Christopher000 wrote:
Are we all reading completely different Bibles or something?

John UK wrote:
Ha! I was going to quote the text, as in the context it refers only to those who are preaching the truth and have their message rejected:
Matthew 10:14 KJV
14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

Appreciate you quoting the verse in context and demonstrating that there is no mention of grace or mercy.

Dustinthewind wrote:
I have found neither grace nor mercy here. The Word says shake the dust.

John Yurich USA wrote:
Just who do you and all the other Evangelical Protestants on here think you are to state that because I don't attend an Evangelical Protestant Church that I am not saved? Where in the Bible does it state that one who is Born Again must belong to an Evangelical Protestant Church or they are really not saved?

How come you have no testimony to salvation or any Christian experience of the Lord's dealings with your soul? John you say you believe, but so do the devils! Mental assent to the truths of Christianity cannot save you. You have to experience conversion and have a real relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Are you really saved John Yurich?

John yurich USA wrote:
My priest is not cognizant that I refrain from participating in the unscriptural parts to the Mass as he doesn't notice that I don't say "and I ask the blessed Mary ever virgin" during the reciting of the Nicene Creed. And the priest doesn't know that I don't pay attention during the eucharistic prayer mention of the Mass being a sacrifice and the intercession of the Virgin Mary and the Saints.

John UK wrote:
Observe the charismatics and altercallers who pander to emotions to get people "saved".

Grace wrote:
Perhaps the facts you present would be suitable for a person who is able to be reached intellectually, not everyone thinks as you do. Catholicism tends more toward feelings and emotions ....

The problem is moral and spiritual. Unbelievers are dead in their sins, held fast by the devil in a state of darkness and rebellion against God. Only God can loose their chains and lighten their darkened minds. God has to break in on their souls to reveal to them their true state before him and the remedy in Christ before the gospel makes sense so as attract them.

We can present the arguments ever so persuasively but unless God should bless what we do, the result will always be the same viz. no results on the spiritually insensitive.

Rufus wrote:
The matter of Uriah did not begin and end at Uriah's death...ended with the fulfilled judgment of God resulting from David's inaction/sin towards his house caused by his own sins.
2 Samuel 12:11 ...

Yes, David, who was a public figure sinned in the matter of Uriah and for this God pronounced a very public punishment which was carried out. He suffered turmoil in his own house and in his kingdom.

This is one of the principles that we learn from God's word that often when we sin, even though the sin be confessed and forgiven, we have to live with the consequences of our sin!!

But your trying to suggest that he continued in sin during the time of this punishment when we have clear evidence that he had repented with bitter tears is outlandish. Even if you could show that his judgement was impaired, which I seriously doubt (read Lawson on David for a corrective), this falls far short of demonstrating that he sinned!

The wise would fall in with God's assessment of his life.

Rufus wrote:
Uriah...
Then Amnon raped Tamar and David executed poor judgment against Amnon which provoked his son Absalom to wrath. He executed poor judgment I suspect due to a lack of moral authority on the matter due to the matter with Uriah. Then Absalom killed Amnon since David didn't take care of it and Absalom tore up the kingdom for a time.
I don't have a thesis for habitual sin and still be saved for I know not the definition of habitual. I do know believers can sin and sometimes they do a whole bunch of it. Doesn't mean they are no longer eternally saved.
As to reprobate equalling worthless, there is such a thing as an unprofitable/worthless servant.

What you previously called David's sin in dealing with Amnon, Absalom etc you now downgrade to poor judgement, but interestingly the Lord found no sin in the matter on David's part! You need to reconsider how you read the Bible.

Rufus wrote:
He repented after the messenger of the Lord (Nathan) lighted his darkened heart.
Later however, King David sinned in his approach to a son who raped and sinned in his approach to a son who murdered and rebelled against the king. One might say the tenor of his life was not good.
Now I love King David so I don't want to impugn him as much as magnify the mercy of David's heavenly father and demonstrate that one who is Godly can start out with a little bit of sin and watch that turn into a whole lot of sin and throughout the whole process still be eternally saved.

I would suggest that you're reading your bible incorrectly!!!

God looked at the tenor of his entire life and only saw one blot viz. the episode with Uriah. You look at his entire life and see nothing but sin after that episode. Who is right?

As God's verdict can never be incorrect, then your thesis that a person can continue in habitual sin and still be saved goes down the pan!

John mackay wrote:
Hi watchman I was most interested to read your account.I agree with your comments entirely.can I discuss further by email?

We should be extremely wary of preachers who preach only to work up peoples emotions. We should rather value the preacher who preaches so that the truth will pierce the heart and under the blessing of the Holy Spirit will lead to lasting results, bringing genuine glory to God.

How is it JY that you appear to have no personal testimony or Christian experience? You have little or no sensitivity to sin, even stating lightly on this forum that you would violate your own conscience to achieve your objective of marriage in the RCC because you know you can ask the Lord to forgive. Such presumption is wicked indeed.

We tend to find even now that in countries where persecution is rife, we don't get so much dead wood in the churches!

