The Bridge Tract

[evangelist6589]

Disagreeing with you, pointing out flaws in thinking, and/or correcting errors is NOT "attacking." Perhaps the way in which it's done can be emotionally hurtful; but when you expose yourself publicly, you must know that in a sinful world, such things are gonna happen. You have two choices: complain to the moderators, and if they don't see things your way, go somewhere else; or toughen up and quit responding to any taunts, which only gives them encouragement to continue.

Knew a guy in Kansas; we'd play pranks on him, and each time, he'd get all huffy and loudly declare how he was gonna get us back. Which only made it more interesting to us to play more pranks on him, and see if he'd actually follow through and do something; or if he was just full of hot air.

You remind me a lot of him.

Likewise I am playing around comparing my critics to Gremlins. You think I believe in Gremlins? If so you are more naive than I thought.

 

[JonC]

After another look at this tract I have to say I was mistaken. It's very well illustrated and perhaps the best at that of any tract. I bought myself a pack of them and have used them to mail out to individuals (not churches or abortion centers) but individuals. Anyone here use this tract and what are your thoughts? I really do not have any gripes about it. Produced by Detroit Seminary a IFB Calvinistic place of education.

I could suggest they produce a ESV and NIV version but that's okay as the NASB is good enough. I like the alternative to the KJV and let me tell you that Fundamentalist usually do not produce tracts in other versions.

1 Cor. 15 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, [2] by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. [3] For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, [4] and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, [5] and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

No resurrection, no gospel.

 

[evangelist6589]

1 Cor. 15 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, [2] by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. [3] For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, [4] and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, [5] and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

No resurrection, no gospel.

Read the tract please

 

[Don]

Likewise I am playing around comparing my critics to Gremlins. You think I believe in Gremlins? If so you are more naive than I thought.

Believe in? It never crossed my mind--or anyone else's, for that matter-- that you might believe in gremlins. It's been quite obvious that you were using the reference to analogize people to annoying, destructive creatures--thus, making the reference derogatory, and a very good reason why the mods keep deleting it.

"Playing around" by referencing people as destructive monsters...well, let's just ask the question: would it be okay for all of them to do the same to you? If yes, then please let everyone know, so the "attacks" can really begin in earnest. But if not, if you wouldn't like people calling you a gremlin when they don't like what you say--perhaps you can explain why it's okay for you to do it?

 

[JonC]

Read the tract please

I did, but I did not see the resurrection explained. Quote what it say of the resurrection, please.

 

[evangelist6589]

I did, but I did not see the resurrection explained. Quote what it say of the resurrection, please.

The cross is mentioned but the resurrection perhaps not but I need to read it again.

 

[evangelist6589]

Believe in? It never crossed my mind--or anyone else's, for that matter-- that you might believe in gremlins. It's been quite obvious that you were using the reference to analogize people to annoying, destructive creatures--thus, making the reference derogatory, and a very good reason why the mods keep deleting it.

"Playing around" by referencing people as destructive monsters...well, let's just ask the question: would it be okay for all of them to do the same to you? If yes, then please let everyone know, so the "attacks" can really begin in earnest. But if not, if you wouldn't like people calling you a gremlin when they don't like what you say--perhaps you can explain why it's okay for you to do it?

They also sang Christmas carols, drank beer, and watched Snow White! He he

 

[evangelist6589]

Believe in? It never crossed my mind--or anyone else's, for that matter-- that you might believe in gremlins. It's been quite obvious that you were using the reference to analogize people to annoying, destructive creatures--thus, making the reference derogatory, and a very good reason why the mods keep deleting it.

"Playing around" by referencing people as destructive monsters...well, let's just ask the question: would it be okay for all of them to do the same to you? If yes, then please let everyone know, so the "attacks" can really begin in earnest. But if not, if you wouldn't like people calling you a gremlin when they don't like what you say--perhaps you can explain why it's okay for you to do it?

Maybe a rabbit is a better word.

 

[JonC]

The cross is mentioned but the resurrection perhaps not but I need to read it again.

Let me know, I may have just missed it. But if not then what was communicated was short of the gospel message.

 

[evangelist6589]

Let me know, I may have just missed it. But if not then what was communicated was short of the gospel message.

The tract is well illustrated but it is short on text. No tract is perfect in fact no gospel presentation is perfect. But you are right I should look more closely at my tracts for this essential doctrine.

 

[Don]

Maybe a rabbit is a better word.

Whatever word you choose--it's your intention that defines it. It's still obvious that you're being derogatory.

So--you still gonna continue the grade school insults? Or will you show some real maturity and stop responding in a way that encourages people to antagonize you?

 

[evangelist6589]

Whatever word you choose--it's your intention that defines it. It's still obvious that you're being derogatory.

So--you still gonna continue the grade school insults? Or will you show some real maturity and stop responding in a way that encourages people to antagonize you?

Hmm... let me think.

 

[Salty]

As I have said about 50 times I am WOTM P not WOTM O.

What is "P" and what is "O"

what is the difference?

 

[evangelist6589]

What is "P" and what is "O"

what is the difference?

Preferred vs Only. I am preferred but not only.

 

[evangelist6589]

Jon C looked at the tract again and it misses the resurrection. No tract is perfect I will say. Even MacArthurs tract misses this vital doctrine.

However John Pipers "Quest for Joy" does not and is perhaps the best of tracts in my collection.

 

[John of Japan]

A missionary to Japan once witnessed to a young Japanese lady without mentioning the resurrection of Christ. She replied, "Why should I pray to another dead person?" You see, religion in Japan, whatever its form, involves worshiping ancestors--dead people. In many other religions around the world, the resurrection is crucial to set Christ apart from and above those religions.

The resurrection of Christ is a huge part of the Gospel, and I do not hand out any tracts that omit it. The tract in my pocket right now ("Something to Smile About") says, "His resurrection assures that the believer can claim everlasting life when Jesus Christ is received as his/her personal Savior." (Order at www.lighthousepublications.org.)

 

[evangelist6589]

A missionary to Japan once witnessed to a young Japanese lady without mentioning the resurrection of Christ. She replied, "Why should I pray to another dead person?" You see, religion in Japan, whatever its form, involves worshiping ancestors--dead people. In many other religions around the world, the resurrection is crucial to set Christ apart from and above those religions.

The resurrection of Christ is a huge part of the Gospel, and I do not hand out any tracts that omit it. The tract in my pocket right now ("Something to Smile About") says, "His resurrection assures that the believer can claim everlasting life when Jesus Christ is received as his/her personal Savior." (Order at www.lighthousepublications.org.)

The MacArthur tract does not have it but does emphasize lordship salvation and repentance. Other tracts may have it but they preach easy believism. As I said no tract is perfect.

 

[InTheLight]

Jon C looked at the tract again and it misses the resurrection. No tract is perfect I will say. Even MacArthurs tract misses this vital doctrine.

However John Pipers "Quest for Joy" does not and is perhaps the best of tracts in my collection.

How can anyone say a tract that leaves out the resurrection is "best"? It's impossible.

 

[Salty]

Preferred vs Only. I am preferred but not only.

That is so obvious - I dont know, why I didnt realize that. (Maybe I am working too hard)

 

[evangelist6589]

That is so obvious - I dont know, why I didnt realize that. (Maybe I am working too hard)

If I was ONLY I would not stock tracts that were not law based, nor would I sometimes not use the law in my witnessing.