MG wrote: No, "huh". I just don't see Scripturally how Christ's resurrection can/could change one of the 10 Commandments. There's no proof of a definitive Sunday resurrection either, so I still don't see how the Sabbath is one of GOD's apparent temporary ways of living - I've read it's for ALL generations!
Of course you don't see. The fact that he is Lord of the Sabbath with every right to change the day of observance would have no impact on a 7th day Sabbatarian.
You've read it all for generations! And still no light? 2 Tim 3.7.
MG wrote: "Huh": He was possibly raised right at the end of a Saturday, just as it was "dawning" toward the first day of the week. This doesn't necessarily mean becoming light, but can mean the beginning of a day (dusk). Even if He did rise on a Sunday, there's no reason that would change the fourth commandment.
Basically it can mean anything that suits your view. I get it.
MG wrote: Acts 20:7. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. When you realise the Sabbath ends at sundown Saturday, then you also realise that this verse is talking about everyone meeting on the Sabbath (Saturday), and eagerly staying together into Saturday night (the first day of the week) until midnight. 1 Corinthians 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. Here we see that there was no thought of money on the Sabbath, so the first day of the week was the time to collect your money! The Sabbath surely remains. Much of the NT explains the OT more deeply, but we need to be careful that we don't say that the NT is above the OT! It is GOD's Word, and His blueprint for righteous living should not be swept aside as not being valid for modern times. Our Messiah said that not a jot or a tittle will pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away! Look around and you'll notice that they haven't passed away yet!
On what day was Christ raised from the dead? On a Saturday?
FYI guy wrote: low-income Americans ransacked stores, cleared shelves and then abandoned shopping carts filled with food. who writes this stuff? do they ever go shopping? go during food stamp distribution times? I have yet to see low income people ransack groceries, or clear shelves at food stamp time ... when it is discovered your card does not work ,is embarrassing and people did leave their carts and cried as there would be no food for the kids ...
John for JESUS wrote: Wet, wet, wet... I believe these Gentiles were baptized in water. But what for? They already made a public profession of Christ by being baptized on the Holy Spirit. It seems to me this was part
Since when is Baptism of the Holy Spirit a public profession?
John Yurich USA wrote: I believe salvation is important to go to Heaven after passing away. And I would be uncomfortable attending an Evangelical Protestant Church as I don't wish to communicate with anybody. I would sit in the back and leave after worship without communicating with anybody. And I do tell individuals on discussion forums that salvation is only by embracing Jesus as Lord and Savior.
post Pentecost wrote: ..The Reformed on the other hand, place Regeneration/born again - (indwelling after Christ's glorification) at a crucial and essential point placing the Holy Spirit indwelling - who THEN works faith in the heart of the elect after they are born again. This is the historic doctrine of the Reformed church from Paul's revelation in Romans 8, ad infinitum...
May I ask politely, why are you having such problems proving this, if as you say, it is the teaching of the Bible and of the entire reformed community?
Surely you can find just one bible verse that clearly teaches indwelling prior to faith? Or just one reformed commentator who can expound a passage of scripture and show us this indwelling prior to faith?
This is now a pretty long thread and you have been given a fair crack at it. But, other than repeating your assertions ad-nauseum, nothing has been offered by way of proof. Why is this?
Solafide wrote: When these OT believers came empty-handed to the Temple but full of faith, was that enough?
If they were full of faith, how could they come empty handed?
There were sacrifices provided for the poor so that none should come empty handed.
So, do you have any examples of people of faith coming empty handed, or is this theoretical to make, what you consider, an important point, Mr Schwab?!
That article is complete and utter trash and a waste of everyone's time and effort. It is so full of lies and misrepresentation!!
If you are convinced by it then it says a great deal about you and whether you value your bible. Your faith, like that of every other Presby, is in the teachings of your denomination and not in the Bible. No wonder you guys dont like Bible study. You're spoon fed your beliefs.
All Aboard wrote: Either you'll read history backward ending a Baptist biblicist; Or read history forward ending an Evangelical Roman Catholic: Any other denomination is a mere train station moving you toward one of these final destinations.
Evangelical Roman Catholic?!!! What the.... is one of them? The terms are mutually exclusive, except to a reprobate Jesuit aka Allan Schwab.
New religions wrote: If this is Christianity, which religion represents its single unshattered mind?
