Vince53

Did anyone else here graduate from Hyles-Anderson College?

I appreciate the helpful replies and friendly attitudes of all the posters. I don't think that this is a case of the person never really being saved to begin with. 2 Peter 1:9 tells us "For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins." Notice that he was cleansed from his old sins. Whatever Peter is talking about, the person being referred to is really saved.

One idea from the passage in 1 Peter 1 is that the fellow believed that he was a spiritual giant and therefor failed to grow. He later rejected the existence of God, not realizing that his own concept of God was false. Then he started to grow spiritually.

I appreciate the helpful answers. The Greek word for "sure" can refer to certainty, but it usually refers to steadfastness, as in a building. Does this meant that if your calling and election isn't "sure," you have an unsteady calling and election? Note: I am not a Calvinist, and this is not a secret plot to convert people for or against Calvinism. I really did talk to the friend who is now an atheist, and I am trying to help him out.

Thirty years ago, a friend of mine had a large and successful ministry, and today he is an atheist. He is actually a kinder, calmer person than he used to be. 2 Peter 1:9 is sometimes used to teach that a genuine Christian can become an atheist. "For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins." In researching the verse, I noticed that the next verse says: "Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble;" It seems that Peter is warning them that if they aren't diligent about making their calling and election sure, they could forget that they were purged from their old sins. I would appreciate intelligent comments on this passage.

Jesus began by describing the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, and then blended into a description of the Great Tribulation.

It is my understanding that the Church of Christ is a very tightly-controlled denomination, founded by Alexander Campbell. Campbell was an unsaved Baptist minister who taught that salvation was by works, with baptism being required as a part of earning your salvation.

.

I am a Baptist who taught Christian high school for ten years. The few Seventh Day Adventist students we had were a very Godly, Christ-like group. The few that I have met in their homes were always Godly. While I disagree with their theology, and I believe that the source of much of Ellen G. White's writing was her getting bonked on the head with a rock, they are not a cult.

Wouldn't you rather check the physical evidence [earth] to determine whether the flood myth was true? I'm not sure I understand why you would rely on myths to support a myth. The Flood is not a myth, and I believe it because God told us in His Word that it happened. My point is that there are so many Flood myths in that area, that it is safe to say that the story is true, but it got corrupted. The rock layers and fossil layers also support the Flood having literally occurred.

When I worked in a paper mill, this problem came up frequently. ALL the men, Christian and non-Christian gave the woman the same advice: just tell him.

I've been using a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance for decades, and it's way better than any commentary I've ever used.

On another forum, I posted an article about how we are to seek the better gifts, explaining that we are allowed to have more than one gift. When they transferred my post from the Baptist forum to the charismatic forum, I objected that I am a Baptist, and we are allowed to believe in spiritual gifts. They politely refused.

There is some truth in false religion because Jesus enlightens every man who comes into the world, and because distorted remnants of Biblical truth survived among ancient peoples. For instance, the flood myths are common enough to say that the Flood really did occur, and that over time the story got corrupted.

Although I wasn't saved, I did learn something from the Wizard of Oz. The Wizard explained to the lion that he wasn't really a coward. The lion feared real danger, but he did his duty anyway. Watching the movie as an adult, for the first time in over twenty years, I realized that the Scarecrow was the smartest, the Tin Man was the kindest, and the Lion was the bravest. I think the kids miss that.