Donations for the month of August


We have received a total of $0 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Meta4
Meta4
Canada
Posts: 45
Joined: May 2016
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,666
Posts51,367
Members928
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,489
Tom 3,504
chestnutmare 2,920
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,767
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 20
Pilgrim 19
John_C 6
Meta4 4
Recent Posts
No NRA Members Need Apply
by Pilgrim. Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:55 PM
Joni Eriksson Tada
by Tom. Sat Aug 18, 2018 3:16 PM
Neo-Orthodox
by John_C. Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:06 PM
Atone vs Propitiation
by Pilgrim. Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:06 AM
When reading..
by Pilgrim. Thu Aug 16, 2018 7:59 PM
Calvin and Limited Atonement
by Pilgrim. Thu Aug 16, 2018 7:46 PM
Active Threads | Active Posts | Unanswered Today | Since Yesterday | This Week
Open Forum
Yesterday at 08:55 PM
John,

1. I didn't write the article. grin
2. I personally would never promote nor endorse the NRA "as the barometer for conservatism".
3. The NRA is, however, a strong advocate for the freedoms guaranteed by our founding fathers in regard to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution...AS IT WAS INTENDED.
4. I never vote for any candidate on the basis of one issue. But I do reject every candidate who does not endorse all conservative Constitutional and social issues. For example, if a candidate endorsed a strong Pro-Life position but was anti-Second Amendment, he/she wouldn't get my vote and vice versa.
5. The Left considers the NRA as an arch enemy because they stand upon the Second Amendment... AS IT WAS INTENDED which guarantees every citizen the right to own and bear arms with very few exceptions. The Supreme Court has ruled in like manner in such cases that deal with singling out various types of firearms and/or accessories for them, e.g., the infamous AR-15 rifle (platform), which Justice Scolia made very clear that such a firearm is clearly protected by the Second Amendment, etc., etc. The "progressive Left", aka: Socialist/Communist Left desires to disarm citizens in this country in order to have free reign to implement its Socialist/Communist agenda. Without disarming the populace first, there is little to no possibility they could succeed. This has been the modus operandi in every country throughout the world used by dictators, Communists and Socialists would strip people of their freedoms and control them without fear of opposition.
2 16 Read More
Open Forum
Yesterday at 07:16 PM
There is no doubt words like "gay" have been changed from there original meaning. The word "gay" used to mean "happy". However, although we may not like it, when we hear the word "gay"; most people have no idea of the original meaning of the word.
The English language is a language that has changed over even my own generation, let alone in the past 500 years.
You say that the word "gender" has no meaning in the English language. However that simply is not true, check any English dictionary and you will notice the word "gender" does indeed have meaning and that meaning is determined by the context.
I am 59 years old and until you brought this subject up, I have always understood the word gender to mean male or female.
I would however have a problem with the words "gender neutral".
Bottom line to me is not the language, but the issue itself. I would rather not nitpick things like this.
Tom
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Yesterday at 04:08 PM
I have no problem with your overall assessment about the progressive bent on our major societal institutions in their disdain for anything not promoting their worldview. I'm just not sure by presenting the NRA as the barometer for conservatism, especially a christian worldview is accurate. And, the progressive left makes the same mistake in their identifying the NRA as their arch enemy.

My point in this is that I remember 15-20 years or so, the NRA endorsing an incumbent US Representative who was pro-abortion and big government over a candidate who held to a pro gun position along with a christian worldview. Sure, the incumbent had a good voting record on the 2nd amendment, but was basically in the liberal camp on all other matters. It seems as if the NRA is very much naive in matters such as that.
2 16 Read More
Open Forum
Yesterday at 09:45 AM
Like most people, we understand that educational institutions and staff tend to lean left. The degree and intensity of the bend varies across universities, but a leftward orientation is actually expected today.

We’re aware that some – perhaps even many – academics look upon the NRA and gun owners with disdain. We always hoped this didn’t extend to the individual level, that the disdain was limited to the aggregate, and that personal interactions could be open-minded or – gasp! – even cordial.

The thought that academics would consider NRA members the bottom of the proverbial barrel never occurred to us. We never imagined that more college professors would be comfortable with an avowed communist than with an NRA member. It sounds like a joke, like an appeal to extremes to call attention to the absurd, but that’s precisely what a new study has discovered. A sociology professor at the University of North Texas found that political biases in academia peak with NRA members.

