MS wrote:
Mrs. Mc,
Not ignoring you, just have been busy.
As I stated to you a few weeks past, your concerns are of no consequence.
Any further posts that you address to me will be reported as unwanted solicitation.
Thanks.

Kev wrote:
Hey there Bro Observer

Lord bless.
...

to continue

"You are under no bondage whatever to regard the regulation. We owe no allegiance to the ecclesiastical powers which have made a decree on this matter, for we belong to an old-fashioned church which does not dare to make laws, but is content to obey them. At the same time the day is no worse than another, and if you choose to observe it, and observe it unto the Lord, I doubt not he will accept your devotion: while if you do not observe it, but unto the Lord observe it not, for fear of encouraging superstition and will-worship, I doubt not but what you shall be as accepted in the non-observance as you could have been in the observance of it. Still, as the thoughts of a great many Christian people will run at this time towards the birth of Christ, and as this cannot be wrong, I judged it meet to avail ourselves of the prevailing current, and float down the stream of thought. Our minds will run that way, because so many around us are following customs suggestive of it, therefore let us get what good we can out of the occasion. "

On another occasion he said:

"There is no reason upon earth beyond that of ecclesiastical custom why the 25th of December should be regarded as the birthday of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ any more than any other day from the first of January to the last day of the year; and yet some persons regard Christmas with far deeper reverence than the Lord’s-day. You will often hear it asserted that “The Bible and the Bible alone is the religion of Protestants,” but it is not so. There are Protestants who have absorbed a great deal beside the Bible into their religion, and among other things they have accepted the authority of what they call “the Church,” and by that door all sorts of superstitions have entered. There is no authority whatever in the word of God for the keeping of Christmas at all, and no reason for keeping it just now except that the most superstitious section of Christendom has made a rule that December 25th shall be observed as the birthday of the Lord, and the church by law established in this land has agreed to follow in the same track."

James Thomas wrote:
Romans 8:29 (KJV)

The word of God is to conform us not the other way around.

Reminds me of our Lord's words at John 17

6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

The word "kept" means to a. accept in faith b. obey and c. to guard

The apostle Paul commanded Timothy:

2 Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

So the question is did the early church, knowing the vital importance of maintaining the sacred deposit of truth, fail in their duty, or does the fact that we have the majority witnesses which are in agreement testify to their faithfulness? The thought that we had to wait more than 1800 years to discover 2 aberrant texts which supposedly are truer to the original than the majority seems to fly in the face of all scriptural expectations that God would preserve his NT revelation just as he did the OT.

This is what Spurgeon had to say:

“This is the season of the year when, whether we wish it or not, we are compelled to think of the birth of Christ. I hold it to be one of the greatest absurdities under heaven to think that there is any religion in keeping Christmas-day. There are no probabilities whatever that our Saviour Jesus Christ was born on that day, and the observance of it is purely of Popish origin; doubtless those who are Catholics have a right to hallow it, but I do not see how consistent Protestants can account it in the least sacred. However, I wish there were ten or a dozen Christmas-days in the year; for there is work enough in the world, and a little more rest would not hurt labouring people. Christmas-day is really a boon to us; particularly as it enables us to assemble round the family hearth and meet our friends once more. Still, although we do not fall exactly in the track of other people, I see no harm in thinking of the incarnation and birth of the Lord Jesus. We do not wish to be classed with those

“Who with more care keep holiday
The wrong, than others the right way.”

The old Puritans made a parade of work on Christmas-day, just to show that they protested against the observance of it. But we ...

Trust you're keeping well.

Just thought I would pay my annual visit to SA to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas!

Let's look at what's really allying America, SIN! Ouch, truth hurts.

We all need to get on our knees and pray to God (Yahweh) and REPENT of our sinful, wicked, evil, rebellious ways! Like: Abortion, drugs & alcohol, adultery, fornication, lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, gossiping, backbiting and the list goes on!

REPENT is not only be sorry for doing it, but turning away from it in a conscious effort. And then to Trust JESUS alone, not man, for our salvation.

