Good morning June. Yes the major problem churches have with a new convert is how to deal with all the baggage he has picked up along the way as a result of being born into this world. Even non-Christians pick up a whole lot of religious stuff while unregenerate, and they imagine when they are converted that all that info is now kosha, and do not question it, unless the Spirit acts directly.
Nativity scenes? Can't think of any Bible verses for that one.
If anyone wants a basic fundamental article to compare the regulative principle with the normative principle (these are the only two principles unless you want to go the mystical route) then have a read:
At the moment, I tend to lean on the regulative side of normative. At least, I think that's what a theologian would evaluate me as, if I was asked a lot of questions.
If anyone thinks it is a lot of woffle, here is an idea to change your mind. Imagine you are a church pioneer, and you have a congregation forming in a remote place. You are immediately faced with a multitude of questions. How do we set up the church, what day or days for worship, what do we sing, who is permitted to preach, and so on and on...
3. To secure Christian liberty. How often have the deniers of the Regulative Principle complained that it takes away the liberties of the people of God! But the contrary is the truth. Yes, the Regulative Principle takes away peopleâ€™s freedom to worship as they please â€“ but that is not true Christian liberty. The liberty of the people of God consists in being free from the traditions and commandments of men, to be free to keep the will of God alone. It is hymn-singing, and organ-playing, and Christmas-keeping, that takes away true Christian liberty. The Regulative Principle means that only Biblical worship is required of Godâ€™s people â€“ that secures their liberty.
It's a good, little article. Well worth reading to get some background on the principle, even if you still end up disagreeing with it.
What impresses me with some of the cults is their consistency with worship, such that no matter what country you are in, you can expect an identical form of worship. In Christian denominations you used to see the same thing in Brethren Assemblies and some Presbyterian churches. Soon there will be none left as men introduce new things.
James Thomas wrote: Bro. John, ... I was working on The point that Paul makes contained within 2 Cor 3:6-18, but I'll leave it to you to look on.
Yes I am very happy with 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, and rejoice in the truths of it. One of the best phrases in that passage is "done away".
Christianity, as I see it, flowed (note, not seamlessly) from the OT Jewish religion, which was more physical than spiritual. The reason for this was, because God was painting pictures of spiritual realities to come, which were all fulfilled in Christ.
What we need to do, as Gentile Christians, is understand that the Father seeketh such to worship him, who worship him now in spirit and in truth. Christianity is more spiritual than physical, and the Holy Ghost is far more active not only in the daily life of a believer, but also in the church setting, where he has gifted all the church with a spiritual gift or more.
Once we see that, what days do we have? One day in seven for physical rest from work and for spending more time with the Lord; remembrance of Christ's death in the breaking of bread (once a week, once a month, or once a year); and, ......? James, are there any more days, according to scripture?
Christopher000 wrote: Hey John, Jesus, Michael Jackson, Elvis, Aliens...take your pick. I've often wondered how many of the mentally disturbed are actually possessed..
I remember living in Chicago, and walking to work, or just being out and about...there would always be people on the sidewalks, wearing breadboards, and witnessing, passing out tracks, etc. I remember one time there was a very disheveled man wearing a breadboard, with end times stuff scrawled onto it, and bible verses, etc. He was screaming about the end times, and I mean he was screaming everything, and attracting attention for blocks. Bible verses, sin, and repentance was proceeding from his mouth, but littered with vulgar profanities.
Hello bro, yes I have wondered about that also. It seems that possessed persons are literally out of control, they are being controlled by devilish forces. Little wonder their crimes are horrific.
In the UK we call them sandwich board men. I've not seen one in many years, and they were very rare anyway. Very few Christians in the UK would care to stand up for Jesus, not even the nice ones who could give a better, and more gracious testimony. I went out with a board last year, and was....
Amen SC, and thanks for all your postings on this subject. Appreciated.
And now, seeing as someone mentioned it, to new moon celebrations.
Psalms 81:3 KJV (3)Â Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day.
The Jews were given strict instructions. Note, regulative principle.
Psalms 81:11-13 KJV (11)Â But my people would not hearken to my voice; and Israel would none of me. (12)Â So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lust: and they walked in their own counsels. (13)Â Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways!
