<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Ek Pyros - Out of Fire</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ekpyros.com/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ekpyros.com</link>
	<description>Ἐκ Πυρὸς - Out of Fire</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:23:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Death to Zygotes?  That&#8217;s a no-brainer. by Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22&#038;cpage=1#comment-217</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22#comment-217</guid>
		<description>Women have freedom: have sex and accept the responsibilities of pregnancy or abstain.  Your inability to accept this deal is just excuse-making.  There&#039;s also contraceptives.

If the baby is your body then why is it murder to kill a mother&#039;s child outside of the womb?  Shouldn&#039;t it just be assault?  The mother is still alive.  Only part of her body is dead.

&quot;We are curious for the experiences that we have not known, and sex is always one of them. So then, since we are made in God’s nature, aren’t we disrespecting him by going against our nature, or HIS nature?&quot;

Where in the Bible does it say we have God&#039;s NATURE?  We are made in God&#039;s IMAGE--we do not have His NATURE.  That would be blasphemous to suggest we share a nature found only between the members of the Trinity.  Besides, God does not have sexual desires.  That thought is laughable, but sinister as well.

Jesus accepts anyone who will turn to Him, repent, and believe.  Please repent of your sins, believe in the only One who can save you from God&#039;s justice, and enjoy the peace and security of God&#039;s children.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Women have freedom: have sex and accept the responsibilities of pregnancy or abstain.  Your inability to accept this deal is just excuse-making.  There&#8217;s also contraceptives.</p>
<p>If the baby is your body then why is it murder to kill a mother&#8217;s child outside of the womb?  Shouldn&#8217;t it just be assault?  The mother is still alive.  Only part of her body is dead.</p>
<p>&#8220;We are curious for the experiences that we have not known, and sex is always one of them. So then, since we are made in God’s nature, aren’t we disrespecting him by going against our nature, or HIS nature?&#8221;</p>
<p>Where in the Bible does it say we have God&#8217;s NATURE?  We are made in God&#8217;s IMAGE&#8211;we do not have His NATURE.  That would be blasphemous to suggest we share a nature found only between the members of the Trinity.  Besides, God does not have sexual desires.  That thought is laughable, but sinister as well.</p>
<p>Jesus accepts anyone who will turn to Him, repent, and believe.  Please repent of your sins, believe in the only One who can save you from God&#8217;s justice, and enjoy the peace and security of God&#8217;s children.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Death to Zygotes?  That&#8217;s a no-brainer. by Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22&#038;cpage=1#comment-216</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 05:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22#comment-216</guid>
		<description>Considering you haven&#039;t even attempted to refute my original post, I should delete that.  My post was on the existence of the soul and its relationship to the abortion debate.  Nowhere did I mention anything of God&#039;s laws prohibiting abortion.  Identify where in my post I have even hinted that my &quot;stance is based on a law&quot;.  Instead, you read enough to know my position on abortion and then rant against God and men.  Please, attack my argument, not your strawman.  And please refrain from making silly statements like &quot;my body, my baby&quot; [to kill].  Non sequitur.