The mind of Christ is one. What you witness on these boards is fallible humans trying to come to grips with the Divine mind.
Strenous disagreements exist in all sorts of spheres; science, philosophy, history etc. So would you, on the basis that students in these fields cannot represent "a single unshattered mind", deny their legitimacy as fields of study?
If not, then why should you single out Christianity for this treatment? Unless, you have a gripe!
T of C wrote: John 13:5 After that he poured water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded. Then he cometh unto Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord,dost thou wash my feet?...8b Jesus answered, if I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me....9b Lord, not my feet only but my hands and my head. 10 Jesus saith unto him, he that is washed needeth not but to wash his feet, but is clean every whit,and ye are clean but not all. Hebrews 6:1b not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptism(s), and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment. In both cases the origin words were addressed to Jewish believers in Christ.
Observer wrote: The Westminster divines viewed baptism as the instrument and occasion of regeneration by the Spirit, of the remission of sins, of ingrafting into Christ (cf. 28.1). The Confession teaches baptismal regeneration.
Chapter XXVIII Of Baptism I. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, ****of regeneration,**** of remission of sins, ‚Ä¶.
*** TIT 3:5*** Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
‚ÄúThe full force of the language will be met by the supposition that it means that baptism is the emblem or symbol of regeneration, ‚Ä¶ And that this is the meaning is further clear, because it is nowhere taught in the New Testament that baptism is regeneration, or that it is the means of regeneration‚Ä¶‚ÄĚ (Presbyterian minister A. Barnes - commentary on Titus 3:5)
Frank Dombrosky wrote: THE KING JAMES BIBLE USES SUCH OBSOLETE WORDS. Actually, not that many. I find some of these same words in newspaper and magazine articles from time to time. (Ever heard of a dictionary?)
I know I would need a dictionary to look up some of the words used in the modern versions.
Filigree, verdant, terebinth, satraps, qualm, portent, porphyry, pinions, parapet, offal, armlets, fomenting, dappled, forded, ibex, overweening, stadia, abashed, abutted, annotations, brooches and there are many more words that could be added to this list.
Ugh wrote: Here is an example of Spurgeon contradicting himself ..
It is only a contradiction if you are an unthinking person, which clearly you are.
Both regeneration and faith occur in time simultaneously. However for hypercalvs. who might accuse Spurgeon of being an Arminian (and many did) he is quick to point out that if one thinks of cause and effect then the cause is regeneration and the effect faith.
No contradiction because one statement relates to time and chronology, the other to cause and effect.
CHSpurgeonfaiththegiftofGod wrote: Do we agree with C H Spurgeon that faith is the gift of God and the result of the new birth? Just checking At the same time, this faith, wherever it exists, is in every case, without exception, **the gift of God and the work of the Holy Spirit**. Never yet did a man believe in Jesus with the faith here intended, **except** the Holy Spirit led him to do so. **He has wrought all our works in us, and our faith too** I do not find it difficult to believe **faith** to be at the same time the duty of man and **the gift of God** Faith in the living God and his Son Jesus Christ is **always the result of the new birth**, and can never exist except in the regenerate. Whoever has faith is a saved man. 'Faith and Regeneration'
I agree with Spurgeon. Since you are not answering any questions I don't yet know what you believe, so I cannot say whether we agree.
As has been pointed out already Spurgeon believed that Regeneration and Faith happen simultaneously. Only causally is faith the result of regeneration. In other words faith and regeneration amount to the same thing viz. the new birth. But the impression I get is that THAT is not what you believe.
Now care to answer any of the questions that have been put?
Faith. The GIFT of God. wrote: Blah Blah Blah...Thus God teaches, not only, that He has given to His own the GIFT of Faith, but also in a measure which HE decided is appropriate to the person concerned.
You are so predictable and boring
What do you understand by your own comment that "faith is a gift"? Do you mean that YOU did not believe, but somehow whilst in a trance like state it just came to you?
And why would belief be so critical if you were already born again?
C.H. Spurgeon says ‚ÄúAs far as we can tell, faith has been selected as the channel of grace because there is a natural adaption in faith to be used as the receiver. Suppose that I am about to give some alms, I put it into his hand - why? The hand seems made on purpose to receive. So in our mental frame, faith is created on purpose to be a receiver. It is the hand of the man and there is fitness in receiving grace by its means etc.‚ÄĚ