pennned wrote: SteveR, you recently admitted it was wrong of the reformers to baptize (register) the babies of all the heathen "into the church". I wonder what you expected those of the Word to do when the reformers compromised? you have over applied the term "Anabaptist" to a point that it is not historically accurate. That was an evil, they were misrepresenting the Kingdom of God including families who were not believers. The fault rests with them.
Hi Pen My goal w/Martin was to establish the correct Christian understanding of Esther. Esther is a type of Church, King Ahasuerus is a type of Christ. It is blasphemous to suggest Esther engaged in civil(or any other) disobedience against her husband.
I dont believe 2nd guessing true Christian response of reformation era rebaptizing infants is meaningful when discussing what a 21st Century response should be to all the ills that face us.
btw: 1) When I refer to anabaptist in the present tense, I speak of the spirit of anabaptisits present today. One need only look up the utubes of Hillsong rebaptisms to see the wicked initiations taking place 2)While I agree 'mute point' is an accurate phrase to be used by SAs unholy trinity, Christians and civilized people should use 'moot point'
I completely understand your argument, but notice the 'except' in Esther 4:11. What Im saying is that Queen Vashti behaved in the spirit of civil disobedience against the King, whereas Queen Esther has a history of compliance. Even when she risked her life, the law could have condemned her or not DEPENDING on the Kings discretion
Vashtis civil disobedience Esther 1:12 But the queen Vashti refused to come at the king's commandment by his chamberlains: therefore was the king very wroth, and his anger burned in him. ...1:17 For this deed of the queen shall come abroad unto all women, so that they shall despise their husbands in their eyes, ..
Esthers history of trust earned by obedience Esther 2:15 .. she required nothing but what Hegai the king's chamberlain, the keeper of the women, appointed. And Esther obtained favour in the sight of all them that looked upon her.
Esthers obedience to Mordecai, her people and King knowing full well DISCRETION of the King would decide her fate Esther 4:11 .. who is not called, there is one law of his to put him to death, except such to whom the king shall hold out the golden sceptre, that he may live:
She wasnt depending on civil disobedience, rather the Grace of her husband
Martin wrote: By civil disobedience, I mean acts of non-compliance with the law, such as Esther's, Daniel's, and the apostles non-compliance with unrighteous laws in their day. We must learn how to look government officials in the face and say to them, it is better to obey God rather than men,
Indeed,let me clarify
Esther never engaged in non compliance, she knew the risk of entering the Kings Court without summons. Esther COMPLIED with the law, embraced by her husband, greeted with an offer of half the kingdom, and Haman was hanged on his own gallows. Why? Because the King LOVED her and trusted her(unlike Vashti)
You want cowardice? Pastors in Houston not only refuse to give up their 501c3 status, they WERE AFRAID to give their SERMONS to the proper authorities. What an opportunity to minister! give a LIVE SERMON right there in front of City Hall! news cameras from all over the world have listened. (It wasnt against GODs law to comply w/ those sermons)
But what did they do? Instead they ran to the Constitution for salvation, They ran and hid behind the skirts of lawyers rather than trust in what they were preaching.If we want the LORD to protect us, we must TRUST HIM and HIM alone. The wicked will be ensnared by their own traps
John for JESUS wrote: Adultery has been accepted within the church without much push back at all. How much more will homosexuality be accepted with all of the LGBT groups out there promoting that behavior? One can imagine pastors saying, "Well, it's wrong however God forgives and wouldn't want anybody living alone for the rest of their lives. We mustn't be Pharisees about it!"
To clarify for everyone, I believe you mean remarriage when you say 'adultery.' Most Churches do not accept adultery in the more common definition.
While I understand your point, I would say the refusal of the Church to recognize this difference slowly led to liberalism
1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
1 Corinthians 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Bear wrote: QUESTION: WHAT DENOMINATION WAS JESUS, WHAT ABOUT HIS DISCLES? Were they baptist? No. Were they Methodist? No. Were they trinitarian? Were they Presbyterian? Were they Pentecostals? Were they... You get the drift. they were CHRISTIAN and belong to the body of Christ, of which we make up his church and he is our head. So why don't we all return to Christ and quite squabbling among ourselfs, while the world laughs at us! Please brothers and sisters I implore you to do so...
Evil hates the true Church and spends it days here trying to divide her. Some silly women are led captive, some reprobates soothe their depression but like the Anabaptists of the Reformation era their battle is in vain. SAs unholy put on a cloak of denominationalism, magnify error of Apostolic Churches, declare each other Saints, then return & justify their duties as servants of wickedness. Sure they have their Judas moments when they look up and see they have been beguiled. They temporarily run away from SA, but their father the devil forces them to return here to their vile duties of slandering the Elect
Dolores wrote: Pennned, sad to say, I agree. Our christian freedoms are slowly being taken away from us.
Let none beguile you, NO ONE can take away Christian Liberty from a true child of GOD. They can do whatever they might try against the flesh, but not the Spirit.
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
Romans 8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Romans 8:36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Romans 8:37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. Romans 8:38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Romans 8:39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Christopher000 wrote: SteveR Wrote: A National Baptist Convention Church Pastor in Alabama just admitted to all kinds of crimes without being 'exposed.' Crimes that include illegal drug use, sex with congregants, and affairs without informing sexual partners he has AIDS That's why I qualified my comment with, "maybe there are a few..." Sounds like this particular pastor experienced true conviction.
