The Quiet Christian wrote: John UK, .. I would think that since we don't know whom the Lord is calling to Himself, speaking to larger numbers has a greater potential to be within hearing of those whom He is calling.
When I "thought like a child" I too used to think like that. But not any more. I will exalt the Lord my God and his sovereignty and immense power, his providential workings and ability to bring to pass certain events, that his elect will get to hear the gospel in his time and in his way.
People like myself, who have sat at the feet of Charles Spurgeon, have learnt not to throw water at a crate full of bottles, hoping to get some water into each one, but rather to carefully pour the water into just one of the bottles until it is full.
There are people who have done hardly any evangelism who imagine themselves experts on the subject. Too bad.
Hey Ho, back to sleep in Zion, folks. You have had your chance to learn a few things, but you prefer the lie rather than the truth, so I will not stay here to be used as a punch bag, thank you very much.
I'll be back for the ChristMass debate, to see if anyone has woken up out of their spiritual RCC antichrist slumber.
"I don't see a biblical warrant for doing this. Why don't they just get on with doing what God told them to do, and face whatever consequences they have to face? As in, be a disciple of Jesus Christ, and follow him. Is that too simple?"
Do folks imagine it was easy to preach the gospel in Bible times, when Saul of Tarsus was on the march, rounding up Christians, beating them, forcing them to blaspheme, putting them in prison, or killing them?
Oh boy, now we have students who imagine themselves Christians oh-so-annoyed that they have been relegated to a corner of the park in order to preach their gospel, and what are they doing? They are taking the city to court. What sort of students are they? Rich kids with rich parents who have caught the modern stand-up-for-your-rights phenomena, who have learnt from the queers to take a case to court and get satisfaction? How much time and money and effort is all this going to take? Can they justify spending their parents' money on a court case? Wheaton College is observing but not interfering, they are on their own. And their studies? Who cares?
Am I the only person on SA who does not see Christianity in all this? That it is all of the flesh not the Spirit?
Frank wrote: Brother John, Thanks for your below comments and especially for the smiley face following your Arminist comment. I know you have preached often in public and commonly give out tracts in public to whomever will take them. That is not Arminian in the slightest but simply witnessing to all who will listen. The great commission. Like you, I believe in election. But I can't imagine walking up to someone and saying: "I'm not sure if you are one of God's elect, but in case you are, here is the gospel".
You got that on the button, Frank.
The Quiet Christian wrote: 1. Ah, just saw you latest, John. Why would approaching the larger group of people be Arminian? 2. Also, the concept of free speech zones goes against the right of free speech in a truly public place.
1. During ancient research, QC, I discovered that the BGEA could tell you before a crusade how many 'converts' they expected, based upon how many people were attending the crusade.
2. If you are right, the boys should win their court case easily, paving the way for a free-for-all "Speaker's Corner" at the Bean. If you are wrong, and they lose, they could always do what God tells them and face the consequences.
Just in case some folks didn't know this, the Millennium Park has a specific zone within the park where anyone can exercise their freedom of speech and either campaign for a political party, preach on climate change, bear Christian testimony, or whatever they want to do. It's like Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park, London.
The park is a tourist attraction, and many people attend what is called "The Bean", and so these students wanted to preach in this area (zone) simply because there were more people there. [Presumably they thought that their chances of getting conversions were better, because there were more people to witness to.] Oops, sorry, that is arminist thinking.
The truth is, that on the way to the park, in true evangelism, God, in his providence, could have arranged for a meetup with a prepared soul, whose heart was already hungry for the word of the gospel.
This is walking in the Spirit, not the flesh (which is DIY evangelism). It is depending on God totally, seeing HIM at work, being a part of what HE is doing, not doing it yourself and thinking yourself to be something or somebody, when you are nothing. God works with old clay pots, so that HE will have glory.
Frank wrote: Good morning brother! Yes, I'm sure the powers to be are having a laugh among their inner circles. Most know that many wars are started through lies. Look at Iraq and VN just to name a couple. No weapons of mass destruction, etc. Have a great day!
