Douglas Fir wrote: I think it's time for him to shake the dust off his shoes from any trip to UK ... I am always recommending US readers to give up on the UK as a source of any example. UK society, UK Constitution (wait, does it have one?), UK laws, UK population (esp. large percentage of Muslims) are very different from the US.
A remarkable, and generalised, but not completely tenable opinion you sustain.
When the Lord *gives up* a nation or people to themselves, it comes marked, according to Romans 1, by them leaving the proper use of the God-given bond between genders, and this, by no means today, is singular to UK. The present dearth and trend of sin is prevalent all over the West.
Certainly the tide is low in the UK, yet it has a heritage of glorious providences to consider and a peculiar remnant not keen to endorse Mr. F. Graham's ilk for different reasons.
On the other hand, and with no desire to enter into conflict, there is mainly one nation from which soil Hollywood's moral decay has spread globally.
The nations in hell mentioned in Ezequiel 32 come characterised by peculiar prevarications, by which we can judge the existing ones today also.
John UK wrote: Good evening sister. If your question could be phrased: "How do you explain why it is that a believer may resist the Spirit's work of sanctification in him" then I will give a short answer, as I am just turning in. In all men it is the flesh that rebels against the Spirit. Thusly, the unregenerate man can only rebel, because he only has the flesh from which all things proceed; it is his heart. In a believer, he has a new nature, a new heart, and this nature is all good, it is from God not from Adam. But is it not true that his old nature is still present, it still seeks to rebel, it fights against the new management? The war is on, flesh and the Spirit, as Paul explained in Romans 7, and sometimes the believer wins the skirmish and sometimes it is his old nature which wins the skirmish. Apparently, it is this battle which shall rage until death, when at last the old man is permanently put to death, and righteousness shall prevail continuously in heaven. I hope I have got the drift of your question, sister.
John UK wrote: Dr Tim, seeing as Mike has brought this aspect up. Are you equating the Holy Ghost with the Grace of God? Nay, but not so. Men always resist the preaching of God's word; it is in their nature to do so. And they brought about this terrible condition themselves. The sinner is spiritually dead in sins, and is in need of the quickening power of the Holy Ghost. Does the Spirit do this for all men? Nay, not so. So why should not men resist the Spirit, who are before predestined to this condemnation? And what was the Spirit trying to do in them, that it should be called "resisting" Him? Was He trying to turn them around? How powerful (or how weak) is the Spirit? Is anything impossible to Him? If He can raise the dead, can He not save a sinner who is determined against Him? Is His love so weak that He cannot get the sinner to love Him? Did Christ Jesus come into the world to save sinners, or to make a valiant attempt to save sinners? Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He **shall** save His people from their sins. Amen!
How do you explain the resisting to change towards sanctification in the believer's life?
danfromtenn wrote: John UK, I believe your excellent points are not going to bear fruit. I didn't see a direct response to your challenge in post #8 which was very clear and SHOULD make one think. But, as is usually the case with these online debates, direct challenges are sidestepped and the next point in their list is presented instead.
Accurate observation. Conveniently, such fraudulent strategy is the reason why truth seldom advances in these sites.
Moderator Alpha wrote: ... to submit recommendations to the site founder ... send them in an email to info@SermonAudio.com.
Moderator, Having had a non conclusive antecedent of recommendations passed on as you suggest here, these open comments are presented with SA's leadership in mind.
Healthy situations call for boundaries. Even in a day of no internet, Paul dealt with problems involving unruly religious speakers: "there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: *Whose mouths must be stopped* "
No doubt boundaries might not be easy to determine as neither morality or godliness can be legislated, but a new heart, yet our NT mentions the fact of internal bitting and devouring due to unsanctified practice of Christians.
One might find extremely difficult to believe how a site carrying a considerable percentage of biblical preaching developes a situation similar to Stephen's where, as a pack of wolves, a religious audience resists truth with the obvious charateristics of the children of Belial, or the accuser of the brethren.
It would be sad to have to accept that this is our ongoing trend to the detriment of truth and truth bearers of our day.
Moderator Alpha wrote: Thank you for your thoughts. However, please understand that as a moderator it is not mine to create or amend policy but to enforce the policies already published. If you would like to submit recommendations to the site founder, Steven Lee, please send them in an email to info@SermonAudio.com.