Psalms 81:14 KJV (14)Â I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hand against their adversaries.
Psalms 81:16 KJV (16)Â He should have fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee.
See what happens when you reject the regulative principle? It is a great loss of blessings. It is like hewing out your own cisterns, providing your own refreshing waters which never refresh.
Far from being miserable, it is the Nay-sayers who are following hard after God, accepting his instructions, and being blessed.
"These missionaries braved malaria and yellow fever to preach the gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ under the auspices of the Sudan Interior Mission (SIM) and planted several churches as they preach along like Paul the Apostle and around mid-20th century these churches became independent to carry on the gospel. ECWA has the largest mission organization of any African church living up to its name Evangelical which by name Evangelical Mission Society (ESM) has sent out about 1,600 missionaries."
"Throughout Nigeria, but especially in the central regions, ECWA churches are growing rapidly. Some churches have experienced as much as 400% growth in the last several years. Churches in the Northern (traditionally more Islamic) parts of the country are also growing. There are currently more than six thousand ECWA congregations with more than ten million members. ECWA has over nine District Church Councils (DCC's) and a number of Local Church Councils (LCC's)." wiki article
It is only a matter of time before persecutors appear before God, and receive their wages, which are eternal.
I seem to recall a time in history, when Christians would regard certain things as unbecoming for a Christian.
All gone now.
Regarded as legalism or some such thing now. They say taking away Christian liberty - so called. It's not introducing a downgrade, it's a full on downgrade. Maybe the dispensationalist brethren are right all along, and there is such a thing as a church age which will end in abject failure.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Again John Gill is reading his thinking into the passage. Who is to say this not referring to what is found over in I Corinthians about meat being offered to idols? or maybe it just means what we see on the page in front of us a person who eats meat and one who does not.
It doesn't help that the KJV word meat can mean simply food. But anyway, the verse itself does not mention meat, although it does compare "all things" with "herbs".
One thing is for sure, Paul is doubling up on his point, for in verse 6 he mentions the "day" and the "eating" in the same text, showing that his main point applies to both.
Bro, I would say that you imagine vainly that John Gill interprets the texts from a presupposition, and that this is why he has it wrong. That is too much like accusing him of false motives in his commentary. Not that I am saying he is infallible, certainly not. And if believe him to be wrong on anything, I too will say so.
So far, I'm inclined to believe him on this one, and it would be good to compare all recognised theologians, and see what they all believe.
Frank wrote: Under communism in Romania the government controlled and approved sermons.
That is interesting, Frank.
I attended once a BBC radio recording of a Brethren Assembly "service" in Carmarthen, Wales. I knew the preacher very well, and all those taking part in Bible reading, prayers etc. So I also knew that the BBC producer asked for the whole service to be typed out, so that she could give her consent to what was going out over the air waves one Sunday morning.
The whole thing was shambolic, and I would never attend another one.
James Thomas wrote: John, I'm having a hard time following your trail and what your after now. I've noticed my questions go by the way side after I've answered yours which makes for difficult interaction.To be specific, the questions I am referring to are what is the ministration of death? What are those tables of stones? I only make mention them because I believe it to be a piece that may be a help but I only get crickets and more questions off on a different tangent.
James, if it helps you, "the wages of sin is death" and "the soul that sinneth shall die".
What is sin? Transgression of the law. What law? Decalogue.
All have sinned, therefore all die.
The decalogue on literal stone is opposed to us and is called the ministration of death because if we transgress it we die. This is why we died and needed regeneration.
Is that sufficient?
What is it about my post 1/7/19 11.53am that you disagree with?
Bro US, I appreciate your points and will bear them in mind for sure. We know the scripture is true; it is just a matter of grasping what is said.
