Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of $140 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
NH, USA
Posts: 13,309
Joined: April 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,547
Posts50,757
Members921
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,309
Tom 3,319
chestnutmare 2,866
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,748
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 23
Pilgrim 17
Recent Posts
Glorious Bach
by goldenoldie. Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:46 AM
Christmas
by chestnutmare. Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:13 PM
Nothing New Under the Sun?
by PerpetualLearner. Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:25 PM
Sexual harrassment fraud
by PerpetualLearner. Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:09 AM
Christian Leaders Behaving Badly
by Anthony C.. Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:41 PM
Israel
by Pilgrim. Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:21 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#6915 - Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:18 PM Re: The Wills of God  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


The Calvinist view as I am assimilating it is that man, after the fall, has no freedom what so ever to choose good apart from those upon whom Christ acts. As you put it, "only free to choose damnation". That is all the choices available to man are equally wrong in God's sight. Clearly that is not the freedom we are talking about. It might be a rather large prison but still a prison. <br><br>The freedom we are talking about is the freedom to choose to serve God by doing what is good in His eyes or rebel. For Adam, He was not free if the freedom he had was only to choose from this tree or that tree when all trees are equally acceptable to God for him to eat from. Adam, when placed in the Garden had no freedom to rebel, only to serve God, until God put in the Garden with Adam The Tree and SAID, DO NOT EAT FROM IT. The command is what gave Adam freedom. Now he has a choice. He can obey God or rebel. With out that command, it was impossible for Him to sin. <br><br>With out that option he was a prisoner in the Garden of God. There was no way out. <br><br>Now man is out side of the Garden. If there is no way for man to get back inside the Garden or more specifically back into the will of God or even more specifically back into fellowship with God, he is not free to choose not to sin. God has never left man with out the means to come back to Him. He found Adam and called him back. Adam responded and took from God the clothing he needed. <br><br>[color:blue]So the question I am asking here is if God was not able or willing to so act on Adam to keep him from rebelling, how is He going to keep the elect from continuing in that rebellion? Obviously your salvation has in no way hindered your ability to sin and for most people only slightly suppresses it. In what manner or at what point is God going to insure that you will never sin again? If he didn't do it for Adam, how is He going to do it for you unless it is to take away your freedom to choose to rebel in which case you become His prisoner, a wife with no choice at the alter but to go through with it?

#6916 - Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:08 PM Re: The Wills of God  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


<blockquote>[color:green]For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.</font color=green> Galatians 5:1 (ESV)</blockquote>But only Christians are set free. Before we are Christians, we are in that [color:green]"yoke of slavery"</font color=green> that Paul is telling us to not go back to. Before salvation, we are in forced labor to Satan and there is no way out. But we were born into that and so we know no other way of life. We just stay in that bondage because it is what we are naturally accustomed to. But then, Christ sets the Christians free. And it was for freedom that we were set free. Not everyone is set free. Some are left in their sin so as to show the justice of God and the love of God.

#6917 - Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:21 PM Re: The Wills of God  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]God has never left man with out the means to come back to Him. He found Adam and called him back. Adam responded and took from God the clothing he needed. </font><hr></blockquote><p> Really? Adam responded by HIDING and not repenting until he was clothed upon—note the text DOEST NOT say Adam took the clothing and clothed himself, but rather that God clothed Adam and Eve:<br><br><blockquote>Gen 3: 21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and [color:red]clothed</font color=red> them.</blockquote> The term here used for [color:red]clothed</font color=red> (labesh) is indeed a great word study within itself. It means to ‘be” clothed upon, be arrayed, or to be armed. It is in the imperfect tense and thus it has symbolic meaning for us. The imperfect expresses an action, process or condition which is incomplete, and it has a wide range of meaning: (1) It is used to describe a single (as opposed to a repeated) action in the past; (2) it differs from the perfect in being more vivid and pictorial (3) The perfect expresses the “fact”, the imperfect adds colour and movement by suggesting the “process” preliminary to its completion. Thus, here in Genesis, if compared to the rest of Scripture, we may see a salvation born and a sanctification which continues. <br><br>PLEASE NOTE: (1) it is an action upon Adam directly by God (2) it is an action that happens ONLY once, as opposed to being repeated—a person is not lost one second and then saved the next, and then lost again and then saved again as Arminians assume.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] So the question I am asking here is if God was not able or willing to so act on Adam to keep him from rebelling, how is He going to keep the elect from continuing in that rebellion? </font><hr></blockquote><p> It is very unusual that you would think that God is UNABLE to act to keep Adam from rebelling—this reveals that you do not really believe in the sovereignty of God. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] Obviously your salvation has in no way hindered your ability to sin and for most people only slightly suppresses it.</font><hr></blockquote><p> Though a Christian may sin, it does not condemn him because he has an advocate with the father (read 1 John 1:9).<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]In what manner or at what point is God going to insure that you will never sin again? </font><hr></blockquote><p> It is called glorification.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]If he didn't do it for Adam, how is He going to do it for you unless it is to take away your freedom to choose to rebel in which case you become His prisoner, a wife with no choice at the alter but to go through with it?</font><hr></blockquote><p> I would rather be a prisoner of Christ then a slave to Satan. What you have failed to realize is that the second man Adam—Jesus, accomplished that which the first man Adam failed. Our righteousness is in that of Christ alone and not in that of the 1st man Adam. I have attached a teaching chart and brief outline that may assist you in clarifying some of these issues. Enjoy!

