Donations for the month of March


We have received a total of $20 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Featured Member
Registered: Friday, February 27, 2015
Posts: 4
Forum Stats
813 Members
30 Forums
5978 Topics
47558 Posts

Max Online: 41 @ Saturday, June 30, 2012 7:54 AM
Top Posters
Pilgrim 13432
J_Edwards 4843
Tom 3944
Wes 3553
chestnutmare 2555
CovenantInBlood 2375
MarieP 2311
RJ_ 2288
John_C 1937
gotribe 1767
Top Posters (30 Days)
Pilgrim 28
Theodore A.Jones 11
Tim 8
chestnutmare 7
John_C 7
prodigal 4
friendoftruths 3
Robin 2
muchforgiven 1
Tom 1
Recent Posts
God's love
by Pilgrim
08:49 AM
Single meaning of a text but many (endless?) number of applications
by Pilgrim
04:46 PM
Question asked for the Reformed
by prodigal
Sunday, March 1, 2015 2:36 PM
"How are We Complete in Christ" by William Whitaker
by Pilgrim
Sunday, March 1, 2015 5:48 AM
The church calender helps us to be balanced - I disagree
by Pilgrim
Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:15 AM
Current Heaven
by Pilgrim
Tuesday, February 24, 2015 9:23 AM
Yesterday at 09:40 AM Single meaning of a text but many (endless?) number of applications by Johan

What baffles me for quite a long time now is the enormous variety of interpretations or applications that are attached by different preachers to a specific text in Scripture. I experienced it more than once that in many cases sermons on the same text might have completely differing applications; I mean really 180 degrees away from each other. Of course, these sermons were from different pastors.

Recently I came across an article by Robert L Thomas on "The principle of single meaning" in which (for me) he argues convincingly that each text in Scripture has only one meaning. The problem I have is that if the text has only one meaning, how is it possible that there can really be such a variety of valid applications? My "feeling" is that since a text have a single meaning, the application, even for us today, must be closely linked to the meaning and that therefore there simply can't be a multitude of valid applications.

Does the variety of applications/interpretations mean that preachers don't get to the real meaning of the text?

Would like to hear your views on this.

Johan




50 Views · 2 Comments
Sunday, March 1, 2015 5:48 AM "How are We Complete in Christ" by William Whitaker by Pilgrim

Quote:
“But Christ is all, and in all.” Colossians 3:11.

THE great concernment of lost creatures is, above all things, to mind salvation. This is “the one thing needful;” this should be the great inquiry; (Luke 10:42; Acts 16:30;) and in the neglect of this, all our other endeavours are no better than laborious trifles. The great danger which even they are in who seriously mind salvation, is, lest they build upon some sandy foundation, seeking heaven in those ways which lead not thither. The great design of Satan is, either to detain poor undone creatures in a total neglect of salvation, or to deceive them in the way and means thereof. It is therefore the great care of the apostle, as in other scriptures, so in this, not only to undeceive the world as to those mistakes which prevailed then, but to point out the right, the proper, the only sure, way of salvation; namely, through Christ, whom he here declares to be so complete a Saviour, that, as we have “none other,” (Acts 4:12,) so we need none other, because “Christ is all.”

If you have the slightest love for the Lord Christ, this month's article by the Rev. William Whitaker (1548–1595) will surely be of great interest to you. And without question, if you are not in union with the Lord Christ, you surely should take an interest in what the author has written for he makes known all the riches which are in Him of which you are missing out.

In my personal estimation, this is one of those rare pieces of writing that goes straight to the heart and causes a true believer to experience joy unspeakable knowing that they belong to God in Christ.

You can read this article now by clicking HERE.

Or, you can always access this article and all the other Articles of the Month from past years from the main "The Highway" website and clicking on the "Article of the Month" logo.

In His service and grace,

105 Views · 0 Comments
Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:03 AM THE SANCTITY OF TRUTH by chestnutmare

(1) Samuel carried into effect what the Lord asked him to say and do. ‘And Samuel did that which the Lord spake, and came to Beth-lehem. And the elders of the city came to meet him trembling, and said, Comest thou peaceably? And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice’ (I Samuel ’16: 4, 5).

Hence Samuel was authorized to say nothing more than what he actually did say and perform. He did not speak what was contrary to fact. There was no untruth in what the Lord authorized. If it is objected that this is a fine-spun distinction akin to sophistry and quibbling, we must take note that these are precisely the facts which the Scripture itself is meticulously, almost repetitiously, careful to set before us.

