Islamic extremists from Somalia’s rebel Al-Shabaab militants on Friday (Nov. 16) killed a Christian in Somalia’s coastal city of Barawa, accusing him of being a spy and leaving Islam, Christian and Muslim witnesses said.
The extremists beheaded 25-year-old Farhan Haji Mose after monitoring his movements for six months, Christian sources said. Mose drew suspicion when he returned to Barawa, in Somalia’s Lower Shebelle Region, in December 2011 after spending time in Kenya, underground Christians in Somalia told Morning Star News....
Christopher000 wrote: Also, like Frank, I don't think any unclear theological issue should be laid to rest just because one may find a giant like Spurgeon, or whoever, that may agree with ones line of reasoning.
I agree with you Christopher. If someone agrees with a famous theologian, dead or alive, simply because they have Dr. in front of their names or they have a huge following or anything else our flesh might esteem, they are no different than the Catholics who also follow men and yield to some teaching when they aren't convinced of that truth. In the protestant world we don't excommunicate but often look down on those who refuse to believe something solely because it might be controversial or go against some creed or statement of faith. So what do we do; we pretend to go along. God knows our hearts and He isn't fooled. Sorry for the rambling.
John UK wrote: --- Mike Even those that get saved, Mike, will resist, because it is in the nature of all men to do so. And it is a hard work to break that resistance and subdue a sinner so that he bows the knee to Christ. You must have seen this over the years bro. ---
From the Book wrote: Rubbish! The suggestion that the body and the spirit do not both serve God's purpose in life is incomplete. The heart and mind are 'body' and when regenerated serve the Lord, whereas prior to saving cannot serve. In that respect both are regenerated to new life and purpose IN Christ. Re Heart and mind. In transition from 'dead in sin' to 'life IN Christ' a change is effected in the body which is why/how sanctification becomes a process in the saved sinner - and is obvious by its very absence in the reprobate. There is a requirement for the body of the saved to be affected by regeneration to counter the inherent and continued power and dominion of sin. This is called the struggle and is found within the Christian and their new life in Christ. Sanctification:- a) God changing me. b) What God does in me. c) Christ at work in me by the Holy Spirit changing my life, whereby the body is the 'Temple' of the Spirit. Regeneration changes all of me, by the immense power of grace and the Holy Spirit, not just the spirit of me. And whilst on earth I do not separate the body and spirit which God created with inherent power by and for divine purpose.
Frank 1. Yes that is what I believe. It really is a persuasion, and even the elect need to be persuaded, which is why men preach. And I also believe your spelling is improving. 2. Phew! I'm glad you didn't have me compared to Ingleesi.
Mike Even those that get saved, Mike, will resist, because it is in the nature of all men to do so. And it is a hard work to break that resistance and subdue a sinner so that he bows the knee to Christ. You must have seen this over the years bro.
Christopher Some of the "grammar" you mentioned to be awry, may in fact have been Authorized Version-speak. I noticed that also, and wondered how people would respond to it. When you've read through the Bible several times, you'll begin to notice it in sermons when the text isn't even quoted. John Bunyan was very much like that. I agree with you and Frank that even the giants may be wrong sometimes, but it's always helpful to see their thoughts, and glean from their storehouse.
Also, like Frank, I don't think any unclear theological issue should be laid to rest just because one may find a giant like Spurgeon, or whoever, that may agree with ones line of reasoning.
Frank wrote: --- on kippers and how election works. I don't have time to go back and find it now, but here is the thought it generated in me. Election isn't forcing someone to believe; it is simply persuading someone to believe. It isn't forcing someone to eat the kipper, but persuading them it is the right thing to do. The elect will be persuaded, the unelect will not. So election could almost be thought of as us choosing Christ because He first choose us and used irresistible grace and persuasion to do it. ---
If kipper eating requires persuasion, there must naturally be resistance to it. But how might there be resistance to the irresistable?
Another question, is the persuaded in kippers before the eating, or after?
John UK wrote: Ahem..... That was a quote from the sermon. Which means I may have to revise my thinking.....maybe.
Yes, you need to revise your thinking. But, let me change the subject slightly. You wrote something earlier on kippers and how election works. I don't have time to go back and find it now, but here is the thought it generated in me. Election isn't forcing someone to believe; it is simply persuading someone to believe. It isn't forcing someone to eat the kipper, but persuading them it is the right thing to do. The elect will be persuaded, the unelect will not. So election could almost be thought of as us choosing Christ because He first choose us and used irresistible grace and persuasion to do it. Notice I my spelling.
I didn't say what you wrote were your thoughts only that I agreed with it.
Frank wrote: Yes, my thoughts on the subject are the same as those you noted above. Good discussion and even though my mind remained unchanged, your thoughts on the subject were very provoking! I got much more from dialoguing with you and reading your comments than from reading the Spurgeon sermon. Thanks.
Ahem.....
That was a quote from the sermon.
Which means I may have to revise my thinking.....maybe.
