John UK wrote:
Sure thing bro! Just as soon as I am on a higher plane after these cluster headaches. If you have a landline I can phone free.

I will ping you the number tomorrow.

Speak soon.

In the meantime, I will continue to bear you up before the throne of grace. May the Lord be pleased to give you relief.

Lisa wrote:
Thankyou sc for that scripture. Yes you are right.

Though I am not in the same field as you I am also a professional and understand all too well the pressures experienced by Christians living in today's society.

View them not so much as witches, but as sinners needing the love and grace of God and you should find many of the difficulties will vanish away.

The Lord bless you in his service and grant you many encouragements!

Hello John UK

How are you dear brother? Trust you are going from strength to strength.

I wonder where Lisa lives in relation to you?

Maybe you can email me your phone number some time. Would love to have a catch up, if you are up to it.

Lisa wrote:
The struggle was...

A number of points:
You are a professional. You are paid by the NHS. You are meeting these people in the context of work.

So you have a duty to God to give your best in your secular calling, as well as legal duties to your employers and clients.

Even if you had no opportunities to openly speak about the Lord, the way you live and conduct yourself at work should speak volumes about you and will undoubtedly lead to people asking.

And you are quite right to pray for opportunities, and to take them up as they arise.

But being intimidated by their paraphernalia is superstitious. Let me explain. I am a first generation Hindu and so all my family still worship Hindu 'gods'. Most Hindus have home shrines with pictures and statues of their 'gods'. They also eat food offered to idols. Now I know that these things amount to devil worship, but the pictures, statues etc. do not intimidate me in the least. I DO NOT eat food offered to their idols, not because there is anything wrong with it, but for their consciences.

Given the current climate in the UK we must heed:

John UK wrote:
I know nothing about a Christian movement which is dominionist. Could you give a bit more info on that..

Up late with kidney stone pain!

Google Christian Reconstruction or Theonomy and you will get the story. Rushdoony (a Presbyterian) championed this and it took roots in Presbyterianism [one could ask what doesn't? ]in the 60s and has grown considerably. The Paleo Presbys love it. Imagine what they could do to the Baptists if they succeeded!

It has also evolved a little and spread to Charismaticism in a slightly different form since the 80s.

Essentially those who hold these views believe that it is the duty of Christians to conquer and create a worldwide kingdom: in the case of Theonomists, patterned after the Mosaic Law. They wish to conquer all lands and make them like OT Israel viz. a theocracy.

Never mind that Christ said my kingdom is not of this world!!

John UK wrote:
But then, SC thinks you've caught some of it.

Christopher000 wrote:
Oh, I do, but thank you...just a bit of early AM humor. Does drive me crazy though...blah, blah, blah. I try to leave the house as early as possible each day...ha-ha.

Christopher000 wrote:
So, how do I neutralize this protein.? My wife never stops talking. I could be three rooms away or on a different floor and she will be blabbing as if I am right next to her, causing me to have to strain
to hear her or run to her to find out what she's saying. Maddening. Look out though if I do the same to her. Women.

"Likewise, ye husbands, DWELL WITH THEM ACCORDING TO KNOWLEDGE, GIVING HONOUR unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered".

Michael Hranek wrote:
SC UK
O how I wish you lived in my area. I would be so honored to have you sit with my family and I on Sunday morning in the church (imperfect but a blessing) we attend, to worship the Lord together and hear His word preached and maybe afterwards to fellowship and pray for each other.
I found this song on YouTube I hope you like it:
Dear Refuge of My Weary Soul
btw if John from Wales was with you he would be welcome too.

If I lived near you, the honour would be mine to fellowship with you. If the other believers in your fellowship are nearly as warm hearted and zealous as you, then it would be a home I would desire.

Thank you too for the link. I shall look at that later.

John UK is only a few hundred miles from me. I hope to meet him one day.

John UK wrote:
The only way for isolated believers to have fellowship today is either to move or to pray believing. Seeing as the latter is dependent upon sovereign grace, a move is probably the better option.
New York here we come!

