____________________________________________________________QUOTE:"Making a young child sit through a service is expecting more than their nervous system is ready for and even worse, if they have no toys or distractions but even then, they do not have the parents proper attention. No the place for a young child is OUT of the service. There are plenty of other occasions to teach obedience and it will not result in rebellion if it has been within the childs ability. It is unreasonable behaviour by the partent which causes the child to loose its desire to please the parent. And then the poor child gets the blame for being a sinner when it is merely responding to the sins of the parent by righteous indignation. A young child with a rebellious spirit must be handled firmly but at the same time the parent is at fault and should seek help to regain the trust of the child before it is too late."____________________________________________________________Brenda, I do not think you and me will ever agree...you have your method of raising children and I had mine, the which is normal for those in our brotherhood. You assumed something I did not indicate: I never said a child cannot have a toy to play with in church. Or, be fed a snack, quietly. It can be done and is being done. They did not learn disobedience from me or my husband: they were born to do so when their will conflicted with ours. A child is born with a will that needs training to submit to authority. Scripture is clear in that one is to train up a child the way he should go. It also gives clear instructions that it may need reinforcement by the use of the "rod". None of our children have ever run afoul of the law, other then acquiring a speeding ticket or two. They are all law abiding citizens, all gainfully employed. All married except for one and he now has a lady friend. Our five children have given us 11 grandchildren and these parents use the same methods in training as they were. Our oldest granddaughter is an 18 YO, pretty, talented lady, and her brother is coming right along behind. How we love them!Brenda, obviously you and me will never agree on this issue...ginnyrose
_________________“If you wish to know God, you must know His Word. If you wish to perceive His power, you must see how He works by His Word. If you wish to know His purpose before it comes to pass, you can only discover it by His Word.” (Charles Spurgeon)
Thank you for sticking to your Guns and revealing the truth of your Doctrines! You guys hold to the (Catholic!!) Augustines Original sin to its purest form. Murrcolr wrote "Proudpapa It’s not me you have the difficulty believing; you can twist and wriggle and squirm all you want the truth is what you have difficultly believing is God’s word it says"No, its the (Catholic!!)(exgnostic) Augustines interpatation I find no evidence for as I have said.By natural course we all out side of Grace will naturally walk according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience Read eph 5:5 5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.(Know infant is guilty of this!!!) 6 Let no man(murrcolr) deceive you with (vain words): for because of these ((things!!)) cometh the (wrath of God) upon the children of disobediencedisobedience (You can not disobey if you do not have a law to Obey)(NO LAW NO SIN!!)RE: murrcolr wrote "Proudpapa It’s not me you have the difficulty believing;(OH YES IT IS !!) you can twist and wriggle and squirm all you want the truth is what you have difficultly" believing is God’s word it says."Murrcolr, Am I the one squirming the truth??? (MURRCOLR AND OLD JOE) ANSWER THIS!!!1JOHN ch 4Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh(SARX) is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.IS SARX SIN!!!IF Christ came in a different flesh(SARX!) than What we are born with, than you explain to me How HEBREWS 4:15 can be true???? For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in (all points) (tempted) (like as we are), (yet without sin.) Murrcolr and Old Joe 1 John ch 4 20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.1 John ch 310 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother v 11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteousStudy CHURCH HISTORY!!!
_________________"I grant freely that the theory of "plenary verbal inspiration," involves some difficulties. I do not pretend to answer all the objections brought against it, or to defend all that has been written by its supporters. I am content to remember that all inspiration is a miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost, and, like every operation of the Holy Ghost, must needs be mysterious." - John Charles Ryle
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the (seed of Abraham.)
FYISin is passed down from Adam in each successive father which is why Christ being born of a virgin was without original sin, but none of the rest of us are.