On Romans 14:2, John Gill says:
"For one believeth that he may eat all things",.... He is fully persuaded in his mind, that there is nothing in itself common, or unclean; that the difference between clean and unclean meats, commanded to be observed by the law of Moses, is taken away; and that he may now lawfully eat any sort of food; every creature of God being good, and none to be refused, because of the ceremonial law which is abrogated, provided it be received with thanksgiving, and used to the glory of God: "another who is weak eateth herbs"; meaning not one that is sickly and unhealthful, and of a weak constitution, and therefore eats herbs for health's sake; but one that is weak in the faith, and who thinks that the laws concerning the observance of meats and drinks are still in force; and therefore, rather than break any of them, and that he may be sure he does not, will eat nothing but herbs,...
Romans 14:2 KJV (2)Â For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
James Thomas wrote: The disconnect seems to be here.
James, to save time, can you explain to me what part of my post 1/7/19 11.53am you would disagree with. Because if you disagreed with any of that particular post, you have not yet reached an orthodoxy held by all true Christians. I'm being gracious, James, not overbearing or showing any nastiness. I would certainly say that the particular post is non-negotiable. And if you can show me why you think it is in error, it might help me to understand what is the point you are making which I'm not seeing. Thanks.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: ...nothing in O.T. about whether or not you could eat meat or had to be a vegetarian.
Eh? There were a lot of laws about certain types of meat you could not eat, bro.
June A. Nadolny wrote: John, I'll forward a copy of your note of thanks to Shaun now.
Shaun Willcock - Gospel Minister wrote: Dear June Briefly, in reply to â€śLurkerâ€ť below, John-UK answered correctly: he brought up the regulative principle. In the worship of the Lord, we are not to add our own ideas, thoughts, opinions. If it is commanded in the Word, then it is right; if it is not commanded, then it is not to be done. Sin is the transgression of Godâ€™s law, yes; but one transgresses the law when one adds to it as well. For this is feeble man claiming to know better than God how God must be worshipped. It is in effect saying to Him, I will worship Thee, but as I see fit. This is sin. In Christâ€™s service, Shaun
What an excellent encouragement, June. And I appreciate such a timely word from such a man of God as Shaun Willcock. If you write to him again for anything, render him my thanks for taking the trouble to engage with our convos on here - most helpful and edifying.
It also looks as though Shaun stands alongside John Gill (and no doubt a multitude of others) in his understanding of the passage in Romans which we were looking at yesterday.
Thank you, sister. What a blessing! We had seven hour meeting today and no-one wanted to leave, because Jesus was there. Wow!
James Thomas wrote: Paul says he was under grace, not under the law of condemnation(2 Cor. 3:9) which your trying to insert to make your argument.
James, I also am under grace, not under the law.
Why is law so important?
Galatians 3:24 KJV (24)Â Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Gospel preachers love the law, they preach it all the time, every time they preach the gospel the law is there. Why? Because sinners need convincing they are sinners. And how do you accomplish that? By defining what sin is. And how do you do that? By quoting the law of God. Transgression is sin; iniquity is sin. It is lawlessness. Is it why baddies in the western films are called outlaws?
Suppose a sinner is convicted of the sin of celebrating a pagan festival in a pagan way, with other pagans. How did he get convicted? Through preaching the first two commandments. And God regenerated him and brought him to Christ in repentance, so that he turned from his sins to Christ.
What? Shall the new convert now repeat his sins and keep celebrating pagan holidays in a pagan way, with other pagans? Not at all, bro. I'm OOS
James Thomas wrote: Somewhere you came to a conclusion which stated that everything Christmas is manmade and therefore sin.
Ah James, have I explained yet why I said that? Maybe we need to look at that first.
Sin is transgression of the law. Break one of the commandments and you have sinned. We are agreed on this.
It is the first two commandments which are broken, when we introduce anything devised by man into the worship of God. Now because there is no biblical warrant for anything christmass, then it is all manmade, and therefore sin, breaking the two commandments. Even worse is the fact that much of it is either pagan or RCC. ______
Regarding what I said below, let us get it back in thread, please.
"Concerning Romans 14:5, I have been doing a little digging into this text and trying to understand what these "days" are that Paul refers to. John Gill makes a very good case that he is referring to days ordained of God in the old dispensation, such that it refers only to Jews, many of whom would have been loathe to depart from accustomed practices which were once commanded of the Lord."
I'm still open to other suggestions as to what the passage means. "A little digging" hardly implies fixed doctrine.