R. K. Borill wrote: John UK writes, Sure, you have an unthinking, unfeeling, unloving sect-like brand of religion within christendom, which you yourself are happy with, but which I would not be interested in. RK Borill responds, Wow! I'm feeling the love here.
Its so wonderful to see brothers IN Christ getting on together like this. RK and John you must be learning so much about Scripture from each other. Your hearts must be so full. Keep up the good work. God be with you both.
Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
Lurker wrote: I have learned so much over the years by way of these discussion because they make one search the scriptures
Lurker. I completely agree with you here. (For a change) Over these last few years even going back to the good old days of JD and Yammil, I have had to search Scripture and study Reformed literature and Puritan writings to grow IN Christ and the wisdom of God. It has been a wonderful experience. You Baptists and others have helped me greatly by putting forward your opposing theories that I may seek the Biblical truth. Of course some discussions were a disappointment because of juvenile contempt being put forward instead of intelligent polemics from some Baptists. However as you say debate does help to promote good and productive research and in Scripture that is always excellent value and good food for the Christian. I am a much more of a learned Presbyterian and knowledgeable Christian because of our debates. Thank you for that. One of the ways which I have greatly benefited is to recognise, by grace, the entirely Biblical contribution of the WCF, Institutes and Puritan writings. When in common with the Reformers works, I unite with Scripture truth it is such a blessing. They certainly know their Bible doctrines.
Lurker wrote: The Holy Spirit is responsible for the doctrinal divisions amongst real Christians?
In a sense He is responsible for doctrinal differences. The Holy Spirit provides guidance of and into the wisdom and doctrine of God, as per John 16.13. But we should never discount the power of sin working inside us. Gal 5.17. There are differences which maintain live debate in the Christian community for example baptism its meaning and mode. Presbyterians follow the Bible on this. Baptists however have chosen a different path from 1521 onwards. The Holy Spirit seems to have allowed the Baptists to go their way even if it isn't strictly Biblical. So the Holy Spirit demonstrates mercy and 'leeway' in certain areas. Thus maintaining lively debate in the community. Praise be to God.
Christopher; I don't agree with everything this FPC uses in worship. For example I only use the Psalms which God wrote and ordained for His worship. Also this US FPC goes along with the FPC Ulster which acquiesce to the Baptist method of baptism, I believe they use both methods Paedo and Credo. I obey only the Scriptural method of Covenant paedobaptism.
Having said that this may give you a general outlook on the Presbyterian Church. BTW there are other Presbyterian sermons here on SA which teach on the subject of Presbyterianism, just type 'presbyterian' into the search for a list.
Christopher000 wrote: Question: does anyone know of any really good, fairly mature, born again Christian forums?
Christopher You know if you google "born again Christian forum" or "Reformed Christian forum" etc in various other combinations of terminologies, you will link with many "Christian" forums. But the problem is identifying good Biblical doctrine. Many of the forums are bound to provide lots of different and lots of heretical debates as you will be aware. Today even finding the right church is a problem with many churches singing a lot and discussing/teaching little. So I can understand your search and the reason for it. As John says Bible and books are a good place to begin. - But get in touch with God in prayer too and keep 'pestering' the Lord till you get an answer. Listen to sermons here and try 'article' sites such as monergism.com.
ps: Watch out for them Baptists they're still having difficulties with the OT.
"We deny that Adam's sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person's free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned."
Aaaww poor Baptists.
Perhaps the Presby's in America should pop over to the SBC and teach them what Biblical Calvinism is all about.
They obviously are confused over original sin and its effects on the children of Adam. This is a typical problem which the Arminians are confounded by. They seem to take the stance that original sin was only a local malady in the garden of Eden. As always the poor Arminians underestimate sin.
The original sin of Adam which is the biggest event in mankind's history, which brought God to earth and required of Christ to be crucified, is just a wee head cold to some Arminians who think it can be solved by mortal faculties.
Free Will being such a powerful sinful erroneous fallacy in some humans, incites them to do salvation by sinner. This is the same old heresy which the Roman Catholic outfit is founded upon.
John UK wrote: Presby wrote: But John; blah blah blah
Okay, so you can't answer my question. Can any other Presby answer it?
John The reason why I did not debate with "Observer" is because he insults people. One of the methods he use's is this quote "blah blah blah" inference in his posts.
Now 'YOU' have started this.
I have been debating with you for years now and I don't insult people just because they belong to a different Christian denomination. THATS THE CHRISTIAN WAY!!