Furthermore, and the reason I decided to leave your ridiculous reply: you have no idea what I have or have not been through.  Do you know me?  Or did you stumble across this website, noted its Christian positions, and decide to push your own political agenda?  You think I don&#039;t know how difficult it is to say abortion is wrong to my friends?  Do you honestly think, simply on account that I coauthor a Christian site, that I haven&#039;t had to sit with girls I know very well who had been drugged and raped and counsel them that IF they&#039;ve conceived, they should not punish the child?  And when you now imagine me doing that, do you see me on my podium, thumping them over the head with my Bible, screaming at them: &quot;REPENT!&quot;??  Is that what you see; instead of me bawling my eyes out listening to my friend tell me she screamed &quot;No, please! I want to save myself for my husband!&quot; over and over and over?  Not being able to sleep for days, writhing in empathetic anguish over their abuse?    You think, because I&#039;m a MAN, a CHRISTIAN MAN who happens to hold high the name of Jesus, that I DON&#039;T KNOW?  Well, you guessed wrong.  You see, the difference between you and me isn&#039;t that I &quot;don&#039;t know&quot; or that I &quot;haven&#039;t been there&quot;.  The difference between you and me is that when I speak to one of these girls . . . I can tell them that there&#039;s hope.  I can tell them that all their anxiety, all their depression, their past regrets, their most shameful nights can disappear, can all be washed away.  I can tell them that there&#039;s a brighter day coming.  I can tell them that someday Christ will return, and He will wipe every tear away from our eyes and we won&#039;t remember our suffering any longer.  We can have freedom because of His shed blood, not because of your legislative agenda.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Considering you haven&#8217;t even attempted to refute my original post, I should delete that.  My post was on the existence of the soul and its relationship to the abortion debate.  Nowhere did I mention anything of God&#8217;s laws prohibiting abortion.  Identify where in my post I have even hinted that my &#8220;stance is based on a law&#8221;.  Instead, you read enough to know my position on abortion and then rant against God and men.  Please, attack my argument, not your strawman.  And please refrain from making silly statements like &#8220;my body, my baby&#8221; [to kill].  Non sequitur.</p>
<p>Furthermore, and the reason I decided to leave your ridiculous reply: you have no idea what I have or have not been through.  Do you know me?  Or did you stumble across this website, noted its Christian positions, and decide to push your own political agenda?  You think I don&#8217;t know how difficult it is to say abortion is wrong to my friends?  Do you honestly think, simply on account that I coauthor a Christian site, that I haven&#8217;t had to sit with girls I know very well who had been drugged and raped and counsel them that IF they&#8217;ve conceived, they should not punish the child?  And when you now imagine me doing that, do you see me on my podium, thumping them over the head with my Bible, screaming at them: &#8220;REPENT!&#8221;??  Is that what you see; instead of me bawling my eyes out listening to my friend tell me she screamed &#8220;No, please! I want to save myself for my husband!&#8221; over and over and over?  Not being able to sleep for days, writhing in empathetic anguish over their abuse?    You think, because I&#8217;m a MAN, a CHRISTIAN MAN who happens to hold high the name of Jesus, that I DON&#8217;T KNOW?  Well, you guessed wrong.  You see, the difference between you and me isn&#8217;t that I &#8220;don&#8217;t know&#8221; or that I &#8220;haven&#8217;t been there&#8221;.  The difference between you and me is that when I speak to one of these girls . . . I can tell them that there&#8217;s hope.  I can tell them that all their anxiety, all their depression, their past regrets, their most shameful nights can disappear, can all be washed away.  I can tell them that there&#8217;s a brighter day coming.  I can tell them that someday Christ will return, and He will wipe every tear away from our eyes and we won&#8217;t remember our suffering any longer.  We can have freedom because of His shed blood, not because of your legislative agenda.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Death to Zygotes?  That&#8217;s a no-brainer. by Clementine</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22&#038;cpage=1#comment-215</link>
		<dc:creator>Clementine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 04:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=22#comment-215</guid>
		<description>Religion and Science are often two factors that stand at complete odds with each other. Connected through the realm of neuroscience and philosophy, I feel strongly that you have taken these worthy academic fields and twisted their meanings so that this is not a logical argument at all, but simply a very biased argument, without much of a leg to stand on. As a christian, you seem to be making a very common mistake. You are being rather hypocritical. In your opinion against abortion, you are holding back the progression of times, the same progression without which you would not have a computer to preach on.
You are speaking medieval ideas in a modern time, it&#039;s no wonder anti-abortion has not gone over well. Secondly, you are hypocritical in that you have never been put in this situation. You have never fathered a child, you have never put your future on the line for an infinitesimal speck that has no knowledge of it&#039;s existence. Yes, every baby is &quot;one of God&#039;s creatures&quot;, but then if you are in no place to provide one of these precious creatures the blessed life it deserves, then why should you have it? So it can be miserable? Why is it wrong to release it&#039;s soul so that someone with better circumstances may raise it with happiness? 
In addition, the foundation of any anti-abortion argument is simply &quot;God says abortion is bad&quot;. I understand that it is firmly your belief that God exists, and it is not any of my business to contradict this, but perhaps I am not the only one that thinks basing a logical argument upon what many people believe does not exist doesn&#039;t really seem like a solid way to convince anyone of anything.
Besides, regardless of whether God exists or not, the laws decreed by God were not for our benefit, they were for His (once again assuming that he does exist, since in your argument, he does). The rules that God laid out (since we were made in God&#039;s nature, and we can reasonably say that he must have roughly human reasoning abilities), were simply for self preservation. How can we survive as a species if we all kill each other? It has been discussed for a very long time that the Kosher qualities of Judaism exist solely because shellfish were known to cause certain diseases. Once again, self preservation. But times have changed, most Jews are no longer Kosher, and so your stance is based on a law that is outdated, and essentially nonsensical. 
