|
|
USER COMMENTS BY ANDREW CLEMENTS |
|
|
| RECENTLY-COMMENTED SERMONS | More | Last Post | Total |
· Page 1 · Found: 18 user comments posted recently. |
|
|
12/2/2020 12:26 AM |
Andrew Clements | | Illinois | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Frank wrote: Well some might say that since the below is an OT verse, then it doesn’t apply to the NT. But, scripture says that God doesn’t change and neither does the below admonition. Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God. Regardless of what medical procedures this young lady undergoes, she will never be able to father a child and she will never be able to participate in sports with men. IOW, she will never be a man. What an incredibly evil world we live in. The distinction of sexes by the apparel is to be kept up, for the preservation of our own and our neighbour's chastity, Deu 22:5. Nature itself teaches that a difference be made between them in their hair (1Co 11:14),and by the same rule in their clothes, which therefore ought not to be confounded, either in ordinary wear or occasionally. - Matthew Henry's CommentaryThis is part of God's eternal moral law and has not been abrogated in this New Testament era. Thank you, Frank. Great comment. |
|
|
5/16/19 9:58 PM |
Andrew Clements | | Illinois | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Given His statement about him How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! I would say that is far fetched, not impossible, but far fetched. Of course it is **impossible** for anyone born of the flesh, but Christ regenerates even the most wicked (Saul) of His elect. I've noticed, U.S. that during this discussion, you have constructed points consistent with the Arminian position, a position the reformers unanimously rejected (Canons of Dordt). Your views seem to echo those of the Roman Catholics (with regard to the doctrine of Justification) during that period (and today). I know that our standard isn't "the church fathers", but Scripture. However, I would think that if my position was similar to the R.C's, this might at least leave cause for reexamination. Perhaps a glance at Luther's classic, "Bondage of the Will", might get your attention. Peace. |
|
|
5/16/19 7:22 PM |
Andrew Clements | | Illinois | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
ladybug wrote: Thanks Andrew, I would add the doctrines of grace should never be accredited to Calvin - he didn't write them. I do not hold to 'Calvinism', rather, I hold to the word of God alone as the only source of truth. Agreed, and I'm sure that Calvin would also agree. "Calvinism" is just a nickname for TULIP/D.O.G. I don't know anyone that calls themselves a Calvinist who would disagree with your comment. Blessings. |
|
|
12/8/17 3:15 PM |
Andrew Clements | | Illinois | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Carl in Greensboro wrote: Australia had a great spiritual awakening in the 1980s and 90s....; I spent the first 40 years of my life in Australia and I don't remember that. Quite the contrary, in fact. I remember the 80's and 90's as a time of spiritual declension in Australia. As far as I remember, it really all started in the late 70's and it continues today. I'm just wondering where you got the idea that there was a spiritual awakening in the 80's and 90's. |
|
|
12/25/15 8:05 PM |
Andrew Clements | | St. Louis | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Homeschool Dad wrote: Oh there's even better news...He's coming back!!! True. The Gospel, of course, is **the** Good news. 1 Cor 15: 1-4 "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" This is the Good News that we are to celebrate, according to the Scriptures, not his incarnation, and certainly not a Roman Catholic Holy day (or Pagan sun-worship) - The-Christ-Mass. Peace to you. |
|
|
6/16/15 5:03 PM |
Andrew Clements | | Illinois | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Mourner, I was not yelling. I'm sorry you got that impression. I was only trying to emphasize the word "only" and was not aware of another way to do it. Hence, the use of capitals. The WCF quotes you provided are loosely related to what I was saying. God ***ordinarily*** saves those who are part the visible church, since this is where the true Gospel is heard. His people are only as sanctified as the preaching is true. But I was speaking of an individual's Elect person's response to the Gospel, whether or not the truth was spoken with the accompanying fruit of the Holy Spirit (life of Christ) or not (Phil 1:18). A regenerated individual will always be drawn to the message, whether delivered with wrong motives or not, and an unregenerate individual with never respond to the message, whether delivered with wrong motives or not. The only elements of the message the unregenerate individual will respond to are the non-propositional elements (demeanor etc). It is the preached Word ***only*** that draws (effectively) the elect (Rom 10:14). I suppose there are other sections in the WCF that are related (like chapter 10 on effectual calling), but I think it was the bible passages that I quoted that sad it best. Have a blessed day! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|