Donations for the month of May


We have received a total of $50 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Featured Member
Registered: Tuesday, January 1, 2002
Posts: 403
Forum Stats
732 Members
34 Forums
5713 Topics
46517 Posts

Max Online: 41 @ Saturday, June 30, 2012 7:54 AM
Top Posters
Pilgrim 13023
J_Edwards 4843
Tom 3698
Wes 3553
CovenantInBlood 2375
MarieP 2311
RJ_ 2240
chestnutmare 2230
John_C 1834
gotribe 1767
Top Posters (30 Days)
Pilgrim 15
chestnutmare 9
Tom 7
John_C 7
Hitch 6
RJ_ 2
Robert B Foster 2
john 1
Cranmer 1
Greg Bowman 1
Recent Posts
A-Millenialism
by Pilgrim
05:02 AM
Permanence view of marriage
by EternallyHis
Monday, May 20, 2013 10:37 AM
We should seek the good of other believers.
by chestnutmare
Monday, May 20, 2013 5:11 AM
Framework Theory?
by Pilgrim
Sunday, May 19, 2013 5:57 AM
Psalm 100
by Hitch
Saturday, May 18, 2013 11:41 PM
The Fiscal Cliff Crisis and the Catholic Socialist Offensive
by John_C
Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:06 AM
Yesterday at 11:58 PM A-Millenialism by Tom

When it comes to eschatology I hold to an a-millennial understanding of the subject.
I have found that this is not necessarily always popular even among those who hold to TULIP.
In fact one person that I usually agree with when it comes to Scripture said to me (quite forceful I might add).
Quote:
Those who are A-mil in their eschatology are not consistent.
While most (and rightly so) hold to 6/24 hour days of creation; they do not use the same hermeneutic when it come to their eschatology.


Now I understand that in reality Dispensationalists such as this person, in reality are not as consistent as they claim to be and don't hold a wooden literal understanding of eschatology.
However, I was wondering if there is a way to show this to someone without going into a lot of detail?
I have found that usually I am most successful in getting my points across when I am able to get their attention first. After that, they seem to be more open to what I have say.

Anyone have an idea that might be effective for that particular purpose?

Tom


8 Views · 1 Comments
Saturday, May 18, 2013 11:41 PM Psalm 100 by Hitch

Psalm 100 Boy is Adorable


Sorry I couldnt get this one to ;link; but its worth the copy&paste

37 Views · 0 Comments
Friday, May 17, 2013 7:00 AM Framework Theory? by John_C

(Is it a theory or what?)

How does the Framework theory work out? A friend has been reading Kline and said Kline makes some good points. My friend is in no way trying to make nice with evolution.

91 Views · 1 Comments
Wednesday, May 15, 2013 6:25 PM Why must there be persecution? by chestnutmare

2. There will be persecutions in regard of the enemies of the church.

These vultures prey upon God's doves.

The church has two sorts of enemies.

Open enemies. The wicked hate the godly. There is 'enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent' (Genesis 3:15). As in nature there is an antipathy between the elephant and the dragon; and as vultures have an antipathy against sweet smells; so in the wicked there is an antipathy against the people of God. They hate the sweet perfumes of their graces. It is true the saints have their infirmities—but the wicked do not hate them for these—but for their holiness, and from this hatred arises open violence. The thief hates the light, therefore would blow it out.

Secret enemies, who pretend friendship but secretly raise persecutions against the godly. Such are hypocrites and heretics. Paul calls them 'false brethren' (2 Corinthians 11:26). The church complains that her own sons had vexed her (Canticles 1:6). That is, those who had been bred up in her bosom and pretended religion and sympathy, these false friends vexed her. The church's enemies are those 'of her own house'. Such as are open pretenders, but secret opposers of the faith, are ever worst.

They are the vilest and basest of men, who hang forth Christ's colors—yet fight against him.

—Thomas Watson, The Beatitudes

235 Views · 5 Comments
Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:02 AM Slander by chestnutmare

"He that slandereth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his companion, nor raiseth up a calumnious report against his neighbor."Psalm 15:3

David, after having briefly set forth the virtues with which all who desire to have a place in the Church ought to be endued, now enumerates certain vices from which they ought to be free. In the first place, he tells them that they must not be slanderers or detractors; secondly, that they must restrain themselves from doing any thing mischievous and injurious to their neighbors; and, thirdly, that they must not aid in giving currency to calumnies and false reports. Other vices, from which the righteous are free, we shall meet with as we proceed. David, then, sets down calumny and detraction as the first point of injustice by which our neighbors are injured. If a good name is a treasure, more precious than all the riches of the world, (Proverbs 22:1,) no greater injury can be inflicted upon men than to wound their reputation. It is not, however, every injurious word which is here condemned; but the disease and lust of detraction, which stirs up malicious persons to spread abroad calumnies. At the same time, it cannot be doubted that the design of the Holy Spirit is to condemn all false and wicked accusations. In the clause which immediately follows, the doctrine that the children of God ought to be far removed from all injustice, is stated more generally: Nor doeth evil to his companion. By the words companion and neighbor, the Psalmist means not only those with whom we enjoy familiar intercourse, and live on terms of intimate friendship, but all men, to whom we are bound by the ties of humanity and a common nature. He employs these terms to show more clearly the odiousness of what he condemns, and that the saints may have the greater abhorrence of all wrong dealing, since every man who hurts his neighbor violates the fundamental law of human society. With respect to the meaning of the last clause, interpreters are not agreed. Some take the phrase, to raise up a calumnious report, for to invent, because malicious persons raise up calumnies from nothing; and thus it would be a repetition of the statement contained in the first clause of the verse, namely, that good men should not allow themselves to indulge in detraction. But I think there is also here rebuked the vice of undue credulity, which, when any evil reports are spread against our neighbors, leads us either eagerly to listen to them, or at least to receive them without sufficient reason; whereas we ought rather to use all means to suppress and trample them under foot. [295] When any one is the bearer of invented falsehoods, those who reject them leave them, as it were, to fall to the ground; while, on the contrary, those who propagate and publish them from one person to another are, by an expressive form of speech, said to raise them up. —Calvin, Psalms commentary

112 Views · 0 Comments
Who's Online
0 registered (), 0 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
What, Mckinley, MrsG, TexasCowboy, BpDavid
732 Registered Users
Shout Box

May
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
(Views)Popular Topics
Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine 227857
The importance of going to church 163655
...The people miscalled Antinomians ? 115453
Westminster Larger Catechism 105908
Is man required to "choose" in order to be saved? 79510
"Christ died in a general way for all."? 79274
Double predestination 73182
Roman Catholicism and salvation 68479
Gospel truth 67753
Creation 61979