It is an indisputable fact that what Samuel was told to say was strictly in accord with the facts which followed and there is surely purpose in the explicitness of the narrative to this effect. We are compelled to take account of the agreement between statement and fact. It is looseness to ignore this consideration.

(2) This incident makes clear that it is proper under certain circumstances to conceal or withhold part of the truth.
Saul had no right to know the whole purpose of Samuel’s mission to Jesse nor was Samuel under obligation to disclose it. Concealment was not lying.

(3) This instance gives us no warrant whatsoever for maintaining that in concealing the truth we may affirm untruth. It is the eloquent lesson of this incident, borne out by the plain facts referred to above, that what was affirmed was itself strictly true.
This passage is perhaps unique in the Scripture because there is the explicit authorization of the Lord as to the method of concealment. It is just for that reason that the precise conditions are to be observed; there is no untruth involved.

It is necessary to guard jealously the distinction between partial truth and untruth.
If we are not hospitable to this distinction it may well be that we are not sensitive to the ethic of Scripture and the demands of truth. After all, this is not a fine distinction; it is a rather broad distinction.

But if we wish to call it a fine distinction, we must remember that the biblical ethic is built upon fuse distinctions.
At the point of divergence the difference between right and wrong, between truth and falsehood, is not a chasm but a razor’s edge. And if we do not appreciate this fact then certainly we are not sensitive to the biblical ethic.10
10 Jeremiah 38:24-28 is similar to I Samuel 16:1-5 and need not be dealt with.

~ John Murray

38 Views · 0 Comments
Saturday, February 28, 2015 9:19 AM Providence by chestnutmare

"…the knowledge of a general and universal Providence is vague and confused, unless we hold, at the same time, the belief, and indulge the contemplation, that God covers under the wings of His care each single one of His creatures. To teach us this glorious lesson was the object of Christ when He said, "That not a sparrow that is sold for half a farthing falls to the ground without the heavenly Father's knowledge" (Matt. x. 29). In considering this special Providence of God, however, by which He secretly broods over the care of each individual creature as the work of His hands, it will be necessary that we take a sacred view of the certain degrees and distinct peculiarities which it divinely embraces.
As man is the noblest work of God, for whose "good" all things were created which the heavens and the earth contain, the Scripture sets forth the Providence of God as concerned principally in the care and government of the human race. Paul, in explanation of that passage, "Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn," observes, "Doth God take care of oxen?" implying that the providential care of God does not rest on them in particular as its peculiar sphere of action, but is more especially employed in the care of men. In this respect, as the course of the Divine Providence lies in the dealings of God with men as beings endowed with reason, its conduct assumes a surer light and a brighter glory. For marvellous are the judgments of God; at one time, in punishing the wicked; at another, in teaching the faithful patience and crucifying their flesh; at another, in purging out the wickednesses of the world; at another, in awakening the sleep and sloth of many; at another, in breaking down the arrogance of the proud; at another, in making the wisdom of the wise a laughing-stock; at another, in destroying the machinations of the malicious. On the other hand, the surpassing goodness of God is brightly displayed in succouring the distressed, in protecting and defending the cause of the innocent, and in coming to the assistance of those who are in despair of all help. The 107th Psalm contains a beautiful and glorious description of the conduct of the Providence of God, which is manifested towards men. In that Psalm the prophet shows that those vicissitudes, which men generally consider violent floods of change, are not waves of trouble, rolling over men with blind impetuosity, as it were, but bright glasses wherein to behold the goodness, the wrath, or the justice of God! And at the close of this blessed Psalm, the penman of it draws the concluding inference that if the godly and the "wise" would duly "observe" these various changes in the world, they would gain understanding in the ways of God, and would find abundant cause for rejoicing. While the Psalmist also implies that the same contemplation, if exercised by the wicked, would stop their mouths, by giving them an awe-striking sight of the wonderful works of God!" ~ John Calvin

33 Views · 0 Comments
Friday, February 27, 2015 10:11 PM God's love by Tim

Can we speak about God's benevolence as love (agape) even when shown to the reprobate? Obviously, this would have to be distinguished from the saving love that He has for His elect. Personally, I would answer "yes" to the question. Thoughts?

444 Views · 16 Comments
Who's Online
0 registered (), 13 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Thomas Bruce, prodigal, Tim, C.N. Croom, gralan
813 Registered Users
Shout Box

March
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
Is man required to "choose" in order to be saved? 556752
...The people miscalled Antinomians ? 421855
Westminster Larger Catechism 407000
Roman Catholicism and salvation 306662
The importance of going to church 293891
Double predestination 288590
"Christ died in a general way for all."? 259874
Gospel truth 233181
Creation 209270
Continuity in Old and NT 178143