Attached Files-Click on Image to view full size.

Reformed and Always Reforming,
#6918 - Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:17 AM Re: The Wills of God [Re: J_Edwards]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


This is a good response Joe. Thanks. I really have a lot of things I would like to say about this odyssey into Calvinism. I never dreamed there were such huge differences. It is a little embarrassing in fact. I better just stick to this response. It’s going to be much longer than I like anyway.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Really? Adam responded by HIDING and not repenting until he was clothed upon—note the text DOEST NOT say Adam took the clothing and clothed himself, but rather that God clothed Adam and Eve:<br><br>Gen 3: 21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.<br>The term here used for clothed (labesh) is indeed a great word study within itself. It means to ‘be” clothed upon, be arrayed, or to be armed. It is in the imperfect tense and thus it has symbolic meaning for us. The imperfect expresses an action, process or condition which is incomplete, and it has a wide range of meaning: (1) It is used to describe a single (as opposed to a repeated) action in the past; (2) it differs from the perfect in being more vivid and pictorial (3) The perfect expresses the “fact”, the imperfect adds colour and movement by suggesting the “process” preliminary to its completion. Thus, here in Genesis, if compared to the rest of Scripture, we may see a salvation born and a sanctification which continues. </font><hr></blockquote><p>Most of this I emphatically agree with. Adam’s first response was to hide. He did not run out to meet God and cast him self down begging forgiveness. Your definition and explanation of clothed is very good. It was truly a Divine and sovereign action taken by upon Adam of which he had no participation in whatsoever. This stands in stark contrast to his previous attempts to cloth himself with leaves. The symbolism is relevant to us today as well. Adam and Eve had sinned and they were utterly powerless to change anything about the condition into which they had fallen. They were just as dead as the worst sinner ever was.<br><br>There is one thing I disagree on. (Wouldn’t you know it?) The sequence of events as you see them is different from the way I see them. You said he didn’t repent until after he was clothed, though there is nothing in the text to indicate that.<br><br>Let’s see if we can tell when he actually was restored to fellowship with the Creator. I will quote the passage to get the [color:red]flavor</font color=red> of it, for those who like puns.<br><br><blockquote>Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? <br>Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. <br>Gen 3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? <br>Gen 3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. <br>Gen 3:13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. </blockquote><br><br>They are scared, they are naked (except for leaves) before God their creator. They are dead. BUT they both confess in turn “I DID EAT”. That was a statement from there dead, sin filled conscience that they were guilty before God and worthy of death. The very next sentence from the mouth of God was the promise of redemption from the seed of the woman.<br><br>It was the confession that was required of them to open the door of restoration and the promise of life. It is very important to understand about this -- there was nothing meritorious about Adam’s confession. It didn’t change any of the facts, he was still every bit as guilty. There is nothing to boast about. It is just the condition that God puts on man that must [b]precede salvation. (Romans 10:10) Dead men can’t do anything to bring themselves back to life, but spiritually dead men can confess their sin before God and only then receive the pardon.<br><br>Just like the Pharisees in John 9 we talked about earlier. If there is no confession of guilt the sin remains. <br><br>I will post the rest tomorrow, hopefully. It is too long.

