Donations for the month of September


We have received a total of "$75" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Posts: 3,084
Joined: September 2003
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,273
Posts53,182
Members964
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,021
Tom 4,035
chestnutmare 3,084
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,818
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 21
Tom 13
Ruben 10
Robin 2
Recent Posts
New update on forum software
by Ruben - Mon Sep 27, 2021 2:12 PM
All Glory to God
by NetChaplain - Wed Sep 22, 2021 9:40 AM
Rage Against the Unvaccinated!
by tomatoetom - Sun Sep 19, 2021 9:24 AM
Strength via Weakness
by NetChaplain - Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:29 AM
Good News for a Change
by Pilgrim - Mon Sep 13, 2021 9:53 PM
Doxology
by chestnutmare - Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:41 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
#6141 Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:15 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
The 1689 LBC (London Baptist Confession) Chapter 22, Sections 7,8 say the following about the Sabbath:<br><br>7. As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord's day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished. <br>( Exodus 20:8; 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2; Acts 20:7; Revelation 1:10 ) <br><br>8. The sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all day, from their own works, words and thoughts, about their worldly employment and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy. <br>( Isaiah 58:13; Nehemiah 13:15-22; Matthew 12:1-13 )<br><br>I have a feeling that the WCF would read similar in that regard.<br><br>It would seem from this reading (particularly the word "recreation") that on the sabbath, we shouldn't even do things like take our family on a picnic.<br>Would you go as far as what these confessions say on the sabbath? Why or why not?<br><br>Tom<br><br>

Tom #6142 Wed Oct 01, 2003 9:08 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I can see no biblical warrant for changing the Sabbath from sat to sun (I am not a SDA)<br><br>No one keeps the Sabbath - some go to church 2 or 3 times on Sunday , but thats only a few hours not the entire day.<br>It was kept for us by Him.<br><br>howard

#6143 Wed Oct 01, 2003 9:51 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Howard,

Just curious if you have ever read much concerning the Sabbath and the traditional view that holds that Sunday is the Lord's Day Sabbath of the Church? There are quite a number of articles, books, etc., around including literally thousands of sermons. But I'm really curious whether you have read Francis Nigel Lee's book (since you seem to favor his writings and even have offered copies of one of his booklets on baptism)?

Read his book here: The Covenantal Sabbath.

In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Tom #6144 Wed Oct 01, 2003 10:47 AM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 90
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 90
Tom, I know that lots off people have a problem to give the Lords day to the Lord. This day was meant for us to grow in our believe. To come closer to our Lord. To seek His will, to understand . If we can not keep the Lord's day for the Lord than what do we want to do in His Kingdom there it will always be the Lord's day.


Willemina
beggar at His Throne
Pilgrim #6145 Thu Oct 02, 2003 5:27 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Thanks Pilgrim. I shall endeavour to read that at a later date. <br><br>I never heard of F N Lee until about a month ago when Joe recommended his critique of The Reformers and their stepchildren which was good I thought.<br><br>I have read a bit over the years but there is still nothing (as yet) to convince me , and many christian friends about the change from sat to sun in the Bible itself.<br><br>As to "keeping" the Sabbath (Lords Day)- It simply cannot be done IMHO. 24 hours is a long time.<br><br>howard

#6146 Thu Oct 02, 2003 6:09 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 85
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 85
I was reading Walter Chantry's Call the Sabbath a Delight some months ago. At one part he draws a parallel between the tithe and the sabbath. Then it struck me. There are 168 hours in a week and 24 hours in a day. Subtract 8 hours of sleep leaves 16 hours...a tithe of a week!<br>


Soli Deo Gloria
John Schultz
[Linked Image]
#6147 Thu Oct 02, 2003 6:25 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]As to "keeping" the Sabbath (Lords Day)- It simply cannot be done IMHO. 24 hours is a long time.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Hmmmmm [Linked Image] and so is this impossible to be done:<blockquote>1 Peter 1:15-16 (ASV) "but like as he who called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living; because it is written, Ye shall be holy; for I am holy."<br><br>Matthew 5:48 (KJV) "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."</blockquote>Not 24 hours, Howard, but 24/7 for as long as you draw a breath. There are many things which God requires of all men, not just those who are His children by adoption, which are impossible to be done, e.g., repentance and faith for unbelievers and living perfectly in that faith which a child of God was given. Keeping the Sabbath for 24 hours is child's play compared to what is required in the other 9 Commandments, which are to be observed always. Lack of perfection in keeping the Law is no excuse for exorcising it completely and thereby deliberately breaking it. We are not saved by keeping the law. But we cannot be saved if we consciously and deliberately break it. (Jam 2:26; Rom 6; 1 Cor 6:9, 10; et al)<br><br>In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
jfschultz #6148 Thu Oct 02, 2003 6:46 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I am sure what you are saying is a great thought, but I can't make the numbers jive.<br><br>New Math?

#6149 Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:14 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Basically, 16 waking hours on the Sabbath is roughly 1/10th of 168 weekly hours. Hence, a tithe of the total hours given each week. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile[/img]


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
Pilgrim #6150 Fri Oct 03, 2003 4:43 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Good one Pilgrim . When you said 24/7 , it reminded me of what a chap said on another forum ages ago.<br><br>It goes something like this : If you do not do on the Lords Day what you do the on the other 6 days then you are a hypocrite.<br><br>Tis quite an interesting thought.<br><br>Mean while , I can see no biblical warrant to change from Saturday to Sunday . Who can ? I've yet to meet him/her.<br><br>howard

#6151 Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:39 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
Mean while , I can see no biblical warrant to change from Saturday to Sunday . Who can? I've yet to meet him/her.

Far be it from me to even try, Howard. I've learned years ago not to spend valuable time trying to convince someone who lives by the adage: "Don't confuse me with the facts. I've got my mind all made up." shrug

In reply to:
If you do not do on the Lords Day what you do the on the other 6 days then you are a hypocrite.

And I would say to that "chap", whether you keep the Sabbath of the Lord's Day holy or not, you decide. But for me and my house, we shall obey God. We shall no differently reverence and observe the Sabbath than we do any of the other nine commandments of the Lord.

