members, click to sign in..

2,698 active users!Bandwidth
MONDAY
APR 21, 2014
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
BroadcastersNew Stuff!
Local Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff PicksNew Stuff!
CommentsALL -2 hrs
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
PhotosNew Stuff!
StoresNew Stuff!
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

 
MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2014 | TIPS Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
COVER Page ALL News CHOICE VIDEOS User COMMENTS
TUESDAY, OCT 1, 2013| 59 comments
A church divided

The gay marriage controversy in Britain’s Anglican Church focused recently on a quite practical question: Can gay and lesbian civil partners both register as parents on a baptismal certificate? When Aimi and Victoria Leggett approached the Rev. George Gebauer of Warsash, England, to have their infant baptized, they requested that Gebauer list them both as the child’s mothers. He refused, saying that doing so was illegal and that no child could possibly have two parents of the same sex. Church officials reversed the decision of the retired minister, however. Archdeacon Gavin Collins said “we would be thrilled to carry out this baptism” and to record both parents as mothers. ...

CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.worldmag.com

   04/21/14  |  Obama Goes to Baptist Church for Easter
   04/19/14  |  David Cameron: I am evangelical about Christian faith • 7 comments
   04/05/14  |  African Christians Will Be Killed if Church Embraces Same-Sex... • 12 comments
   04/04/14  |  World Vision Board Member Resigns Over Gay Uproar • 5 comments
   04/02/14  |  World Vision’s Rich Stearns: ‘A bad decision, but we did it with... • 5 comments
MORE RELATED ( APOSTASY ) NEWS | MORE..
   04/20/14  |  China on course to become 'world's most Christian nation' within... • 14 comments
   04/16/14  |  SermonAudio Tip: SermonAudio App v2.2 for Android Mobile Devices • 48 comments
   04/16/14  |  As Titanic sank, he pleaded, 'believe in the Lord Jesus!' • 9 comments
   04/13/14  |  Feminists Go Bonkers Over Kirsten Dunst’s One, Simple Comment • 40 comments
   04/13/14  |  U2's Bono Opens Up About Jesus, God And Praying With His Kids • 11 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 31 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
   01/01/14  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 29 comments
   12/10/13  |  SermonAudio Broadcaster Loses Historic Church Building To Fire • 3 comments
   07/27/13  |  3 Dead When Bus Carrying Teens Crashes in Indiana • 34 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 59 user comment(s)
News Item10/7/13 10:14 AM
Christopher000 | Rhode Island  Find all comments by Christopher000
No pressure, don't want to put you on the spot...if you ever want to post a link, I'm sure many would be interested in taking a peek.

No need to respond, just something to keep in mind for the future...

59

News Item10/6/13 8:37 AM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Christopher000 wrote:
What the?! You never mentioned anything about having a website. I guess you don't need me after all. You're not that guy on TV with the big fluffy afro who paints landscapes for an hour every weekend, are you? I turn him on whenever I need help falling asleep...ha-ha. Just kidding...can't believe you have a web site since you were asking back about how to put some pics up.
Ha! Oh boy! My apologies, Christopher. It is a mystery, but I will explain. Thus:

I initially started a website with the intention of running a shop on it. But that didn't work out very well, so I ended up with a display site and contact details and info on how to buy a painting at local craft fairs and indoor markets etc.

Then I considered a free site simply for display, as I was paying £45 per annum for my url and hosting. That was when I asked a few questions about the possibility of doing it for nothing.

Then I realised that I could downgrade my site in terms of space, and only pay half what I was previously.

This is what I am now thinking of doing.

Sorry about that.

Any further news on your own venture?

58

News Item10/6/13 8:04 AM
Christopher000 | Rhode Island  Find all comments by Christopher000
What the?! You never mentioned anything about having a website. I guess you don't need me after all. You're not that guy on TV with the big fluffy afro who paints landscapes for an hour every weekend, are you? I turn him on whenever I need help falling asleep...ha-ha. Just kidding...can't believe you have a web site since you were asking back about how to put some pics up.
57

News Item10/6/13 5:49 AM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Christopher000 wrote:
Hi John,
No need to respond right now, but just wanted to mention: IF you ever want to put up some of your paintings, you could email them to me and I could put them up on my SkyDrive account. I'd put them in a public folder and post a link for everyone. This is the easiest, fastest way for you, otherwise, you can use Picasa, snapfish, Photobucket, etc, if you don't mind the extra steps.
No pressure. Just something to keep in mind if you ever want us to see your connect-the-dot, Crayola crayon drawings of stick people and rainbows.
Thanks Chris.

It would be easier though just to visit my website.