Dictionary. "Blah" 1. nonsense; rubbish:"
If you have now considered, in your expertise, that the entire Presbyterian theology is so much "nonsense and rubbish" - Then we can go our separate ways and I wish you God's blessings. However I think that you are just picking up bad habits formed in the reprobate hearts of others and it is not the real John UK we have always known.
John UK wrote: why did you tell me to read the 1689
But John; I assumed being a Baptist that you wanted the Baptist answer. All you seemed to want to know is what was the Covenant all about. Chapter 7 of the 1689 is all about Covenant, it's title is "Of God's Covenant."
Chap 7 Of the Presbyterian WCF carries more information and relates back to the Genesis 17 inauguration of the Covenant of Grace by God, with Abraham. Therefore covers the whole counsel of God.
For example Para 5 Begins; "This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law and in the time of the gospel: under the law it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances...."
Para 6 begins; "Under the gospel, when Christ the substance was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lordâ€™s Supper..."
Now you guys don't even go there do you? Just as your Confession does not, because it supports your Baptist interpretations.
The differences between your 1521 Anabaptist ideologies and subsequent Baptist historical development is a lot more than just depth of water.
Mike wrote: I don't care how the jailer was baptized, only that the plain sense says he wasn't "in prison" when it happened, contrary to what Hodge said.
But Mike; I have to disagree with you! I'm a Presby and you're a Baptist.
John UK wrote: Why did you recommend me to read the 1689 if it is incorrect? "The covenant of salvation rests upon an eternal covenant transaction between the Father and the Son about the redemption of the elect."
John UK wrote: 1. Did I say I was a Baptist? 2. The covenant is between God and his Son a) Believe that all the children of believers are saved. b) Believe that some of the children of believers are saved. 3) then you baptise them upon anticipation of a certain salvation. 4) if the covenant of grace was made by God to ensure the salvation of all his elect 5) then obviously you believe that all the children of believers ARE elect
1) Yes! 2) Wrong! a) Wrong! b) Try election (again) 3) We baptise in obedience of the Command of Christ. Matt 28:19. 4) God does not need to "ensure" the salvation of the elect. Eph 1:4,5. 5) Election! Election! Election!
WCF 10/1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ;....etc
John UK wrote: 1. It matters nothing to me what label men put on themselves or by others. The question is, have they got it right? We are not Baptists and Presbys, but either sheep or goats. 2. How about the answer to my question?
1. Stick to the point John!! If it doesn't matter to you why do you call yourself Baptist? And not Presbyterian?
2. Already did below. 'Again' see your 1689 Baptist confession Chapter 7. Alt see Gal 3:14.
Mike wrote: Just to take on one of Hodge's assertions,... 1) The jailer "brought them out" of the jail, v30 2) Paul tells him what he must do to be saved, v31 3) Paul spoke ..... 4) The jailer cleans up Paul and co...
"brought them out" We can never really exactly see what that means. Question:- Was the Jailer's house in the prison compound?? Today in our society it would not be that way! But back then 2000 years ago - and even in Hodge's day - it would have been a different set of circumstances. Even if it was not, how far were they away from water as a group of buildings? Nothing in this story indicates finding sufficient water to immerse.
BTW in your previous post below you said;
Mike wrote: Does this apply to grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc, or is there a big space between "your children" and those "afar off"?]
The word which I would respond with is "election" - We can have these discussions about Abraham "and his seed" - but cannot ignore God's choice/decision in election. Especially in Calvinist (Limited Atonement) thinking! "the promise is unto you and your children" (if they are elect). __________
John; Hodge is an excellent Bible theologian - he just isn't a Baptist.
Luke 1:67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost and prophesied, saying,.... 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember HIS HOLY COVENANT;... 76 And thou, child,(John the Baptist) shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; 77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins"
"We cannot escape the inference that the redemptive accomplishment signalized by the coming of Christ found its historical prototype in the redemption from Egypt. In Zachariasâ€™ esteem it is the same fidelity to covenant promise and oath that is exemplified in the accomplishment of redemption through Christ and in the redemption from Egypt by the hand of Moses and Aaron. This indicates that the undergirding principle of the thought of pious Israelites at this time was the unity and continuity of Godâ€™s covenant revelation and action, a principle which came to spontaneous expression in the thanksgiving of Zacharias and bears the imprimatur of the Holy Spirit. It was by inspiration that Zacharias spoke, for we are told that he â€˜was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesiedâ€™" (Lk.1.67) (John Murray)