Christopher000 wrote: ... Maybe these people weren't born again Christians so God wasn't listening to them? Or, the child's life was within their control. God gave us medical knowledge for a reason, and expected them to seek out a physician?
First, we have to say that God is sovereign and whatever He does is right. We need to also understand that God is a God of means. He needs no help from His creatures but that more often than not is the path He will chose. The water came from God, but the Israelites dug the ditches. The Lord watered the earth but Adam and Eve had to dress the garden and keep it. God sent the animals to Noah, but he had to build the ark. The Lord was born in Bethlehem just like it was prophesied, but a heathen king made a census decree to get the couple to leave to go there. God might well have answered their prayers positively had they taken the child to the doctor. In Him we move, and live, and have our being, so the wisdom the doctors, scientist have is God allotted. Faith, if it have not works, is dead. We are told to look to God for our daily bread and yet reminded if any does not work he shall not eat. It is not only the prayer of faith but the anointing of oil (medication) that saves the sick. IMHO
San Jose John wrote: Exactly the reason my pastor's wife was unable to take her young boys shopping with her, causing the major inconvenience of having to have grandma come over and watch the kids while mommy shopped.
Me would think that the inconvenience is for grandma, that would actually be a help to mom.
James is back wrote: The story reporting it to be a hoax was in fact proven to be a doctored video. The event actually happened and as unbelievable as the event even more unbelievable I'd that they were uncertain if this was a terror attack?
didactics wrote: Freddie; ... b. Considering all the unsaved reprobates which the Baptist church dunks...
Lemme see if I get this correct from didactics. He(she) thinks you should baptize babies (who are CLEARLY unregenrate, (see Ephesians 2:3) and then criticizes the group who states that a person is baptized UPON profession of their faith. (see Romans 10:9) Who is baptizing the unsaved? All this because he(she) finds in the New Testament the command to baptize ANYONE as a covenant sign. (will wait for your reference) But if you can quote the Old Testament verse, if you have one, that states that baptism would replace circumcision, that will be fine too.
Michael Hranek wrote: I used to live in Chattanooga, TN. My wife has family in Georgia. The last time I was in Atlanta, years ago, I was driving tractor trailer.
Just a couple hours south of Chattanooga, Atlanta has grown quite a bit, so traffic probably a truck driver's big headache. (people think they can stop on a dime) Looks like you went from being a stone's throw from Georgia to a stone's throw from Pennsylvania. God's blessing to you, brother. Your posts are a blessing and very well informed.
Really, John Yurich, you claim to be saved. If that were so (and I am not saying it is), consider what you are saying. The Lord Jesus left the glories of heaven and took voluntarily the restrictions of humanity on Himself laying aside the free exercise of His Divine attributes.(He subjugated them to His Father's will) He lived with all the frailties of the human condition except that being tempted in all areas He was without sin. He still suffered hunger, pain, weariness, and was even called a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. He suffered the agonies of the garden of Gethsemane, went through (after a sleepless night) 6 illegal trials, was beaten, spit upon, mocked, had his backed ripped open up with cruel lacerations, a crown of thorns placed and matted down on His brow (it hurts to say all this) was nailed to a cross with all the shame and pain that it caused, and in the shroud of darkness endured the wrath of God that you should have suffered, even to the cry of dereliction, God forsaken of God for your sake, and you are too shy to openly confess Him? see Dorcas post
Phillip Andrew Jones wrote: Dear Sir[s] (SermonAudio); This news article submitted on your website concerning a supposed military soldier heheaded by so called muslim extremists is a complete main stream and military intelligence hoax...
SteveR wrote: I never watched her, but in two minutes I found that EWTNs website has quite a bit of information published by her. Mother Angelica on salvation "JESUS MY SAVIOR Mother M. Angelica "It is never the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost." (Matt. 18:14) ...When we prefer our will to His we sin or weaken our will. By His life, death and resurrection Jesus merited the indwelling of the Spirit and through the grace of His Spirit, we are able to rise above our own will and desires and live in His Will, His peace and His love. We have then two aspects of Salvationâ€”God's and ours. God's Will a. The Father wills that we are saved. b. Jesus merited salvation by shedding His Precious Blood. c. The Spirit fills our souls with graceâ€”gifts and fruits in order to sanctify us." -- It continues with parts I would agree, many I dont. She certainly is Christian. To deny that is only asking for judgement on yourself
Proverbs 17:15 (KJV)
He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the just, even they both are abomination to the LORD.
