YEC majority wrote: This is good news: "Summarizing the numbers, BioLogos says that a slight majority of pastors, or 54 percent, support Young Earth Creationism, 18 percent agree with Theistic Evolution, and 15 percent accept Progressive Creation."
Freddie wrote: Biblicist, Thanks so much for sharing and caring. You truly sound like one who knows from the heart how to "bare one anothers burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ". Your advice was perfectly true to Scripture! Thanks again. Any advice or help I can get from this forum is much appreciated!
Write me an email if you want to talk more in private.
One thing I would add Freddie. As difficult as this may sound, try not to isolate and focus on your sins, whether you consider them large or small.
Remember the children of Israel in the wilderness (Numbers 21) when the Lord sent them fiery serpents. They felt the bite, but their salvation was not in looking into their festering wound, or considering how fatal it was. It was not even in them considering their awful sin that led to that point. Their salvation was in obeying by looking away to the fiery serpent on the pole!
"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else."
Michael Hranek wrote: Biblicist Just a comment or observation. In the New Testament does the KJV use the word "candlestick" for the LAMPSTAND that was in the Holy Place? Hmmmmm. If the KJV is such a "perfect" translation it seems they should have know an oil lamp is in no way a (wax)candle.
I am not KJV Only, but I do maintain that the "received text" is far superior to the corrupt texts used as a basis of modern versions. Of course the KJV could do with updating. But, if you have the defined Bible, you will see very quickly that the number of antiquated terms is not so great that it should present an insuperable problem to even an early teen in understanding the text.
And then also we have the problem of the method of translation viz. Dynamic Equivalence etc.
You should spend some time studying the strengths of the KJV and stop listening to the likes of Jim.
Jim Lincoln wrote: ..now if you don't speak English, but only Elizabethan, then KJV is adequate....
What a give away! The man thinks that the KJV is not written in English, but in a foreign tongue called "Elizabethan"!
Makes one wonder why worldwide there is still such a clamour over Shakespere? Perhaps all classics should be dumbed down so that the likes of Jim can appreciate them! Or maybe Jim is of the opinion that only God's word should be dumbed down.
Freddie wrote: Is there anyone in here that knows where I came from and can offer any help or hope?
Makes no difference where you are coming from. We all have to come just the same way.
It sounds to me like you already know conviction of sin. It is the remedy that you are missing. Go to Jesus Christ in prayer, repenting of your sins. Determined that with God's help you will loath and leave them forever. Believe in him only for the forgiveness of all your sins. And he will not disappoint!
Remember, go as you are. You cannot change yourself. He will give you a new heart and His Holy Spirit and that will change everything!
Sounds simple doesn't it? But it is just that simple. Only believe and act! Salvation is FREE and FULL!
" ..Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved ..."
wretched wrote: 1] Biblicist you really, really must pay more attention to english comprehension at school! You naughty boy! #Report - "Must try harder!" 2] "NT Baptists"????? Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha! Oh Biblicist you really do have a great sense of humour.
wretched wrote: ...My denominational affiliation and doctrine goes back to the Bible times not 1521. Baptist indeed.....!!!???
They had denominations back in the Bible times? If not, how could you have a denominational affiliation going back to those times?!
The only people who have a tangible connection to the NT times, because we are biblicists, are the Baptists.
Wrong again! Do you think that God's foreknowledge failed and therefore he did not know of the fall before he created all things? Then, if he intended to leave sinners to the judgement you would be implying that he created in order solely to destroy. Seriously, what sort of a God do you guys have?
wretched wrote: Its great fun watching you guys agree with each other and then pat each other on the back because you agree with each other. Unlike you perfect Christians I am an unworthy sinner Totally Depraved with no hope within my mortal faculties.
Is your point that you're proud of being different?
Mike wrote: I might try to convince them that God does not make man believe or disbelieve, but allows them to do either. But I'm afraid this would fall on stopped ears.
I know what you are saying Mike, but can you see the problem that the calvinist has?
If the difference is down to how the individuals process the enlightenment that they receive, then one of them must have a better thinking capacity, or maybe developed a better receptivity or some such thing, and this qualitative difference achieved by them is their contribution to arriving at faith!! Any such contribution is then considered to be a work.
For them the bottom line is:
If God is not the one making the difference, then you are, and hence you are contributing to your own salvation.
j3 wrote: If you mean justified by God-given faith alone, through God-given grace alone, then I say AMEN. Faith is a result of my Justification; faith is a apart of my santification, what God is doing in me. Faith is not the reason I get saved, but the result of me being saved by God.
If salvation is by grace "through faith" , then salvation must be received by faith. IOW faith preceeds (or must exist to receive) salvation, and is very much related to your "justification"!!
Mike wrote: Not all who have been given some light seek more. And dead isn't as dead as some propose. Man is held responsible for a reason. If a man hates the light, it is because he can discern it enough to hate it. "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed [it] unto them." (Ro 1:19) "so that they are without excuse" (Ro 1:20) When he rejects the light that is made manifest in him, it does not show that he is unable to do otherwise, but that he is unwilling, thus without excuse. You are right in that enlightenment is before the new birth.
Good post Mike
I guess a calvinist would not be happy with the answer you gave because it does not explain why some believe and others do not. To them if the difference cannot be tracked back to God, then salvation becomes works based.
John UK wrote: And I for another. Now what's this about the calvinist's understanding of spiritual death being defective? How so? We've not even mentioned it yet. But alas, my time is out, and must away to the Land of Nod once again. But post it up bro, and in the morn I will have a look and see why you think the Frenchies have it all in a muddle.
I've touched on this in my previous posts. See for instances the following: