Not meaning any sort of creatures, for there are some to be killed for the food and nourishment of men, and others for their safety and preservation; but rational creatures, men, women, and children, any of the human species, of every age, sex, condition, or nation; no man has a right to take away his own life, or the life of another; by this law is forbidden suicide, or self-murder, parricide or murder of parents, homicide or the murder of man; yet killing of men in lawful war, or in defence of a man's self, when his own life is in danger, or the execution of malefactors by the hands or order of the civil magistrate, and killing a man at unawares, without any design, are not to be reckoned breaches of this law; but taking away the life of another through private malice and revenge, and even stabbing of a man's character, and so all things tending to or designed for the taking away of life, and all plots, conspiracies, and contrivances for that purpose, even all sinful anger, undue wrath and envy, rancour of all mind, all malice in thought, word, or deed, are contrary to this precept. [Gill]
The only way I can understand man's inhumanity to man is to believe that all men are servants of either Satan or Jesus Christ; no middle ground, one or the other.
And I know the MO of both the devil and the Lord. Here it is, as explained by the Lord Jesus Christ himself.
The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. (John 10:10 KJV)
I am not dismayed or depressed about these dear folks in North Korea suffering for their Lord. Their God and Saviour will reward them openly for any trouble they have met with along the road to the celestial city; and those rewards will be eternal, while suffering in this life is only temporal.
James Thomas to Frank wrote: Interesting thoughts, but The RC didn't create but only carried on the very same Faith plus works which is The trouble with the RC being the great whore. The prophecies speak to the whoredoms long before the RC was a thought and furthermore, NEVER was God's wife.
I am thinking about what you said, and regret I am unable to debate the subject because I have never studied it particularly. But I would like to ask you a question which, from what you have been saying, ought be very easy to answer, and I am only looking for a simple answer, not a fifteen week Bible study on the whore of Revelation. It concerns:-
And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God: For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the *great whore*, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand. (Revelation 19:1-2 KJV)
The question is, "Who here is the 'great whore' and what is your reason for believing what you believe?"
There has been a plethora of good and edifying points from mature brethren in the like precious faith, presenting the truth of the gospel and the working of the Spirit in the hearts of sinners, symbolised by baptism in water, whereby the sinner dies to his old life and rises up to a new and different life in Christ Jesus, now motivated and led by the Spirit, giving evidence of having been born again and sealed by the Spirit.
In my daily reading today:-
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. (Titus 2:11-14 KJV)
As the text says, one of the main purposes of Christ's oblation is to "redeem us from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people who are zealous of good works".
It is a tremendous work of God in the soul, not attainable in any other way. Faith and good works emerge after regeneration not before.
B. McCausland wrote: 1. Yes, John, our society is not driven by facts. People have been trained not to think, but to 'feel' about matters. All works by afilliation, personal preference / convenience, but not by rational evaluation of truth. Thanks for your input. 2. Such tricks happened most of time in theological debates
Tricks is a very good word for it.
Thank you sister for your encouragement. I have no doubt you could say a whole deal on this subject.
When I'm gone, I would love to be remembered on SA as one of those Christians who would not simply use one or two proof texts, but as one who observed the entire scripture to try to arrive at God's truth on any subject.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: You have even commented negatively about some Calvinist here who think there is no human interaction in salvation.
It is interesting Bro US that when David wished to demolish the Calvinist doctrine of Limited Atonement, he went to verses like "made atonement for all". And when the Calvinist wishes to demolish the Arminist doctrine of universal atonement, they go for a verse like "made atonement for many". Both of them are being deceptive.
However, David was being even more deceptive in saying that John Calvin and Calvinism believes in limited atonement. I have personally shown here many times, and you may remember it, when I quoted from Calvin's commentary, and proved that he actually believed that Christ died as an atonement for the sins of the whole world.
But this doesn't suit David Cloud's argument, so he lies about it, and nobody is any the wiser about his subterfuge, they lap up his (false) teaching, and then spread the same lies themselves. And no-one thinks there is any need to check up on it, so they take it as read. And that makes David a PP.
And yes, some Calvinists also are in grievous error about how God saves a sinner.
No problem Rnel, and thanks for your reply. I wish I had grappled more with the subject in hand, but every time I tried it made my head spin and I could get nowhere with it. I think it's true to say that many brethren and sisters will discover that their interpretation of Revelations was incorrect, even if their salvation was certain and they were truly born again of the Spirit. But which ones are incorrect I do not know. However, if you wish to post any more of your thoughts on the matter, be assured that I will ponder all and see if I can see what you see.