RE:"Sin is passed down from Adam in each successive father which is why Christ being born of a virgin was without original sin, but none of the rest of us are.
p1118 Niv Student Bible 1 John commentary Zondervan 1992//Gnostics balked at the Christian concept of Gods becoming human.because they believed a physical body was intrinsically evil,they denied a pure God could take on a body. Some dealt with the problem by claiming that Jesus was never a human being,but a phantom,a temporary appearance of God who looked human.... The apostle John debated in person with gnostics of his day,and had Gnostic thinking in mind when he wrote this letter.....throughout the letter especially in 4:2-3,the author lambastes those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh.//Sound familiar to anyone?? they believed the physical body was intrinsically evil
p1118 Niv Student Bible 1 John commentary Zondervan 1992//Live as you pleaseTo Gnostics all matter was evil . Only the Spirit was pure,and Gnostics sought to rise to a higher more spirtual plane.This teaching produced side effect:people who strove to rise above matter didn't care about personal ethics.Their pure spirits could not be tainted by "earthly" sin Thus,they could act any way they wanted.//Sound familar to anyone??? They believed in dual nature
The flesh (sarx) was created by God. The sin nature was not. Christ came in the flesh, but did not come in the sinful nature of fallen man passed down through Adam. Remember, Adam too was tempted, but could have said no. Christ, the Second Adam (the second man ever to have literally been hand crafted by God), did what Adam did not, being free from a sinful nature was able to perfectly resist sin.To say that man is not born fallen, leaves the possibility (remote and improbable as it maybe be) that there could be a man born that could theoretically not be in need of redemption, having his own righteousness to present, being free from sin apart from Christ by his own efforts. No matter how you spin it, you will always be left with that probability if this is the path you choose to believe.I haven't read all the pages of this thread, but I'm sure that was probably stated somewhere already. Just because a Catholic agrees with a truth does not make that truth false. Most cults agree with at least 60-70% of what we do, some even more. We shouldn't discard a Biblical truth because the heathen also embrace it.Maybe the misunderstanding comes with your idea of the word "flesh" and what's being spoken of? Like the English language, just because the same word is being used in different places, it doesn't always mean the EXACT same thing in every situation.Examples: Cool, Hot, Tight, Loose, Bad, Tired, Rose, Wonder, Puzzle, Flesh, Sarx, etc. etc.
IS SARX SIN!!!IF Christ came in a different flesh(SARX!) than What we are born with, than you explain to me How HEBREWS 4:15 can be true????
Hi, EverestoSama But by saying that you still can not say that He was tempted in all points as what we are, If we have a inward disposition (sin nature) to sin and He did not. And further more, It does not Say that Jesus took on a Prefallen Adam Flesh(SARX) But rather says Heb ch 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Abraham was post Fall.Catholic Augustine taught that the sin nature was passed on thru conception and thus Leaving Jesus exempt. Everyone believes this even though no verse clearly teaches thisCatholic Augustine also taught that sexual desire was a result of the (Fallen Sin Nature) and what was being implied When Adam and eve relized that they where naked.I am not Catholic (nor reformed Catholic)and these verses do not imply that to me and further more infants do not relize that they are naked thus disproving his whole argument.No, Sin Is Choice the Bible states several times (No Law No Sin.)(infants have no Law)Further more the father of this Catholic Doctrine Augustine Taught regenerational BaptismSalvation is in the Catholic church Augustine is also whom we get The concept of Just War from. from opThe new Foxes Book of Martyrs John Fox rewritten updated by Harold J chadwick p.56referring to Papal persecutions and the Inquisition/They justified the horrors they committed by wresing Old Testament Scriptures, and by appeal to (Augustine), who had interpreted luke 14:23 as endorsing the use of forse against heretics: "Then the master said to the servant, 'Go out into the highways and hedges,and compel them to come in,that my house may be filled."/From my research as of now,(and I do not have all of the facts), I can not find any way to reconcile 1 John With those whom Early on held strong to this doctrine.By their fruits you shall know themCharles Finney, Spoke loud and clear against this doctrine, He said it was used as an excuse for Christians to sin. He also said of such doctrines that in a court of Law it could not be proven that the Bible teaches such things , Many of You will say well He had a Devil,Whom Else did Men Blinded by there traditions say had a Devil??