#6919 - Sat Nov 01, 2003 7:02 AM Re: The Wills of God  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I'm sorry for interjecting here, Costello, with your conversation with Joe, but I just wanted to add something.<br><br>The confession you speak of in Romans 10:10 is not confessing your sins:<br><br><blockquote>Romans 10:8-10 "But what does it say? 'The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart'--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resluting in salvation."</blockquote><br><br>1 John 1:9 would have been more appropriate for your point, but I know what you meant.<br><br>Now lets look at the passage in Genesis and see how this is not a true confession of sin as is talked about in 1 John.<br><br><blockquote>Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? <br>Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. <br>Gen 3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? <br>Gen 3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. <br>Gen 3:13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.</blockquote><br><br>True, they are admiting the truth in their actions, the same as a murderer can say, "Why, yes, I did kill that man" (perhaps that's a little extreem but I hope you see my point). So they admit that they did do it, but do not take responsibility for it. Adam places the blame on Eve and ultimately on God for giving the woman to him. And Eve blames the serpant. It is not true confession when it is not mixed with sorrow for that which was commited.<br><br>Take care, brother,<br><br>Chris

#6920 - Sat Nov 01, 2003 7:09 AM Re: The Wills of God  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]There is one thing I disagree on. (Wouldn’t you know it?) The sequence of events as you see them is different from the way I see them. You said he didn’t repent until after he was clothed, though there is nothing in the text to indicate that.Let’s see if we can tell when he actually was restored to fellowship with the Creator. I will quote the passage to get the flavor of it, for those who like puns.</font><hr></blockquote><p> Of course, you knew I would reply. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/rofl.gif" alt="rofl" title="rofl[/img] I agree they both said, I did eat. But is this a REAL confession? Look at the wording again,<br><br><blockquote>Gen 3:12 And the man said, [color:red]The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree</font color=red>, [color:blue]and</font color=blue> I did eat. <br><br>Gen 3:13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, [color:red]The serpent beguiled me</font color=red>, [color:blue]and</font color=blue> I did eat.</blockquote> Now, I do not call these honest confessions, do you? <br><br>Notice that the I did eat is joined in each case with an [color:blue]and</font color=blue> to the rest of the [color:red]phrase</font color=red>. Each blamed the other for their sin, but God still held each of them responsible for their sins (plural at this time--they ate, they hid, and they lied not understanding the theology of the "will"). I see that they believed during the process (though the process is almost instantaneously, there is still an order....they first see God's grace--clothing, then repentance and faith follow, see the diagram in the last post) in that they raised their children to bring offerings unto the LORD (Gen 4:3ff). It follows that they taught their children to worship, because they themselves had become worshipers having seen the grace of God. Additionally, I see that they believed in the fact that they offered no more excuses or continued to hide themselves from God--they took their just punishment without excuse--without a word (which they did not do when first confronted). Thus, IMHO, they became repentant at the time of being clothed upon and not before.<br><br>What you need to understand here is that salvation is of the Lord alone. A confession of BLAMING someone else for your sin is a DEAD confession coming from a depraved man and woman. Using your logic EVERY person in the world could scheme and say well I did this sin because of so and so and because the Devil Made ME DO It, and would HAVE an acceptable confession before God-thus everyone would be saved. Judas could even say the Devil Made ME DO It (Lk 22:3). I am afraid I do not concur with Flip Wilson's theology. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/evilgrin.gif" alt="evilgrin" title="evilgrin[/img] Simply, God had grace in spite of their condition and confession, for they were elect before the foundation of the world. Salvation is of the Lord!