Michael Hranek wrote:
'We do not realize how precious to God a true expression of the church is.'

I have been following this discussion with interest, not only because of its importance, but also because the reality for so many nowadays is to choose between a church which is a church in name only or to stay at home.

I am not even speaking here about finding a perfect church, whatever that may be, but a church where the gospel is preached, where sound doctrine is espoused and where the Lords people want to grow in the knowledge and love of Christ, and desire to serve him acceptably in this evil generation.

It seems to me that most churches have capitulated to worldliness, oftentimes the worst forms, and church is now pure entertainment value.

Regenerate church membership is out, discipline is out etc.

So we can all explain the ideal from the Bible, but please have a heart for many who have tried and from frustration have to stay at home. The desire is there to be part of a church, but realistically the prospects are bleak. Does the Lord not accept the intent for obedience where practically it is not possible?

John for JESUS wrote:
.. We could all probably know our church history better, but that doesn't mean we cannot talk about it. Thanks for the link to "The Pilgrim Church".

1. Your moniker is provocative to say the least. Are you trying to say that you ONLY are for Jesus and everyone else posting here is not? If this is not the case, then it would be wise to change the moniker.

2. There is nothing wrong with the term "Catholic", if used correctly. In Protestant usuage it just means "universal".

3. The corruption of the churches from their primitive purity was gradual and so your quest for a specific date is a little simplistic, although there are some key events that accelerated the decline e.g. during the time of Constantine.

4. To insist as you wrongly do that there was one cohesive organised church from its inception known as the "Catholic" church is nonsense and anyone with even a little knowledge of church history would not make that mistake.

John for JESUS wrote:
JOHN UK...Before the Reformation occurred all Christians outside of the eastern orthodox branch went to a Catholic church. After the Reformation, a lot of Christians left the Catholic church and formed new churches. So all those Christians who went to Reformed churches came out of the Catholic church, which was around for some 1500 years.

May I suggest that you study church history books before making dogmatic statements which are just plain wrong.

One of the best books to read is E H Broadbent's "The Pilgrim Church". This is a thrilling read for anyone not familiar with church history. He does not go into great depth but makes a broad sweep.

You can find an online version

HERE

John UK wrote:
Well howdy there brother. Good to hear from you, and I am looking forward to having you participate again on the forums when the time is right. I am glad you are cheered; you are a real blessing to me.

Still not up to the heat that would be created on forums like this. Recovery has been slow, but praise God, sure. Thank you for your prayers and concern.

The Lord continue to bless you!

John UK wrote:
Hey brother - great to hear from you my dear friend. Are you still on the same e-mail address? If so I will write. If not, I'll post mine own one next post.
Blessings to you and yours also!

Best if you let me have your contact details through

contact details

I will then respond so you'll have mine.

How are you keeping these days? How is work and the church situation? Are you still street preaching? Would love to catch up sometime, but don't have any contact details for you.

John UK wrote:
About these passages,
I rather think this is a prophetic passage, concerning the dispersion of the Jews all over the world....

Re: the passage on Deut- hasty answer John ... what would be the significance of such circumcision if it was only to take place at the dispersion? Why would repentance and love to the Lord be pre-requisits to such a circumcion? What is this circumcision then?

Look also at the surrounding verses, some of which are quoted in the NT, and see how the NT writers understood them ... Requires patient searching, but I am sure you will be guided to the correct answers.

I must be away from SA now ... too many other things to do.

So I shall say Lord Bless, and keep in touch.

Prayerfully yours

SC

DJC49

You're on my wavelength, and the Gal 4.29 verse is very pertinent.

Lord bless.

John UK wrote:
....Are you saying the old testament saints were all born-again believers?

Just looking in briefly. Hope you are well.

Don't want to get embroiled in the controversy on this forum, but having read your last post, permit me to ask:

How do you square Deut 30.6 with Romans 2.28-29?