Donations for the month of October


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


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 3,542
Joined: April 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,693
Posts51,468
Members929
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,525
Tom 3,542
chestnutmare 2,920
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,771
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 22
Pilgrim 16
Susan 4
John_C 3
Johan 2
grit 1
Recent Posts
ADHD
by Tom. Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:47 AM
Quoting Scripture a Comfort?
by Tom. Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:53 PM
Ever heard of Michael Heiser
by Susan. Thu Oct 11, 2018 7:49 AM
Looking for information
by Tom. Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:51 AM
"ites"
by Johan. Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:50 AM
Guilt or Innocence Does it Matter?
by grit. Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:20 AM
Active Threads | Active Posts | Unanswered Today | Since Yesterday | This Week
Open Forum
10 hours ago
Jump to new posts ADHD [by Tom]
Today during worship service, I sat behind a family whose teenage son (nearly 6’ tall) was disruptive. I could tell his parents were agitated and felt helpless; they even tried to discipline him. During the sermon, their son said loud enough for many to hear “this is so boring!”
After the service, I talked to his dad and told him I was praying for him and his family. He told me his son has ADHD and though it doesn’t excuse him, his mind doesn’t work normal. His dad told me that he appreciates my prayers.
I am assuming his parents are actively seeking solutions for their son and I do not want to make them feel unwelcome in Church. However, his actions made it very hard to concentrate on the sermon.
Does anyone reading this have any knowledge of ADHD and how one might help a family like this?
I am going to be looking to see if there is anything written by Dr. Jay Adams on the subject. But, I thought it might help to make this enquiry on The-Highway.
Thanks
Tom
0 5 Read More
Open Forum
Yesterday at 01:53 AM
I believe the couple who lost the child were professing Christians.
I kept my mouth shut during that conversation, because to do so, would be going against the group.
I am not saying that compassion and prayer should not be offered as well. However, it seems to me anybody with a high view of Scripture, would appreciate Scripture in times of morning and or troubled times.
In fact, it sure was to me is my health crisis.

Tom
2 87 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum
Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:49 AM
Also there was this relevant quote at the end of Phil Johnson's article:
"Righteousness is a much bigger concept than Tom Wright will acknowledge, and herein lies my chief complaint with his approach to theology: he has made righteousness a smaller concept than Scripture does. He makes sin a minor issue. He downplays the idea of atonement. He barely touches on the sinner’s need for forgiveness. He diminishes the doctrine of justification by declaring it a second-order doctrine. What he ends up with is a theology that is destitute of virtually all the lofty concepts that the Protestant Reformation recovered from the barrenness of Medieval theology.

Let me close with an illustration of why I think Tom Wright’s influence poses such a serious danger to sound doctrine. When I was in England last month, there was a great deal of controversy there about a new book titled The Lost Message of Jesus, by Steve Chalke. The Evangelical Alliance held a formal debate to discuss the merits and demerits of that book.

The book contains explicit denunciations of some fundamental doctrines of evangelical Christianity, including the notions of penal substitution and original sin.

Regarding the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement, Chalke writes this: “John’s gospel famously declares, ‘God loved the ... world so much that he gave his only Son’ (John 3:16). How then, have we come to believe that at the cross this God of love suddenly decides to vent His anger and wrath on his own Son?”

Chalke says, “The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse—a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offense he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside of the Church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith. Deeper than that, however, is that such a concept stands in total contradiction to the statement ‘God is love.’ If the cross is a personal act of violence perpetrated by God towards humankind but borne by his Son, then it makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies.”

Every true Christian needs to understand that the kind of atonement Steve Chalke caricatures as “cosmic child abuse” is precisely what the Bible teaches. Christ did bear our guilt, and God did punish Him for it. That—and nothing less—is what the biblical word propitiation means. That’s how God can justify sinners without compromising His own justice, according to Romans 3:26. That is also why the cross was the greatest imaginable display of God’s love to unworthy sinners.