He could have been convicted, someone was threatening to expose him or was even blackmailing him. Anyways, from what I hear its not going to help in this world. He has been fired and will probably be banned from the Convention.
pennned wrote: I've heard that BJU spent its millions in back taxes to get out of its 501 status. now most ministries these days can't afford that. so I'm wondering if there is a way for independent Christians to essentially buy the incorporated churches/properties to establish free churches. it would then be under new ownership (hopefully under Christ!), under new rules. now I do not know what the regulations on that would be as far as pastors paying income taxes or land taxes, etc, but it would make the churches places of free conscience and free assembly. problem would be that the conventions and denominations would lose their properties and they probably wouldn't like that. anyone see any gaping holes in my theory?
As I remember, BJU went kicking and screaming fighting in court trying to keep the tax status and discriminate against Blacks. Eventually they lost, apologized and applied for other 501c3s
Christopher000 wrote: The way I look at it is that pastors, leaders, etc, never seem to be remorseful, open to change, or beg forgiveness, etc, etc, until after they have been exposed. Using Mr. Driscoll as an example, I have to wonder what would be any different about him at this very moment had he not been called out into the open forum. I would say, like anyone else, it would be business as usual. Everyone is sorry and begs forgiveness when their sins are exposed, but I think most are more sorry for themselves over the embarrassment of the exposure as opposed to really feeling the pain they caused and recognizing their personal faults, etc. Maybe there are a few, but how many people really ask for forgiveness on things without ever being found out first?
A National Baptist Convention Church Pastor in Alabama just admitted to all kinds of crimes without being 'exposed.' Crimes that include illegal drug use, sex with congregants, and affairs without informing sexual partners he has AIDS
Buried in the article we find this Catholic shares the view with most Protestant Pastors
"A survey commissioned by evangelical Christian group BioLogos and released in 2013 found that 19 percent of 743 Protestant pastors who responded to the poll expressed certainty that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Another 35 percent said while they believe that God created life in its present form in six 24-hour days, they express qualified certainty, or doubt the "young" age of the Earth"
btw- Doubting Scripture is rampant among even the most conservative Pastors today. For instance, a Synod we have fraternal relations with doesnt believe Moses recorded his own death in Deuteronomy
imo- Western Culture is pressuring western Churches to embrace same sex marriage and not the other way around. It will be interesting to see how the RCC handles this divisive issue after seeing the international losses experienced by the Anglican Church over this same issue.
While the RCC has a strong base in anti gay marriage cultures worldwide, she still is desperate to maintain her standing in Europe and the US.
If I had to guess, they will continue with mixed signals and the Bishop of Rome doesnt seem to mind losing credibility for the vague appeasement
1517 wrote: This is more disrespectful than Columbus Day. The very people who voted in the change are more than likely ancestors of those who drove out the "indigenous" peoples. Throwing them another cidescending bone is flat out hypocritical.
Dolores wrote: SteveR, if you have an excellent choir that you feel is a blessing, then you are very blessed indeed. I used to sing in the choir that sang in nursing homes and that was a blessing for me because the songs were what I have alwsys sang in my church all my years in church.The music in our church service now is very different. I made mention once to balance the music out. A few tradional songs and a few praise songs for those who seem to enjoy a more lively service. I look around at the elderly ones that come from retirement homes maybe, some on walkers, and then we have the younger ones that actually dance to the music, some in the choir are doing the same so just give us a balance and everybody goes home blessed by the music.
Dolores Im glad your Church was able to accomodate those various styles without division. Im concerned by the movement of some Churches for separate worship, where teens worship in one sanctuary and those 'slightly' more mature in another.
Lurker wrote: Didn't claim he was a false prophet. The fact of the matter is I didn't look up your references. Why was Jonah treated differently? Probably because the man of God had already completed his call from God and Jonah had not. Did you notice God never delivered Jonah from His fit of anger? He never restored joy to Jonah's heart? But if you've got a better answer, I'd like to hear it. Or is it that you are arguing for the sake of argument? You are real good at doling out the questions.... how about some answer? . . . Can't argue your point, Mike. All I can say is God pricked their hearts with fear first as He did with Peter's preaching at Pentecost. He reserved the reward He intended to give them all along until after the fear He set in their hearts worked repentance.
Im suggesting Jonah wasnt disobedient for selfish reasons, but rather knew the Law and was attempting to accurse himself for the sake of the Ninevites
Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
My Church has been Blessed with an excellent choir, with singing so beautiful that even our youth are yet to demand 'contemporary worship.' It also helps that we have respected professional singers in our choir that reinforce the use of traditional hymns in worship.
With all that said, and while I do enjoy Godly hymns, I still believe Psalms only should be used in worship.
Lurker wrote: 1) I agree with James but will add; we must conclude that Jonah was a son of God unlike the false prophets you cited from other texts.
I must remind you, the prophet in Kings 13, this 'Man of God' is NOT considered a false prophet by any denomination I know of. His demise has always been considered that judgement begins in the house of GOD. I ask you to consider why Jonah was treated differently, IF your premise is correct
Adam Clarke on Kings 13
"Verse 24. "A lion met him-and slew him" - By permitting himself to be seduced by the old prophet, when he should have acted only on the expressly declared counsel of God, he committed the sin unto death; that is, such a sin as God will punish with the death of the body, while he extends mercy to the soul. See my notes on 1 John v. 16, 17.
From the instance here related, we see, as in various other cases, that often judgment begins at the house of God. The true prophet, for receiving that as a revelation from God which was opposed to the revelation which himself had received, and which was confirmed by so many miracles, is slain by a lion, and his body deprived of the burial of his fathers;