Comments for

Comment on An Expositor Poll-What about Unity? by the Rev. Bryan Dabney

the Rev. Bryan Dabney — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 15:21:17 +0000

Brett, well spoken. There is only one true church, apostolic and catholic.
But Romanism ( I do not use this term in the pejorative sense but merely to draw a distinction from the catholic church versus the Roman Catholic Church), while it has reconnected with Eastern Orthodoxy in some ways, nevertheless it still views those churches as “outside the box.”
With regard to Protestants, the term “ecclesiatical communities” is a euphemism for being estranged from the truth of God and out of communion with him and them.
I agree with you that we should be in prayer for all who operate beyond the precincts of the Scriptures. That’s not naive at all. God bless you in your Christian walk and witness.

Comment on Is the Reformation Over? by the Rev. Bryan Dabney

the Rev. Bryan Dabney — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:27:31 +0000

Bravo, Dr. Sproul! Article XI of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican faith states that “we are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works and deservings.” What all deserve is death due to original sin. Only by the workings of the Holy Ghost do we seek after God through Christ. And only through our Lord’s act of atonement do we obtain salvation. We are of his workmanship and through him we are justified before our God (Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 2:1-10).

Comment on An Expositor Poll-What about Unity? by Brett S

Brett S — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:03:11 +0000

Thanks Mike Corley,
I’ll have to check back at your media site. Last time tried to download I got an error. Could be a firewall problem on my end; hope to have a few weeks back at the office to cipher such things. I miss the wisdom of Pastor Scott and the great Expositor.

No offense to the good Reverend Dabney above, but this is not a true statement: “To the Romanists, there is no other Christian church, period. The Eastern Orthodox churches regard the Romanists as being in error, while both regard Protestants as heretical associations and not even real churches”
I forgive the perjoritive use of the term Romanist, but please get the facts strait. The Roman Catholic Church (as well as the bible) teaches that Jesus founded one Church. All true Christians are in various stages of communion with the one Church; with Chirst as it’s head. There are many ancient Eastern “churches” in full communion with the RCC (Maronites, Ethiopian coptics, the Chaldean Christians in Iraq, etc, etc, etc.)
The Eastern Orthodox churches ARE considered “sister churches” with completely valid bishops and sacraments. The EO are in schism with the Catholic church because of some minor (to my mind) theological doctrines, plus while recognizing the position of the bishop of Rome, not recognizing his full authority. The EO churches are valid local churches established by the apostles themselves. The last 2 pope have made restoring full communion with the EO a top priority (personally, I think the Lord approves)
Protestant communions are considered “eclessial communities” because they are in schism with the western catholic church without retaining valid bishops and only 2 of the sacraments. This doesn’t stop protestants from becoming Christians or from being called Christians.

I know plenty of romanists and protestants in varying degrees of error and heretical associations; but that’s not keeping me from praying for them and fellowshipping with them. Call me naïve but I think it’s better that walling myself off in multiple layers of separation. Peace be with you!

Comment on An Expositor Poll-What about Unity? by theexpositor

theexpositor — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:35:11 +0000

Thanks Brett. Always good to hear from you. Perhaps the question was too general, but referring to the “basics of the faith”, I would list them as greats such as J. Gresham Machen and others did as being: the inerrancy of the Bible, Sola Scriptura, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the imminent personal return of Jesus Christ. These foundations are non-negotiable.

A quick note, dont know if you know it, but we still do a weekly broadcast available on The Mike Corley Program media site at http://mcpaudio.wordpress.com/. In fact, Scott Reiber and I are taping today for release this weekend, a program dealing with the subjects of Unity and The Manhattan Declaration. Thanks.

Comment on An Expositor Poll-What about Unity? by Brett S

Brett S — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:14:09 +0000

I’m voting in abstention. Not because I’m like a squishy politician afraid to make a decision. I just don’t understand the question.

For one thing I’m not sure if I’m eligible to vote, and secondly the phrase (the basics of the faith) opens up a major can of worms. I’ve been trying to put my finger on it the past few years: Are there really any 2 “Evangelical Christians” out there who can agree on (the basics of the faith)? The poll question offers eg. salvation and the bible. I believe in salvation and the bible; but wouldn’t the death/resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the Trinity be included as basics of the faith?

One good thing, no matter how much we screw it up the Church is not some concept, which we try to “fix” or have “issues” with. The Church is not some human organization we created to meet, study the Bible, support one another, sing hymns, and do good works – as commendable as those actions may be. The Church is God’s plan. Jesus Christ founded the Church and began a new creation. We enter into communion/unity through Christ alone. It’s His Body. He is the head and we are the members. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

How ‘bout a direct simple poll question like [Who misses listening to the Mike Corley Program regularly?] There’s a question that’s easy to vote YES to.
Long live MCP!

Ps: I signed the Manhattan Declaration because I;m willing to face persecution and death for the good news of Jesus Christ, the “Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), who died and rose from the dead. In the time of King Herod and the Emperor Caesar Augustus, God fulfilled the promises that he made to Abraham and his descendants. He sent “his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons” (Galatians 4:4-5).

Comment on An Expositor Poll-What about Unity? by the Rev. Bryan Dabney

the Rev. Bryan Dabney — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:31:27 +0000

“Can two walk together, except they be agreed?’ Amos 3:3. This verse affirms the notion of unity with those of like mind, and necessarily carries with it the notion of mutual acceptance of one another as believers, which they do not for a minute share outside of the points raised. To the Romanists, there is no other Christian church, period. The Eastern Orthodox churches regard the Romanists as being in error, while both regard Protestants as heretical associations and not even real churches.

Comment on Ask the Pastor by theexpositor

theexpositor — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:02:40 +0000

Chris, your question has been directed to Pastor Scott for his reply. We will also discuss it on a future radio program.

Comment on John MacArthur Calls Obama a “Non-Christian” by theexpositor

theexpositor — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:59:55 +0000

Oh I beg to differ Chris. You sir should do your homework. In spite of your objections, for whatever reason, to faith and religion, this country was most definitely founded on Judeo-Christian principles, which is thusly based on the Holy Scriptures. Agree or not, this fact is undeniable.

Comment on The Heresy of Oneness Pentecostalism by the Rev. Bryan Dabney

the Rev. Bryan Dabney — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:52:56 +0000

Well said, Brother Mike. We must contend for the faith (St. Jude, 3) if we be in Christ. And those who bear his name ought to abide in the sound doctrines of God’s word written. The Holy Trinity is one of those defining tenets which separate the wheat from the chaff. Nowhere in the New Testament will you find a nullification of our Lord’s words in St. Matthew 28 wherein he confirmed the method of baptism “in the name of the Father , and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. ” The Nicene Creed was simply an affirmation of a previously known fact of Scripture.

Comment on John MacArthur Calls Obama a “Non-Christian” by chris

chris — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:08:04 +0000

I’m sorry to burst your bubble… who cares. This country was not founded on scripture. Many of our country’s forefathers were not “Christian”, thus why they understood the separation of church and state. Do your research!