I'll begin by pondering the text you mentioned, Rev 18:24 and take it from there and see where it leads. It will make a good study for me on Sunday. Thanks again.
Dolores wrote: John, I know Jesus was talking about the signs of the end time when he mentioned the fig tree .Like you quoted that in Jesusâ€™s parables the fig tree was symbolic of Israel. The withered fig symbolizes the fruitless, sinful Israel at that time. All I am saying is they will rebuild the temple in which the Antichrist will set himself up in their rebuilt temple as ther Messiah to be worshipped by them. I donâ€™t claim to know all about the end time. Who and when will the Antichrist appear??!! Will there be a rapture or will we have to go through the Great Tribulation?? I donâ€™t know the hour or time but I can look at the signs all around me and see that the fig tree is putting on itâ€™s leaves and Israel just back in her land that was given to her by God is a sign that tells me that in order for the temple to be rebuilt Israel had to be back in her land. If anyone disagrees with me thatâ€™s more than ok. with me because I donâ€™t agree with everything posted on this forum.
It is all perfectly possible, Dolores, just as you say.
It is also possible that the plant withered just because Jesus cursed it.
Tim, I have just been listening to a PP preacher here on SA and the subject is "The Calvinism Debate". The visiting preacher is David Cloud, and it is very clear from the outset that he hates Calvinism and wants to demolish it.
I listened to over half of it, but it was just getting silly and boring. Why do I say that?
David begins by defining Calvinism as Tulip. But he obviously doesn't know that John Calvin never came up with Tulip, that came much later.
Now how do you defeat Calvinism? Just the same as Democrats tried to defeat the Republicans. Dig up as much dirt as you can on the opponent, and spread it before people and say, "Do you want to be involved with this man?" So David does this with John Calvin, and uses half-truths and possible lies also.
Then he says, "I have a right to analyse Calvinism's Tulip and reject the whole thing." However, he forgot to mention that he agrees with the fifth point, making him a one-pointer.
Then he says, "I am not a Calvinist and I am not Arminian." Then he goes on for the whole message to try and prove the doctrines of Arminians.
Dr. Tim wrote: So as I understand it, John, your solution to alleged misrepresentations of Calvinists by IFB preachers is to misrepresent IFB churches. Hmmm...
Tim, you call the misrepresentations of Calvinists by IFB preachers "alleged" whereas you say I misrepresent IFB churches. In other words, you are saying that you are right and I am wrong, but you do not come up with any proof of such. I am supposed to just take your word for it? That is yet another example of PP subterfuge.
Now if you were to say, "Well brother, if you would like to come up with some proof yourself", tell me what sort of proof you would like and I will see what I can do. For example, do you accept David Cloud as a good example of the IFB movement? Is there an IFB conference that you would accept as representative? Or none of the above. I am willing to show you exactly what I mean, and give you proof that IFB men misrepresent the beliefs of the believers who hold to the beautiful doctrines of grace, and in so doing actually seek to dethrone God and remove from him the glory due to his name.
sc wrote: As an aside- I read in the Bible that one is to not remarry another if the spouse which they divorce or have been divorced from is still living. I never hear this preached. Input is welcome. It would seem that the church has been allowing for that which it shouldn't have.
Be encouraged SC, I preach it, and I know it can be heartbreaking for some people who desire forbidden fruit. But far better to obey God and realise that divorce and remarriage is not an option.
So anyway, it is a cause of concern to me that many so-called churches misrepresent the doctrines and overall teaching of those churches which believe the biblical doctrines of free and sovereign grace. It concerns me because the Holy Spirit will be grieved, the church will end up having to do things in the flesh, and eventually that leads to apostasy.
So, what sort of things do these churches say?
They say that Calvinists believe that God forces people to become Christians against their will.
Well, that is a plain lie, and no Calvinist on these threads believes that. It is a nonsense. So why do they say it?
It is for the same reason that Democrat politicians tell lies about Republicans. It is an attempt firstly to bring people over to their side, and prevent those who have already come over from returning. It is an evil technique and I watch with interest the posts every day on this very thing, where people are talking about this. Jim Lincoln is a classic example of this, and is why I never reply to him.
So PP's in the IFB churches poke fun at Calvinists and tell lies about what they believe, in order to keep their converts; not by feeding them from the word, but by making all other churches appear idiots.
