Rodney K. wrote:
Thanks JT!
I'm leaning towards bro. Lurker's suggestion that this needs to be viewed in an Old Testament context. The preceding verses are dealing with Balaak and how he caused Israel to sin by tempting them to fornicate. So they were clean escaped from Egyptian bondage, but proved themselves to be non-elect.
How's that? Does that fit the text?
Bro. Observer,
I just noticed your post. More good stuff and food for thought.

=============================

Connor wrote:
...
Thanks y'all for your prayers...

Rodney K. wrote:
2 Peter 2:18 KJV

Believe it or not there are some who come so close to entering the Kingdom of God BUT then turn back. If you read Hebs 6 for instance you will see that of such it says:

1. They were enlightened
2. Have tasted of the heavenly gift
3. In some sense were partakers of the Holy Spirit
4. Have tasted the good word of God, and
5 Have tasted the powers of the world to come

But they were never converted, because Paul says of the believers that he was writing to: 9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

In the intervening verses this (viz.unconverted status) is also alluded to in imagery - they are referred to as those that bear thorns and briers fit for burning (see v. 8)

In 2 Pet 2 - there is a similar approach - v 17 they are wells without water, clouds carried with a tempest and of course v 22 dogs that turn to their own vomit and washed sows wallowing in the mire. IOW their nature was not changed - they came very far, but short of conversion.

This should cause sobering reflection on the part of all professing Christians, that we may come so close to life and yet miss it!!

I hope that this helps.

I am hoping that any impartial reader will see that SteveR's nasty side surfaces whenever anyone criticizes the RCC and that he enjoys singling me out for special treatment. I don't mind what he says about me; that don't really touch me none. But I will admit that his attacks on the good brothers and sisters on this board who bear so patiently with his spiteful attacks does get to me - for instance when he calls sister MS Jezebel etc.

I will continue to counter his false theology, and his promotion of the RCC as a true church, but it is not to feud with him but to provide a corrective for the unwary readers who may accept what he posts as truth.

Anyways, I hope that this will be taken in the spirit it is offered.

Christopher000 wrote:
Connor, how'd you make out?

ladybug wrote:
Brothers and sisters,
Please keep Frank in your prayers, and all who live in the path of this latest storm bearing down on Florida. I am not sure how close this system will be to Frank's area, in any case prayer is needed for all in the path of this storm.

MS wrote:
Most of SteveR vicious comments are being deleted.
(thank you SA)
Just as a suggestion,lets not give him any free air timeby tagging on to his posts.
Thanks.

12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

=====================

BTW

Re: bro John UK

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
Conner, I see the point you are trying to make but I am not sure I would fully agree. You don't become a fornicator until you commit fornication (mental or physical). Your are not covetous until you covet, you're not a homosexual unless you practice the sin, etc.
Under your theory all people are currently fornicators, adulterers, etc. even if they do not do those things. The fact that you have the capability to do so, doesn't mean you are guilty of so doing. In the case of a newborn many of things you have listed they are not within their capacity. The only thing I can think of that the Bible says is that we are liars from the womb.
Having a sin nature and sinning are two different things.
The idea that people are "born gay" is to take culpability away from them, saying they had no choice. Romans 1 tells us it is a downward spiral from not acknowledging God or being thankful to be given up to their base sinfulness, not that they were born that way. That is my thoughts on your dialogue. God bless.

Rodney K. wrote:
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (John 8:44 KJV)
Other than Jim, no one here has any affinity for PP. You are a liar to suggest it. But it is a far greater sin to crucify the Son of God anew and put Him to open shame (i.e.: transubstantiation) than to murder innocent children (as horrible as that is). Only someone who has a higher view of the creature than the Creator would suggest otherwise.

I wonder what his problem is? Here are the options as I see them:

1. He is just a deeply troubled unconverted individual
2. He is mentally disturbed
3. He is a delusional unconverted reprobate
4. He is possessed by an evil spirit
5. A mixture of any of the above

One thing is for sure, he has no truth in the inward parts, nor does he possess a love of the truth.

Christopher000 wrote:
He's foaming now because he keeps getting deleted, I've noticed.
...

Isn't it amazing that on almost every spiritual issue he is on the wrong side? Quite a commentary on the state of his soul.