Isaiah 58:13-14 (KJV) If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, [from] doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking [thine own] words: Then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken [it].


In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6152 Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:45 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I fail hopelessly in honouring God EVERY day Pilgrim , not just Sunday.<br><br>My mind is quite open re the day change . I fail to see how you could be dogmatic about it.<br><br>howard

Pilgrim #6153 Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:53 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Pilgrim<br>I agree totally with you that Sunday is the Lord's Day, but I have wrestled for years with knowing whether whether we would even know if we are keeping it holy. By what standards do we use? In in my spirit I realize that it is one of the commandments that are still binding upon the elect, but don't the others seem a little more clear?<br><br>This may not belong on this post, but if not, could you answer on another. I did stop working on Sunday's as I was too exhausted after 50 hours anyway, and I felt I wanted to honor Christ at least in that way. But what else do we do, and is it a matter of conscience, yet if that is the case, thou shalt not murder would then be a matter of conscience. Obviously I need help here.<br><br>Linda

#6154 Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:55 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
I fail hopelessly in honouring God EVERY day Pilgrim , not just Sunday.

My mind is quite open re the day change . I fail to see how you could be dogmatic about it.

[Linked Image] I guess it's just that I'm a Christian who believes the Word of God. Why anyone would ignore the 4th Commandment, or how anyone could possibly reject the 4th Commandment is beyond me. I've read the hermeneutical gymnastics of the Antinomians, NCT'ers, etc., and it is amazing how some men with marvelous educations can be so ignorant? But, something else I learned years ago Howard; it's not always a head problem, but it is always a heart problem. And some heart problems not attended to and corrected can be fatal.

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6155 Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:58 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
It is the day change that I am not dogmatic about Pilgrim .<br><br>howard

#6156 Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:35 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Linda,<br><br>Doubtless, it is very easy to fall into extremes when it comes to the issue of "how to" observe the Sabbath. Some, which you are surely aware, say that the Lord's Day isn't a special day at all and there is no need to get "legalistic" about some issue that died out when Christ came, etc. Then on the other hand there are those who believe you should follow a strict set of rules and regulations; i.e., what is appropriate behaviour, but in most cases these rules and regulations don't tell you what you can or should do, but rather they are lists of what is forbidden. The Pharisees were masters of the latter approach and of course, the world owns the former view. The writers of the Westminster Confession, I believe have the right approach, but the document itself doesn't set forth any details that expound upon their general statements. Even their general statements can and have been used to create a list of "Do not's", e.g., it is a violation to: read the newspaper or any other non-Christian literature, cook meals, wash dishes, talk about anything other than God, etc., etc.. ad nauseam. So, with that said, here's what the WCF says on this matter of the Sabbath:<blockquote><center>[color:blue]The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XXI</font color=blue><br>Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day</center><br><br>VII. As it is the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in his Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment binding all men in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven, for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him:[34] which, from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week,[35] and, from the resurrection of Christ, was changed into the first day of the week, which, in Scripture, is called the Lord's day,[36] and is to be continued to the end of the world, as the Christian Sabbath.[37]<br><br>34. Exod. 20:8-11; Isa. 56:2- 7<br>35. Gen. 2:2-3; I Cor. 16:1-2; Acts 20:7<br>36. Rev. 1:10<br>37. Matt. 5:17-18; Mark 2:27-28; Rom. 13:8-10; James 2:8-12<br><br>VIII. This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest, all the day, from their own works, words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations,[38] but also are taken up, the whole time, in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.[39]<br><br>38. Exod. 16:23, 25-26, 29-30; 20:8; 31:15-17; Isa. 58:13-14; Neh. 13:15-22<br>39. Isa. 58:13-14; Luke 4:16; Matt. 12:1-13; Mark 3:1-5</blockquote>Van Reenen is quite good in his exposition of what it means to keep the Sabbath, IMHO (his entire series on the Ten Commandments is marvelous). You can read his exposition by clicking here: The Fourth Commandment<br><br>In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6157 Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:38 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
It is the day change that I am not dogmatic about Pilgrim.

So, can I thus presume that you keep Saturday unto the Lord; a day esteemed to be holy unto God where in you cease from your normal labors and focus your heart and mind upon the great things of God, etc.? scratchchin

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6158 Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:43 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Pilgrim, I agree with you and the WCF re "the spirit" of the day.<br><br>Tis the day change I cannot see , especially from Rev 1:10. <br><br>howard

Pilgrim #6159 Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:51 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
That "chap" , I have just remembered, goes by the name of "Visigoth" who posts on the Puritan boards by the way.<br><br>howard

#6160 Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:56 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
In reply to:
Mean while , I can see no biblical warrant to change from Saturday to Sunday . Who can ? I've yet to meet him/her.



Define "warrant", please?

Thank you.


God bless,

william


Pilgrim #6161 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:00 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Pilgrim, I "keep" as much of EVERYDAY unto the Lord. <br><br>Saturday or Sunday is no different to me .<br><br>I am at home every day as I do not work in the secular world apart from 5 hours a week driving for a charity.<br>I have no place of worship at present so Sunday is the same to me as Wednesday. I study theology every day and witnees whernever I can .<br><br>My "normal" labours are christian ones.<br><br>howard

#6162 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:02 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I cannot see the change of day in the bible .<br><br>howard

#6163 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:05 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I know what you believe, I want you to define the word warrant, so I know the level of evidence necessary to sway you.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

#6164 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:07 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Ok , perhaps warrant was the wrong word.<br><br>How about what sayeth the scripture ?<br><br>howard

#6165 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:10 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
What about the practice of the early church for understanding?<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

#6166 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:15 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
After we've looked at what the bible says about the day change .<br><br>howard

#6167 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:25 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Howard,
In reply to:
I have no place of worship at present

Does this mean that you are also:

1) Not partaking of the sacraments?

2) Not hearing the sound preaching of the entire counsel of God and seeing its fruit borne in the life of the church?

3) Not subject to the discipline of any church body under the pastoral oversight of its elders?

4) Not in mutually beneficial fellowship with other believers in your local area?