Reformed and Always Reforming,
#6921 - Sat Nov 01, 2003 12:42 PM Re: The Wills of God [Re: J_Edwards]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


still have about a page of notes on the Joe’s post from Friday which will probably expand as I work on it. That’s one short coming of a message board, that it is difficult to stay focused on any one issue very long. But there are plus sides too, one being in real life it would be impossible to have a discussion quite like this at all (unless this IS real life, then it would be possible).<br><br>The point Joe and Chris make are of course valid and it admittedly weakens the strength of their confession. It is only as I said; they did not run to meet God and cast themselves prostrate before Him. Never the less, they did openly and freely admit disobeying the command. The attempted blame shifting was only to try to minimize their personal responsibility but in the end the confession came, “I did eat.” To me, that is the bottom line.<br><br>Joe rightly says, “But God still held each of them responsible”, but what follows is not right.<br>He says “sins- plural”. I say “no, sin- singular”. There was only one command they were responsible for, “Do not eat”. There was no command not to hide (there still isn’t, that I know of) and there was no command not to lie (I don’t see where they lied either, (I’m not ready to say at this point who is not understanding the theology of the ‘will’, (though I do have an opinion about that))).<br><br>So my point in this discussion is just made by Joe. God held them responsible for their sin. It follows then, that if God has made them responsible for their sin, He is not responsible, more specifically can not be responsible. This brings me to the next point in my notes from yesterdays post.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] <br><blockquote> So the question I am asking here is if God was not able or willing to so act on Adam to keep him from rebelling, how is He going to keep the elect from continuing in that rebellion?</font><hr></blockquote><p> It is very unusual that you would think that God is UNABLE to act to keep Adam from rebelling—this reveals that you do not really believe in the sovereignty of God.</blockquote><br>My note says, “It is very unusual that you would think it unusual that I would think God is UNABLE to act to keep Adam from rebelling against the known will of God.”<br><br>While I do believe in the sovereignty of God, though I admit perhaps imperfectly, it is apparent that we do not share a common belief or understanding of the sovereignty of man. There is an argument used by atheists (or agnostics) that if God can do anything, why can’t He make a rock that is so big that He can’t move it? My answer to that is that He did. He created man and gave him a free will and is bound by His own word to not violate it, or interfere with it.<br><br>If it was God’s intention to create man and have him act freely within the will of God, it must be possible for him to act outside of it with out any restraint. It just has to be that way, or man is not acting freely.<br><br>It should be perfectly clear that God intends man to be sovereign and self governing over certain aspects of his life. I believe God’s first choice and highest form of government is individual people controlling their behavior under the laws of God, a theocracy. This is how Israel got its beginning as a nation in the book of Judges. It is also, in some respects, the basis of American government.<br><br>The only way that man can be truly be free in the sense that Jesus meant when He said, “you shall know the truth and the truth shall make your free” is man living in perfect obedience to the laws of God, having the option to rebel if he chooses.<br><br>Your answer to the question how is God going to keep us from ever sinning is inadequate unless you explain what glorification means.<br><br>My belief is God is never going to take away our freedom. A lot of things will change when comes to receive His Bride, but not that. I have to say, and I know this is harsh, but your statement that you would rather be a prisoner of Christ than a slave of Satan is pathetic. The God of the universe will not have a prisoner for a bride. We will not be locked up in a garden with no way out. He could have done that and saved a trip to Calvary. He is not taking prisoners. He is winning hearts. <br><br><br><br>Gal 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.<br>