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
..you will be hard pressed to find an example in the New Testament where people were not baptized into church membership immediately after their profession of faith..

So I would be careful with admitting those who newly profess the faith into membership. (I believe that the NT teaches a regenerate church membership).

I accept that no church can be infallible in discerning the marks of a genuine convert, and so the occasional one or two may slip the net. After all the counterfeit can look very like the real thing.

I do agree with your assertion that churches today do not exercise discipline. In days gone by they would have argued that a church that fails to exercise discipline is NO church at all!

Blessings!
_____________________________

John Yurich USA wrote:
The Altar Call is based upon Romans 10:9. So the Altar Call is not unscriptural.

Where in Romans 10.9 does it say that if you respond to an altar call you are saved?

It is a matter of the heart!

So how does this play out in an altar call? Well, let me explain. Generally speaking one goes to a revival meeting with a charged atmosphere. A so called evangelist who is generally quite eloquent will rouse the emotions and by the end people's emotions will be supercharged. This is the moment they make the altar call and so many people come forward. How many of these people are responding to the truth and how many because their emotions are charged?

Read the stats from any Billy Graham crusade and you will see the trend. The overwhelming majority made an emotional response and simply disappeared from church circles within a very short time!!

Whatever impact the crusade had died away very quickly so that these so called converts lost their faith.

Talk to them now, and they'll tell you that they tried Christianity and it did not work for them!!

How do you even start to convince them that what they experienced was not even genuine Christianity?

The majority of these problems would vanish if we get rid of "easy believism", "altar-calls" etc and have true notions of what conversion is. If we take great care in looking for the marks of a true convert before accepting people into church membership. And certainly we should never, even when days are dark, be in a hurry to appoint anyone as an office bearer. Candidates for office should be under scrutiny for a long time and their metal tested to make sure that they are fit and proper persons - men full of the Holy Ghost and able to care for and feed the flock of God which he purchased with his own blood. Recent converts should not even be considered for office no matter how gifted, nor should men who have had moral problems of a sexual nature pre or post conversion.

These temporary believers though not converted may continue in the faith for some time (some even years). The tenor of their spiritual life will be kept hidden. They will never speak of struggles with sin, anwers to prayer, delight in reading the bible etc. They have no Christian testimony or experience to speak of!

Perversely, even though Christian experience is foreign to such, they may learn the language of Zion and after some time because they speak like Christians may even be accepted as Christians by the undiscerning. Churches with such people will experience all sorts of problems with them, but misguidedly will not confront them.

When these dogs go back to their vomit to betray that they were never changed, it may nevertheless come as a shock to those believers who were taken in by them.

When these abandon the faith, their fall will be permanent. They will die without recovery and will die in their sins.

In the case of Mr Vines, he is clearly deluded as to his standing before God and is going about doing the devils bidding.

____________________________________

US

My concern is to show the difference between the genuine convert and the 'reformed dog' who professes conversion.

Christ's blood which is able to cleanse him. He obeys out of love. He guards jealously his heart, his eyes and his mouth for fear that he may offend his loving heavenly father, and fears that he may fall to incur his anger.

His nature has definitely changed and this is evident to everyone because this is no flash in the pan. This is an enduring change and the fruit of the Spirit are evident.

Now with time this person may backslide from neglect of the means, from allowing his heart to grow cold, from losing his first love etc. BUT in a backslidden state he knows he is like a fish out of water. The rebellion may continue for some time- maybe even years, but the Lord will not forgot his loved one and will bring him back by use of the rod of affliction and chastisement.

Those who have never known this radical change may nevertheless lay claim to conversion and profess to follow the Lord. But they will not know what it is to hate sin, love the Lord and his people, receive answers to prayer, be fed with milk and meat for the soul. They are like the seed in the parable of the sower; the many temporary believers who will abandon the faith because the seed never took root for various reasons(Luke 8).

Rufus wrote:
I must confess then, I do have a real problem.
A believer can return to his vomit

The whole tenor of his life changes. The sins he previously loved he now hates. The evil company he used to keep brings no pleasure to him. The Christians he used to despise, now he finds a love towards them. The book which was a mystery now speaks to his heart. The God he was a stranger to, is now his heavenly Father and he finds he cannot but talk daily to him. He delights in Gods company and his closet is now his favorite place, next to the place where he has fellowship with God's people.

This is now his normal, daily, weekly, monthly life. His habitual life.

It is not easy because he has to struggle against the world, the flesh and the devil, but his new relationship with God spurs him on in the warfare. He may lose some battles, but he will confess his sins and be more determined not to fall. He always has the comfort of Christ's blood which

Rufus wrote:
King David's fall was more than one occasion, lasted for a time and got worse and worse. Even after being chastened, he sinned the other way in his dealings with Absalom. What is the definition of habitual sin that causes one to lose his salvation or prove that he was never saved to begin with?

Clues - look at the tenor of their life- do they care for Holiness, do they agree with God when God calls something sin. If they do fall, is it occasional, or habitual. Do they recover and desire to be closer to the Lord. Do they struggle with sin etc.