In Christ,
Paul S
Paul_S #6168 Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:35 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
No sacraments, no hearing sermons (I read them), no elders but I have some time with christian friends. I do see some fruit but He sees more.<br><br>Why Sunday ?<br><br>howard

#6169 Fri Oct 03, 2003 10:26 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]After we've looked at what the bible says about the day change .



And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight (Acts 20:7).


This shows that the church celebrated the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and also heard the Scripture, on the first day of the week, that is, Sunday.

Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.


This shows that tithes and offerings were laid aside on the first day of the week, that is, Sunday.

Furthermore, Christ was resurrected on the first day of the week, which is why weekly worship in the early church was conducted on Sundays.


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
CovenantInBlood #6170 Fri Oct 03, 2003 11:21 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Thats what you think Sunday is Kyle.

Where in the Bible does the 4th commandment change from Saturday to Sunday ?

howard

#6171 Fri Oct 03, 2003 12:04 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
Where in the Bible does the 4th commandment change from Saturday to Sunday ?

See Jonathan Edwards' apologetic for: The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath; it's the first item listed, in 3 parts.

See also: The Foundations of the Sabbath in the Word of God by B.B. Warfield.

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6172 Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:19 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
what you think Sunday is Kyle.



No, it's not merely what I think, it's what the Bible says was done on Sundays.



Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
#6173 Fri Oct 03, 2003 9:08 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Howard,<br>Where in the Bible does it list the 66 books of canon?<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

#6174 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:42 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Off topic ?<br><br>Why not start a new thread about it ?<br><br>howard

Pilgrim #6175 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:53 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Thanks Pilgrim. I read Edwards a couple of years ago but I've not read Warfield on this as of yet.<br><br>I just wanted to know , from the Bible ONLY about the day change .<br><br>howard

CovenantInBlood #6176 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:58 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
"Its what the Bible says was done on Sundays"<br><br>Where ?<br><br>howard

#6177 Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:40 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Howard,
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]No sacraments, no hearing sermons (I read them), no elders

I am grieved to hear that you are not in communion with the living body of Christ, which is His church. Neither this, nor any other Christian discussion board, nor [color:red]some time with christian friends, is sufficiently the body of Christ. If you are truly seeking answers to the many questions you have posed, then humble yourself to submit to the teaching and discipline of a church of living saints, in which context alone you will be able to watch your life and doctrine closely. Will all your questions be answered? They will certainly be put in proper perspective.



In Christ,
Paul S
#6178 Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:50 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
I just wanted to know , from the Bible ONLY about the day change .

That's a really silly statement to make, Howard. As another challenged you, can you show in the Bible ONLY verses which teach the Trinity; i.e., without any additional comments, etc.? What about all the literature you send out on the subject of Infant Baptism? They are not filled with "Bible only"; i.e., just quotes from the Bible, eh? We don't cater to "SOLO Scriptura" here, but rather, we value the wisdom which the Spirit has given to men and women through the history of the church who have exegeted and expounded the Scriptures. And thus, I recommended to you several articles, sermons and one particular book, which if you read, you will have read, IMHO, the most definitive work ever written on the Sabbath. And, it deals with your particular question about the Bible's teaching in regard to the change of the day from Saturday to Sunday, although I personally believe you need far more instruction on the day itself in addition to simply the change of day.

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6179 Sat Oct 04, 2003 9:13 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Where ?</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Howard,<br><br>Did I not quote Scripture for you? Both Acts 20:7 (Lord's Supper, sermon) and I Cor. 16:2 (tithe and offering) mention things done on the first day of the week, i.e., Sunday. Surely you don't want to say that the first day of the week mentioned in these verses isn't Sunday?


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
#6180 Sat Oct 04, 2003 9:36 AM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
What part of "first day of the week" do you not understand, Howard?

Some helpful links:

http://www.carm.org/sda/1stdayofweek.htm
http://www.carm.org/sda/sunday.htm

(I know you said you aren't SDA, but these articles aren't just for SDAs)


Hebrews 10:23-25

23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful;
24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,
25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Now I know that this "assembling together" does not just mean church gatherings. We ARE the Church! But I've found that an important aspect in my Christian growth is the teaching I get in my Sunday School and church services. I understand what it means to work in a Christian environment- sometimes that can feel like "church" as you talk with fellow co-workers in Christ. But I've found church actually isn't just for my own benefits- it is yet another opportunity to glorify Christ and to be an encouragement and witness to others.


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
Paul_S #6181 Sat Oct 04, 2003 11:53 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
May I respectfully suggest you read in the Church Locator forum the thread Southern England +WCF. <br><br>Nothing has changed in the 3 months since posting .<br><br>howard

Pilgrim #6182 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:06 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I do need all the instruction I can get Pilgrim , not just about the Lords Day either.<br><br>howard

MarieP #6183 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:10 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Ta.<br><br>howard

CovenantInBlood #6184 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:13 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Ok.<br><br>howard

#6185 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:14 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]I do need all the instruction I can get Pilgrim, not just about the Lords Day either.

Howard,

I can say, without reservation, that we ALL need all the instruction we can get. But, have you possibly considered that what you need even more at this particular time is "teachability"? . . . without which all the instruction in the world isn't going to have any effect on your growing in grace. scratch1

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6186 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:23 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I've learnt much here Pilgrim in the short time I've been on the Highway, for which I thank you.

Teachability ? From an unregenerate punk to a jw , arminian dispy , antipeadobaptist and today a Calvinist in a short space of time ?

If I'm not teachable , then , quite frankly , no one is.

A real live church is what I need , with deacons , elders etc ,etc , but as yet............

howard

#6187 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:24 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Huh?<br><br>And what exactly was that "OK" reply to CovenantInBlood?


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
MarieP #6188 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:27 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Ta is thanks and ok is ok<br><br>howard

#6189 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:43 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]A real live church is what I need , with deacons , elders etc ,etc , but as yet............</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Philippians 4:19- "And my God will supply all your needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus."<br><br>I don't believe God would leave us without believers to fellowship with. If there truly is no church "suitable" for you, why not form a group that meets together for worship and fellowship?