#6922 - Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:45 PM Re: The Wills of God  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]The point Joe and Chris make are of course valid and it admittedly weakens the strength of their confession. It is only as I said; they did not run to meet God and cast themselves prostrate before Him. Never the less, they did openly and freely admit disobeying the command. The attempted blame shifting was only to try to minimize their personal responsibility but in the end the confession came, “I did eat.” [color:red]To me, that is the bottom line</font color=red>.</font><hr></blockquote><p> A very liberal bottom line to say the very least. Thus, now you assert that God is satisfied with less than perfect repentance—that is, that one may lie and blame others for their sin. Thus, why do we need Christ if depraved man’s dishonest confession of his sin is sufficient? God requires full repentance nothing less. This is only possible, as has been shown to you numerous times, by an act of the Holy Spirit upon man, first, enabling him to repent for both that he does know and that which he is not even aware.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Joe rightly says, “But God still held each of them responsible”, but what follows is not right. He says “sins- plural”. I say “no, sin- singular”. There was only one command they were responsible for, “Do not eat”. There was no command not to hide (there still isn’t, that I know of) and there was no command not to lie (I don’t see where they lied either, (I’m not ready to say at this point who is not understanding the theology of the ‘will’, (though I do have an opinion about that))). God held them responsible for their sin. It follows then, that if God has made them responsible for their sin, He is not responsible, more specifically can not be responsible. </font><hr></blockquote><p> Really? Hiding from the very person of God because you have sinned is not sin? Not being willing to walk with your Creator is not sin? Not being willing to account for your sin is not sin before God? Non-communion with one’s Creator is not sin in the Arminian’s understanding of things? Hiding and not answering God when He called were all the result of Adam and Eve’s first sin which perpetuated into these others. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] While I do believe in the sovereignty of God, though I admit perhaps imperfectly, it is apparent that we do not share a common belief or understanding of the sovereignty of man. There is an argument used by atheists (or agnostics) that if God can do anything, why can’t He make a rock that is so big that He can’t move it? My answer to that is that He did. He created man and gave him a free will and is bound by His own word to not violate it, or interfere with it.<br> </font><hr></blockquote><p> Really? So, God made a rock to big for himself to move, but made man capable of moving it? Your God is not a sovereign God at all, but one who is controlled by the whim of depraved man. BTW the correct answer to your question is that God would never do anything against His own nature, such as making a rock to big for Himself to move (to do so would be sin), or giving man a sovereign will, which controls His will (to do so would be sin). To promote otherwise is to embrace/promote heresy.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]If it was God’s intention to create man and have him act freely within the will of God, it must be possible for him to act outside of it with out any restraint. It just has to be that way, or man is not acting freely.</font><hr></blockquote><p> You have confused your idea of what Calvinism is with what it really is historically! (1) Calvinism DOES NOT say man DOES NOT have a will—man does have a will (2) It DOES NOT say it is not somewhat free-just not as free as you think it is—to control God himself. (3) It says man in his depraved nature is dead to the things of God (4) It says since depraved man is dead to the things of God, he must first be made alive by the Holy Spirit (regeneration) to understand spiritual things (1 Cor 2:6-16, et. al.) (5) When he SEES (John 3) he then chooses (yes, a will, Ps 110:3). Calvinism and Arminian both agree man has a "will", the problem is where you put the “will” in your solution to ordis salutis.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]I have to say, and I know this is harsh, but your statement that you would rather be a prisoner of Christ than a slave of Satan is pathetic. The God of the universe will not have a prisoner for a bride. We will not be locked up in a garden with no way out. He could have done that and saved a trip to Calvary. He is not taking prisoners. He is winning hearts. </font><hr></blockquote><p> Really? It is indeed, very sad to see some today that call themselves Christians and do not see Christ as Lord. I am happy and joyful to be the prisoner of the Lord—captivated by His love, His life, His Word, His Spirit, et. al. As His prisoner, wrapped in the chains of grace and mercy, I am free to walk as He walked. Not to be a prisoner of Christ meant for the Puritans, and for me, to be enslaved to Satan and to do his bidding. Just what does Paul mean when he calls himself the prisoner of the Lord? Does he mean simply a prisoner of Rome, if so, why not state such? Hummmm, it seems to go much deeper than that!<br><br><blockquote> Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, [color:red]the prisoner of Jesus Christ</font color=red> for you Gentiles, <br><br>Ephesians 4:1 I therefore, [color:red]the prisoner of the Lord</font color=red>, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, <br><br>2 Timothy 1:8 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor [color:red]of me his prisoner</font color=red>: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,<br><br>Philemon 1:1 Paul, [color:red]a prisoner of Jesus Christ</font color=red>, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer, <br><br>Philemon 1:9 Yet for love's sake I rather beseech thee, being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also [color:red]a prisoner of Jesus Christ</font color=red>.<br><br>Philemon 1:23 There salute thee Epaphras, [color:red]my fellowprisoner in Christ Jesus</font color=red>; </blockquote>


Reformed and Always Reforming,
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 18 guests, and 98 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
drewk, patrice, Robert1962, Ron, billmcginnis
921 Registered Users
Shout Box
December
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)
665,506 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.048s Queries: 17 (0.004s) Memory: 2.6594 MB (Peak: 2.9419 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-14 20:55:58 UTC