And regarding the doctrine of original sin, Steve Chalke says this: “To see humanity as inherently evil and steeped in original sin instead of inherently made in God’s image and so bathed in original goodness, however hidden it may have become, is a serious mistake. It is this grave error that has dogged the Church in the West for centuries.”

It’s no surprise that Chalke’s book contains endorsements from Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo, the two leading advocates of every postmodern corruption of Christian doctrine.

But it may surprise you to learn that the lead endorsement on the book, at the top of the front cover, is an unqualified endorsement from the bishop of Durham, Tom Wright. Wright says this about Chalke’s book: “Steve Chalke’s new book is rooted in good scholarship, but its clear, punchy style makes it accessible to anyone and everyone. Its message is stark and exciting.”

To true evangelicals, the message of Steve Chalke’s book is anything but exciting. It’s depressing. It leaves sinners without any hope of true redemption. And it utterly corrupts the message of the Bible.

But frankly, if you embrace everything Tom Wright says, that’s what you ultimately will be driven to. There’s no room in the New Perspective—and no real need for—the classic view of the atonement as a vicarious payment of sin’s penalty. The idea of propitiation makes too much of divine wrath; the idea of penal substitution involves the imputation of my guilt to Christ; and the Reformation understanding of justification involves all of those things. Reject the historic principle of sola fide, and you’re left with every evil the Reformation rightly rejected.

I’m not a prophet or the son of a prophet, but I can see which way the wind is blowing. And it’s my conviction that the next great controversy that will arise out of the New Perspective is going to involve an assault on the doctrine of the atonement. Steve Chalke has already put that issue on the table.

That’s why I reject the New Perspective on Paul: because it’s not a new perspective at all, but a recycling and repackaging of several serious errors that have already proved their spiritual bankruptcy. May God raise up men who will take the Word of God and the problem of sin seriously, and refute this error for the heresy I am convinced it is."
4 237 Read More
Open Forum
Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:51 PM
Pilgrim
Thankyou, that confirms that I wasn't being unreasonable in my discussion with him. I have found sometimes it is good to make sure of these things, because we all have our blind spots.

Unfortunately sinse I made that enquiry, I had further dialogue with him. He did not take it very well; he even told me something very telling about himself.
Basically saying that what I said to him is what is wrong with Christianity today and another reason why he would never belong to "organized Church".

Maybe that should not surprise me. Sigh...

Tom
3 287 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum
Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:50 AM
Originally Posted by Pilgrim
Originally Posted by Johan
What about the "Pilgrimites"? smile


there is a remnant of Pilgrims who do even now exist as described in Scripture,

Quote
Hebrews 11:13-16 (ASV) These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things make it manifest that they are seeking after a country of their own. And if indeed they had been mindful of that [country] from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. But now they desire a better [country], that is, a heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God; for he hath prepared for them a city.

I am confident that I have been given the grace and mercy of God and made one of those pilgrims who is seeking with an unshakable hope that 'better country, that is, a heavenly:'. grin



Amen
4 333 Read More
Open Forum
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:20 PM
It's been a while since I posted, so it may be wise to start by affirming my agreement.

I do think it gives us talking points as a nation and then as Christians that merit thorough discussion. In looking around on a few sites that largely reflect liberal Atheist and conservative Christian viewpoints there can be little doubt that liberals oppose Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation sincerely and ardently enough for some to even propose and encourage violence in championing their agenda, and conservatives support Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation sincerely and ardently enough for some to even champion his confirmation were Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations true (though of this “some” sample there's a distinguishing between characterising the alleged behaviour as attempted rape and manslaughter, or viewing them as druken high-school campy horseplay). Those are the extremes. The question then becomes that for folk between those extremes, to what degree ought a SCOTUS nominee's personal and professional histories be determinant of both their worthiness to represent all the people of the nation and to do so with a moral clarity and comportment reflective of national expectation.