Seems to me that there are 3 views being presented in this thread, and all others:

1. The true gospel, which gives true freedom and power over sin through the Holy Spirit

2. The false gospel of Rome which ensnares and damns millions to hell, and lastly

3. The pharisee gospel of rules and regulations trying to bring people back to bondage because we have not been freed from sin and have no power over it and therefore need minute regulations from the most vocal who will hold us all to account, never mind that the bible says we are all only accountable to the Lord in matters indifferent.

In the first there is real joy and happiness and eternal salvation.

The second, if we may judge by its proponents, produces the bliss of ignorance and in apologetics the bile of the devil himself. The first exemplified by both JY and SteveR, the 2nd by SteveR .

The third, like socialism, produces an equal sharing of misery with the most fervent doing the dishing out of the misery by the perpetual invention of rules they consider essential to their form of godliness which denies the power of the gospel.

To those who know the Lord in truth and promote #1, may the Lord bless your efforts!

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
Every blessing.

Special high fives to all the brothers and sisters who know me.

Ah well, best get back to unpacking the shopping from the Mall, and then to watching some football with a glass of wine once I've done decorating the Christmas tree.

SF from TX wrote:
Got it. Communist. Unloving. Rude. CAPS LOCK WAS TURNED ON.etc. etc. Out of here. .. This is beyond silly. Um, people disagree and move on. That's life. Yall win. I'm done.

I too have to say wow, and again wow!

No regard for the facts, no regard for the false judgements that were passed on those who were misunderstood, no apology issued to them, but the innocent are the guilty ones, the judgemental ones, the tares no less. And this according to some is righteous judgement?!

The thin skinned who are not even given offense take offense and must be appeased at all costs. The intolerance of the so called "tolerant" is quite staggering!

Well, I too am done with this forum. I said a while ago that it is going to the dogs and this is further proof if any were required. The Romanizers and their sympathisers win the day with their false notions of love where the Bible and truth must always be sacrificed in the name of "Christian charity" no less.

Any wonder the churches are such a mess when we have people like this populating them?

May the Lord have mercy on us all.

To all who know me and love the truth, may the Lord's richest blessings be your portion.

Buckeyes wrote:
(TMC)
@Andrea
P.s. I truly think you misunderstood SF’s and Observer’s posts. SF’s post simply pointed out 2 logical fallacies you made in your post- (Something my own brothers do for me on a regular basis!)
Observer then found it to be ironic for an American to inform a European of some logical mistakes, when the European had just cited stats that Europeans score higher than Americans. He didn’t say the stats were untrue, just ironic. Which in America is considered non-offensive humor!
They say comedy does not translate well, and unfortunatly, I think we’ve stumbled across an example of that.
Hope all is well with everyone, Blessings!

Andrea,Athens Greece wrote:
Observer,why so much pride? It is lower,why do you not do some research.I am amazed at the comeback of my comment.Why such offense? Your own stats prove my point.

And why shouldn't I give a thumbs up to sister SF for her well thought out response?

You are very quick on the judgement trigger - accusing sister SF of being angry (I detected no anger on her part), accusing me of pride, when all I did was have a laugh at the irony, and then attacking sister SF again for teaching people to be rude and sarcastic. Really? Where do you get off making such outlandish accusations? Maybe its a Greek thing? Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps you are being overly sensitive and reading things into people's posts?

Lighten up and get a sense of humor!

Andrea,Athens Greece wrote:
...

The level of education is comparatively lower in the U.S.A to Europe

....

"I have neither time nor inclination for controversy with any, but least of all with the Romanists. And that, both because I cannot trust any of their quotations without consulting every sentence they quote in the originals, and because the originals themselves can very hardly be trusted in any of the points controverted between them and us. I am no stranger to their skill in mending those authors who did not at first speak home to their purpose, as also in purging them from those passages which contradicted their emendations. And as they have not wanted opportunity to do this, so doubtless they have carefully used it with regard to a point that so nearly concerned them as the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome. I am not therefore surprised if the Works of St. Cyprian (as they are called) do strenuously maintain it; but I am that they have not been better corrected, for they still contain passages that absolutely overthrow it. .."

