Author	Thread: Message to Tinyfrog
Admin	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 01:56 AM I would have sent a private message to tinyfrog, in response to his saying "3. What? The church exists any time when more than one Christian are gathered together in one place. " But his age limit to send messages is 30 and I can't send him a message. I was going to invite tinyfrog to be my Facebook Friend. If tinyfrog is on Facebook or wants to join, send me a message and tell me you are tinyfrog. On Facebook send me a message, and/or reply to me on CDFF. My name is Bernard Pyron. I have about 120 Facebook Friends now and among them are a core of non-church Christians, and there is a network of Friends. We often get into interesting discussions of Bible issues. Some comments often reflect standard church positions on issues, but in this network of Friends the church Christians are not predominant - and that makes posting interesting. Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 05:31 AM Just curious, halfback, Why are you after tinyfrog so badly? Think you can get another one to waver? Curious minds want to know. Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 05:55 AM Find out what the dialectic is. It tends to sidestep a didactic Biblical text and hits at it from the side, in an attempt to compromise the Biblical position. Often the issue is the doctrines of dispensationalism, especially the pre-trib rapture and Jewish supremacy, plus the teaching that there is to be one Anti-Christ as world leader who will sit in a re-built temple in Jerusalem. When someone who is generally not a church Christian quotes Scripture on these issues, the church Christian will answer with the dialectic. Often what the church Christian says is ambiguous and not clear at all about what he or she is saying. In addition, the church Christian will avoid the main issue, which is what Scripture says. He will bring up something not on point in an attempt to compromise what the non-church Christian quoted and talked about. Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 07:37 AM I have no idea what you are talking about. "non church Christians". You mean Christians who are unable to attend church? Christians who refuse to become a member of the local church? Christians who believe no one should be a member of the local church? Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 07:45 AM What are you trying to say about the anti-christ? clarify please what do you mean by saying people who are non church christians Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 10:49 AM To try to answer the question of dgrimater on the Anti-Christ I can find a comment I made yesterday on this. It was in response to a question someone on Facebook asked about Obama being THE Anti-Christ. "Obama is not THE Anti-Christ, because First John 2: 18 and 4: 3 do not say there is one Anti-Christ but that "even now there are many anti-christs" and there is "that spirit of anti-christ..." Obama has the spirit of Anti-Christ, but so do many others." What is a "non-church Christian?" Its a person who has come to love the truth of Scripture, has at least some knowledge of Scripture, and is trying to avoid false doctrines - but who does not want to join a 501C(3) IRS incorporated "church." Beyond this, we could get into endless arguments on all kinds of issues on this topic. I know that Calvinism has a different view of physical Israel, that is what Paul in Romans 9: 8 calls the "children of the flesh" than does the dispensationalist church. Dispensationalism claims that God has two different peoples, the Jews (physical Israel, the children of the flesh) and the "church." Apparently classical dispensationmalism does not know an Israel transformed by Christ into what Paul refers to in Romans 9: 8 as the children of the promise, who are the seed of God. He says in Romans 9: 6 "...they are not all Israel, which are of Israel." The small group of "non-church Christians" I know would say that all saved people, that is, Christians, are Israel born again in Jesus Christ. Christ came only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, not to the "church." The "church' should never be capitalized. It is a translation of ekklesia, a meeting of the called out ones, and "congregation" is an acceptable translation of ekklesia. This is why Stephen in Acts 7: 38 calls the Israelites in the wilderness the ekklesia or church in the wilderness. Church is just a meeting of the followers of God. This is why I wanted to invite tinyfrog to Facebook. He seems to understand this. If I understand contemporary Calvinism, they or most of them, would say that the "church" is Israel, and not that the "church" replaced physical Israel. The earlier Calvinists may have understood something of the turning of Jerusalem upside down (II Kings 21: 13) and his re-making of his lump of clay that was marred into another vessel as seemed good to him (Jeremiah 18: 1-6) Post Reply
View Profile History	Message to Tinyfrog Posted : 23 May, 2011 06:48 PM lol Thanks for the public facebook invite, but I prefer to simply add my commentary here when I'm in the mood. I'm glad you understood my remark though! :peace: Post Reply