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
MarieP #6190 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:51 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I meet a couple of brothers a few times a week. We are hoping and praying for a church plant but there are not enough folk in the area into the WCF to make it possible as yet.<br><br>I want to re-locate but that is just not going to happen for a while.<br><br>howard

#6191 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:54 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Ok I didn't know what "ta" was, and I'd thought you would give more of a response to the posts.


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
#6192 Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:58 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Howard,
In reply to:
May I respectfully suggest you read in the Church Locator forum the thread Southern England +WCF.
Nothing has changed in the 3 months since posting .

I have in fact read that thread, and quite honestly, what seems not to have changed is your immediate resistance to nearly every positive exhortation you receive.

In reply to:
If I'm not teachable , then , quite frankly , no one is.

Our church received a family several years ago. The father was a policeman who, just being awakened to the doctrines of sovereign grace from a false gospel, could not find adequate fellowship near his home. He drove his young family the equivalent of Bournemouth to London every Sunday for several months so that he could feed on the Word in communion with, and under the supervision of, a living church. No one thought it would be their permanent home, due to the distance, and in fact the Lord later directed them to a solid church they had not known of much closer to home. But during their months with us this gentle soul had many agonizing hours of discussion and prayer with several of us. This man's approach, Howard, unlike your own as evidenced in these posts, was teachable. When he asked a question, he listened to the response, without [color:red]cavilling, as you are prone. When I offered him Packer's Essay to read, he devoured it and thanked me for it, without [color:red]tearing it to shreds as you did. That attitude, Howard, is "teachability".

[color:blue]"Your boasting is not good."

Howard, before all else, you need to be in a church. You dismissed out of hand every suggestion that was given you. If you need to drive the 100 miles to be in a good church, do it, believing that the Lord will make it worth your while, and give you further directions later. But you cannot continue to defend your "teachability" and remain apart from the care of the church.



In Christ,
Paul S
Paul_S #6193 Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:18 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
That was not boasting Paul. <br><br>What have I got to boast about apart from The Lord Jesus Christ .<br><br>The Holy Spirit led me from "there" to "here" if you did but realise.<br><br>howard

#6194 Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:30 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
You claim to be teachable, and yet by your actions you display that you are not.<br><br>First, if you were teachable, you'd admit you were wrong about the early church not meeting on Sunday. I will ask again: What do you think "first day of the week " means?<br><br>Secondly, you have not responded, except for saying "Ta" and "Ok," to any of our exhortations on the necessity gathering for corporate worship.<br><br>Why is it that you cannot find a church that is already founded in your area? Is it because you think you cannot fellowship with people who differ over the "minors" of doctrine?


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
MarieP #6195 Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:41 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
THEN WHO OR WHAT HAS TAUGHT ME WHAT I KNOW ???????????

#6196 Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:51 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
In reply to:
THEN WHO OR WHAT HAS TAUGHT ME WHAT I KNOW ???????????

The answer is not a singular one, which it would appear you are expecting, eh? There are some/many things which the Spirit has brought to your knowledge and planted in your heart. But there are other things which are clearly NOT of God but of man..... and not necessarily men who are holding to the truth in one or more areas. It is also so important to realize that "knowledge" is not simply that which is embraced with the intellect. There is an "experimental knowledge", which is the resulting change in one's affections, desires and walk; aka, the "Fruit of the Spirit"; being conformed to the image of Christ, being made a partaker of the divine nature. There are several passages of Scripture which speak to this; a couple which come to mind most quickly are:

Colossians 1:9-10 (KJV) "For this cause we also, since the day we heard [it], do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God;"

2 Peter 1:4-8 (KJV) "Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make [you that ye shall] neither [be] barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Perhaps you could devote some time to the truths contained in these two passages of Scripture and in self-examination.

In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6197 Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:02 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
I Corinthians 2:1-16<br><br>1 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. <br>2 For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. <br>3 I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, <br>4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, <br>5 so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. <br>6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; <br>7 but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; <br>8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; <br>9 but just as it is written,<br> "THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD,<br> AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN,<br> ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM." <br>10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. <br>11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. <br>12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, <br>13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. <br>14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. <br>15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. <br>16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. <br><br><br>From Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible<br><br>http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commenta...mhc-com.cgi?book=1co&chapter=002


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
Pilgrim #6198 Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:06 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Thank you Pilgrim . Your advice will be taken on board - once again.<br><br>I 'm off to eat humble pie (with tabasco sauce ).<br><br>howard

#6199 Sat Oct 04, 2003 3:22 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] just wanted to know , from the Bible ONLY about the day change .</font><hr></blockquote><p>Exactly, as I asked earlier, the list of canonical books, from SolO Scriptura. Thank you.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

MarieP #6200 Sun Oct 05, 2003 2:19 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I have Henrys commentary thanks. <br><br>howard

#6201 Sun Oct 05, 2003 3:40 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
As I said earlier - Off topic ? Start a new thread ?<br><br>howard

#6202 Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:20 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Because it's your level of evidence I wish to know, and why it applies differently tothe day we worship on. I also want to point out the absurdity of your SolO Scriptura tendencies.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

#6203 Sun Oct 05, 2003 9:43 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 49
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 49
Hi Howard,<br><br>Just my two cents worth here..Sunday is the first day of the week when looking at a calendar, but that's about the end of it. Socially and culturally, Sunday is the last day of the week...that's why we call it the weekEND!<br><br>Blessings to you this Lords Day!<br><br>Hannahsmom

Tom #6204 Sun Oct 05, 2003 3:21 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
So far nobody has answered my original question, they have talked about the Lord's days, but they haven't answered my question, which was:<br>"Would you go as far as what these confessions say on the Sabbath? Why or why not?"<br><br>In case you didn't understand my question, the context of the question can be found in the words:" It would seem from this reading (particularly the word "recreation") that on the Sabbath, we shouldn't even do things like take our family on a picnic."<br><br>Tom<br>