Thanks. Understanding the staffing demands of your role however, the reenforcing of the existing policies had been often slow in situ allowing bad practice and disrespect to push boundaries with impunity .
Moderator Alpha wrote: There has been a long standing rule here which I will state again. Keep your comments topical, civil and meaningful. In other words, stay focused on the news item topic and avoid getting wrapped up in critiquing, criticizing, attacking or insulting other posters. This comment board is hosted by SermonAudio and in that regard everything posted here is a reflection on SermonAudio to the entire world. We are under no obligation to continue this comment board if it no longer serves our intended purposes or reflects on us negatively. I trust everyone will bear that in mind and conduct themselves accordingly.
Sorry, with respect, perhaps, sadly, the issue is a reflection to all of the actual state of the church.
When conduct, not necessary doctrine, is the problem privileges need curtailed as it is obvious users cannot handle responsibly such privileges before God and their consciences faithfuly.
For what instead of an open forum a 'closed' forum with tangible accountability would check behaviour weeding tares away.
MS wrote: Greetings BMcC- You have a good day.đź™‚
There is so much blessing robbed and spoiled here due to sin, and unjustice that it rather seem to make the company of the ungodly desirable for a 'good day' humanisticly speaking than here , had we not the good Shepherd guiding the pastures for the souls of his own .
MS If talking of being innocently or unjustly maligned, regretfully you might need to reckon things again. You are adding to distorting truth. There are wrongs on this earth that never will be put right, so that the culprit turns out to come out as the innocent. Nothing new.
US Truth is drawn with fine lines, not with thick painting brushes, other wise pity party distortion and non accurate testimony creap in. Please, abstain from fabricating manggled representations of your personal sense of equity because they contain half lies.
BTW, how many false witness were sufficiently needed to condemn Christ?
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC) I highly suspect that the majority of the misunderstandings and offense between the Brits and us Americans is perception of tone and differences in culture. A very large portion of our language is conveyed by tone and gesture- those canâ€™t be used on this site. To an American, terms like â€śInsolentâ€ť and â€śImpertinentâ€ť are degrading and demeaning, implying that one is at the level of a child who has sassed someone in authority over them. To hear it from oneâ€™s peer produces a rather strong urge to bring them down a peg or two. Perhaps these words are used differently in the UK?
Dictionaries are useful, and cultures may slightly vary, yet the best lexicon to define conduct is Scripture.
Can any run a concordance check to consider the use and meaning of the biblical term froward as in "... the froward man sows strife"?
Conduct measured by Scripture terms can help.
Railing is a sign of perversion of heart also, and as well not pertaining to godliness, so after an admonition or two if persisting in such, we are instructed to brand the individual none repentant engaged in such as one out of the household of God.
Carol wrote: Dear B, McCausland- I agree with many of your excellent points. 1. Where I differ is, I donâ€™t assume everyone I engage with on a Christian forum is regenerate. 2. Iâ€™m afraid that even with believers our carnal nature can overtake us and we act more like the ungodly.(to our shame) 3. Was not my intention to be a flame thrower, just giving an opinion.
Carol, 1. GREAT observation, which is in the back of my mind constantly, as by their fruits we shall know them, but trying to be gracious, one gives the benefit of the doubt constantly, though sometimes with serious misgivings.
2. This is the more tricky one. How can we go on sinning if we are saved without impunity of our consciences? This is a deep dilemma which 1 John 3 does refuse to acknowledge as a mystery.
Carol wrote: As a Christian lady who occasionally posts on this forum I will say that most of the gentleman who are on here as well as my own dear husband, will not abide a women who corrects every little nuance, jot, or tittle. We ladies have that tendency đź™‚ and we do have to keep it in check. Not trying to butt in, just giving my assessment of the situation as it appears to me.
Dear lady, May we be reminded that we are not debating here a different opinion, something we disagree with, or debating a particular issue, but we are dealing about wrongs of Christian conduct in this forum practice.
We are not correcting every nuance, jot, or tittle as you say, but checking that ethics have a minimmum of decency following Christian protocol of what would be biblically commendable.
What kind of men are we breeding to be home and church leaders that cannot practice honourable ethics if not?
Have Christian women to be mocked without impunity because they are women?
Have we to accept sneak bullying/continual contend as sincere Christian fellows speak?
Are wrongs to be perpetuated? Can practice or character be improved? Can they either be challenged or corrected?