Michael Hranek wrote:
Pia
Thanks for posting to me.
First let me thank you again for your prayers for my mother and my family.
My mother believes she doesn't have much time left on this earth and she may be right as her health is very poor. etc..

Be assured that "...Salvation is of the Lord...." Jonah 2.9

Think on Jonah - rescued but still in the belly of the fish saying this! And then he makes this acknowledgement and is delivered on dry ground.

What did Jonah do to effect his own rescue? Did he have control of the boat or the waves or the fish?

The Lord was gracious to him .. Salvation was indeed of the Lord!!

And so it is in our own salvation .. Others may speak to us about the Lord, we may read the Bible etc.. all very right and needful..BUT unless the Lord act in the matter, all is in vain.

I shall carry on praying for your mother and brother.

Surprised to see you still here!!

Just passing through and thought I would stop and say hello.. Trust that the Lord is blessing you and yours.

Trust that you and yours are keeping well. Have been off SA for some time.. just happened to look in today and found your post.

Just a reminder that you had promised to send me some literature on prophetic interpretation... my email address is [email protected]

On the question of texts, would appreciate your comments on

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=4170612493

Remembered your mother and brother in prayer today, and will keep them on our prayer list. Keep us posted.

Even though I shall not be posting here again, I will look in from time to time, as I am able to catch up on the news.

Salvation is of the Lord - only He can open eyes, bring about conviction, lead to faith and change the heart! Trust Him only.

I was just going to look in without posting, but seeing your last, I just had to respond. Thank you for your concern.

Actually, I would take issue with John Piper on a number of counts, including the irenic ecumenical spirit fostered at his church. Of course, they are also too accommodating to Charismatics, and there was a hint of Robert Schuller's influence in one of his books.

So I am by no means 100% with Piper.

But as I said, thanks for your concern.

I should finally like to thank you too for your interaction. I have enjoyed reading your posts and conversing with you here. I trust and pray God to continue blessing your walk with him.

A final word to my egocentric friend Yamil - I forgive you too, and pray that some day (soon hopefully) you will be humbled by God and learn God's truth as taught in the Bible, forsaking your attachment to human philosophy and to your false dispy arminian hermeneutic, which may be appealing to the natural man but can find no place in the hearts of those who have come to a saving knowledge of God in Jesus Christ.

May God continue to bless his Israel.

Well my time on these forums is up. Mex from Mike said that a certain person was maddening. Yep, hit that on the head. And since there is no chance of any kind of meaningful discussion all the while he is around, then I shall take my leave before I go doo-lally on his account.

To the other kind folk who have interacted - MurrayA, Lurker, Discerned Believer etc.. Many thanks for your input.

I ask your forgiveness if I have seemed at all intemperate or caused any one any offence.

May the Lord grant us all more light!

Yamil seems to think that whenever he makes a reply he is giving irrefutable arguments for his position. But the questions just keep coming.. Ummmm.. wonder why? Could it possibly be that his replies are not irrefutable, except in his egocentric imagination?!!

Then when the Calvs on here present a positive case for what they believe, instead of refuting it he will start his childish antics and then claim that he has confounded the Calvs!

The man has some real issues that someone should help him deal with!!

BTW.. did you ever read why Gresham Machen refused to be called a Fundamentalist? According to John Piper the reasons are:

(1). The absence of historical perspective;
(2). The lack of appreciation of scholarship;
(3). The substitution of brief, skeletal creeds for the historic confessions;
(4). The lack of concern with precise formulation of Christian doctrine;
(5). The pietistic, perfectionist tendencies (i.e., pharisaical rules);
(6). One-sided otherworldliness (i.e., a lack of effort to transform the culture), and,
(7). A penchant for futuristic chiliasm (or: premillennialism).

JD, ever considered that every heretic throws out this line? Like the criminal caught red handed who says, I am innocent!!

Yamil

JD, your ignorance is absolutely astounding!!