Tom #6205 Sun Oct 05, 2003 3:29 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Tom,<br><br>What do YOU think? Do you think taking your family on a picnic is included in what the WCF says concerning the Sabbath, i.e., the day should be spent in worship (corporate implied), works of mercy and necessity? Would riding a motorcycle 100 miles to visit a relative you haven't seen in ages be acceptable?<br><br>In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6206 Sun Oct 05, 2003 7:43 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Actually I think going on a picnic could possibly an act of worship that would all depend on what one did during the picnic.<br><br>I will say however that I have only recently begun looking into this topic in detail. Though I don't know the practices of the people on the board when it comes to Sunday, I personally don't know anyone that follows to the degree that these confessions say.<br><br>That of course doesn't necessarily mean they are correct however, the Bible should be the standard for that.<br><br>Tom<br>

Tom #6207 Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:12 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Actually I think going on a picnic could possibly an act of worship that would all depend on what one did during the picnic.</font><hr></blockquote><p>We must acknowledge that all that we do in life is in one sense, "an act of worship" (Rom 12:1). However, on the Lord's Day corporate worship is what is enjoined by example in the Scriptures. This is simply to point out that one cannot substitute other acts of "daily worship" for corporate worship. There is nothing inherent in a picnic that would exclude it from being done on the Sabbath, IMHO. But as you said, it would depend upon the intent of going on a picnic and what one actually does during the picnic. I would put picnics in the same class as taking a nature walk or like activities where one could admire God's creation and offer up praise. These things can easily be used in other ways which would be contrary to the intent of the Lord's Sabbath.<br><br>As I pointed out to Howard further down in this thread, there are far too many churches and individuals who have created a list of DON'Ts and far too little that have seriously thought about the things which one can DO on the Lord's Day, e.g., visiting the elderly and infirmed, counseling inmates in prison, feeding the poor, having a hymn-sing, etc. The guidelines set forth in Scripture are broad compared to the Pharisaical rules and regulations devised by man. They are: corporate worship, works of mercy and necessity. Generally, there is no limit to how man can find ways to participate in recreation and work to gain income. But why is it no so when it comes to spending one day in seven to worship the Lord and to do those things which the Lord Christ did on the Sabbath to help those less fortunate in this world? [Linked Image]<br><br>The Sabbath is a day in which we are to delight in God. Why is it a day which the vast majority of people find boring unless they are "vegging out" or playing games? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/scratch.gif" alt="scratch" title="scratch[/img]<br><br>In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6208 Mon Oct 06, 2003 2:51 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Start a new thread called - The Absurdity of howards SolO Scriptura tendencies.<br><br>howard The Absurd.

Hannahsmom #6209 Mon Oct 06, 2003 3:01 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Sunday IS the first day of the week .<br><br>The LAST day of the week is Saturday . <br><br>There is NO "weekend " in CREATION .<br><br>Just a thought............. please dont create about it !<br><br>howard

Tom #6210 Mon Oct 06, 2003 4:18 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Tom , how about Augustines maxim -: Praise God and do what you please . ?<br><br>howard

#6211 Mon Oct 06, 2003 5:37 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I recently did start a thread on SolO Scriptura. It can be found in the Theology section, or you may simply click here. <br><br>http://www.the-highway.com/cgi-bin/...d&sb=5&o=&fpart=<br><br>I didn't include you, personally, as it is a problem within much of Christianity lately, it seems. <br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

#6212 Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:06 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
It looks pretty personal to anyone reading it.<br><br>howard

#6213 Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:00 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]It looks pretty personal to anyone reading it.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Well Howard, all I can say is that being "pretty personal" is to be preferred to being "ugly personal"!! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/laugh.gif" alt="laugh" title="laugh[/img]<br><br>I would venture to say that non-personal things rarely make any impact on people. It is those things which stand in your way and in your face that make one stop and take notice. It would also seem to me that many of the literature you send out is of that type too, if I recall. I never take offense at such things but appreciate that they do cause me to THINK! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/ponder.gif" alt="ponder" title="ponder[/img]<br><br>Those who are most easily offended usually have a pride problem. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/wink.gif" alt="wink" title="wink[/img]<br><br>In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#6214 Mon Oct 06, 2003 11:40 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Indeed it does, if you got that problem. Would you rather I never addressed it again, because it affects you? Or is it an area that needs reflection upon for ALL people? I say the latter, and I hope it does become personal to those who have such a problem.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william

Tom #6215 Mon Oct 06, 2003 2:42 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Tom,<br><br>Thanks for starting a very interesting thread! The whole question of the Lord's Day is one that has caused me a lot of thought in recent months.A book which deals with your question, and much more, and which is also very easy to read is The Lord's Day, by Joseph A. Pipa. I found it a great help.<br><br>Yours in Him.<br>Brian.

Pilgrim #6216 Tue Oct 07, 2003 4:29 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I'm not easily offended Pilgrim but pretty ugly .

We all however have a pride problem - easily offended or not . This began with Adam at the Fall.

howard

Tom #6217 Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:40 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Tom,<br>Good day to you!<br>Are you Jewish? If you are not the Sabbath does not apply to you, since it was given to Israel.<br>Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6218 Fri Oct 10, 2003 1:40 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Steve,

Let's for fun apply your hermeneutic consistently and thus ask: Are you Jewish? If not, then the following prohibitions or injunctions do not apply to you:
    [*]You shall have no other gods before Jehovah.[*]You shall not make any idols, nor any likeness whatsoever or any of the three persons of the Godhead. Nor, you shall not bow down or worship them.[*]You shall not use the name of God in a vain or empty manner.[*]Children must honor their parents.[*]You shall not steal.[*]You shall not commit adultery.[*]You shall not lie.[*]You shall not covet anything.[/LIST]Therefore, Gentile Christians are free to live a life of total rebellion and sinfulness. [Linked Image]

    In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #6219 Fri Oct 10, 2003 2:00 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Good afternoon!

Actually, that is not the case at all. We are under the Law of Christ, which aptly reiterates the majority of these commands.

If we are under the 10 Commandments, then we are also under the OTHER 603 Mosaic Laws. You can't pick and choose.

