about to listen This comment is to Doyce. I know that Doyce may never see this but for those the may read the comment and feel the same way I just wanted to address the crying child. I am not Calvinist. I feel, at least at this moment, the truth lies someplace in the middle. I would also freely admit that I lean more to Calvinism than any other interpretation. Without getting to deep as one point rests on the other, I will try to keep it simple. IF the child is elect of God then the child may cry wondering of salvation. Much the same as many Christians would do in times of trouble. However, if the Child is not Elect then the child is dead in sin and God would be the furthest worry from the child's mind.
I think the parent needs to teach the full council of God. God is so much more than love alone. What of pure justice to name but one?
When God saved the Hebrew people do you think the men in Cana or children for that matter cried at night wondering if they had been accepted by this Hebrew God? What of the people of Egypt the night of the exodus?
Feel free to find me on Facebook if you would like to discuss this further, or my email is Nolan.email@example.com
Great Sermon! There have been a couple of attempts to locate a ‚Äúsource‚ÄĚ for Darby's concept of the rapture. These attempts imply that Darby's concepts originated from a "false" (demonic) source. Samuel Prideaux Tregelles alleged that John Nelson Darby's concept of the rapture was taken from one of the charismatic utterances in Edward Irving's church. Since Tregelles regarded the utterances as ‚Äúpretending to be from God,‚ÄĚ his implication is that Darby's rapture is from a demonic source. Dave MacPherson built upon Tregelles's accusation, and claimed the source for Darby's rapture was from an utterance of Margaret MacDonald. However, scholars think there are major obstacles that render these accusations untenable. It is clear that Darby regarded the 1830 charismatic manifestations as demonic and not of God. Darby would not have borrowed an idea from a source that he clearly thought was demonic. Also Darby had already written out his pretribulation rapture views in January 1827, 3 years prior to the 1830 events and any MacDonald utterance. When MacDonald's utterance is read closely, her statements show her to hold a post-tribulationist position (‚Äúbeing the fiery trial which is to try us‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúfor the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus‚ÄĚ). For these an
Great Sermon! You'll get no back biting, double talking, or bad exegesis with the Dr.; he's cut and dry, to the point. Doesn't wander off into fables, nor relies on "private interpretation". The Dr. considers the word with and listen to his flock. He also has steady influences in theology and isn't afraid to stand for Christ in public at secular colleges. Of course, let the glory be unto God and thanks to the Dr. for representing Jesus in an obedient manner.
Great Sermon! Even though Chris and talk twice as fast as Dr. Phil, chris did nit cinvince me over to his view. Personally, anniliation is preferable to everlasting consciousness in torment when I consider dead lived ones who had no interest in Christ or their eternal souls. I can't help but think of Rob Bell's thoughts on sin that our sins are mere finite sins against an infinite Being. I'm not cinvinced also because of how many times Jesus plainly spoke of hell and question why He would never have spoken plainly about anniliation. Again, anniliation would be much more comforting ofthe two views if I was basing it on emotion. Thank you for the debste.
Great Sermon! This debate was great! As someone who has recently stumbled onto this topic myself, I was impressed at the charitable approach you both used for this debate. After spending many years on the traditionalist side of the argument, I must confess that the conditionalist argument is much more scriptural. I do appreciate your willingness to deal with this topic and again, you both did a fantastic job of approaching this debate with an aire of mutual respect. Great job!
Thanks Like sermon audio and have great respect for my reformed brothers, I have tried to search out truth on this subject and only leaves me confused. After listening to Dr. Fernandes I can say that to me his view seems more biblical and sets My mind at ease. Thanks
Outstanding Sermon! Brother Fernandes really tells it like it is and like it will happen. His analysis of where we are today and where we will be in the not distant future is very Biblical. The USA is definitely a post-Christian nation and will continue to become more anti-Christian in every year. A true follower of Christ Jesus should get stronger in the Lord and be ready for trials and tribuations that will be on us. Weak "Christians" will not understand or endure that what is coming, but you and I brother and sister will understand and overcome. God Bless you listeners of this message.
Praise God! This blessed me so much I listened to it 3 times! Brother Tal's comment that we need to be "historically aware" is so very, very true. I ordered the book "One World" and can't wait to read it. I just pray that pastors would wake up to this new world order and take a stand like out founding fathers did. Our pastors have become nicey nice gutless wonders. Thank you Phil for this wonderful interview.
Great Sermon! I enjoyed the debate. I do not feel it answered the question which position was Biblical. To me it was still vague. I personally have difficulty with both positions. First, Jesus loved children...of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. As a loving Father, God is going to keep them from the edge of the cliff. Secondly, God is not the author of confusion, Calvinism has a way for a child to cry in their sleep worring about not being one of the elect. How can a parent teach all their children Gods love and at the same time say you may not be his choice for heaven. If that is the case, you will be tormented in an eternal flame so deal with it. 3rd, if a person chooses to accept Gods grace, it does not limit Gods ability, mark Gods character, or give anyone of something to boast. Instead, it shows that all things are possible with God, He is still Holy, all powerful, and all knowing. Then, I have nothing to boast if I choose to use my free will no more than if I tell my children to clean their room. Instead, they know the consequences if they dont. They can not boast on what they have an obligation to do. REPENTANCE is the same. If we boast, it is not Repentance. God has elected all who are living to breath. He controls the next heart beat. Yet, in His sovereignty gives people a choice.
Great study. The greater part of this message deals with Iranaeus and his theology, especially his theology of recapitulation. Good observations, especially on his view of the Fall and its consequences.
Great Sermon! It is fantastic to raise issues that most matter to societal survival and well-being! But cares that must be taken before selecting the speakers and their real and hidden motives as devils are on alert to destroy you America and your free blessings from God Almighty! Without God's hand and mercy USA can't exist for a moments especially these terrible days! Watch out and don't give your fist to your enemy to destroy you and your values! May be you haven't seen yourself from outside as you Americans are very proud of yourselves! Just do some researches to see the present day USA in may mind! America has totally been changing from the one I had been told by my father and grandmother! Even if debate is good for your political corrected-ness and the so called unclear and ambiguous human made democracy, much better to be alert on the main issue-responding to Almighty God! Jesus knows more than US! Tell this to all who are proud of their 80 years of incomplete love and knowledge! Ezekiel331-5 God's Message came to me:"Son of man,speak to your people. Tell them, 'If I bring war on this land and the people take one of their citizens & make him their watchman, & if the watchman sees war coming & blows the trumpet, warning the people, then if anyone hears the sound of the trumpet ...
Great Sermon! Dr. Fernandes,
John Macarthur tweaked his position on the eternal sonship of Christ.
I appreciate all the effort you put into this series. I am on number 11 now.
I also appreciate that you do not make the early church fathers against baptismal regeneration, but rather suggest it was an inching towards that doctrine. Very fair assessment.
Very insightful! I have a lot more to think about A great message as always. I check your page just about weekly to see if there's anything new, and have recommended you to several of my friends who were wondering how they can be closer to God, so don't feel like you're talking into thin air. I can't say how many other listeners you have, but rest assured there's at least one guy across the world listening!