What I've heard from liberals is that Judge Kavanaugh is “evil” and evil ought to be eradicated and especially precluded from the SCOTUS – that having this evil on the Court will do irreparable harm to the nation. And, in any case, that Judge Kavanaugh cannot possibly represent them with any degree of fairness or non-partisan justice.

What I've heard from conservatives is more of a mixed bag, but on the guilt/innocence issue those believing Judge Kavanaugh largely claim his innocence establishes his moral worthiness to the Court, and his record in jurisprudence establishes his fairness in representing all the people of our nation.

However, among conservatives there seems also to be a noticeable group of folk giving a heavy ponder to this last part of the hearing and accentuated claims from others earlier regarding Judge Kavanaugh's temperament and seemingly partisan remarks directed to the Democrats. This speaks to what the OP reflects on the linked article.
Quote
Douthat makes the case that it doesn’t really matter whether Judge Brett Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent of the allegations against him. Even if Kavanaugh is innocent, he has been tainted by accusations made against him and on those grounds alone could be unfit to serve on the Supreme Court.


Quote
Even if Kavanaugh is innocent of the charge of a teenage sexual assault… to give such prominence and power to a man credibly accused would both leave an unnecessary taint on his future rulings (especially given his appointment by our Playboy president) and alienate social conservatives from the persuadable Americans, women especially, whose support any pro-life program ultimately requires


It's striking to me just how much the current debacle reflects that of the confirmation of Justice Clarence Thomas to the SCOTUS. While Democrat Sen. And Committee Chairman Joe Biden opposed and voted against Justice Thomas on policy, other Democrats indeed expressed that Justice Thomas would be too tainted by allegations of sexual misconduct to effectively serve on the Court.

I heartily agree that mere allegations ought in no way influence or effect appropriateness to serve or effectiveness of performance. Further, while I would personally be uncomfortable with a drunk or lush or alcoholic on the bench, and equally uncomfortable with someone who may have done something somewhere in high-school or college that was sexually inappropriate, those demographics represent a very large segment of the American people and American culture. To me, inappropriate juvenile behaviour is not and should not be an automatic disqualification, even to the highest court of the land. The “casting stones” wisdom remains, even considering King David's record of adultery, murder, and redemptive restoration. Did King David remain in struggle with the consequences of his repented actions? Yes, he did. Did they remove or disqualify him from service? No, they did not, not with repentance.

I realise too, the angle toward just picking some other unstained nominee out of the bag, but hey, this has become the new normal – delay and destroy the competition by any means necessary. That sort of strategy ought never be rewarded, whether of Democrats or Republicans. We shouldn't as a nation or as Christians be looking for ways to enact treason against our President, even if or when we think it's in our nation's best interests. It's maybe too modern and common a phrase to sink in for some, but, "One nation, under God. with liberty and justice for all" is something to which I think Judge Kavanaugh remains steadfastly committed.

In college we studied Richard Niebuhr's 5 classic Christian Christ-culture options trying to untangle messy debates on living in the world. The thought proposed by Douthat is that in saving a persuadable culture toward Christian value(s) we ought not to needlessly confront them directly with pure contrast and certainly not belligerently in stark prior distance from agreement and acceptability with them. Christ though, calls us to be salt and light, a preserving beacon of hope toward redemption. While it's most certainly true that God came to Earth and tabernacled among us as one of us, it's equally true that He did not compromise nor withdraw His service from being thought either a prude or a fraud. That He was tainted by false allegations thankfully did not dissuade Him from all needed loving service on our behalf. Neither ought such challenge dissuade or disqualify Judge Kavanaugh.
2 291 Read More
Open Forum
Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:12 PM
The person is not actually saying we are to be under the authority of every elder of the universal Church. He is saying we are to be under the authorrity of local Church elders. However, one doesn't need to be a member of that local Church to be under the authority of them.
In other words being under the authority of local elders is biblical, but local Church membership is not.
When pressed about how a local Chirch could actually enforce their authority to a non-member. The person says basically that if the person does not submit they are still subject to local Church discipline. They don't actually say how it could be enforced, they just say it is a matter of the sovereignty of God.
Not sure what he means by that.
One person said to him that he is going against a few thousand years of practice in the Church. He said he does not mind because Martin Luther did it, against the Roman Catholic Church.
I had to laugh about the last part, Luther wasn't actually doing anything that they Church didn't believe before. Augustine, Huss and a few others come to mind.