56

News Item10/5/13 7:56 AM
Christopher000 | Rhode Island  Find all comments by Christopher000
Hi John,

No need to respond right now, but just wanted to mention: IF you ever want to put up some of your paintings, you could email them to me and I could put them up on my SkyDrive account. I'd put them in a public folder and post a link for everyone. This is the easiest, fastest way for you, otherwise, you can use Picasa, snapfish, Photobucket, etc, if you don't mind the extra steps.

No pressure. Just something to keep in mind if you ever want us to see your connect-the-dot, Crayola crayon drawings of stick people and rainbows.

55

News Item10/4/13 10:13 AM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Joston wrote:
Or as Paul puts it:
Romans 9:6 For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."
Then
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
As humans we can never tell who is elect and who is not. Whether we baptise them as babies or adults - even if they try to convince us by confession.
Cool!

There are some very convincing pointers to a person's conversion, without which we would doubt it was real. But to be 100% certain, when we baptise a professor, is not possible, and God will not hold the baptiser responsible for a pseudo convert's profession of faith.

But to baptise babies? I think you walk over thin ice on the lake. Drop through and you really will be baptizo'd.

54

News Item10/4/13 10:01 AM
Joston  Find all comments by Joston
John UK wrote:
Abraham had children, but not all of Abraham's children were "children of promise". Thus, some were children of promise, and some were not children of promise.
Or as Paul puts it:
Romans 9:6 For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

Then
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

As humans we can never tell who is elect and who is not. Whether we baptise them as babies or adults - even if they try to convince us by confession.

53

News Item10/3/13 4:01 PM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Joston wrote:
(A) 14 million, 783 thousand and 456.
(B) No! They were not the children of promise.
a.

b. Well now, here we have some agreement. It's been a long time coming, but we may just have got there. Let us review this, eh?

Abraham had children, but not all of Abraham's children were "children of promise". Thus, some were children of promise, and some were not children of promise. The children of promise are in heaven right now (eg. Isaac) and those who were not children of promise are in hell right now (eg. Ishmael).

Circumcision availed nothing for either Isaac or Ishmael. The crucial thing was whether or not they were a child of promise or not.

Children of Promise = God's elect

So Abraham can have some children who are elect, and some who are not elect.

Those who turn out to have like faith with Abraham and are likewise justified by their faith, can be called children of Abraham, children of promise, God's elect chosen from before the foundation of the world. Genealogy enters not into the equation, evidence = Isaac and Ishmael. Thus children of believers may or may not be elect, and this is not known until either they truly believe or die unbelieving.

Correct!

52

News Item10/3/13 3:10 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
John U.K,
Gil Rugh said or, wrote:
If we can only be brought near to God through the death of Christ, how then were the Old Testament saints such as Abraham, David, and Moses saved? Hebrews 9:15 states, 'And for this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, in order that since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant (the Law and Levitical priesthood), those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.' Chapter 10:4 also says, '...it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.' Men were never saved by sacrificing the blood of bulls and goats in the Old Testament. They were saved by placing their faith in God and the revelation that He had given of Himself. And God saved them because Jesus Christ, of the Melchizedekian priest-hood, would offer a sacrifice that was eternally sufficient to save them.
from the transcript for, A Superior Priesthood.

It's obvious that the Anglican Church isn't Christian! q.v., The Down Grade

51

News Item10/3/13 3:01 PM
Joston  Find all comments by Joston
Unprofitable Servant wrote:
You PROVED by point by offering NO PROOF
I presume that should be quote "You proved *MY* point"
As for proof as I said below everything connected with baptism in Scripture is about affusion and baptism of all ages including the babies of covenanted parents. Nowhere in the Bible will you find the discrimination of any age group, that is unbiblical!

Thats the simple reason why from the early church and before they taught paedobaptism as normal. Which means the Bible age disciples passed this method on to the early church. In Covenant God does not reject the babies just because humans don't know their heart.

As for translation of Baptizw the Baptist version didn't arrive until 1521ff. Prior to that the orthodox Christians knew that affusion was the true method of using water. Even the Catacombs confirm that.

John UK wrote:
Abraham had a vast family. (A) How many of them are currently in heaven? (B) And do you include those children born to the Egyptian slave Hagar?
(A) 14 million, 783 thousand and 456.

(B) No! They were not the children of promise.

50

News Item10/3/13 1:38 PM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Joston wrote:
And as GOD states in His Covenant discussion with Abraham CHILDREN ARE INCLUDED in GOD's Covenant of Grace. Amen!
Seeing as you won't be able to refute Unprofitable Servant's post, maybe you will have time to answer a simple question:

Abraham had a vast family. How many of them are currently in heaven? And do you include those children born to the Egyptian slave Hagar?