Human beings are by definition curious and selfish creatures: I am sure you will agree, they are foundations that your religion is based on, take Adam and Eve for example. How then are we supposed to oppose our natural instincts? If having a baby would be bad for us, we are selfish, and we simply choose not to have one. Abstinence is a joke. As humans, this is proven. We are curious for the experiences that we have not known, and sex is always one of them. So then, since we are made in God&#039;s nature, aren&#039;t we disrespecting him by going against our nature, or HIS nature? Curious how that works out.
Lastly, I think your greatest fault is that you are speaking in a giant hyperbole. Philosophical and psychological studies alike have shown that speaking in great numbers of people as opposed to single people you know make the huge difference. Sure, it is easy to say that people in a far off distant land are evil for getting an abortion, but it is difficult to say the same for your best friend, or your girlfriend. After all, you want what&#039;s best for them, right? Your tragic flaw is drama, simple as that. And when it comes down to it, morality or no, it is the WOMAN who has the baby, the man has nothing to do with it. If you don&#039;t want me to have an abortion, that&#039;s fantastic. Why don&#039;t you have the baby instead? You&#039;ll notice that the majority of anti-abortionists are male. Look at both of you, for example. But until you have my baby, I think the decision remains with me, correct? My body, my baby. Not yours, not the United States of America&#039;s. It&#039;s mine. It belongs to it&#039;s mother. And nothing you ever do will change that. So, let&#039;s leave abortion open. Let&#039;s stop this unnecessary stupidity, and give women what we were always meant to have: freedom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Religion and Science are often two factors that stand at complete odds with each other. Connected through the realm of neuroscience and philosophy, I feel strongly that you have taken these worthy academic fields and twisted their meanings so that this is not a logical argument at all, but simply a very biased argument, without much of a leg to stand on. As a christian, you seem to be making a very common mistake. You are being rather hypocritical. In your opinion against abortion, you are holding back the progression of times, the same progression without which you would not have a computer to preach on.<br />
You are speaking medieval ideas in a modern time, it&#8217;s no wonder anti-abortion has not gone over well. Secondly, you are hypocritical in that you have never been put in this situation. You have never fathered a child, you have never put your future on the line for an infinitesimal speck that has no knowledge of it&#8217;s existence. Yes, every baby is &#8220;one of God&#8217;s creatures&#8221;, but then if you are in no place to provide one of these precious creatures the blessed life it deserves, then why should you have it? So it can be miserable? Why is it wrong to release it&#8217;s soul so that someone with better circumstances may raise it with happiness?<br />
In addition, the foundation of any anti-abortion argument is simply &#8220;God says abortion is bad&#8221;. I understand that it is firmly your belief that God exists, and it is not any of my business to contradict this, but perhaps I am not the only one that thinks basing a logical argument upon what many people believe does not exist doesn&#8217;t really seem like a solid way to convince anyone of anything.<br />
Besides, regardless of whether God exists or not, the laws decreed by God were not for our benefit, they were for His (once again assuming that he does exist, since in your argument, he does). The rules that God laid out (since we were made in God&#8217;s nature, and we can reasonably say that he must have roughly human reasoning abilities), were simply for self preservation. How can we survive as a species if we all kill each other? It has been discussed for a very long time that the Kosher qualities of Judaism exist solely because shellfish were known to cause certain diseases. Once again, self preservation. But times have changed, most Jews are no longer Kosher, and so your stance is based on a law that is outdated, and essentially nonsensical.<br />
Human beings are by definition curious and selfish creatures: I am sure you will agree, they are foundations that your religion is based on, take Adam and Eve for example. How then are we supposed to oppose our natural instincts? If having a baby would be bad for us, we are selfish, and we simply choose not to have one. Abstinence is a joke. As humans, this is proven. We are curious for the experiences that we have not known, and sex is always one of them. So then, since we are made in God&#8217;s nature, aren&#8217;t we disrespecting him by going against our nature, or HIS nature? Curious how that works out.<br />
Lastly, I think your greatest fault is that you are speaking in a giant hyperbole. Philosophical and psychological studies alike have shown that speaking in great numbers of people as opposed to single people you know make the huge difference. Sure, it is easy to say that people in a far off distant land are evil for getting an abortion, but it is difficult to say the same for your best friend, or your girlfriend. After all, you want what&#8217;s best for them, right? Your tragic flaw is drama, simple as that. And when it comes down to it, morality or no, it is the WOMAN who has the baby, the man has nothing to do with it. If you don&#8217;t want me to have an abortion, that&#8217;s fantastic. Why don&#8217;t you have the baby instead? You&#8217;ll notice that the majority of anti-abortionists are male. Look at both of you, for example. But until you have my baby, I think the decision remains with me, correct? My body, my baby. Not yours, not the United States of America&#8217;s. It&#8217;s mine. It belongs to it&#8217;s mother. And nothing you ever do will change that. So, let&#8217;s leave abortion open. Let&#8217;s stop this unnecessary stupidity, and give women what we were always meant to have: freedom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Assurance&#8221; Part IV &#8211; A.W. Pink by jaybird632</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=195&#038;cpage=1#comment-206</link>
		<dc:creator>jaybird632</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 16:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=195#comment-206</guid>
		<description>Hi,
I enjoyed visiting your blog.  I believe we are interested in many of the same things.

