John UK wrote: 1. Are you standing up for the PCUSA now?
2. Even when it has renounced any hope of ever being called a Christian church ever again
1. Do YOU think a church is worth fighting for in this world John?
2. Ever heard of GOD, John - Doesn't He have something to do with this particular problem. HE saves from a fallen world, - Can your 'god' save from a fallen church?
It seems it is a shock to you John that you find fallen churches in a fallen world.
PCUSA is a church I know nothing about, not being an American. But perhaps it is the influence of Arminianism which has developed into Liberalism over these decades in many denominations, which has poisoned the witness and their comprehension of truth in scripture.
Calvinists of course are a more Biblically stronger breed, knowing a Sovereign God and Total Depravity in the human race. But don't worry John, the Elect, by Unconditional Election, will not go down this path of evil since Limited Atonement and Irresistible Grace is working for them, IN Christ, and in Perseverance.
John UK wrote: So much for presbyteries safeguarding the church. Once the majority of members of the presbytery go apostate, the whole denomination is taken with them. Well I did once say that independent Bible Baptist Churches were the way to go. Er.....perhaps more than once. You see folks, if an autonomous Baptist church goes sour (and they do!), the one down the road is unaffected. This is what autonomy and independency and nondenominationalism is all about. The PCUSA has nailed up its own coffin. Bye bye everybody. And all the true believers and disciples came out and sought after something better and biblical. Ring a bell with anyone?
If you think the problem with this fallen world is presbyterianism John, then your Baptist teaching is not Biblical, not working and not realistic.
Ever heard of sin and Satan John???
BTW if Satan is attacking the Presbyterians and not the Baptists - perhaps it is because he does not have to!!!
John UK wrote: However, please tell me why you ignore the scriptural pattern for worship as given by St Paul, which starts off with "everyone has a psalm...."
I assume you mean 1Cor 14 - viz 1Cor 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
In this chapter Paul ~Commends prophecy ~Preferred before speaking in tongues ~A comparison drawn from instruments ~Both referred to edification ~The true use of each is taught (v26) ~The abuse of each (v27ff)
This is not a pattern of worship!
Whereas the Regulative Principle is drawn from the Whole of Scripture.
WCF XXI.1 "the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited to his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture." Exod 20:4-6; Deut 4:15-20; 12:32; Mat 4:9-10; 15:9; Acts 17:25; Col 2:23.
According to this you will have to give up your love for 'Rapping.'
John UK wrote: Tell me, in case I have my facts incorrect. Have the state church/presbyterians ever persecuted independents?
As a Scotsman a Presbyterian and Covenanter - all who were persecuted burned at the stake, hanged or exiled from our homes by you English, I think you are on dodgy ground as far as who did what around here.
Regulative Principle is the Biblical method of Worship and praise carried out by committed and dedicated Christians.
"The Regulative Principle as it has been defined by our Scottish Reformers and others who have shared their position Our starting point is the truth that Christ is the Head of the Church. In relation to the Church as the body of elect, redeemed, regenerate sinners, the Headship of Christ signifies that through His union with them He is the source of all their life and grace and unity. In relation to the Church as a society on earth, the Headship of Christ signifies that He originated it and that He continues to administer its affairs. It has taken its form from Him and continues to depend upon Him for existence and power. Christ gives the Church its constitution laws, ordinances, officebearers, its independent authority and spiritual power. The Church is accountable to Christ..." (Hugh Cartwright)
John UK wrote: many of those who hold to the regulative principle say that those instructions have been revoked and rip out from their Bibles the only clear instruction as to how God wants his people to conduct their services. And so they then invent their own "service style" with unbiblical practices
And many other such practises they hold to, which have no warrant in scripture, like persecuting genuine believers to death, and generally behaving in an ungodly manner
What on earth are you accusing us of John UK???
What do you mean by quote "unBiblical practices"??? "persecuting genuine believers"??? This is pure ad hominem per John UK??? This is lies and deceit!!!
Do you know anything about the Regulative Principle??? Those who adhere to this principle are the REAL Reformed, and invariably Calvinist Bible believing Christians and Churches unlike those Liberal balloons in the C of S and C of E.
I take it John you have returned to your old hyper-wesleyan ways and prefer the religious inventions of sinners.
Credobaptism wrote: Iv'e tried on two occasions to open dialouge with you, but it appears you are would rather Fight with Mike and Jim
Credo In answer to Neil's post below I drew him to SermonAudio's survey at [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/survey_details.asp?voteid=pr82905231354]]]"What is the Scriptural mode of baptism?"[/URL] The reason being that we have already been down this path of 'Paedo' Versus 'Credo' before; - Ergo is there any new point's to cover on this subject? What this survey and others proved was that we will not receive your polemics - and you will not receive ours.
PS I do not 'fight' with Mike and Jim just 'joust' with respected fellow Christians. __________
Neil wrote: behavior reminds me of paleo-Presby piranhas. Look what they do to ea. other:
Now Neil Is that just a 'pithy observation' or are you being trenchant?
Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
Oh Jim No wonder you are lumbered with that badly translated NASB.
Of course infant baptism by sprinkling IS Biblical. That is why the Presbyterian Church has been doing it for 2000 years. Thats what the Apostles were doing in Biblical times. Baptism is the sign of the Covenant and is to be applied to the children of Covenanted parents. That is what the Scriptures teach.
Adult baptism is only for those who were not baptised as infants of covenanted parents.
Guinness wrote: Regardless of credo- or paedo-baptism the old Anglican baptismal liturgy should be rightly immersed in six foot deep soil and for ever buried for expressing the evil false doctrine of baptismal regeneration. http://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-worship/worship/texts/christian-initiation.aspx
"39 Articles XXVII. Of Baptism Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of Regeneration or new Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed; Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ."