"A fragmented Church becomes more fragmented by unsettling what is good and established.
Since the Revised Version of the Bible appeared in 1885, we now have, apparently, over 100 versions of the New Testament in circulation. In other words, once the craze for revision starts, it does not stop. It would be an interesting study on its own as to why that is the case. But it may have something to do with the fact that when the Church is low, a certain kind of desperation can set in and novelty is sought. Nevertheless, when the Church is already weak and fragmented, the innovations produced by some fail to satisfy others, who want different, perhaps more radical measures. Even with Bible translation this is the case. Only where absolutely necessary should settled things be unsettled." (Rev David Silversides)
The Psalms of God used in Praise and worship... A sermon here on S.A. [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=7210515718]]]Why We Should use the Scottish Psalter.[/URL]
"1] We have time enough for ourselves in those six days, on the seventh day let us serve God; and time enough to tire ourselves, on the seventh it will be a kindness to us to be obliged to rest.  This is God's day: it is the sabbath of the Lord thy God, not only instituted by him, but consecrated to him. It is sacrilege to alienate it; the sanctification of it is a debt.  It is designed for a memorial of the creation of the world, and therefore to be observed to the glory of the Creator, as an engagement upon ourselves to serve him and an encouragement to us to trust in him who made heaven and earth.  God has given us an example of rest, after six days' work: he rested the seventh day, took a complacency in himself, and rejoiced in the work of his hand, to teach us, on that day, to take a complacency in him, and to give him the glory of his works, Ps. 92:4. The sabbath began in the finishing of the work of creation, so will the everlasting sabbath in the finishing of the work of providence and redemption.  He has himself blessed the sabbath day and sanctified it. He has put an honour upon it by setting it apart for himself; it is the holy of the Lord and honourable: and he has put blessings into it....(M.Henry)
John UK wrote: Ah, so Colossians 2:16 has nothing to do with the 4th commandment, this is what you're saying is it? So I should not attend either, eh?
"Exodus 20:8. Remember the Sabbath-day. The object of this Commandment is that believers should exercise themselves in the worship of God; for we know how prone men are to fall into indifference, unless they have some props to lean on or some stimulants to arouse them in maintaining their care and zeal for religion" (J. Calvin)
Sabbath for WORSHIP of God. I give one day to God expressly for the worship of God. I see nothing in Col 2:16 which contradicts this commandment.
Col 2:16... "In respect of a festival-day. Some understand [to me rov] to mean participation. Chrysostom, accordingly, thinks that he used the term part, because they did not observe all festival days, nor did they even keep holidays strictly, in accordance with the appointment of the law. This, however, is but a poor interpretation. Consider whether it may not be taken to mean separation, for those that make a distinction of days, separate, as it were, one from another. Such a mode of partition was suitable for the Jews, that they might celebrate religiously the days that were appointed, by separating them from others. Among Christians, however, such a division has ceased.
But some one will say, "We still keep up some observance of days." I answer, that we do not by any means observe days, as though there were any sacredness in holidays, or as though it were not lawful to labor upon them, but that respect is paid to government and order -- not to days. And this is what he immediately adds." (Calvin)
As for your point re attending the festival. I view Sunday through the 4th Commandment, therefore could not join you at this festival on the Sabbath.
"Col 2:16. Let no one therefore judge you. What he had previously said of circumcision he now extends to the difference of meats and days. For circumcision was the first introduction to the observance of the law other things followed afterwards. To judge means here, to hold one to be guilty of a crime, or to impose a scruple of conscience, so that we are no longer free. He says, therefore, that it is not in the power of men to make us subject to the observance of rites which Christ has by his death abolished, and exempts us from their yoke, that we may not allow ourselves to be fettered by the laws which they have imposed. He tacitly, however, places Christ in contrast with all mankind, lest any one should extol himself so daringly as to attempt to take away what he has given him.
In respect of a festival-day. Some understand to me rov to mean participation. Chrysostom, accordingly, thinks that he used the term part, because they did not observe all festival days, nor did they even keep holidays strictly, in accordance with the appointment of the law. This, however, is but a poor interpretation. Consider whether it may not be taken to mean separation, for those that make a distinction of days" (Calvin)
John UK wrote: Geneva notes: Col 2:16 (15) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: (15) The conclusion: in which also he means certain types, as the difference of days, and meats, and proves by a new argument, that we are not bound to them: that is, because those things were shadows of Christ to come, but now we possess him who was exhibited to us. Does anyone know the interpretation of these notes? I'm not quite sure what they mean.
Hey ye ole sassenach; If you want to know the meaning of the Geneva Bible notes - Why not ask Mr. Geneva himself.
Barry Watson wrote: John UK I'd like to talk with you, but your not into it it seems.. This started out on Tiger Woods, but you prefer to mouth your nothings and try to draw people to your feelings.. The more one listens to you the farther into apostacy one falls.. You maybe should listen to Jim Lincoln .. least he points to a pastor Gill Rugh who does have a apointed mouth to preach.. You could really improve your mouth, by listening.. Take care John UK..
Barry You are displaying arrogance and judgmentalism in your posts. John has many friends on the site and we know him NOT to be as you have described. Perhaps not "knowing" him is why you seem to have gone off on a tangent in these recent posts, here today. But that is no reason to judge him thus! If you are reaching to us as potential customers then I fear your posts are not exactly welcoming today. BTW apostasy is with an "S" not a "C"
Mike wrote: If God is sovereign in the manner some say, nothing is outside his "work." If we believe he is in sovereign control of all events, we have to conclude that doing nothing is an active, not a passive choice. Take it back to the beginning, where the choice was made that an unrepentant sinner be created in the first place. Is it not then that God actively chose him for damnation, in the very act of creating him and predestinating him to remain unsaved? Allowing him to remain unsaved today was an active choice made before his birth. Of course, that is if we are to believe this sort of thing of God. I think those who say God "passes by" some, leaving them unsaved, do not trace what they believe back far enough to see the error in their position.
What are you doing up this early in New York???
Good morning to you. Good Afternoon here.
BTW you forgot that God is omniscient and omnipotent in the lives of His creatures.
Mike wrote: So Banner is wrong when he said Calvin didn't comment on Revelation because "he was honest enough to say he did not understand it." Was Banner just being a free-will liberal with the facts?
Aaahh Mike; Me darlin boyo! There is a wee bit o' difference betwixt the Institutes and the commentaries.
But nonetheless you should have a good read of both.