Dr. Tim wrote: Okay, now I follow you, John. I donâ€™t think anything of the Elims, as I have never heard of them before now.
Wow. Okay, brief potted history.
"The Azusa Street Revival was a historic revival meeting that took place in Los Angeles, California, and is the origin of the Pentecostal movement. It was led by William J. Seymour, an African American preacher. It began with a meeting on April 9, 1906, and continued until roughly 1915."
PP's in abundance in Azusa Street, don't you know.
Christopher, yes you answered the question mighty fine. And if we had some Elims join us on the forum they would be mighty upset and argue with you from now until the cows come home.
The bottom line is: What is Truth?
I say, especially regarding the salvation of souls, "the Biblical Doctrines of Free and Sovereign Grace" is the truth. And this is where the sparks start to fly, and I get called all sorts of names for my stance. And because the IFB churches all disagree with me, they have to protect their flocks somehow from being influenced, and this is why their PP's are so important to them.
Christopher000 wrote: Hi John, what's an Elim? I just did a search, but came up with everything from oilfield work to software development...ha-ha.
Sorry bro I was out of space and had to make it short. You can choose between the Elim Pentecostals and the Assembly of God Pentecostals.
I ought to say that the IFB churches as a whole do not have fellowship with any other body of believers, seeing as they believe in separation from all apostates. I'm not saying that the Elims are believers, just that the IFB stance is one of separation from all other churches not of their ilk, believing them to be detrimental to their own spiritual life. It's a bit like me saying I stand aloof from all ecumenical churches in the UK, because their purpose in life is to destroy the gospel.
BTW, check out my post 5/11/19 4.41am where I said I would never use that expression again, as it upsets people, but change it to PP (Psychological Preacher).
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Also, while I know what youâ€™re trying to say just for clarification, are you saying there is no emotional response from a sinner under the convicting power of the Holy Spirit?
No, I never said that, bro.
What are PP's all about? I've already mentioned that PP's can be found in any and every denomination or independent church. They can found among politicians, among fundraisers, among global money-grubbers like Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland. They are everywhere. You turn on the TV, they are there, all the time. It's just that hardly a soul notices. They are hoodwinkers, con artists, deceivers. Those friends of mine who believe global warming thing is a myth, are evaluating the proponents and saying that they are PP's who are not basing their message on facts but appealing to the emotions. And it works! Around the world there are now multitudes working for zero carbon emissions and reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The success of such a mission is all down to the psyche of people, not the working of the Holy Ghost, or the revealing of facts. This is what my friends are saying.
Okay, let's talk about the Elims. Chris, Tim, what do you think of the Elims? You go first.
Now when it comes to Christian preachers, Wayfarer, you can see it has nothing to do with Bible versions, nor even denominations. The PP is a technique, pure and simple, and some Christians use that technique every time they preach. And they influence their hearers, and the hearers become just like them. An example of this is J4, who acts on here just like the preachers he listens to. The fact that he parrots their half-truths and lies shows that.
Are there examples of PP's? Sure. Most crusade evangelists are PP's. Ever watched a Billy Graham crusade from start to finish? Did you see the technique which affects emotions, aided and abetted at the end by such hypnotic music as "Just as I am, without one plea" at the call for people to "give their life to Christ" just at the moment when they are tearful and hopeful and all manner of other feelings? Watch any evangelistic film produced by the BGEA and notice the emotional content, designed to produce a result.
We don't need that. What we need as preachers is the Holy Ghost power and anointing, which influences a person not just for one evening in a tent, but the remainder of their life.
I am playing catchup, so will try to answer both Wayfarer Pilgrim and Bro US at the same time. If I leave anything out, please get back to me and ask.
I can see that the expression 'Yee Ha' is a stumbling block for some, so I apologise for using it and I am going to change it to PP, which stands for 'Psychological Preacher'.
A PP has a definite aim in his preaching: to influence the emotions of his hearers and thereby get a good result. (Now good preaching ALWAYS ought to be aimed at the affections, NOT the emotions.)
A PP can be a politician, a fundraiser, an Islamist et al. It is a technique used the world over to influence the emotions, so that you get the result you want. A politician uses PP to get elected. During a meeting, the crowd get whipped up until, without them knowing why, they are standing up and clapping for all they're worth. They might be crying or laughing (emotions) but one thing is for sure, they are right behind the politician, and they believe he is the best ever. But they don't know why, they could not explain it. After all, his whole message consisted of him talking about the opposition and how bad the others are.