John UK wrote: Not at all bro. I have to rethink my own position on this aspect, because..... "The second thing is that you do accept this for yourself. In Adam's sin, you did not sin personally, for you were not then in existence; yet you fell; neither can you now complain thereof, for you have willingly endorsed and adopted Adam's sin by committing personal transgressions. You have laid your hand, as it were, upon Adam's sin, and made it your own, by committing personal and actual sin. Thus you perished by the sin of another, which you adopted and endorsed; and in like manner must you be saved by the righteousness of another, which you are to accept and appropriate. Jesus has offered an atonement, and that atonement becomes yours when you accept it by putting your trust in him." So a sinner did not sin in Adam, according to Ingleesi.
Yes, my thoughts on the subject are the same as those you noted above. Good discussion and even though my mind remained unchanged, your thoughts on the subject were very provoking! I got much more from dialoguing with you and reading your comments than from reading the Spurgeon sermon. Thanks.
Frank wrote: ...and in my way of thinking an infant did not sin when Adam sinned, but simply inherited a sinful nature that will always sin (total depravity). There is a nuance here that you will recognize because you said that when Adam sinned, all mankind actually sinned. It actually sounds like Spurgeon agreed with your thought on that issue.
Not at all bro. I have to rethink my own position on this aspect, because.....
"The second thing is that you do accept this for yourself. In Adam's sin, you did not sin personally, for you were not then in existence; yet you fell; neither can you now complain thereof, for you have willingly endorsed and adopted Adam's sin by committing personal transgressions. You have laid your hand, as it were, upon Adam's sin, and made it your own, by committing personal and actual sin. Thus you perished by the sin of another, which you adopted and endorsed; and in like manner must you be saved by the righteousness of another, which you are to accept and appropriate. Jesus has offered an atonement, and that atonement becomes yours when you accept it by putting your trust in him."
So a sinner did not sin in Adam, according to Ingleesi.
John UK wrote: It is well, and I look forward to your comments.
First let me say that I didn't read the sermon carefully; mainly because he agreed with me so it was hard for me to be critical. However, I did disagree with some of his reasoning. He attributes it to election whereas I say that election is when God chooses one sinner over another and in my way of thinking an infant did not sin when Adam sinned, but simply inherited a sinful nature that will always sin (total depravity). There is a nuance here that you will recognize because you said that when Adam sinned, all mankind actually sinned. It actually sounds like Spurgeon agreed with your thought on that issue.
He also says it is more compatible with the goodness of God and I never considered that thought. So, Spurgeon and I agree, but used different reasoning for the most part, although some of his reasoning was interesting and helpful to me. For instance, Spurgeon attributed the salvation of infants to Christ's sacrifice on the cross and I am ashamed to say, I don't think I even considered that and just assumed since they hadn't sinned, then the cross was unnecessary. SHAME ON ME.
Frank wrote: Glad it was a good read and I will read it in a few minutes. Just finished mowing the yard. Now I am going to sit on my porch, cool off and smoke a cigar. John, let me say something from the bottom of my heart, in my opinion neither Spurgeon, nor any theologian is the last word. I only googled it because you referred him to Christopher. If he agrees with me fine; if he doesn't then that is also fine. I was not searching for proof of my thoughts. I'm sure I can find many in the grave and alive that would disagree with me.
Doris wrote: But the body is not born again, and so your original statement was plain wrong!!
Rubbish! The suggestion that the body and the spirit do not both serve God's purpose in life is incomplete. The heart and mind are 'body' and when regenerated serve the Lord, whereas prior to saving cannot serve. In that respect both are regenerated to new life and purpose IN Christ. Re Heart and mind. In transition from 'dead in sin' to 'life IN Christ' a change is effected in the body which is why/how sanctification becomes a process in the saved sinner - and is obvious by its very absence in the reprobate. There is a requirement for the body of the saved to be affected by regeneration to counter the inherent and continued power and dominion of sin. This is called the struggle and is found within the Christian and their new life in Christ. Sanctification:- a) God changing me. b) What God does in me. c) Christ at work in me by the Holy Spirit changing my life, whereby the body is the 'Temple' of the Spirit. Regeneration changes all of me, by the immense power of grace and the Holy Spirit, not just the spirit of me. And whilst on earth I do not separate the body and spirit which God created with inherent power by and for divine purpose.
John UK wrote: Yes it is only a 20 minute read, but most, most heartwarming, in true Spurgeon style. I think you will find he agrees with what you said about the unsinning infant, but the sermon is not about that. It will be great to hear your thoughts on it, when you have time to read it. As also Christopher's thoughts. We agree on this thought process.
Glad it was a good read and I will read it in a few minutes. Just finished mowing the yard. Now I am going to sit on my porch, cool off and smoke a cigar. John, let me say something from the bottom of my heart, in my opinion neither Spurgeon, nor any theologian is the last word. I only googled it because you referred him to Christopher. If he agrees with me fine; if he doesn't then that is also fine. I was not searching for proof of my thoughts. I'm sure I can find many in the grave and alive that would disagree with me.
Frank wrote: I will read it later and perhaps we can compare thoughts.
Yes it is only a 20 minute read, but most, most heartwarming, in true Spurgeon style. I think you will find he agrees with what you said about the unsinning infant, but the sermon is not about that. It will be great to hear your thoughts on it, when you have time to read it. As also Christopher's thoughts.
182
There are a total of 221 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Paul Fountain | 1/30/2009
COMMENTS | 
: "john 8:44.
jude 11,12,13. matthew 22:18
matthew 23.
not our enemies,the lords."