Professor George Yancey wanted to investigate possible hiring discrimination in higher education. He asked professors across the country how their support for a job applicant would change if they knew the applicant was a member of certain groups. Of all the groups Yancey tested, “NRA membership was ranked as the most likely to hurt an aspiring professor’s chances of getting hired.”

NRA membership was more damaging than being a Republican, a Libertarian, a vegetarian, a member of the ACLU, or a member of the Green Party. NRA membership is considered more damaging than being a communist.

Overall, more than two in five professors say a person’s membership in the NRA would “‘damage’ an applicant’s chances of getting hired.” Yancey suspects that, “academics envision individuals in the NRA as being on the far right.” Yancey also found that “meat hunters, evangelicals, and fundamentalists also are less likely to be hired.”

Imagine that. Being an actual, admitted communist – who proudly acknowledges being as far left as left can go – is less harmful to one’s career prospects than being an NRA member.

We’ve heard about high school teachers kicking students out of class for wearing NRA shirts. We’ve heard politicians disparage this association and its membership. But to hear that college professors would rather work with a communist than an NRA member is just sad. We found two takeaways from this: first, an inability to explain one’s adherence to a political and economic ideology with an absolute perfect failure rate probably doesn’t matter in academia and, two, academia is somehow even more out of touch with America than any of us thought.

Remember that the next time “academics” release a “study” on “gun violence.”

SOURCE: NRA-ILA.
2 16 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:33 PM
Originally Posted by Tom
I personally have no problem with the word "gender". Providing of course it is used as "male or female."
The word does not offend me at all and quite frankly making a big deal about a word like this can do more harm that good.

Tom

But Tom, the word gender does not mean male or female, even though modern day liberals have changed its meaning, in the same way they have changed the meaning of other words, such as "gay."

This is the same type of language corruption as using the word "they," or using the phrase "he or she," or "he/she" when referring to an individual, rather than using the proper construct of the single word "he" or the single word "she." And the point of this corruption is once again to mask the sex of the individual, because the liberal/feminist agenda cannot accept any difference between male and female.
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:22 PM
Originally Posted by ReformedDisciple
But what would you say, if, in a remote village somewhere a Christian woman arrives, and the whole village is unreached. Would you say that even to the men, she is not allowed to preach the Gospel? This is not to challenge you in the sense of battle, but a question of inquiry, because, I am still learning the strict doctrines of true biblical history and God.

cheers2

Do you yourself know of such a case? One can come up with any number of "what if" scenarios which sound plausible, yet they are not actually possible unless God brings them to pass. Remember, God is in control of all things. Without an actual case, speculation is fruitless.

God does not change; neither is He a god of "situational ethics." His word stands in all situations, regardless of all the liberal raving to the contrary. Liberals always seem to want to argue (unsuccessfully) around 1 Timothy:

"Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." [1 Tim. 2:11-14 (NKJ)]

Notice that Paul's argument is based on the created order, and upon the resultant consequences. As goldenoldie said, always remember Eden.

But then they most often overlook (or choose to ignore) 1 Corinthians:

"Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church." [1 Cor. 14:34-35 (NKJ)]

And Paul goes on to add that this is God's command:

"If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord." [1 Cor. 14:37 (NKJ)]
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:59 PM
I personally have no problem with the word "gender". Providing of course it is used as "male or female."
The word does not offend me at all and quite frankly making a big deal about a word like this can do more harm that good.

Tom
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:46 PM
The Scriptural command to proclaim the Gospel is for all Christians, not just men.
However, proclaiming the Gospel should not be done by women from the pulpit, or where she is teaching men.
Tom
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:37 PM
Pilgrin
I don't have any doubt that she holds to the the doctrines of Grace. In fact, RC Sptoul was a mentor of hers that was largely responsible for her embracing these doctrines.
You however are correct to point out these other things that no true Reformed Christian should participate in.

Tom
12 79 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:06 PM
It seems as if the term neo-orthodox can refer to many beliefs on viewing Christianity. For instance, Reinhold Niebuhr is said to be a neo-orthodox theologian. Did he completely distance himself from the gospel and biblical teaching? Who are the current day neo-orthodox and have for the most part they have stopped calling themselves as neo-orthodox?
0 10 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:06 PM
Originally Posted by John_C
In discussion Bible translations, I was attempting in making the point on the unreliability of the NIV by stating that the NIV always use the word atone instead of propitiation. In counteracting my use of 'atone/propitiation', not making a statement on the unreliability of the NIV; it was said that the two words are synonyms. I remember hearing quite a while ago that the using propitiation is important in biblical understanding.Is propitiation one of those words that has a different understanding in theology, than it does in general?