Fruchtenbaum aptly states, "It must be understood that the Mosaic Law is viewed in the Scriptures as a unit. The word, Torah or “Law,” is always singular when applied to the Law of Moses, although it contains 613 commandments. The same is true of the Greek word, Nomos, in the New Testament. The division of the Law of Moses into ceremonial, legal, and moral parts is convenient for the study of different types of commandments contained within it, but it is never divided this way by the Scriptures themselves. Neither is there any scriptural basis for separating the Ten Commandments from the whole 613 and making only the Ten perpetual. All 613 commandments are a single unit comprising the Law of Moses.
It is this principle of the unity of the Law of Moses that lies behind the idea of keeping the whole law in James 2:10. The Apostle’s point here is clearly that a person needs only to break one of the 613 commandments to be guilty of breaking all of the Law of Moses. And this can only be true if the Mosaic Law is a unit. If it were not, the guilt would lie only in the particular commandment violated and not in the whole Law. In other words, if one breaks a legal commandment, he is guilty of breaking the ceremonial and moral ones as well. The same is true of breaking a moral or ceremonial commandment. To bring the point closer to home, a person under the Law of Moses who eats ham is guilty of breaking the Ten Commandments, although none of the Ten says anything about ham.
In order to clearly understand the Law of Moses and its relationship to the believer (Jew or Gentile), it is necessary to view it as do the Scriptures: as a unit, one that cannot be divided into parts that are nullified and parts that are kept. Nor can certain commandments be separated in such a way as to give them a different status from other commandments."


If you want to be under the Law, go ahead...but I am hoping you have not mixed your fabrics today! Oh wait, I have! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/eek.gif" alt="eek" title="eek[/img] Leviticus 19:19

Have a great weekend,
Steve





Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6220 Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:40 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Steve,

Again... I openly challenge your hermeneutic, again! I don't recall these other "603" laws being carved in stone by the finger of God, being broken and then rewritten and stored in the Arc of the Covenant? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/scratch.gif" alt="scratch" title="scratch[/img] Can you kindly point that passage of Scripture out to me please? Another item which I would like you to instruct me on is where are these other 603 laws recorded before they were given to Moses? The "Ten Commandments" were not new when spoken by God and written in stone at the time of Moses. They were millennia old, e.g., the commandment prohibiting murder is first read in regard to Cain's killing of Abel, iterated again at the time of Noah, etc.. What is known as the "Ten Commandments" was a universal law recognized by all people because they are MORAL in nature, where the other "603 laws" make up the Theocratic civil and ceremonial laws; some being types and shadows but all fulfilled by Christ.

You have a nice weekend too! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/laugh.gif" alt="laugh" title="laugh[/img]

In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
li0scc0 #6221 Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:48 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
li0scc0

Spoken like an antinominian.
Do you not know that the 10 commandments are part of the very character of our God?

1John 2:3-4 "And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
He that saith, I know him and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar and the truth is not of him."

Please don't try to tell me that the 10 commandments were not what these verses were talking about.

As believers we are not saved by obeying the commandments, but the obedience of them should become part of our character as Christians. Think about that in light of 1John 2:3-4.

Tom

li0scc0 #6222 Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:44 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,579


True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
li0scc0 #6223 Fri Oct 10, 2003 8:29 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]You can't pick and choose.



Indeed! As our Lord said,

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:17--19.)




Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
li0scc0 #6224 Sat Oct 11, 2003 1:33 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Steve, Fruchtenbaum is a Judaising Arminian who is promoted by Jacob Prasch of "Moriel" ministries in Leeds England.

One word of advice - Flee.

howard

#6225 Wed Oct 15, 2003 7:57 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Interesting you say he is Arminian, as he is known as a Calvinist, and, having read his works, he certainly is a Calvinist.<br>Next time, read the author before going on hearsay!<br>


Grace is not common.
CovenantInBlood #6226 Wed Oct 15, 2003 7:58 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
I am so glad you brought that up!<br>And you are correct, he did fulfill the law and the prophets! For if he did not, then we would still be required not to mix fabrics, we could not eat pork, etc.


Grace is not common.
Tom #6227 Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:01 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Are you then keeping the Sabbath command, Tom? Your day of rest is Friday sundown through Saturday sundown?<br>Do you eat pork or shellfish, Tom? Do you also have long hair?<br>Are you advocating executing adulterers?<br>No, of course not...because, like all other covenant persons, you have arbitrarily picked and chose. <br>The Mosaic Law is over and done with, replaced by the Law of Christ.


Grace is not common.
Pilgrim #6228 Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:03 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
For my hermeneutic, read Robert Thomas' book on hermeneutics. <br>Thanks!


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6229 Wed Oct 15, 2003 9:50 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Yes, the ceremonial laws need no longer be adhered to, since Christ is their fulfillment. But the moral laws still apply to the Christian life. Now, you may argue that the Sabbath was a ceremonial law and that the Christian thus has no duty to keep a Sabbath day, but to say that the Mosaic Law in toto has been done away with, i.e., abolished, is to call Christ a liar. Even the ceremonial laws were not "done away with," but are perpetually fulfilled in Christ.

Last edited by CovenantInBlood; Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:02 AM.

Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
li0scc0 #6230 Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:01 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
li0scc0,

Sorry, but I'm far more interested in YOU justifying whatever hermeneutical methodology YOU are using to obfuscate the integrity of the Moral Law of God, which was simply iterated at Sinai, having been in existence from creation and shall ever be binding upon all men until Christ returns. The "law of Christ" which you are wanting to use as an apologetic to deny the Sabbath Day in its fullness, having been changed to the "First Day of the week", to reflect the fulfillment of all that preceded it in types and shadows, is nothing other than this same Moral Law which all men everywhere from Adam to the last man is responsible to keep. As to the Sabbath Day itself, Christ made it perfectly clear that it was perpetual as He announced that He was "Lord of the Sabbath."

There will be a number of articles forthcoming, D.v. which will further defend both the perpetuity of the Sabbath and its change to the "First Day of the week". [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]

In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
li0scc0 #6231 Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:21 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Looking at Dr. Fruchtenbaum's website, http://www.ariel.org/, I don't really see much indication that he is a Calvinist. He is certainly a dispensationalist, however, and a proponent of the "Messianic Judaism" movement, much of which is of questionable validity.


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
CovenantInBlood #6232 Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:35 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
How is it making Christ a liar?<br>And where does the Bible say that there is a distinction between the ceremonial and moral laws?


