Jump to content

Baptist News

Sign in to follow this  

RSS Feed from http://www.bpnews.net/


Baptist News Feed

The news listed in this forum is taken automatically from Baptist Press. The information and links posted here is for reference purpose only. Online Baptist may or may not agree with the content posted in this forum. If you find any OBjectionable material here, please report it and the staff at Online Baptist will look into it.

404 topics in this forum

    • 0 replies
    • 329 views
    • 0 replies
    • 260 views
    • 0 replies
    • 399 views
    • 0 replies
    • 408 views
    • 0 replies
    • 280 views
    • 0 replies
    • 355 views
    • 0 replies
    • 308 views
    • 0 replies
    • 346 views
    • 0 replies
    • 183 views
    • 0 replies
    • 316 views
    • 0 replies
    • 369 views
    • 0 replies
    • 294 views
    • 0 replies
    • 249 views
    • 0 replies
    • 250 views
    • 0 replies
    • 195 views
    • 3 replies
    • 459 views
    • 0 replies
    • 324 views
    • 0 replies
    • 270 views
    • 0 replies
    • 251 views
    • 0 replies
    • 368 views
    • 0 replies
    • 316 views
    • 0 replies
    • 319 views
    • 0 replies
    • 387 views
    • 0 replies
    • 307 views
    • 0 replies
    • 326 views
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Recent Topics

