
Christopher000 wrote: Really though, the point is trying to eat somewhat healthy since our bodys are a gift and temples of the Holy Spirit. Anyone who eats nothing but fast food and frozen dinners which are loaded with chems and preservatives can't be all that healthy. Might feel fine, but it catches up In one way or another. Bad for the brain too. I should eat much healthier too, but I'm working on it.
But getting health food is too expensive and it is too time consuming to make a healthy meal from scratch. I don't have the time to waste to make a meal from scratch. I have more important things to do than to waste time making a meal from scratch. I get chef salad's from the groery store with Ranch dressing. I also get vegetable trays from the grocery store with Ranch vegetable dip. So you see I do eat vegetables that are healthy and don't need to be prepared.
Another thing you have to watch with the frozen dinners, even if it says it's a healthy choice, is sodium. It is loaded with sodium! If you have blood pressure problems, not good. John y, have you got a crock pot? You can put a roast in there with potatoes and carrots , onions, cook it for a few hours and your meal is done. Make a salad with all ready prepared salad greens and frozen peas that you dump in water and cook a few hours. There's your meal for a few days Get a crock pot receipe book and make at least a few meals in it a week! How hard is that?!! My husband learned to cook, my two sons cook. I've been asked for my receipes they love that I've cooked, never thought I'd see the day my sons would be asking for my receipes.