Spanking ban to stay in NZ Good Sermon and I totally agree with your comments.
Unfortunately our new "so called" conservative prime minister believes he knows better than the 87.6% of New Zealander's who voted in the recent referendum to get rid of the crazy "anti smacking" law that was brought in by the previous Labour Government. He has openly stated that his government will not repeal this law.
So it is still a crime in NZ to discipline your child with a light smack.
Great Sermon! As always, a wonderful sermon by Dr Alan Cairns. I am thankful for his clear Bible reasoning instead of all the no 501c3 and parachurch talk. Alan Cairns is a man I try to listen to often
Dangerous, because not Christian. In Romania, the Baptist churches (to which I belong) say about themselves that are conservative - but there is this lack of discernment that a publisher among them publishes Steve Chalke and many in the churches look at him as evangelical!
No. Excellent observation: people who are calling themselves today apostles are arrogating for themselves an authority which they received not from God, and they are doing this to arrogate a dictatorship so that people should be forced to submit to their teaching and leadership.
No. If the Bible defines what it means to be a Christian, then Roman Catholicism is not a Christian church, but an non-Christian and anti-Christian cult, because it has another authority over the Scripture. Clear argumentation.
Great Sermon! This is absolutely refreshing to hear someone state what I have thought all along, but have continuly been shouted down at any statements I make regarding this issue. I have always thought, how does one claim to be Christian yet remain in a system that is in opposition to what the Bible says? Some may think they have legitimate answers for this, but I ask you where does your loyalty lay, at the foot of the cross or upon the alter of Rome?
Great Sermon! Dr. Cairns says, rightly, that baptism is not essential to salvation, but in these 4 minutes does not cover the problem of a professor of Christ who refuses to be baptized even when instructed that Christ commands him to be. "My sheep know my voice, AND THEY FOLLOW ME." If they don't then they have no claim on full Christian assurance.
Great encouragement, Dr Cairns! In this short but beautifully rendered message, superb preacher and speaker Dr Cairns deals with one of the most disturbing passages of Scripture- concerning a Christian's possible loss of salvation - and yet makes it clear that it does not refer to genuinely saved born again men and women. A great message, and very reassuring. Recommended.
The real context Actually we often ask the wrong questions when treating these passages in Hebrews. The context is the deliverance of God's Hebrew people as a group detailed in Number 12 - 14, not individual personal salvation. This situation historically is referred to many times in Hebrews 3 and following. The issue was the rebellion of the whole group in Numbers having had all the benefits Paul mentions in Heb. 6: 4, 5 - and when they tried to undo their rebellion, it was impossible (Num14:44ff) for them. Paul used this paradigm case to try and persuade the Hebrew Christians as a group in his day not to return to the sacrificial system (as Dr. Cairns rightly observes). These warnings are corporate warnings for a 'church' which can apostatise - it is not treating individual salvation. Individuals (like Joshua and Caleb) for whom Christ died and who rest on Him alone for salvation will never be lost, even though their churches might apostatise - but different Scriptures address that issue of personal salvation.
Difficult texts; good answer Using the context of these passages, Dr. Cairns explains the specific situation they are meant to address, which is why they are included in the letter. When taken out of context, these passages in Hebrews can be troubling to Christians. This is a good answer that should set things straight. People worried about these passages ought to give this a listen.
Often-asked in Pentecostal circles A good answer to a question that is often answered badly, or speciously, by those in the Pentecostal and Word of Faith camps. If you're in this group and worried about the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, this is a good answer that succinctly (Dr. Cairns did it in five minutes; I didn't think he could answer a yes/no question in under an hour!) explains the context and intent of this passage, an area where the Pentecostals sometimes struggle. This answer shows what the passage was intended to mean in its context, which should help people who are afraid of having committed this sin understand what the original point of including this passage was. Because Pentecostal/Word of Faith teachings are so sensitive to the Holy Spirit, this often comes up among them, but it can occur to anyone. Good answer!