I run a Christian blog called &quot;The Theological Round Table&quot;.  http://1jaybird.blogspot.com/

I conduct a blog to engage in and grow Internet Evangelism.  I would like you to consider linking your site to mine.  If I link to you, will you link to me?
Thank you so much

Lord bless you, 
Jaybird632</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,<br />
I enjoyed visiting your blog.  I believe we are interested in many of the same things.</p>
<p>I run a Christian blog called &#8220;The Theological Round Table&#8221;.  <a href="http://1jaybird.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://1jaybird.blogspot.com/</a></p>
<p>I conduct a blog to engage in and grow Internet Evangelism.  I would like you to consider linking your site to mine.  If I link to you, will you link to me?<br />
Thank you so much</p>
<p>Lord bless you,<br />
Jaybird632</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Assurance&#8221; Part III &#8211; A.W. Pink by Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=192&#038;cpage=1#comment-198</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=192#comment-198</guid>
		<description>&quot;Therefore it behooves every serious soul to prayerfully and carefully set down the Scriptural marks of God’s children on the one side, and the characteristics of his own soul and life on the other, and determine if there be any real resemblance between them.&quot;

I think the &quot;trick&quot; to assurance does lie in this quote but the challenge is to evaluate our characteristics justly.  On the one hand, if the mark is Jesus&#039; own life and character, we are continuously and grossly inadequate in meeting it or feeling like we meet it.  On the other hand, as the writer has indicated, our very turmoil over our inadequacy is, perhaps, one of the best marks of our salvation.

I was struck when reading this series of posts that this issue of the assurance of salvation is one where Satan can wreak havoc in our souls.  Reminded of the fictional account of hellborn strategies that C.S. Lewis provides in The Screwtape Letters, I imagined how the devil could use a sense of our own failings as ammunition to debilitate our sense of assurance as a tactic to render us spiritually useless.

In other words, if he can&#039;t get us caught up in overt or covert sins that, in and of themselves, hamper our relationship with God, he might engage us in innterminable bouts of circular self-examination that absorb us from simply acting out our faith.

I say &quot;acting out&quot; very purposefully, because I think we can fall into the trap of thinking that, if we are saved, we will naturally, with a joyful heart, act accordingly.  However, if &quot;obedience&quot; and &quot;loving one&#039;s neighbor&quot; and &quot;returning good for evil&quot; and &quot;hoping&quot; and &quot;demonstrating patience&quot; were automatic responses stemming from our salvation, they would be effortless in a way that would render them meaningless--systematic responses from a changed individual who would do less or more.  The fact that we wrestle with these (not all of us with the same ones) is where the power of our acting them out is found.

The best non-spiritual example I can think of regarding this is courage.  Courage is not &quot;acting without fear&quot; as some would define it.  Rather, courage is &quot;acting in spite of fear.&quot;  Likewise,&quot;patience&quot; is not necessarily the ability to wait without fretting; rather, it is, for many of us who are impatient by nature, simply the ability to force ourselves to &quot;wait.&quot;  Over time, as we force ourselves, kicking and screaming inside, to wait, we find it easier.  Does the Spirit help us with &quot;patience?&quot;  Surely.  But if He simply endowed us with such by so much &quot;spiritual magic,&quot; then it would not have as much meaning in demonstrating our transformed hearts to us or others.

Put another way, if Jesus and the Scriptures just command us to do things that are now easy to our regenerated selves, then much of Scripture, written to the saints, would be pointless, since there would be no need for admonitions directed to the saints to begin with.