Tom


4 327 Read More
What's New on The Highway website?
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:28 AM
Quote
A STRONGER INDICATION OF A mind unreconciled to God can hardly be conceived than the unwillingness to receive reproof. The humble man is always thankful for admonition administered in the spirit of meekness and prompted by a sincere desire for the welfare of the offender; while the haughty sinner, whose ways are always right in his own eyes, indignantly rejects it. Hence the reasonable precaution which our Saviour addressed to His disciples: “Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you” (Matthew 7:6).

Theologian and evangelist of great renown, Asahel Nettleton, is the author of this month's Article of the Month. He was greatly admired and respected by Jonathan Edwards and was instrumental in the Second Great Awakening, reported to have brought over 30,000 to Christ.

His article is divided into three parts:
  • First, The Care Which God Has Taken For the Reproof of Offenders—It Is Often Administered.
  • Second, The Effect of This Reproof—He Hardens His Neck.
  • Third, The Consequence of An Incorrigible Disposition—Sudden and Remediless Destruction.

To the text upon which he expounds; Matthew 7:6, he directs his readers to two additional passages, “He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot” (Proverbs 9:7). “Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee; rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee” (Proverbs 9:8).

Thus the reader will assuredly gain some spiritual wisdom in dealing with those around him and perhaps gain some insight into the verity of their own profession of faith. May the Lord bless the reading of Asahel Nettleton's words as they are sound scriptural teaching.

You can go immediately to the article by clicking here: Final Warning
Or, you can read it later at a more convenient time by going to The Highway website and clicking on the "Article of the Month" logo.

In His service and grace,
0 292 Read More
Open Forum
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:05 PM
Pilgrim
You are preaching to the choir here. Azusa is an Arminian institution so their statement is expected. Every single one of us whether gay, straight, whatever, are worthy of hell. It is a wonder that any of us were chosen in Christ before the foundations of the world.
My point was not to use this thread for that particular topic.
My point wasn't even Azuza at all. It was how institutions who claim to be Christian are being forced to make a choice of either compromising to stay in business, or suffer the consequences. This is even affecting our own denominations to various degrees. I am fully aware that God's plans are not being affected at all; in fact this is part of His plan. Yet, I have never seen such depravity in North America in my 59 years; and the ball seems to be rolling faster and faster in that general direction.

The only reason why I even brought Azusa back into the conversation is because new information came in that I only thought fair to bring up.
The only value depraved man has is the fact that they have been created in the image of God. We do not need to compromise anything in order to show love to the world; unfortunately there are so called Christians who seem to want the whole LBGT community and other depraved movements to go to hell rather than repent and turn to faith in Christ.
If I am proclaiming the truth of the Gospel to anyone, no matter who they are, I want to proclaim the truth in love, showing them I actually care about them. I do not want me to get in the way; because the only thing good in me is Christ. I did not deserve to get saved.

Tom
10 543 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:19 PM

I just want to thank the Highway and especially Pilgrim, that even though he is a Paedo-Baptist, he does not treat Credo-Baptist almost as if they were unbelievers.
Unfortunately baptism seems to be the hot button on many boards and both sides are equally as guilty.
I was told in no uncertain terms that I am in serious sin because of Credo-Baptism.
I was trying not to be argumentative with the person so I asked them that if a Credo-Baptist baptized their baby when they believed that it was wrong, would they be in sin?
The person basically in a long winded way, said no because they would be in obedience to the truth.
That is when I decided to bow out and I think perhaps I am going to stay away from this particular hot button.

