|
| Page 1 | Page 2 · Found: 308 user comments posted recently. |
|  | |  |
|
|
 12/6/11 4:40 PM |
| RP | |  |  |
|
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
|
From David Brown's Commentary Acts 2:
"37-40. pricked in their hearts--the begun fulfilment of Zec 12:10 , whose full accomplishment is reserved for the day when "all Israel shall be saved" (see on JF & B for Ro 11:26).
what shall we do?--This is that beautiful spirit of genuine compunction and childlike docility, which, discovering its whole past career to have been one frightful mistake, seeks only to be set right for the future, be the change involved and the sacrifices required what they may. So Saul of Tarsus ( Act 9:6 ).
38. Repent--The word denotes change of mind, and here includes the reception of the Gospel as the proper issue of that revolution of mind which they were then undergoing.
baptized . . . for the remission of sins--as the visible seal of that remission.
39. For the promise--of the Holy Ghost, through the risen Saviour, as the grand blessing of the new covenant.
all afar off--the Gentiles, as in Eph 2:17 ), but "to the Jew first." |
|
|
| 12/6/11 1:25 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
|
The Berean's searched the Scripture which was their duty and priviledge, as they sat under pastor/teachers given them "For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:" Ephes. 4:12-15Agreed, You are sloppy indeed. |
|
|
| 12/6/11 12:23 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Buchan wrote:
RP,
My point is simply trying to unravel what your point was behind your unsupported, and therefore ad hominem, attack on my knowledge of history.
The nature of the Roman political and ecclesiastical antichrist has not been a point of dispute, ... You didn't answer my question. You like the divide and conquer approach I see? You're not alone? FYI, I reject your interpretation of what I said, based upon the facts of history you clearly don't acknowledge. I could attribute it to a number of reasons but I could not know why, with any certainty, in this context. It has been proven by yourself, by your false accusations. I said no such thing, as you assert. I stand by my initial post; now that you have defined your opinion with more words; not unlike a Roman, from the outer court of the Gentiles. You attempt to twist what I assert to establish your contrary point. I disagree that you can compare Anglicans with Presbyterians, as a form of Church Government, by trying to argue from a false premise in favor of independency. Anglican Church Gov't and State combine. With Presbyterians they are opposites. Arguing denominational distinctions made your assertion popular. It is just for the sake of promoting division. I am not interested |
|
|
| 12/5/11 4:45 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
|
John UK wrote:
1. Well that's another place where you argue with Presby,
2. Oh and when it comes to communion, I ought to tell you that there is but ONE CHURCH, and ONE BODY of CHRIST, and that all who are born again are IN that body, and therefore in communion.
3. If you think seriously about it, you're not the only one who claims to have historical precedent for your church base. 1. I might quote one of these men, but I'd have no need to; as I have a great selection of teachers who have attained to a greater reformation on behalf of the Church that is One.
2. I agree here. I don't believe in denominations, I'm a Presbyterian. Perhaps you misunderstand what that means. Too little space to explain #2 and it would loose something without an adequate explanation.
3. Ah Yes, history. I had a wonderful day encouraging excitement for Church and American History in the Laundromat, I had one taker, a delightful young man that I meet there regularly. I sent him home with a list of good books after looking through the Scripture together first. I told him he'd be more qualified for a public office then most candidates, if he read them.
Pray for ZR and his family. |
|
|
| 12/5/11 4:13 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Buchan wrote:
Surely you do not deny the fusion of church and state that is found in Popery, Anglicanism and ... Popery et. al. - Daniel 7:7-9 "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another 'little horn', before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire."I know not what you mean by classical presbyterianism??? And Yes, the (im)moral person of the Anti-Christ of Scripture is both civil and ecclesiastic. Your point?
Rev. 17:1-3 |
|
|
| 12/5/11 7:16 AM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
|
John UK wrote:
Oh! So you also argue with Presby, despite being a Presby yourself? I was responding to his ridiculous claim that the Spirit operates ONCE, before repentance, and then no change for the rest of life. Did he say that exactly? I don't remember discussing being filled with the Spirit. I am not arguing with Presby, there is no need. We appear to embrace the same body of Doctrine and with that same base, as a body of evidence from pastors/teachers with a credible historic testimony, and with the blessing of God; we could then have mature deliberation on any points wherein we might differ D.V. At this time, I am not clear on wherein we disagree. I don't hear him say, what you hear him say. That is why on another thread I mentioned Terms of Christian Communion, which if there was space, I would share because it blasted much of the nonsense that passes for Scriptural argument and in reality is no such thing, neither is it mature deliberation, but rather proud wranglings. I spent some time on Saturday in James 3. As Frank helpfully explained a while ago argument verses dialog when what is being contended for is the truth. This is a very difficult means for what is at stake; God's glory and man's good. |
|
|
| 12/5/11 6:45 AM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Buchan wrote:
...unlike the state-church nonsense of all of the Papists, Anglicans and Presbyterians. Obviously History isn't your strong point; No matter you certainly are not alone.