Daniel knew his Bible and he was obviously familiar with Leviticus 26.27-42, because he alludes to this in his prayer- see Dan 9.7 etc..

And if you read it again, the naming of the Messiah as "Emmanuel" in the Isaiah prophecy is inextricably linked to the virgin birth, and not separated by 2-3000 years from it!!

Quote:
".. a virgin shall be with child
and shall bring forth a son
and they shall call his name Emmanuel..

What having problems understanding plain English now?

You will forgive me, but I find you very tiresome. You really should rename youself "weapon of mass tiresomeness"!!

Since it is obvious that we are never going to get past your antics, I see no point in conversing with you on this board.

Talk about stating the obvious!

The verses are actually telling us the method and purpose of his coming, but a corroborative of all this was the Isaiah prophesy. Always, when Matthew says "that it might be fulfilled" he is quoting prophesy to corroborate what was happening.

JD your problem is that you cannot see that by the shedding of blood Christ procured the remission of sins for all that the Father had given to him.

For you the blinkered approach of equating the Jews as Christ's people and waiting for their salvation pushes the accomplishment of this well into the future. What I am saying is that Matthew did not use OT prophesy in this way. His burden was to demonstrate that in the life and death of Christ OT prophesy was fulfilled!

Are you just playing dumb, or plain dumb?

Matt 2.15; 2.23; 4.14; 8.17; 12.17; 13.35; 21.4; 26.56; and 27.35.

Quote: "Yes, unlike you I do not believe that my camp has the corner of truth."

Oh, such painful ignorance!!

Permit me to ask you, why did Daniel think to pray to God for forgiveness and deliverance when he had already discovered the prophesy saying that after 70 years of captivity there would be a return of the people to the promised land?

He knew from his reading that God had determined this, so why did he bother praying?

The quotes were not from his book on Typology, and besides which, I doubt very much that you have either read it in its entirety or studied the book, judging by your ignorant comment. And in case it had escaped your notice, he was reformed in his hermeneutics and in his theology!!

Quote: "The prophecy says he will save his people from their sins. This has not happened yet, but it will soon."

More ignorant prouncements! His people, does not mean merely the Jews, but those whom he would redeem from all tribes, tongues and nations. And though in your scheme of things Christ's life and death only made salvation possible, scripture speaks otherwise. He did accomplish everything for his people and the work of the Holy Spirit is vouchsafed to them to effect this salvation in them.

Your statement on the word "might" is absolute balderdash. This is a recurring phrase throughout Matthew, and in every instance it is to demonstrate that in the life and death of Christ there was a definite fulfillment of things prophesied in the OT.

For anyone who is interested in this, see the same recurring phrase in the following passages and tell me, does it ever refer to anything 2-3000 years down the line?

Coming from a man who believes that Peter quoted Joel's prophecy saying, "this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel" when what he really meant "this is that which Joel meant will happen at the end of the world"!!

And then again the Matthew passage, where just before quoting Isaiah he says, "all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying..."

So Matthew is telling us this was the fulfillment of the Isaiah passage and JD says, Oh no, Matthew got it wrong, because this is to find a specifically Jewish fulfillment at the end.

And now he claims this is the right handling of the word of God?!!!

Be warned of such lunacy!!!

[URL=http://www.allbygrace.com/prolhecyunderstoodmain.html]]]http://www.allbygrace.com/prolhecyunderstoodmain.h..[/URL]

This is a very worthwhile series of studies to work through, because you will learn principles that will help open up the OT prophecies in a wonderful way.

For the benefit of those who are concerned to know the truth about whether "regeneration" precedes or follows the act of faith, or to state it as to the real point at stake, whether the work of God in the unregenerate is monergistic or synergistic (viz. his sole work, or whether we participate in it) I would refer you to:

[URL=http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2006/05/27/regeneration-reception-and-faith/]]]http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2006/05/27/rege..[/URL]