Atone/Atonement is an inclusive term which refers to the whole aspect of making one right with God.

There are 4 main aspects and a few minor ones (not to be construed as less important) of atonement:

  • Redemption
  • Reconciliation
  • Sacrifice
  • Propitiation

Propitiation has a two-fold prospective: a) to appease the wrath of one offended, b) the removal of that which has caused the offense. In biblical/theological terms, The Lord Christ paid the penalty for the sins of the elect, thus appeasing the wrath of God and judgment upon them. The Greek noun is hilasterion and the verb is hilaskomi (cf. Rom 3:25; 1Joh 2:2; 4:10)
1 10 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:26 PM
In discussion Bible translations, I was attempting in making the point on the unreliability of the NIV by stating that the NIV always use the word atone instead of propitiation. In counteracting my use of 'atone/propitiation', not making a statement on the unreliability of the NIV; it was said that the two words are synonyms. I remember hearing quite a while ago that the using propitiation is important in biblical understanding.Is propitiation one of those words that has a different understanding in theology, than it does in general?
1 10 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:59 PM
One of the best which we prefer is M'Cheyne's Calendar for Daily Bible Reading. BigThumbUp
1 19 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:46 PM
!. The accusation that Calvin's view of the atonement is contrary to all the Reformed Confessions and Catechisms is flatly false!!

2. This subject has been discussed in detail here over the years and I personally have shown that Calvin held to a universal atonement is false.

3. I have also recommended, among several other things, that one read Calvin and the Calvinists by Paul Helm (Banner of Truth, 1982). Helm takes R.T. Kendall to task on his claim in his book Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649, published in 1981, that later Calvinism was in fact a departure from the theology of the Reformer. In Helm's book he shows that there is an unbroken continuity between Calvin's view of the atonement and other doctrines are the same as the later Reformers and Puritans.

4. One need only to read some of Calvin's sermons and treatises where he wrote on the extent of the atonement to see that he believed in a Limited/Definite Atonement which was iterated at the Synod of Dordt (1618-19).
2 26 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:24 PM
Apologies, Meta, for the ignorance of my wording. Sex IS what I meant, and I was unaware of it's grammatical history/usage.

But what would you say, if, in a remote village somewhere a Christian woman arrives, and the whole village is unreached. Would you say that even to the men, she is not allowed to preach the Gospel? This is not to challenge you in the sense of battle, but a question of inquiry, because, I am still learning the strict doctrines of true biblical history and God.

cheers2
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:59 PM
If I have a commentary or any such help book, what is the preferred method to read? Cover to cover? NT then OT? Especially to one who is still learning the bible and memorizing scripture? I'm asking this question in regards to the bible as well, but it came to me as I was reading a commentary idea
1 19 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:09 PM
Gotcha. Is there a list of bibles and their critiques from a reformed perspective?
7 78 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:22 PM
Well, if that were his actual view, that would be contrary to unconditional election. The beauty of Calvinist Theology is its consistency. If one of those doctrines fail, they all fail. I am sure I'm still too ignorant, as I'm still a reformed baby, to explain in depth enough for it all to sound sensible, but I can say I know it because I have heard this discussion already on The Dividing Line with Dr. James White, I just didn't memorize all that was said ( I wish I had that ability!).
2 26 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 4:49 PM
I was recently told (without proof) by someone that Calvin did not believe in 'Limited Atonement', at least in the way today's "Calvinists" do. That in actuality Calvin believed that the atonement was universal, but the benefits are only for those who repent and believe in Christ alone for salvation.
This person went onto say that Calvin's view is "Authentic Calvinism".
I could say a lot of concerning this view, mainly that it sounds a little like Wesley's view of prevenient Grace; but what I am trying to find out first is if this is an accurate description of what Calvin believed?
Any thoughts would be helpful.
Yes I plan on acting the person for proof.

Tom
2 26 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:06 PM
Originally Posted by Anthony C.
It's solid Tom..... John also brings up some good points....but the 'deep state' is doing very outward evil.... So I think most of it is true.... Throw a little Paul Washer in there and you truly have a complete picture on the hows, the whats and the whys


It IS solid.