Daniel 12:7-13 "And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days. |
|
|
| 12/4/11 7:05 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Mike wrote:
It is the people from the various nations that will stand before the Lord, not the government entities. And they will be judged as individuals. It is as regards the moral persons of nations which are made up of individuals. For example the USA. If one uses the value of the OT sacrifices to gage accountability, the first is the Gospel Ministry they will give an account to God for their national consideration of the people of God. Is it true of them that they met the need of Christ's in their suffering or were they the instruments of it, in this nation? The purest in doctrine, worship, discipline and gov't most accountable and so on down the line. Sheep or goat? Next the congregation of the professed visible Church, did they meet the need of Christ's poor suffering ones? Third the
the Civil Sphere from the top down. Did the relieve these poor ones or afflict them? Lastly those outside the pale of the visible Church how did they deal with these that belonged to Christ? Yes, this will be every man that ever lived giving an account to God, but make no mistake here, there is a good deal of culpability that most are ignorant of, and ignorance of the Law is no excuse. |
|
|
| 12/4/11 5:30 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
|
John UK wrote:
No it was a fresh infilling of the Holy Ghost, empowering him again for ministry. And this happened many, many times. Until he forgot to ask, and played the hypocrite. Don't tell me he was filled with the Spirit and played the idiot, lest you falsely accuse the Spirit.  You put words in my mouth that have not been there, find a post where I stated any such thing. I've been studying pastor/teachers together with God's word and sharing what I've learned from others, not pontificating or teaching for doctrines the commandments of men or worse yet, of women. That is why I hold to the WCF and approved teachers, yet all the while dependent on the unction of the Holy Spirit. Aware that I am a sinner saved by grace and still ignorant of many things contained in the gold mine of God's Word. My life like that of all God's people calls for diligent dependence on the God of truth, in order to fight the good fight of the faith against the same unseen forces that every Christian must war against. This seems a good balance of obedience concerning Ephesians 4:8-21 and faith concerning 1 Jh.2:20. All graces & gifts are of God. There is no room for boasting on anyone's part. You can ignore me, if you like. I'd like less false accusation. |
|
|
| 12/4/11 3:21 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Presby wrote:
"The National Covenant of Scotland, which preceded the SL&C is also another faithful civil (and ecclesiastical) pattern. Compare these God honoring covenants (which the lawful civil authorities of the day swore before God to uphold, *nationally and internationally between the three covenanting nations*) with the godless U.S. Constitution and then tell me who it was that was truly "intensely religious." (R.Barrow SWRB)
ps: Don't forget that "success" in this world is persecution and suffering for the true Christians. Agreed. This Lord's Day I had a number of things to consider and Reg's quote was timely. Again, thank you. I was meditating on two things relative to recent discussions here and else where.
1Cor. 1:10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." Phil. 1:27 "Only let your conversation be as it becometh the Gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit and one mind striving together for the faith of the Gospel" I found instruction in the RP Terms of Communi |
|
|
| 12/3/11 2:41 PM |
| RP | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
John Knox has very thoroughly addressed this subject that Rufus eludes to for posterity. It was known and believed amongst us for a long time, thanks to Mr. Knox. but since those days much has come in to confuse and distract.This was a point driven home to me not only by WCF LC Q.192, but as a teenager, in a practical way. My Mother came home one evening very upset. The new traffic arrows had been first installed, in a busy college intersection where she worked. She saw a red arrow? In her mind, the arrow said: Go this way, the red color said: No. She was uncertain. She was in a hurry to get home, so she went. Behind her, the police. When she claimed, that she didn't know what it meant to the officer, he still gave her a ticket. I remember my Dad saying: Margaret, ignorance of the law is no excuse. I never forgot. This is a far more serious issue, I grant but I think the point is clear. We can't let sin and Satan confuse the real issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