If we take the example of raising a family, we all know that kids have to be allowed to make mistakes to grow. If kids grew up in a family where their every failing was pointed out in big red letters, shouted from the roof tops or they were jumped on from a great height, they are very unlikely to grow up as balanced individuals. A censorious home creates a suffocating environment that can be toxic to the well being of the children and also the parents.

Similarly, we have to have wisdom on how to deal with minor errors among those of the household of faith. Some things are best left alone - they could just be minor slips, unthinking utterancs, pure mistakes. Take into consideration the spiritual age and maturity of the individual and ask should we turn a deaf ear and blind eye to this matter?

If it is a matter that needs to be pointed out, we should also consider, am I the most suitable person to bring it to attention? We have to be honest enough to recognize that sometimes the answer is no and let others step in.

Re: Spurgeon's admiration of Wesley (not Wesley's doctrines) -agree or not

Please consider:

1. For those who have never read Wesley's sermons, I would encourage you to read them. They are easily accessible. You can feel his zeal, his heart alive for God and for lost souls. Doctrinally you might be surprised too. Newton and Venn claimed to have learnt from him!

2. We should realize that Wesley's followers developed his errors and that probably what we're more familiar with is not necessarily what Wesley personally taught. I am not denying one little bit that he did err, as we are no doubt aware of the dispute with Whitfield on election etc

3. Wesley was by no means a perfect man, but then who among us can claim that? I would even say some of his behavior was deplorable (e.g. fraudulently publishing a piece in Toplady's name).

4. The zeal that Wesley demonstrated in his life for the Lord's service and the salvation of souls is second to none. Anyone who has read of his labors cannot but admire the man. We could never accuse him of lukewarmness!

5. Even Whitfield, despite disagreement with Wesley on doctrine, had the highest regard for the man. Read Whitfield's funeral sermon for Wesley.

OOS..but I will stop here.

We should all realize that error, no matter how small, being a departure from truth is evil, whether it is caused by the evil one or by our own limited sinful intellect. Underlying error is an echo of the devil's words in Eden when he said, "Hath God said........?" It undermines the veracity of what God actually teaches and God is very jealous of his self revelation and his truth.

As sister Ladybug has stated, this is a spiritual battle and doctrinal errors lead to grossly disproportionate effects in human behavior. So for instance we should not be surprised that the teaching of Evolution has messed up education, society's moral compass, the field of medicine etc. So in the spiritual realm, error can make us and our views stunted, deformed etc.and seeking the wrong remedies and answers. We may find ourselves not so much on the way to Canaan, but wandering 40 years in the wilderness.

Finally, I will acknowledge that in some small circles known to me the drive for doctrinal purity is divorced from experiential Christianity and that therefore this has led to a kind of spiritual pride in knowing the truth rather than walking in the truth. A cranial Christianity which only loves to discuss the finer points of theology. This too is an error and a shame!

Most churches have some form of brief doctrinal basis consisting of those matters that they think are absolute essentials for church membership. They may even have an extended confession of faith that helps members appreciate the broader perspective they will hopefully grown into.

Even SA has a doctrinal statement that member churches have to subscribe to to be able to broadcast. Although not explicitly required for people on the comments section I would suggest that it is expected that those who post at least realize that SA is Evangelical and Protestant.

What in the NT was viewed as serious? I would suggest at a minimum

1. The person and work of Christ. This means his divine nature, his sinless perfection, death resurrection, ascension and heavenly ministry etc and also the essence of the Gospel - Grace, atonement, penal substitution, faith etc None of this is negotiable. By implication also the doctrine of the Godhead, the trinity and the plan of salvation

2. Any additions or subtraction from the above

7. A deep desire for inward purity (3.3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.)

8. A love of all that God considers righteous (3.10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God)

9. Willingness to spend and be spent for the brethren (3.16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.)

10. Given to prayer (3. 22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him..)

11. DIscerning between truth and error (4.6 ...he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.)

12. Will be strongly against all forms of idolatry (5.21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols)

No matter how much a person may profess to be a Christian, if they do not value the Bible as their sole authority in life, show no teachability, no sensitivity to sin, no desires for holiness, doctrinal purity, separation from all evil, no love of the brethren etc. they are none of Christ's!! Period.

What then are grave errors as opposed to errors which we may consider minor or inconsequential?