And the evil that is being unmasked is incredibly wicked. If Q succeeds, the Lord has given us a reprieve. If Q fails, only His return will be able to overturn it. Let us pray without ceasing.

https://www.neonrevolt.com/
22 1,735 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:49 PM
Amen.

Remember Eden. Always.
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:39 PM
Originally Posted by ReformedDisciple
Well, considering that giving a lecture or speech has nothing to do with leadership, but more with testimony. I would say that having her speak in a motivational or inspirational role is well within the doctrinal "Okay" zone. But I've never heard her speak so I am unaware of the content.


And if she IS teaching, I would think it's alright if she's doing it from an experiential perspective. As in "Hey, let me teach you how to appreciate God/ give God glory/ endure in Christ etc. based on the lot given me by God in life, I'm proof it can be done" sort of way. Or any other point of view in which she uses her disability to inspire, using it as a vessel to spread the gospel message, as all Christians, regardless of gender, are called to do.
Emphasis mine.

It is WRONG. Period. No woman should teach (lead, have authority over) any man any thing. A woman most definitely should teach her sons while they are children--not men.

Second, I take issue with your use of the word gender. There is no such thing as gender. Gender is an English word for something that does not exist in the English language. It refers to words in other languages which are either neuter, masculine, or feminine--not male or female. If you mean sex, then say (write) sex. Sex is the proper word to refer to, well, the sex of an individual. It is not a dirty word, though more often than not it is used in a dirty context.

But the word gender is just another part of the feminist agenda to remove all trace of the Biblical distinction between male and female. The process goes like this:
Equal == same
Same == interchangeable
Interchangeable == women rule the home
== women rule the church
== women rule the municipality/state/country
== women rule the world.
Interchangeable also == same sex relationships.

O My people! Their oppressors are children, And women rule over them. O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray And confuse the direction of your paths. [Is. 3:12 (NASB)]

It is not my intention to single you out at all, I just don't recall seeing that word on this board, in anything that I was replying to. Though it is rampant in the world, Christians should be taught that it is not correct.
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:20 PM
Originally Posted by ReformedDisciple
Okay, what about the RYRI Bible?

I'm going to assume that you mean the "Ryrie Study Bible"? IF that is what you are referring to then I wouldn't have anything to do with it for several reasons, two of which would be:

1. Charles Ryrie is a semi-Pelagian
2. He also holds to quasi-Classic Dispensationalism.
7 78 Read More
Open Forum
Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:16 PM
In addition to Tom's concerns about a woman teaching men, which primarily applies to the organized church and it used to be held that it applied likewise outside the church.

It is doubtful that she holds to Reformed Theology and thus her worldview would influence many things beyond just theological/doctrinal matters. I am sure that she has been of great help to individuals who have suffered debilitating accidents or are disabled from birth, etc. But that isn't the important issue. She is speaking in a Ligonier Ministries conference which was once founded squarely on Reformed Theology, which effects all of life. Here are a few items which cause me no little concern:

Quote
In November 2009, Tada signed an ecumenical statement known as the Manhattan Declaration calling on evangelicals, Catholics and Orthodox Christians to work towards changing laws which permit abortion, and other matters that go against their religious consciences.

She also holds the following degrees:
Bachelor of Letters from Western Maryland College
An honorary Doctor of Humanities from Gordon College
An honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Columbia International University, the first honorary doctorate bestowed in its 75-year history
An honorary Doctor of Divinity from Westminster Theological Seminary
An honorary Doctor of Divinity from Lancaster Bible College
An honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Indiana Wesleyan University
An honorary Doctor of Laws from Biola University
On April 1, 2009, Tada was inducted into the Indiana Wesleyan University Society of World Changers and was presented with an honorary doctorate while speaking at the university.
12 79 Read More
Open Forum
Wed Aug 15, 2018 4:26 PM
Okay, what about the RYRI Bible?
7 78 Read More
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (Pilgrim), 22 guests, and 99 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
reformedbygrace, ReformedDisciple, Micki Bowman, Nigel J, wischnotes
928 Registered Users
Shout Box
August
S M T W T F S
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
BFrenchy
Popular Topics(Views)
790,832 Gospel truth
Page Time: 0.092s Queries: 6 (0.013s) Memory: 2.5493 MB (Peak: 2.8329 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-08-19 00:36:00 UTC