At any rate, those are my initial thoughts on the subject, without a great deal of research or specific theological underpinnings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Therefore it behooves every serious soul to prayerfully and carefully set down the Scriptural marks of God’s children on the one side, and the characteristics of his own soul and life on the other, and determine if there be any real resemblance between them.&#8221;</p>
<p>I think the &#8220;trick&#8221; to assurance does lie in this quote but the challenge is to evaluate our characteristics justly.  On the one hand, if the mark is Jesus&#8217; own life and character, we are continuously and grossly inadequate in meeting it or feeling like we meet it.  On the other hand, as the writer has indicated, our very turmoil over our inadequacy is, perhaps, one of the best marks of our salvation.</p>
<p>I was struck when reading this series of posts that this issue of the assurance of salvation is one where Satan can wreak havoc in our souls.  Reminded of the fictional account of hellborn strategies that C.S. Lewis provides in The Screwtape Letters, I imagined how the devil could use a sense of our own failings as ammunition to debilitate our sense of assurance as a tactic to render us spiritually useless.</p>
<p>In other words, if he can&#8217;t get us caught up in overt or covert sins that, in and of themselves, hamper our relationship with God, he might engage us in innterminable bouts of circular self-examination that absorb us from simply acting out our faith.</p>
<p>I say &#8220;acting out&#8221; very purposefully, because I think we can fall into the trap of thinking that, if we are saved, we will naturally, with a joyful heart, act accordingly.  However, if &#8220;obedience&#8221; and &#8220;loving one&#8217;s neighbor&#8221; and &#8220;returning good for evil&#8221; and &#8220;hoping&#8221; and &#8220;demonstrating patience&#8221; were automatic responses stemming from our salvation, they would be effortless in a way that would render them meaningless&#8211;systematic responses from a changed individual who would do less or more.  The fact that we wrestle with these (not all of us with the same ones) is where the power of our acting them out is found.</p>
<p>The best non-spiritual example I can think of regarding this is courage.  Courage is not &#8220;acting without fear&#8221; as some would define it.  Rather, courage is &#8220;acting in spite of fear.&#8221;  Likewise,&#8221;patience&#8221; is not necessarily the ability to wait without fretting; rather, it is, for many of us who are impatient by nature, simply the ability to force ourselves to &#8220;wait.&#8221;  Over time, as we force ourselves, kicking and screaming inside, to wait, we find it easier.  Does the Spirit help us with &#8220;patience?&#8221;  Surely.  But if He simply endowed us with such by so much &#8220;spiritual magic,&#8221; then it would not have as much meaning in demonstrating our transformed hearts to us or others.</p>
<p>Put another way, if Jesus and the Scriptures just command us to do things that are now easy to our regenerated selves, then much of Scripture, written to the saints, would be pointless, since there would be no need for admonitions directed to the saints to begin with.</p>
<p>At any rate, those are my initial thoughts on the subject, without a great deal of research or specific theological underpinnings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Deductive Inerrancy by Errancy</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=54&#038;cpage=1#comment-194</link>
		<dc:creator>Errancy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=54#comment-194</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right: it&#039;s much better to argue for inerrancy based on God&#039;s nature than based on the Bible itself. The Bible itself looks sufficiently man-made to undermine biblical arguments for inerrancy. 

The difficulty is in showing that the Bible&#039;s relationship with God is such that his perfection entails its inerrancy. I&#039;m not convinced that that can be done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right: it&#8217;s much better to argue for inerrancy based on God&#8217;s nature than based on the Bible itself. The Bible itself looks sufficiently man-made to undermine biblical arguments for inerrancy. </p>
<p>The difficulty is in showing that the Bible&#8217;s relationship with God is such that his perfection entails its inerrancy. I&#8217;m not convinced that that can be done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama, Abortion, and His Christian Support by Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=167&#038;cpage=1#comment-191</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 04:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=167#comment-191</guid>
		<description>Thank you, Marc.  Yes, as the website quotes, Obama has said, &quot;The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing I’d do.&quot;  The first thing he&#039;ll do is erase all barriers keeping the US from murdering more babies (as if 1.2+ million per year weren&#039;t enough).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, Marc.  Yes, as the website quotes, Obama has said, &#8220;The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing I’d do.&#8221;  The first thing he&#8217;ll do is erase all barriers keeping the US from murdering more babies (as if 1.2+ million per year weren&#8217;t enough).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama, Abortion, and His Christian Support by Salt and Light</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=167&#038;cpage=1#comment-190</link>
		<dc:creator>Salt and Light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 03:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=167#comment-190</guid>
		<description>Nick &amp; I both ask:
“Why on earth (or should I say, why in hell? for this is certainly hellish) are evangelical, Bible-believing Christians backing a man who claims to be “of the faith” but directly opposes Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior?”