Grace is not common.
CovenantInBlood #6233 Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:36 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Having read a few of his books I can confirm he is, like most dispensationalists, a 4 point Calvinist.


Grace is not common.
Pilgrim #6234 Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:44 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Pilgrim,<br>I was simply doing what everybody else here seems to do. Instead of refuting some issue, they refer the poster to numerous and exhausting (literally) works that others have done. This often seems to be an attempt to simply end the issue without ever dealing with the issues at hand.<br><br>The issue at hand is my hermeneutic, which is simply the literal interpretation of BOTH Old and New Testament Scriptures when possible. I was having to do too many hermeneutical gymnastics when I was Reformed, and I realized it was an unethical treatment of Scripture. It completely ignored the Old Testament in its context, and read the Old Testament Scriptures in a way that nobody at that time ((i.e the time that they were written), would have understood.<br>Think about how the Old Testament is presented in Covenantal/Reformed theology. Would the original readers have understood it that way? <br><br>Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6235 Wed Oct 15, 2003 11:29 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,021
Likes: 1
Steve,

I have no objection to someone referring me to an article, website, etc., to augment their OWN arguments. But I simply don't find someone referring me to some obscure book, which I would have to buy as being helpful. grin
In reply to:
Think about how the Old Testament is presented in Covenantal/Reformed theology. Would the original readers have understood it that way?

Absolutely! The fact that the Jews and particularly the Pharisees, the doctors of the Scriptures, charged the Lord Christ with breaking the Sabbath on more than one occasion, not to mention all that He taught concerning the Law (Moral), seems to indicate quite clearly that they fully understood the continuity of the covenant and its precepts.

Again, I will hopefully be posting some relevant and indepth articles concerning the Sabbath, re: it being a universal and perpetual MORAL law and its change from the Israelic Saturday to the Christian/Church Sunday, D.v. . . . stay tuned. Oh, I'm wondering if you have taken my recommendation and read through Dr. Francis Nigel Lee's treatise on: The Covenantal Sabbath, which I contend is irrefutable.

In His Grace,



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
li0scc0 #6236 Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:35 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Having read a few of his books I can confirm he is, like most dispensationalists, a 4 point Calvinist.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Most dispensationalists I've known are thoroughly Arminian. I would contend that if he is missing any of the five points, it's inaccurate to call him a "Calvinist." Which of the five is he missing?


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
li0scc0 #6237 Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:40 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]How is it making Christ a liar?



Because Christ Himself said He came not to destroy the Law!

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]And where does the Bible say that there is a distinction between the ceremonial and moral laws?



Christ Himself makes the distinction by reaffirming Old Testament moral codes, while at the same time making, for example, the laws of kashruth unnecessary.



Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
CovenantInBlood #6238 Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Calvinism has been defined in different ways (I want to make clear that I know what Calvin taught. If I state that a 4 pointer is a Calvinist, I know that he is not teaching exactly what Calvin taught. Calvinism is often a generic term for essentially believing fully in the sovereignty of God). I know some who say that if one even believes an Arminian is saved then you are not a Calvinist! <br><br>Most Dispensationalists hold to four of the five points of Calvinism. The point they disagree upon, of course, is the limited atonement. <br><br>A few of the sensationalist Dispensationalists (say that fast 10 times!) are Arminians. But the majority of the scholars including Robert Thomas, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, JD Pentecost, Trevor Craigen, LS Chafer, etc. have been four pointers. Some, like John MacArthur even claim to be 5 pointers, but if you read him, he appears to really be a four pointer.<br><br>/scc/<br><br><br>

Last edited by li0scc0; Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:07 PM.

Grace is not common.
MarieP #6239 Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:12 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Thanks.<br>Re this topic, from a covenantal 1st day position, I have read Warfield, Berkoff, Hoeksema, Calvin, Reymond, Kersten, Gill, Dagg, a slew of PRC and OPC folks, and a few others. From the 7th day side I have read a handful each of 7th Day Baptists and even some Adventists. I'm not saying this to pat myself on the back, but merely so y'all don't think I haven't given this any thought and if only I could be enlightened by another covenantalist....<br><br>Blessings,<br>Steve


Grace is not common.
MarieP #6240 Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:12 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Thanks.<br>Re this topic, from a covenantal 1st day position, I have read Warfield, Berkoff, Pink, sproul, Hoeksema, Calvin, Reymond, Kersten, Gill, Dagg, a slew of PRC and OPC folks, and a few others. From the 7th day side I have read a handful each of 7th Day Baptists and even some Adventists. I'm not saying this to pat myself on the back, but merely so y'all don't think I haven't given this any thought and if only I could be enlightened by another covenantalist....<br><br>Blessings,<br>Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6241 Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:25 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
li0scc0<br>I have read quite a bit of John MacArthur and I don't understand where you get that he appears to be a 4 pointer.<br>I know some people probably think that Spurgeon was a 4 pointer, because they disagree with his interpretation of a few Scripture passages.<br>I am interested in seeing where you get the idea that MacArthur is a 4 pointer.<br><br>Tom

li0scc0 #6242 Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:30 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
li0scc0<br>I would be interested in seeing you do a critique on the article that Pilgrim posted in this thread by Dr. Lee.<br><br>Tom

li0scc0 #6243 Wed Oct 15, 2003 6:16 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Calvinism has been defined in different ways (I want to make clear that I know what Calvin taught. If I state that a 4 pointer is a Calvinist, I know that he is not teaching exactly what Calvin taught. Calvinism is often a generic term for essentially believing fully in the sovereignty of God). I know some who say that if one even believes an Arminian is saved then you are not a Calvinist!



The most widely used and readily applicable definition of "Calvinist" is one who holds to the five points of the Canons of Dordt. Thus, a "four-point" Calvinist can hardly be called a Calvinist at all.

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Most Dispensationalists hold to four of the five points of Calvinism.



How do you mean "most dispensationalists," then? Because I was raised in dispensationalist churches, and they are decidely not Calvinist, either in official church doctrine or in general belief.

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]The point they disagree upon, of course, is the limited atonement.



Which I argue makes them, by logical necessity, either universalists (Christ's atonement is effective for all) or Arminians (Christ's atonement is potentially effective for all, but effectiveness rests in man's decision to believe in Christ).



Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
CovenantInBlood #6244 Thu Oct 16, 2003 10:44 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
How do you mean "most dispensationalists<br>The word "most" implies >50%. The major dispensational seminaries are 4 pointers .<br><br>Having read about the Canons of Dordt, I would define an Arminian as one who follows the teachings of Arminius. A four point Calvinist would NOT be an Arminian. If you are going to limit calling a Calvinist as to one who holds all five points, then I can limit the definition of an Arminian. :)<br><br>In His service,<br>Steve


Grace is not common.
Tom #6245 Thu Oct 16, 2003 10:45 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Re Macarthur, it is mainly from listening to his radio show.


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6246 Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:37 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,035
Likes: 1
li0scc0

You will have to be more specific than that.
MacArthur is a big promoter of the doctrines of grace, he is also a fan of CH Spurgeon, who trumpeted the doctrines of grace loudly.

Tom

Tom #6247 Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:58 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
MacArthur, and I own the majority of his books and all his commentaries, is a Reformed Calvinist. I know a few people that use to attend his seminary as well and they come out 'reformed' in the baptist and dispensational (Masters own brand of it) sense of the term. Occasionally some of MacArthur's writing and sermons appear to be only 4 point and at other times he appears 5 point. If you speak to him personally he will tell you 5 point, plus--for there is much more to the Reformed faith then just 5 points. <br><br>P.S. I believe someone on this board attends his church and they will be able to add more.


Reformed and Always Reforming,
J_Edwards #6248 Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:58 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Joe,
Thank you for the clarification. I was not clear and I should have stated that Macarthur certainly claims to be 5 point.

It was remiss of me to bring MacArthur up, because I do not have specific references. I was going simply on an "inkling", and, even if substantiated, I should have waited until I had more info.

Whether 5 point, 4 point, or 5 point +, I certainly like MacArthur.

Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6249 Thu Oct 16, 2003 2:43 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
You did well to use caution. Everything he writes is not 100% ---such as the obvious I already stated, and a few other items--books he had to re-edit. Here is a link to some of his on-line works--pretty substantial: MacArthur (some of these are links to books you must buy, other are links you may read on line).


Reformed and Always Reforming,
li0scc0 #6250 Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:11 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]The word "most" implies >50%. The major dispensational seminaries are 4 pointers .



Are we talking about dispensationalists or dispensational seminaries?

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Having read about the Canons of Dordt, I would define an Arminian as one who follows the teachings of Arminius. A four point Calvinist would NOT be an Arminian. If you are going to limit calling a Calvinist as to one who holds all five points, then I can limit the definition of an Arminian. :)



Giving up any of the five points destroys the coherence of the system. As I showed already, one who rejects limited atonement must hold either to universalism or to (Arminian) free-will. If to the former, he maintains consistency but rejects the historic and biblical faith. If to the latter, he must by logical constraint deny total depravity, unconditional election, and irresistible grace.



Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
CovenantInBlood #6251 Fri Oct 17, 2003 6:56 AM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 45
Journeyman
Offline
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 45
Let me add this about 4 point cal's.

Way back in Seminary I had a friend who claimed 4pts. However, through discussing the issue he just re-defined the terms. All said and done, he did not even agree with Total Depravity (though he claimed he did). And since then, when I run accross those who claim's 3 or 4 points, I often find the same result.

Being a Baptist in the deep south, I am sorry to guess that 3/4 of the other ministers that I have the occation to talk even about Perserverence do not even hold this doctrine as stated in the 1689 confession.

CovenantInBlood #6252 Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Are we talking about dispensationalists or dispensational seminaries?<br><br>Certainly we are talking about Dispensational scholars! Whenever people on this board talk about Covenantalists, they talk about Covenantal scholars. To do otherwise would simply be ridiculous, as we would be going off of hearsay.<br>For example....when I was in a conservative Presbyterian (OPC) church, very few people actually held to 5 points if you pressed them. Many held to one or two points at best. And every PCA church I have worked with is extremely Arminian! BUT, does that mean that most Reformed folks are not really Reformed? Of course not, because when, at this site, we talk about Reformed people, we are really talking about the scholars and the seminaries, aren't we?! <br><br>I bring this up, because I presume that would be your argument, that most Dispensationalists you know are Arminian. Even many of the churches are Arminian. But the scholars and seminaries, in general, aren't....unless we redefine Arminianism as anything but 5 point Calvinism.<br><br>Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #6253 Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:10 PM
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Whenever people on this board talk about Covenantalists, they talk about Covenantal scholars.



I haven't seen enough talk of Covenantalists to verify that claim. But I can say that when someone is referred to as a "Calvinist," it doesn't matter whether they are scholars: the term indicates that they adhere to the Five Points. I call myself a Calvinist though I am neither scholar nor seminarian.

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Of course not, because when, at this site, we talk about Reformed people, we are really talking about the scholars and the seminaries, aren't we?!



No. I daresay most of the people who post here are Reformed, and surely not all of them are scholars or seminarians. When we speak of Reformed scholars, writers, theologians, etc., we speak of scholars, writers, and theologians as groups within the Reformed tradition, not definitive of the Reformed tradition. That there are a lot of unreformed individuals attending ostensibly Reformed churches has no bearing. In the same way, when I refer to dispensationalists, I am referring to people who hold to a particular ecclesiology, i.e., that the nation of Israel and the Christian Church are discontinuous entities for whom God has separate plans in salvific history. Most people and churches who hold to this notion, though not all, have basically an Arminian theology.

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]I bring this up, because I presume that would be your argument, that most Dispensationalists you know are Arminian.



Most I know and most within American evangelicalism are, in fact, Arminian.

In reply to:
[color:"blue"]But the scholars and seminaries, in general, aren't....unless we redefine Arminianism as anything but 5 point Calvinism.



I gave a logical explanation before as to why anything but five-point Calvinism essentially ends up either universalist or Arminian. You have yet to address that.



Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 57 guests, and 39 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
atdcross, NetChaplain, winslowlady, Zach, Daverogk
964 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
September
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
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,284,036 Gospel truth