  • Recent Posts

    • I am still awaiting answers to ALL of the aforementioned questions. Do any care to respond?   No Nicolaitans, Firstly, thank you for your brief answer, yet I am looking for more, and would prefer scriptural answers rather than opinion and subjective views. But with the statement you gave of it being an adult....My question is as so. So, an 18 year old that drinks, fights, steals, cheats, fornicates, etc., gets saved and stays clean into his later years can never be a pastor? Or is just the 18 year old that got married and divorced, got right and stayed clean in his later years that can't be a pastor? This is the issue that I have with teaching the "one wife" is one marriage. It creates a major double standard in the forgiveness & dare I say it yet again....the forgetfulness of God. Does not God not only forgive our sins, but also forgets that we ever committed them? (Heb 10:17) Which would include divorce and another marriage, if it were even a sin to begin with. (1 Cor. 7:27-28)   To all, Again, I have asked specific questions and am looking for scriptural answers.  I understand all are busy, and will continue to wait for the answers to my presented questions. Thank you.  
    • I will address the scriptures you have listed as supposed contradictions. But before I do, I would like to exhort you, and say that there are many things in the scriptures that cannot be simply explained, or at times may not make sense, and seem to be contradictions. My suggestion to you is 1) Take what the scripture says as it reads. If you do not understand it or think there is a contradiction, give it time, and pray to God to reveal to you what the meaning is. 2) Keep your heart sincere. If you are truly seeking for the truth, and not proof there are errors, then God will either show you the answer through the Holy Ghost by opening your eyes to it, or he will show it to you through the Holy Ghost by using a preacher and teacher. Just as he used Philip to preach and teach the Ethiopian eunuch. 3) Accept and receive the truth you already have. If you cannot accept and receive the truth you already know, why would God reveal more to you? You must first be able to handle the milk of the word before you can handle the meat the word, or even the strong meat of the word. I personally always default to the fact that I am the one that is not smart enough to figure it out or to understand it, and so I ask God to reveal it to me with sincere prayer, much study, and seeking preachers and teachers. If you are sincere in your desire to know the truth, God will show it, and hopefully you will learn that when we think the scripture is wrong, that, eventually, God will reveal that the scripture is ALWAYS true, and we are the liars. (Rom 3:4) EXAMPLE #1 Matt. 27:5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. Acts 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. As far as the example you gave above, you say that you were given a “half-butt” explanation, but if I may say, it was a PLAUSIBLE explanation. Is there not some cases where people hanged were decapitated or the rope broke, or what they were tied off to broke? (See the deaths of George Painter 1894, Tom Ketchum 1901, and Eva Dugan 1930 for a few examples) OSHA says that a man tied off in a safety harness must be attached to an anchorage point that can withstand 5,000 lbs of force. They have determined that the average 200 pound man “falling” and then immediately stopping (in this case, very likely, a rope around the neck probably tied to a tree branch?) generates just under 5,000 lbs of weight. So basically his fall is generating enough force to turn him into the weight of a pickup truck if he were to suddenly stop. So yes it is very plausible that he BOTH hanged himself and when the rope tightened the weight he generated from his inertia broke either the limb, the rope, or his head, and he falling headlong burst asunder when he hit the ground. So the question is, is the scripture contradicted or is it just giving some information here by one man's account, and a little more information from another man's account? This is no different than a detective interviewing more than one witness to piece the entire story together. And so it is with the bible...a little here, and a little there. And you are to be the workman studying and rightly dividing to fit the pieces together to make the whole puzzle fit together.   EXAMPLE #2 1 Chron 21:5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword. 2 Sam. 24:9 And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. Notice the wording. 1 Chron. 21:5 is a total all men that drew the sword while 2 Sam. 24:9 is a number of valient men that drew the sword – It would be the same if you were to say the total number of the US army was 1 million fighting men, but the number of Green Berets that are a part of the 1 million, was 100 thousand men. And then again look at the words of the scripture with the number of men from Judah. The total number of men that drew the sword was 490,000, while the total of the entire army was 500,000.   EXAMPLE #3 2 Chron 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD. 2 Kings 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. Let us start at the beginning. Nebuchadnezzar began to reign, and had been reigning for 5 years before Jehoiakim became his servant for 3 years, and then he rebelled. Then Nebuchadnezzar took Jehoiakim captive, which put Jehoiachin reigning the throne by default, with his mother acting as queen and reigning by proxy. This reign only lasted for 3 months and 10 days because according to scripture, he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord. Which means he (his mother by proxy) was rebelling against Nebuchadnezzar (See 2 Chron. 36:13 when talking about Zedekiah “And he ALSO rebelled against king Nebuchadnezzar…”) Therefore, because of this rebellion, he took him and his mother captive and carried them away to Babylon in the 8th year of his reign (2 Kings 24:12). Nebuchadnezzar then puts Zedekiah on the throne, which lasted only 11 years. Now notice, while Jehoiachin was still 8 years old, Zedekiah started his reign. Which means that when Zedekiah was taken off the throne after 11 years, Jehoiachin was 18, not 19, because Jehoiachin was 8 all during the first year of his reign. So with some simple math you can see that when Zedekiah was removed from the throne, Jehoiachin is now 18. So he was given the throne a second time by Nebuchadnezzar. Giving the “18 year old” with FULL reigning authority, and no mother to reign by proxy, an opportunity to show he can be in subjection to him. But this reign only lasts 3 months, because he was right back doing what his father had done (rebelling against Nebuchadnezzar). And so he was taken into captivity once again, being released in his 37th year of captivity (2 Kings 25:27) making him 44 years old. Which coincides with Nebuchadnezzar’s reign of 43 years. So, the way I interpret it, is as the scripture states with no contradictions. It just takes believing the bible is true, even when it seems it isn’t, diligent study, and having the patience to piece the puzzle together.   Hopefully, these explanations are clear enough for you to see, and has given you some more faith in believing that the bible is truth from cover to cover. It just needs to be studied and rightly divided in order to make sense of it, otherwise you could fall into a ditch. I am not sure what materials you have to help you in your studies, but if you are serious about learning the bible, may I suggest a vast library of commentaries and books by Dr. Peter S. Ruckman to help you with getting to know your bible. He has actually done an extensive and exhaustive work entitled “Problem Texts” that could assist you with these supposed contradictions within the scriptures.   