Matthew 6:23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

Sister MS

Connor wrote:
Folks, tomorrow the doc is going to cut me open, if you could pray and ask Jesus to give the doctor's wisdom during my surgery and that I'll make a good recovery from the surgery, that would be much appreciated.
Go to www.180movie.com for resources to combat the abortion practice.

Which is worse?:

1. The Whore church adopts a doctrine straight from hell which insults and undermines the finished work of the God-man mediator, stating that his once for all sacrifice (so says the Bible) is not sufficient and therefore there must be a perpetual sacrifice in the Mass by the miraculous transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Christ. By its adoption of this doctrine they sent and continue to send countless millions of its adherents to hell. The same Whore church butchered countless millions of people who denied its teachings on this issue.

or)

2. That there are countless thousands of people who are going to hell for killing an unborn baby.

Notice please, that there is no one here who justifies abortion contrary to what the ignorant and hateful Romanist shill suggests. But the issue is, which is more serious, insulting the Savior or killing an unborn. Assuming that people realize that there are some sins more serious than others, I hope that most will see that any sin aimed directly at God and the appointed God-man Savior has to be more serious than killing an unborn.

B. Warely wrote:
Don't worry Jim! I will not be debating the differences between the Baptist Non-Covenantal mode of baptism again on this thread. Last time I did the Baptists got all nasty and ran away from the debate. Since then they haven't spoken to me. I guess they are afraid I'll prove the Scriptural-Covenantal mode again.
....

ROFL

B. Warely wrote:
Jim: It's amazing the Baptists are now - again? - trying to validate their mode of baptism which was invented in 1521 by a bunch of heretics called the Anabaptists.
...

Aren't you the Presby that's been goading and hounding baptists for years, spilling your hatred at every given opportunity? You know the Presby of a 1000 monikers?

Care to show us one clear, indisputable example of infant baptism from the NT? Oh wait, I forget the Bible is not important!

Frank wrote:
..And I agree that the only sin that cannot be reversed is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I think there can be differences of opinion as to the extent of that, but in my opinion it is someone that claims that Jesus is of the devil in spite of His testimony and works. ..

The only people I've met who think they may have committed the sin against the Holy Spirit are sensitive Christians and genuine seekers! I don't think that those who have committed that sin would care one way or another!

And you're spot on not to give any comfort to those who profess the faith but preach/teach heresy, or who show no signs of being genuinely converted. That would be the height of cruelty viz. to seal them in their delusion and for them to find out on judgement day that they'd been lulled into a false sense of security and were after all hell bound!

John Yurich USA wrote:
I don't see all you Evangelicals on here as nut jobs.

John Yurich USA wrote:
That is an interesting idea to start a website to cater to anti-Catholic Catholics. I will take it under advisement.

Dolores wrote:
....When I decided to post again it was what God wanted me to say and no arguing or calling people names, etc or downing them or judging them because their beliefs are different than mine . I love you all in the Lord God bless.

The only sin which is unforgivable and damning is the sin against the Holy Spirit, but even in this, we are rarely party to know who has committed it.

So we should never give up on the lost and yes we should make every effort in love to reach them by any legitimate means we can.

BTW, I love your sensitivity and your desire to love all unconditionally, coming as it does from what sounds like a pretty awful life growing up with a dad like yours was before he became converted.

I think where we part company is in the defense of the truth and in calling errorists what they really are. That does not mean that we do not love them. But often times words need to be said to protect the truth and the true flock of God. We're called to it as the Lord's honor is at stake! I know you won't agree with this.

Lord bless.

====================

John Yurich USA wrote:
Actually Christopher, I would have stated Kaine should be told by his Bishop to either fall inline with Catholic teaching and be against abortion, homosexuality, homosexual marriage and artificial birth control or be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. I do believe that any Catholic who supports abortion, homosexuality, homosexual marriage and artificial birth control is under demonic influence. Support of abortion, homosexuality, homosexual marriage and artificial birth control should be the only grounds for excommunication from the Catholic Church. Not subscribing to the unscriptural Catholic doctrines should not be grounds for excommunication from the Catholic Church though.

ladybug wrote:
Here's a link for ya, concerning all the 'dr's you like to quote - https://mikejeshurun.wordpress.com/2015/06/17/dont-call-me-doctor-call-me-brother/

GSMontana wrote:
I have a feeling this thread is gonna get ugly