Liza J wrote: Thanks so much for your reply...Most helpful.
Study the 'reformed' posters on this forum and you will see their flawed hermeneutic at work in all their posts. You will also notice that they cannot answer any questions directly from the Bible. They have to twist scripture, quote proof texts and quote their favorite authors because they cannot make a case for their presuppositions. Also note the sarcarsm, contempt and hate that seeps into their posts. Very educational.
Liza J wrote: ...sounds like Romanism to us,which we (by Gods Grace were delivered from) Explains a lot..
Liza, the reformed never reformed far enough. They carried a great deal of baggage from the RCC from whence they came. The RCC and 'reformed' have always persecuted Baptists, and it will always be the same.
Their basic approach to the Bible is that there is no difference between the OT and NT, between the old and new covenants.
So just as the OT nation was a mixture of believers and unbelievers they assume that the NT church will be the same. Just as babies were circumcised so they assume babies should be baptized. The Abrahamic covenant to them is the Covt of Grace which guarantees salvation to them and their kids. They believe they stand in Abraham's place! Just as the OT nation had a hierarchical leadership structure, so they assume the NT church will also have a hierarchical structure. Just as the OT nation was a theocracy and church and state were the same, so they assume we should still have 'Christian' nations where church and state are the same. Just as heretics were killed in the OT, they think it should be the same in the NT. They don't look for NT proof of any of this. They just assume it carried over from the OT to the NT.
SteveR wrote: See how Biblically illiterate you are? yada yada...even the most secular here revile you
Ooooer. Look who's upset.
OK so I posted a little carelessly. But you still can't show anyone here that OT believers were ever called Christians, because in reality YOU are a complete ignoramus.
And BTW what happened to your contention that OT believers were not born again? Pretty stupid statement, even for an evil hateful little secular troll like you.
Liza J. wrote: My husband and myself have noticed that in some of the reformed denominations when the subject of born again or from above is discussed that some have a disdain or a snide comment concerning Baptists. Perhaps someone could enlighten?
Because they have grace infused into them at their baby baptism and matters like repentance, faith and being born again are not for such blue blooded royals who have a part in the covenant of grace which guarantees their salvation.
Salvation by repentance, faith and being born again is a lowly way of salvation reserved only for us poor ignorant baptists.
R. K. Borill wrote: GSTexas writes: And wheres the verse that referrs to John the Baptist orOld Testament saints as Christians? Hebrews 11:13 KJV  These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them , and embraced them , and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. . . . Hebrews 11:26 KJV  Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
GSTexas wrote: And wheres the verse that referrs to John the Baptist orOld Testament saints as Christians?
The Bible and SteveR are mutually exclusive. He reads with his eyes shut (pious posture!) and his mind turned off (being a good Roman Catholic devotee believing that ignorance is the mother of devotion). And to display his piety, like any good Roman Catholic, he is pretty free with his anathemas.
John UK wrote: He didn't call himself a Christian. Besides, he was born in the OT economy. And are you saying that the OT saints were not born again?
They were circumcised in heart, which is what happens in the new covenant, and this is called 'being born again'. So it would be silly for someone supposedly 'reformed' to affirm that they were saved without being born again. But then again, we are talking about SteveR, so anything is possible!
John Yurich USA wrote: What kind of a stupid way of thinking is that to state that there is only Born Again Christians and not Non Born Again Christians? One who worships Jesus as God but has not embraced Him as their Savior is a Non Born Again Christian.
Where in the Bible do you find Christians who are not born again? I know you are not big on the Bible, but for Christians, it is vital.
Phoebe wrote: To clarify: As far as I am aware it is God not Lisa or Ladybug or anyone else on this site who admits or not to eternal life.
Who has said otherwise?
Phoebe wrote: It is true He knows his own - but He doesn't tell you or Lisa or anyone else who his own are. This you do all by yourselves - to make yourselves seem righteous in your own eyes. Correction: Titus 1:15 reads ....
Actually he said everyone produces fruit and we will know them by their fruit. The fact that you choose to frequent worldly entertainment venues to support productions which knowingly pervert Scripture for the purposes of making money and feel no conscience about it, speaks volumes about the condition of your heart.
We've got used to verse launchers here who use the Scriptures to convey their own personal opinions, as though the Word of God can be so lighty treated with impunity.
What works have you seen here that deny God, are abominable, disobedient etc. I would say that those descriptions more aptly describe your worldly heart!
Do you have your husband's blessing writing all this trash?
SteveR wrote: In case anyone new is in the audience, please dont believe those who intentionally misrepresent my position. Im a Christian in the Reformed tradition that doesnt believe that daily bashing of Christians in the RCC on this message board is an edifying endeavour.
Phoebe wrote: This my anathema (above) I would be afraid of a Creator who can destroy his own temple repeatedly if I were you. The world does not hate you. The world hates Me.
Oh you did a fine job pronouncing anathemas against those who dared to challenge your attitude to frequenting worldly entertainment haunts. There is no reason for the world to hate you when you can join in with them to be entertained.
Phoebe wrote: I thought the point was the hilarity of an insignificant cloister of control freaks and legalists and their outrage over anything other people are doing which you haven't sanctioned first. Evil appears to be whatever you say it is, and is the subject you are most interested in - the evil in others that is. You appear to believe if you say a thing The Creator is obligated to agree with you. I thought the main theme was the subject of evil residing in others and how to condemn it within a purely legalistic framework. You remind me of hyena's. You don't so much offer informed opinions as follow each other into a labyrinth of apoplexy. You seem to view yourselves as authorities on every subject, and think being righteous depends on making others 'unrighteous'. Nasssty little Christianessse. I'm just helping you to understand how you are viewed out there in the world you have nothing to do with.
You were given good reasons why your worldliness was objectionable. For you to come here to pronounce your anathema's from the world's perspective means little to anyone here. We all accepted that when we became Christians that the world would hate us. Friendship of the world seems real important to you!