Good morning Frank! Yes, we can take with a pinch of salt all that we are permitted to hear on the local news broadcast. However, just a couple more incidents from Iran, and I believe this will mark the start of a big fight in the playground, before the bell goes for lessons.
Sister B, I'm not sure what you were saying in your numero uno, but I'll try to answer as best I can.
1. Speaking for where I live in Wales, I don't know any of today's churches who believe in preaching the gospel outdoors. Those Christians who do are regarded as oddballs and weirdos, which is why I am very happy to depart this world for a better place. In my county no-one cares if our freedoms are taken away, because we're not using them anyway.
2. No, the apostles never used DIY evangelism.
3. DIY evangelism is trying to make converts without God. It is going somewhere not authorised by God. It is not going somewhere authorised by God. The worst example I have ever seen of a DIY church evangelising is Westboro Baptist Church (the late Fred Phelps team). It is evangelising without grace, without love, without truth. It is evangelising in such a way as to bring disrepute to the name of Christ.
In this scenario, the park authorities had to repeatedly tell this group to cease their witnessing in the park. Has any good come of this? No. And now the students are all hot under the collar and are taking the city to court. Why not just go tracting and preaching where the city will permit them? It's because they are DIY'ers. Is God with them?
B. McCausland wrote: What can be said of this passage? " ...when it was day, the magistrates sent the serjeants, saying, Let those men go. the keeper of the prison told .Paul, The magistrates have sent to let you go: now therefore depart, and go in peace.
and desired them to depart out of the city."
Sister B, I have already considered this scenario, which occurred in Europe, but it does not fit, simply because Paul and Silas were arrested by the authorities and beaten and imprisoned. Not having a DIY religion, the Lord responded to their praises and prayers within prison, brought about an earthquake, and got the jailer saved and his entire household.
Paul correctly responded to the Roman law at that time, as you quoted. The upshot was that they were told to "get out of town", which they did.
But these students have not been arrested nor charged with anything. It is they who are bringing a charge against the city, for preventing their evangelising in a public park. What I'm looking for is a biblical precedent for this, and there is none. If they had not had a DIY method of evangelism, they would have heard the Holy Spirit speaking in their ear what they ought to do, and it wasn't to keep winding up the park authorities.
Megaphone wrote: Pure speculation. You don't know what the apostles would have done if they had rights guaranteed by law to freedom of speech, it didn't exist in their day. You cannot say with any authority that Wheaton college students did was unbiblical because you have nothing upon which to base it, it wasn't an option for the early Christians.
Ahem, my dear megaphone, although you have a stupid moniker, I will answer your point.
What on earth does your constitution or first amendment have to do with obeying God? Hmmmm?
Now my dear fellow/woman whoever you are, I recommend you read the Acts of the Apostles and get into the biblical idea of what the mind of the apostles was, concerning what they ought to do when confronted with contrary men. Read, for example, the context of the following verse:
Acts 5:29 KJV (29)¬† Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
(Did not I say this right at the start of this debate?)
Now then megaphone, if you believe these students are doing the right thing, will you pay for all their court costs if they lose their case? Or will you disown them and say, "Stupid students!"
Let us look again at this from the beginning, before I look at your recent comment, which I will do, be assured.
"Four Wheaton College students who were repeatedly stopped from open-air preaching and passing out evangelism literature in Millennium Park are suing the city for allegedly violating their First Amendment rights."
I claimed that there is no biblical warrant for them to be doing this. The reason I said that is because there is NO bibical precedent for them to be doing this.
Today's DIY Christianity leaves God outside the church door and refuses to trust in him for anything. So you are left with your own resources - other men.
In this case, the students are actually taking someone else to court and suing them. Nice one! Great witness lads! That's one up for Jesus Christ! High fives all round! Oh what a fantastic bit of evangelism, guaranteed to endear a lot of people to the Christian faith.
And all the time God says, "He that winneth souls is wise."
Why didn't they just find somewhere else to preach? Hmmmm?
In the UK, private shopping centres have their own by-laws. I have tried tracting such places and been politely turfed out. I didn't grumble, just went outside on the street with my tracts.