SteveR, I really wonder why you insist on showing a negative, condescending attitude toward those whom you say are your brothers in the Lord. God says, if you say you love Him and don't show love toward your brother you are a liar (I John 4:20) You negate yourself with the snipes that you persist on taking and make your own posts of little or no value. It is not Frank's fault that you do not share his sense of humor. You could have left off your post with the first line and have expressed your opinion without the snarky paragraph that followed. (like you really had anything to do with the different views of lapsarianism) It doesn't matter what you say or think of me, but I do get tired of you castigating the fine people who post here with a simple desire to assist others in their walk with Christ. I might even understand the back and forth banter you have with those who treat you the same way you treat them, yet the Lord said do unto others AS you would have them do unto you. So tell your big shots a message for me, God resists the proud but gives grace unto the humble. I hesitate to even post this because I am no better than the next guy and have my own corruptions to bemoan, yet I felt compelled to say something in light of this senseless attack.
John UK wrote: Hey I never even thought of that, Lurker. But there may even be a simpler explanation....They just don't bother reading the Bible. I was very fortunate in that when I was converted, I was encouraged to read scripture, and utilise books only as a support or help. I found the Bible so exciting to read, that I devoured it daily, and read it through many, many times. That was back in the days when I had the energy! There is so much to learn from scripture, that even a lifetime of study would not complete the job. But what a quickening word God's word is!
AMEN!!! may we be like Job and esteem the word of the Lord more than our necessary food, because man does NOT live by bread along, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God! Thanks John, although he may have already retired for the night.
Bta wrote: Freddie; Who is this "seaton" you are posting too? a. "may" in this context, indicates to the parents the future possibility that their child might be one of the elect. Unlike you Bapty's we don't try to upstage the Lord and try to read hearts. ...
Ohhhhh, I get it now. You are saying we should NOT be using Dennis Kastens paper as good theology, since it distorts the truth that baptism is for believers only and to "baptize" an infant (and btw pouring or sprinkling is NOT baptism) only serves to get the baby wet. We should practice what the Bible teaches, not some creed or confession of faith. Thanks for clearing that up.
Lurker wrote: It's not? I do? Does anyone else besides me have a problem understanding the following? From the same article by Dennis Kastens "Yes, we baptize babies. Unmistakably Scriptural proof substantiates that doctrine. Christian history, unbroken and uninterrupted. reflects such practice in each generation. Conscientious Christians do not delay but hasten with their children to Baptism that they may received the gift of salvation and regeneration and gratefully embrace the Apostleâ€™s affirmation extended to those of all age groups: "For as many of you as have been baptized have put on Christ" (Galatians 3: 27)."
Sure, it means, and you can quote me, At least this fellow is honest enough to confess that infant baptism imparts salvation and regeneration by the putting on of Christ.
"By You I have been upheld from birth; You are He who took me out of my motherâ€™s womb. My praise shall be continually of You.
Looks like the psalmist view God as His sustainer from birth might have made the same statement.
Well let us see, certainly we will find a statement from Polycarp stating he was baptized as an infant.....
Oops, he NEVER said that. So, then with the same authority that the padeobaptist say he was baptized as an infant, I say he was baptized as a young adult and all his family were baptized after they were born again upon public profession of their faith. If it was good enough for the apostle John it was good enough for his followers.
And SteveR, yes you did seem to miss the point that the RCC priest with his own agenda is NOT a reliable source.
The discussion gets old as it goes nowhere, those who believe that somehow a person can be born again and still walk in darkness, a direct contradiction of I John 1, claim we have saved people in a false religion. No amount of reasoning from the Scripture or exhortation, whether given out in an abrasive or non-abrasive fashion, seems to make a difference. You may not like his style but Observer gave out many great arguments to back up His position.
To place in doubt a person's salvation because they don't use language of which you approve not only demonstrates lack of Bible understanding, it shows a lack of understanding of one's own heart. All of us have numerous areas that we need to show a broken and contrite spirit and confess that we need growth in grace. How oft shall my brother offend me, 70x7 implies two things, we need a great deal of forgiveness for others and that people don't put away offensive habits easily. We are what we are by the grace of God and for His glory. Thankfully we serve a God who abundantly pardons and remembers our frame that we are but dust. May we humbly beseech God for the wisdom to determine to walk in the light as He is in the light, to delight in His company and to detest anything that leads us out of the paths of righteousness.
Have to agree with Frank on two counts. One the Romans 7 passage is post salvation, you certainly don't see an unsaved person being able to say they delight in the law of God after the inward man (v22) seeing the are not subject to it and neither indeed can be. And, of course, the wife is a keeper it will be 29 years worth in July, I always try and send her a sympathy card on our anniversary