The simple answer is that they have surrendered to idolatry disguised as the illusion of “The America Dream”. Abortion is child sacrifice but Christians don’t recognize this as truth because they are biblically illiterate especially on issues that may have an impact on them personally.

I encourage folks to learn about FOCA, don’t be fooled by its title like the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society was. Then sign the Fight FOCA Petition at the following web address.
http://www.fightfoca.com/ 

Thanks &amp;
God Bless,
Marc</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick &amp; I both ask:<br />
“Why on earth (or should I say, why in hell? for this is certainly hellish) are evangelical, Bible-believing Christians backing a man who claims to be “of the faith” but directly opposes Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior?”</p>
<p>The simple answer is that they have surrendered to idolatry disguised as the illusion of “The America Dream”. Abortion is child sacrifice but Christians don’t recognize this as truth because they are biblically illiterate especially on issues that may have an impact on them personally.</p>
<p>I encourage folks to learn about FOCA, don’t be fooled by its title like the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society was. Then sign the Fight FOCA Petition at the following web address.<br />
<a href="http://www.fightfoca.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.fightfoca.com/</a> </p>
<p>Thanks &amp;<br />
God Bless,<br />
Marc</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Our Personal God by Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=81&#038;cpage=1#comment-174</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:35:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/2008/07/28/our-personal-god/#comment-174</guid>
		<description>Some notes from A.W. Pink, on the assessment that God&#039;s predestination is personal because He predestines a specific people to salvation:

&quot;But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth&quot;
2 Thessalonians 2:13

There are three things here which deserve special attention. First, the fact that we are expressly told that God&#039;s elect are &quot;chosen to salvation&quot;: Language could not be more explicit. How summarily do these words dispose of the sophistries and equivocations of all who would make election refer to nothing but external privileges or rank in service! It is to &quot;salvation&quot; itself that God has chosen us. Second, we are warned here that election unto salvation does not disregard the use of appropriate means: salvation is reached through &quot;sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth&quot; It is not true that because God has chosen a certain one to salvation that he will be saved willy-nilly, whether he believes or not: nowhere do the Scriptures so represent it. The same God who &quot;chose unto salvation&quot;, decreed that His purpose should be realized through the work of the spirit and belief of the truth. Third, that God has chosen us unto salvation is a profound cause for fervent praise. Note how strongly the apostle express this - &quot;we are bound to give thanks always to God for you. brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation&quot;, etc. Instead of shrinking back in horror from the doctrine of predestination, the believer, when he sees this blessed truth as it is unfolded in the Word, discovers a ground for gratitude and thanksgiving such as nothing else affords, save the unspeakable gift of the Redeemer Himself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some notes from A.W. Pink, on the assessment that God&#8217;s predestination is personal because He predestines a specific people to salvation:</p>
<p>&#8220;But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth&#8221;<br />
2 Thessalonians 2:13</p>
<p>There are three things here which deserve special attention. First, the fact that we are expressly told that God&#8217;s elect are &#8220;chosen to salvation&#8221;: Language could not be more explicit. How summarily do these words dispose of the sophistries and equivocations of all who would make election refer to nothing but external privileges or rank in service! It is to &#8220;salvation&#8221; itself that God has chosen us. Second, we are warned here that election unto salvation does not disregard the use of appropriate means: salvation is reached through &#8220;sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth&#8221; It is not true that because God has chosen a certain one to salvation that he will be saved willy-nilly, whether he believes or not: nowhere do the Scriptures so represent it. The same God who &#8220;chose unto salvation&#8221;, decreed that His purpose should be realized through the work of the spirit and belief of the truth. Third, that God has chosen us unto salvation is a profound cause for fervent praise. Note how strongly the apostle express this &#8211; &#8220;we are bound to give thanks always to God for you. brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation&#8221;, etc. Instead of shrinking back in horror from the doctrine of predestination, the believer, when he sees this blessed truth as it is unfolded in the Word, discovers a ground for gratitude and thanksgiving such as nothing else affords, save the unspeakable gift of the Redeemer Himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Verbum Dei or Verbum Homo? by Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.ekpyros.com/?p=68&#038;cpage=1#comment-162</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ekpyros.com/2008/03/26/verbum-dei-or-verbum-homo/#comment-162</guid>
		<description>Also, Gal. 1:11-12 - 11For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, Gal. 1:11-12 &#8211; 11For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
