Bible Presbyterianism wrote: Oh good! CV I'm glad you were able to eventually work that out. If you need any further Bible teaching just ask a Presbyterian, Calvinist, Covenantal, Bible Christian.
We're all simply astounded by how astute and clever you are. No wonder you didn't need conversion. The Lord must have been overwhelmed by your superiority over all living things and given you eternal life by virtue of your knowledge of Presbyterianism. Go pat yourself on the back!
Reply wrote: Why do presbies..Congregationalists ..et al.."sprinkle" tiny babes and bring them into some covenant
GOD's Command Genesis 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. 9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised." 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. 13 He that is born in thy house"
Nowhere in the Old or New Testament are these precepts regarding the people of God rescinded or annulled. Therefore they should be obeyed by ALL "CHRISTIANS."
The ONLY change which Christ commanded is that circumcision - IS REPLACED BY BAPTISM.
Frank wrote: I would agree with what DJC49 said and would simply add that if God does something, then it can't be wrong simply because He did it. God is perfection and therefore incapable of doing something that is not perfect. Of course we can draw lessons from those verses, but your thoughts are incorrect. I think you just need to think through what you are saying.
Thank you Frank and DJC. You both make good points. I shall think further.
Strat wrote: if...the murder of children is up for debate....lets just put the bibles away and give it up
Consider Deut 20: 15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations. 16 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: 17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee: 18 That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the Lord your God.
In the previous verses God commanded them to deal with the women and children of certain places leniently. But of the nations mentioned they were to destroy every breathing thing.
Do you believe that pregnant women were spared? If not, did God forget or violate his own view on the sanctity of life? Or do you think that you have a better view than God's?
If you object that in wartime there is a suspension of morality, then consider Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. What if the witch was pregnant?
John UK wrote: Yes, my guess is that he gets it from reading all those old books which commended persecution of anyone not holding precisely what they held. Probably they would have held the Ethiopian eunuch as a reprobate for being immersed on such a flimsy profession of faith.
I think he gets all his knowledge by just reading all those old works. His faith is not in the word of God, but in his library of books.
This could explain why he finds it so difficult to explain the Scriptures in his own words. He has no thoughts of his own. They are all derived from dead authors.
John UK wrote: I think his point is, that although Jim believes in Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, and the Perseverance of the Saints, yet because he believes that Christ died Particularly for The Saints (that they might assuredly be saved) yet the atonement was unlimited in scope, he is unsure as to Jim's standing before God, thinking rather that Jim is likely an unbeliever. Remarkable! Of course, he would have to say the same of Spurgeon and plenty of other fine Christian men and theologians.
Persecution comes easy to him, because he can justify it in the name of Calvin.
Psalm Truth wrote: Jim Lincoln. From Adam and Eve through history to the return of Christ there is only one way to be saved. That is Christ Jesus the ONLY Saviour who ever existed. Quote; "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12. The Old Testament saints were saved through Christ Jesus. Note that today you and I do not know the precise thoughts and knowledge which God made known to His Old Testament saints. But just as we Christians know today the OT Elect knew the resurrection in God who draws the saved alone to His Son. John 6:44. The OT and the NT, BOTH speak of Christ the Son of God. David eg; refers to Him as "My Lord"
perception wrote: Jim Lincoln If you cannot see Christ in Scripture then you are not a Christian. Jesus in the Old Testament ... http://www.xenos.org/teachings/?series=111 Jesus in the Old Testament http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=630131511199 Christ in the Old Testament http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=71413196134
Your comprehension skills leave a lot to be desired. Even a first grader would know that's not what Jim meant. But we do know, don't we, why you like to put words in people's mouths? Building up straw men is a particular skill that you Presbys learn from your master, Calvin.
True Doctrines wrote: What Baptists apparently do not understand::- ""What do you think of the Christ?â In guiding the Jerusalem leaders to contemplate this question of eternal weight, Jesus turned to the authority of what is written âin the book of Psalms,â specifically Psalm 110 (Matt 22:41â46; Mark 12:35â37; Luke 20:40â44), and asked a question childlike in both simplicity and profundity, the answer to which plunges one into the unfathomable wonder of the incarnation of God: How could David refer to his son as Lord? This probing question was but the application of what Jesus would later declare, that he himself is the object of all the Scriptures of the Old Testament, summarizing their threefold division in Luke 24:44 as âthe Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms,â with the Psalms standing as the summary representative of the Writings." (Rev. L. Michael Morales)
He's on a posting frenzy now. You really blew his fuse Jim!
Real Christianity wrote: The real "anti-Christian" is YOU Jim Lincoln - AND apparently the BAPTIST organisation if it believes and teaches these unbiblical lies. No wonder they haven't got a Covenant with God. The ELECT know for a fact that the entire Bible including the Psalms is about Christ Jesus. JESUS states "These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the psalms concerning me" Luke 24:44. Jesus also uses the psalms in discussion in the NT. The words ON THE CROSS spoken by Jesus to God "My God my God why hast thou forsaken me?" Comes from Psalm 22. If this is standard Baptist doctrine then Baptist theology is heretical and unbiblical. It is no wonder that Jim Lincoln uses the heretical modern versions with such blind and unbiblical fallacies being posted below. Clearly this is NOT Christian teachings. No wonder the SBC cant figure out Calvinism - It is too Biblical for them!
Real Christianity wrote: Well well I was right about the Baptist fraternity ditching the Old Testament. Jesus declares don't change one jot or tittle of the Old Testament. Jim and his Baptist cult have lost the plot.
Real Christianity could not survive in your darkened heart... grace and lies do not mix!
CAB wrote: The same Bible teachers who condemn homosexuality (and well they should) -- also teach their congregations that "all sins are equal," that God is blind and can't even SEE sin thru the imputed righteousness of Christ. They promise sweet lies of Heaven no matter what we do or don't do, that all our sins are "paid in advance." They teach the blood atonement in hymns and mention in sermons for emotional appeal, but the real message people take home is that the Father punished the Son on the cross and then later in Hell for every sin he predestined the sinner to commit. No double jeopardy, all paid in advance, no way to lose our salvation. Who would not take a deal like that? You get everything (ie License to Sin and a one-way ticket to Heaven) and the other guy (God) gets NOTHING. It's even sold that way. "It's free." But the Bible says to "count the cost"--that God wants EVERYTHING from us, to put God first, to love him with all our heart, mind, soul and STRENGTH, and that all who live Godly in Jesus WILL be persecuted. The church says to steer AWAY from the Gospels and Jesus' words, that they are "in code to the Jews" and "not for us." Heresies!
Why let facts get in the way of your perverse prejudices, eh?