Tom
0 157 Read More
Open Forum
Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:33 AM
1. Re: Lust, regardless for whom or what outside of marriage is sinful. There are tons of men and women too who lust after their opposite sex. And yes, that includes those professing to be Christians and who are even married. The same can be said for other sins which are listed on the second table of the Ten Commandments. In short, I find no biblical evidence to conclude that once a person is genuinely regenerated and converted to Christ that all sin is eradicated in that person. Paul certainly struggled his entire life with the "old man" and calls it a war within himself.

Quote
Romans 7:14-25 (ASV) "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I know not: for not what I would, that do I practise; but what I hate, that I do. But if what I would not, that I do, I consent unto the law that it is good. So now it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth in me. For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me, but to do that which is good [is] not. For the good which I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I practise. But if what I would not, that I do, it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth in me. I find then the law, that, to me who would do good, evil is present. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: but I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then I of myself with the mind, indeed, serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

The apostle John, under the divine influence of the Holy Spirit put it this way:

Quote
1 John 1:5-10 (ASV) "And this is the message which we have heard from him and announce unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

2. Most certainly, if one is given to struggle against a particular sin, a true believer will be humbled and not exalt himself/herself above others knowing the depth and heinous of their own sin. This is NOT to imply that we are to ignore the sins of others and/or condone their sins. Knowing that ALL are conceived in sin and under the power of the Evil One and under the wrath of God and His judgment unless He, by His boundless mercy and grace, regenerates our dead souls and gives us life in Christ. What should be in the front of every Christian's mind when we see the sinful ways of others around us is the old saying, "But for the grace of God, go I."

3. I agree with the writer of the article at nearly every point. Homosexuality in every and any form is sin for it is contrary to nature (what God created and intends to be) for mankind. There is no circumstance where a person can have romantic affections, desires for someone of the same sex and it is not sin. On the contrary, lusting after another person of the opposite sex (heterosexual desire) is not always sinful in and of itself. But again, I must stress that despite the fact that lust, in and of itself, is not sinful, it is sinful in every and any instance outside of marriage and that lust is for one's own spouse.

Quote
Exodus 20:17 (ASV) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.

Matthew 5:27-30 (ASV) "Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery: but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell. And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell."

Proverbs 6:23-25 (ASV) "For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; And reproofs of instruction are the way of life: To keep thee from the evil woman, From the flattery of the foreigner's tongue. Lust not after her beauty in thy heart; Neither let her take thee with her eyelids."

James 1:13-15 (ASV) "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempteth no man: but each man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed. Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin: and the sin, when it is fullgrown, bringeth forth death."
3 452 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum
Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:32 PM
The best incontrovertible resource for what it is going to be in "heaven" is DEATH! grin

FYI, heaven is where the souls of departed Christians reside until the second coming.

The New Earth is where true Christians will spend eternity.
1 320 Read More
Open Forum
Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:10 PM
Pilgrim, thanks
As you know my children are grown and the way things are going I am glad of that.
However, I know many Christian families that this could effect.
Yet there is part of me that believes that as fellow Christians, we might need to stand with them and that may mean being arrested. Perhaps if enough Christian are willing to do this, it might help the matter? Would the government be willing to arrest thousands on a matter like this?
Concerning moving to other countries where this kind of thing is not happening.
We have already had a few large families from our local Church do just that. A few moved to Belize last year; which is a country that will allow Canadians to live. I have been there before, but other than Huderites, Menonites and Roman Catholics, I couldn't find a good Reformed Church. However, I do know a Reformed missionary family there.
Also years ago, a German family moved his family to Canada, because their school system is corrupt and is manditory. Home school is illegal there.
Tom
2 401 Read More
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 27 guests, and 104 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Susan, reformedbygrace, ReformedDisciple, Micki Bowman, Nigel J
929 Registered Users
Shout Box
October
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
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
823,395 Gospel truth
Page Time: 0.037s Queries: 6 (0.003s) Memory: 2.4774 MB (Peak: 2.6804 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-10-15 15:01:58 UTC