However, if you read the intro to the article it is all about a court case concerning citizens' rights under the First Amendment, which is why I gave the example I did.
Now if you want to champion the First Amendment, and the rights of all religions under the sun to freedom of speech in public places like parks, and you believe God has called you to do that, please go right ahead with your DIY Christianity, but you'll not do it without a loving rebuke from me, even if everyone else is fast asleep in Zion. Now please observe,
Acts 4:17-18 KJV (17)¬† But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. (18)¬† And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
So what did they do?
Acts 4:19-20 KJV (19)¬† But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. (20)¬† For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.
Acts 5:18 KJV (18)¬† And laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison.
When it comes to citizens' rights, concerning, for example, freedom of speech, let us think about this, QC.
You have a park called Millennium Park, where these evangelists have been trying to give out tracts and preach the gospel. They have been prevented. And you believe they are correct to take their case to law, and sue the city.
So would you give the same privilege to preachers and evangelists of other religions, who also wish to gain converts to their religion?
So, let me see now, every Saturday, in the Millennium Park, you are out for a quiet stroll with your dog. The sun is shining, the air is fresh, but there is a problem. Every few yards there is a team of evangelists. Some of them are trying to give you a leaflet, one is preaching a message, others are holding banners up, which you feel compelled to read, out of curiosity. Some even stand in your way.
There are Jews, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, Seventh Day Baptists, Presbyterian Church of America, Methodist Church, Church of Christ, Satanist Church, Rosicrucians, Christadelphians, Spiritualist Church, and a dozen others. They fill the park.
And you are happy with that, because it is their citizens' right?
Brandon, are you saying that I am a modern day Constantine? If so, I would be grateful if you would tell me why you said that. Or are you saying that Kanye West is a modern day Constantine? If so, I would be grateful if you would tell me why you said that. Thank you.
Acts 4:23-31 KJV (23)¬† And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. (24)¬† And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: (25)¬† Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? (26)¬† The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. (27)¬† For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, (28)¬† For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. (29)¬† And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, (30)¬† By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus. (31)¬† And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with
The Quiet Christian wrote: John UK, might I ask for you to lay out your casr, then, for these six students to instead stop preaching where unpermitted and accept whatever punishment the government would like to mete out for having broken the interpretation of the law?
Quiet Christian, can I ask you if you understood what I just said? Perhaps as it relates to one disciple slashing at the head of another man badly wounding his ear, which Jesus then immediately healed and told him to put up his sword, which event is used as justification for millions of Americans to carry semi automatic weapons? Isn't it astonishing how a simple little event like that can turn out in the wonderful unbiblical world of DIY christendom?
Now QC, it is far too late for me to be answering questions, as I am to bed soon. However, if you wish me to answer in the morning, please rethink your question and make it more intelligible, restating it in plain language, as I have not a clue what it is you are asking. Thank you.
Brethren and sisters, the cure for making big errors concerning the Bible, and what is warranted from the Bible, is a very simple one, and the only resource you will need for it is a good Bible, such as the Authorized (King James) Bible. Even just reading reading it through, over and over, will prevent either the making of big errors or the unbalanced theology of many.
It goes like this.
Are there any examples in scripture for my particular query?
The answer could be:
Yes, there are ten examples.
One says to do this.
Nine say to do that.
Could I possibly make out a case for doing it like the one? Sure you can.
Could I make out a better case for doing it like the nine? Sure you can.
But to be fully biblically warranted, you need to see the one being complemented by nine, and ten complemented by ninety, and one hundred complemented by nine hundred. And I am not seeing that. And I never will, until good Christian folks stop working in cliches and traditions and mantelshelf Bible verses, and start working in real Bible theology, which means going back to the basics and starting all over again from scratch.
Frank wrote: Other than that there is just saber rattling.
It's incredible bro. Iran knocks out an expensive American drone out of the sky, attacks oil tankers off its coast, impounds a British flagged tanker in its own waters, secures the release of one of its own tankers from Gibraltar by promising not to send it to Syria, and then they send it to Syria.