49

News Item10/3/13 1:15 PM
Unprofitable Servant | Georgia  Find all comments by Unprofitable Servant
Joston wrote:
The simple..
Thanks for your response. You PROVED by point by offering NO PROOF. No proof to silence the testimony of believers in the second century and on. NO PROOF to silence the testimony of your own people that immersion was the mode of the early church. NO SCRIPTURE showing that baptism replaced circumcision or that there even is a covenant of grace, nevermind that your interpretation of it is accurate.

I could say that blue is the new pink. You think the ladies who are about to have a baby girl will go repaint their rooms just because they saw it posted in the SermonAudio news forum? This is like a blog, anybody can say anything, that does not make it truth just because you say it. I know you are just repeating what you have been taught, the problem is, when you start with an incorrect premise, you come up with an incorrect conclusion.

You even had to avoid translating the original greek word and made a transliteration out of it to create a new word, baptize, because your practice did not match its meaning.

The saddest part, to me, is that you give a false hope to parents and later to their children that they possess that which God has not imparted to them by the means to which you hold.

48

News Item10/3/13 11:57 AM
Joston  Find all comments by Joston
Unprofitable Servant wrote:
NO proof
The simple fact Ups is that references to baptism in Scripture are all about affusion and the baptism of infants as well as adults. This truth came from the Apostles and their pupils who emerged from Biblical times.
You know we wouldn't be having this debate if from Biblical times and the early church immersion and credobaptism had been the rule of the day. However the simple fact of historic reality is that paedobaptism was always the correct method which Christ taught to His disciples. Like circumcision God would never forget the family and the children which He gave to His people.
The fact that we are having this debate is because 16 centuries later a new ideology from the Anabaptists came on the scene to try to change the established orthodox system taught from Biblical times. The Anabaptists sought to establish a RE-interpretation of Scripture to support their NEW UNorthodox hypothesis on baptism.
It is incredible that to establish this NEW interpretation the Baptists chose to reject the OT and Covenant doctrine. Yet Christ is the mediator of the Covenant. And as GOD states in His Covenant discussion with Abraham CHILDREN ARE INCLUDED in GOD's Covenant of Grace. Amen!
47

News Item10/3/13 9:24 AM
Christopher000 | Rhode Island  Find all comments by Christopher000
Us Wrote:
"Brother Christopher you have been definitely in our prayers. Nehemiah 8:10"

Thanks, US. Many of you in mine as well.

46

News Item10/2/13 10:56 PM
Unprofitable Servant | Georgia  Find all comments by Unprofitable Servant
Mike wrote:
" God does not save groups of people."
Hmm.
This leads me to observe that if
• The Household of Cornelius: Acts 11:14 and he shall speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.
• The Household of Lydia: Acts 16:15 And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.
• The Philippian Jailor's Household: Acts 16:33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.
• The Household of Crispus: Acts 18:8 And Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.
• The Household of Stephanas: I Corinthians 1:16 Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other.
Hey Mike, where in any of the verses you have sited does it say that there were children in the households? The Bible also speaks of the household of faith and the household of God. It also mentions the household of Ceaser which is not understood to be his family.
45

News Item10/2/13 9:31 PM
Lurker  Protected NameFind all comments by Lurker
Mike wrote:
But what does it mean that God promises to save the children of believers? Will He save all the children of believers head for head? Paul explains that, "They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed ... that the purpose of God according to election might stand" (Rom. 9:8, 11). Thus God promises to save all the elect children of believers whom He chose in Christ before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4).
Mike FL. You have defined the "children of promise" as children believing parents (presumably implying children = infants to justify infant baptism). There is a fly in your ointment....

Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

Paul wasn't writing to infants or literal children, for that matter. He was writing to "brethren".

The biblical definition of "children of promise" is all who have been born (again) after the Spirit (Gal 4:29).

44

News Item10/2/13 9:07 PM
b4real  Find all comments by b4real
God saves sinners, one at a time. He may call an entire household to faith in Christ, but He did so as each came to faith in Christ by His grace.
"IT SOMETIMES HAPPENS that a good man has to go alone to heaven: God's election has separated him from the midst of an ungodly family, and, notwithstanding his example and his prayers, and his admonitions, they still remain unconverted, and he himself, a solitary one, a speckled bird amongst them, has to pursue his lonely flight to the skies. Far oftener, however, it happens that the God who is the God of Abraham becomes the God of Sarah, and then of Isaac, and then of Jacob, and though grace does not run in the blood, and regeneration is not of blood nor of birth, yet doth it very frequently—I was about to say almost always—happen that God, by means of one of a household, draws the rest to himself. He calls an individual, and then uses him to be a sort of spiritual decoy to bring the rest of the family into the gospel net." Spurgeon, from http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/1019.htm

God saves families, yes,I agree; but they come to Christ individually, as God draws. There is no covenant promise that binds God to having to save entire/whole families, He saves His elect.

43

News Item10/2/13 8:49 PM
Mike | Florida  Find all comments by Mike
" God does not save groups of people."
Hmm.

This leads me to observe that if
• The Household of Cornelius: Acts 11:14 and he shall speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.
• The Household of Lydia: Acts 16:15 And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.
• The Philippian Jailor's Household: Acts 16:33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.
• The Household of Crispus: Acts 18:8 And Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.
• The Household of Stephanas: I Corinthians 1:16 Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other.

42

News Item10/2/13 8:17 PM
b4real  Find all comments by b4real
"God saved the elect households of Adam and Eve, Noah, Joshua, the Philippian jailor and many thousands like them. Why does God save families? Because He is a family God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit."
This is a disturbing statement,first, there is no scriptural backing. God does not save groups of people, he saves individual sinners. It would be biblical to state 'God saves the elect in households'.
God is a family God? This is bordering the Mormon 'god', who is three individual persons, according to their beliefs.
" "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" Deut. 6:4 Let's not portray God as something other than what He is, according to Scripture.
41

News Item10/2/13 7:54 PM
Unprofitable Servant | Georgia  Find all comments by Unprofitable Servant
Joston wrote:
Debating the baptism issue has provided me with new information about the Baptists and their theology...
You make statements with NO proof and condemn those who don't believe your way???? You cannot site one Scripture that states baptism replaced circumcision. Not a commentary, not a confession of faith, not a catechism, but a verse from the Bible. Your speculation about the covenant of Grace (not a biblical term) is just that, speculation. Who is to say you are correct and John UK (and others) is wrong. At least he backs up what he says with Scriptures. History does not support your assertion about the baptist beginning in 1521 and that has been proven time and time again in many other threads. Just because you make a statement does not make it a fact. You have NO historical evidence to back up your assertion. You have neither the Bible nor history on your side. I don't doubt your passion or sincerity but you should call what it is, your opinion.

Brother Christopher you have been definitely in our prayers. Nehemiah 8:10

40
There are a total of 59 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 | last
Last PostTotal
Jew 'registration' leaflets open Holocaust wounds
vigilante: "i think john weaver has a sermon on this. neil well i seem to..."
-2 hrs 13 
Reid smelling anything but rosy in ranch fight
r. k. borill from baton rouge, louisiana: "'it wasn’t the first report to notice..."
-2 hrs 
China on course to become 'world's most Christian nation'...
shane from socal: "gotta find the positive dorcas! :)"
-3 hrs 14 


Unashamed of the Gospel


Jon Couch
Contending Or Pretending?

This Day Ministries
Radio Broadcast
Play! | MP3

Jason Shults
The humility of Christ

Memorial Heights Baptist
Sunday Service
Play! | MP3

James Taylor (Redhill)
Let Me Hear Thy Voice

Hope Chapel Redhill
Prayer Meeting
Play! | MP3

Lewis Kiger
Angels Elect and Evil

Baptist Bible Doctrine in 1yr
Memorial Heights Baptist
Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
Paul Washer: "Most Useful Bible Study"

See what Paul Washer calls the most useful Bible study tool in hist­ory. Click here!
www.puritandownloads.com/sw..

Sermon: Christ Centered Evangelism 3
Evangelist Ed Lacy

Sykesville, MD | zip
Liberty Church, PCA

Preach­ing thr­ough the Gospel of Mark.
www.libertychurchpca.org






                   
Nothing less than a living sacrifice is demanded. ... J. Pearce
Site-Wide RSS & Podcast | Help
Select Podcast Format | Help

HTML Embed | More
Flash Widget | More
Our Staff Picks | Info
Featured Sermon | More

City: Austin, TX
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
MOBILE
iPhone + iPad New!
Church App
Android New!
Kindle + Nook New!
BlackBerry
Windows Mobile, Nokia
ROKU TV
Kindle Reader

FOLLOW
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices New!
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
HELP
RSS & Podcasts
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Favorites
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

NEWSLETTER
View Latest Issue
Subscribe
Unsubscribe | Change
Privacy Policy
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI | Domains
QR Codes New!
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes | WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | API | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
SermonAudio.com is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.
Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads

CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Copyright © 2014 SermonAudio.com.