    • Howdy, I'm Mr. Thomas, but I couldn't figure out how to edit my earlier post or reply directly to each of your posts, so I'll have to take them one at a time: To Mr. Wretched: One of the New Testament Saints (I believe it was Peter) said that every man should have an apologia, a strict logical defense of their faith. But more importantly, in other parts of the Bible God constantly presses the importance of truth, in fact that's even one of the names of Jesus (The way, the truth, and the life). I think that God makes it pretty clear that truth and tool he gave us to search for it (logic) are not only important but holy. Also, to my knowledge God very rarely asked for people to believe in anything without a logical reason to. Jesus didn't just show up and demand people worship him without any explanation at all, he reasoned with people and did a lot of miracles to provide physical proof for people who couldn't be reasoned with. In fact most of God's saints and prophets also acted in a similar manner; by a combination of logic and divine feats. I respect your single-minded determination, but like CS Lewis said: faith is not a move into wholly unknown territory, its remaining calm when the surgeon puts the anesthesia to you. You know that the surgeon is practiced and capable, and your logic dictates that you have no reason to fear, but it's not logic that keeps you confident or brave, it's your faith and trust in what you know to be true. In short, faith is believing in what you already know to be true. I believe that the kind of blind faith you advocate is not only a (unintentional) perversion of the principle of faith, but also a rejection of God's holy gifts of logic and the quest for truth. this I am unwilling to do. To Mr. Jim Alaska: I was raised Baptist and thoroughly understand the Baptist belief system. Also, you might notice that I used the word Saint not only in my original post, but also many times in this response. I stand by my original usage of the term, I believe you are using it incorrectly, not me. The word "Saint" is not synonymous with "Christian" or "Saved" any more than the work "Prophet" is synonymous with "Jew". Both words do, and has always been a special title of reverence for our elders/superiors in the faith, especially those directly spoken to by God or given miraculous abilities. Furthermore, I am not a Catholic, nor does the use of the word "Saint" specifically advocate for the process or procession of Catholic Canonization (which again, I can assure you I am not a fan of). One more time: I use the word "Saint" in it's common, informal sense as a general term of respect (not a formal title) for the great men of God. Also, I don't think you read my question thoroughly (although I do admit it is pretty long), because you did not address the passages I referenced that do, indeed, contradict. in fact, you completely sidestepped my question entirely to instead insult my intelligence and my grammar. To reiterate, this is my problem: As you pointed out in your paragraph, if the Bible was shown to have contradictions it would seriously jeopardize the legitimacy of our faith (I'm not sure in exactly what sense he would 'deny himself', but your point is nevertheless well taken). I believe to have found such passages, and as you predicted, this has led to much emotional and spiritual turmoil that is causing me to lose my faith. If you have any genuine help for this lost soul on this issue I would very much genuinely appreciate hearing it. To Mr. Jordan Kurecki: Yeah, that's pretty much where I sat for a long time (~10 years), but I can't hold back the doubt and despair any longer. Though, even while my beliefs are being stripped from me, I still wholeheartedly cling to the pursuit of the truth. I figure that if God is going to rescue me, he won't do it while I'm sitting in an easy chair; I've got an obligation to seek him as hard as I can, wherever I can. For me, this takes the form of many, many logical debates with anybody who will humor me. I figure that if the Bible is somehow inerrant and true after all, or if Bible-less Christianity can survive, then God will have given someone somewhere the knowledge and skills to convince me and settle my heart. To Mr. DaveW: I can't tell you how much I appreciate your long and detailed answer; your effort has greatly moved me, and I am very grateful to you for your time and thoroughness! I have heard these answers or ones similar to them over years of asking these kinds of questions, but I am still uneasy; they are ad-hoc, or like you said, 'put together' and 'not watertight', and some are still strictly speaking errant (even if rounded in the inconsistent way suggested, the numbers of soldiers in the army are still not the same, and couldn't be referenced in an exact sense, like in a scientific paper or a court of law, to which standards surely God's own word should meet). This doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the strict Biblical Inerrancy either, and as I'm sure you're aware there are many more contradictions in various degrees to be found through out the texts. However, like I said before, I am very, very grateful to you for your effort and dedication, and any more insight from you would be most welcome!
    • Longer answer than I intended, so sorry about that, but if you are really interested you will read it all. 🙂     As Wretched said, if you are looking for a 100% kind of thing, then you are looking to do without faith. Heb 11:6 (6)  But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.     However, to address the three examples you cite: First of all, we must confirm that you are talking about the KJV. Most of the other versions have some pretty gross errors in them, and the rest are less obvious but still notable. Secondly, I am taking this as a genuine question, although these are the three most common “issues” that people bring up……. Thirdly, if you take single verses in isolation, then it is very easy to become “disoriented” from the account. As a result, I will quote passages in most cases rather than single verses.   “Matthew 27:5 (Judas hanged himself) and Acts 1:18 (Judas died by falling down in a field)” Mat 27:4-8 (4)  Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. (5)  And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. (6)  And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. (7)  And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. (8)  Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.     Act 1:18-19 (18)  Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. (19)  And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.     There are actually 2 issues with this passage: the one you mentioned (the manner of his death), and the purchase of the field. Judas didn’t purchase the field, as Acts 1 18 says, but Matthew 27:7-8 tells us that the chief priests purchased the field – but they did so with the money they paid to Judas, so in effect they purchased it for him. Neither is in error. It was the money of Judas, and therefore he paid for it, although the transaction was not done by Judas himself, but on his behalf. I point this out, because it shows that things stated in different ways can correctly refer to the same event. Now in regard to your actual issue with this passage, Matthew 27 tells us that Judas hanged himself. This would be the manner of his death. Acts 1:18 doesn’t actually mention his death at all – you are assuming it is how he died, but the verses do not say that. If you look at the verse it says that he purchased the land, then fell over and his bowels gushed out. But if you look in Matthew 27 you see that he hanged himself, THEN the land was purchased in his name. Paupers who died in those days were thrown into a rubbish pile outside the city walls, and if he was dropped over the wall into that rubbish pile I would think that he would likely burst asunder and his bowels would gush out…… Of course, the money was used to buy “the Potter’s Field” so that practice (Bodies on the rubbish pile) should have ceased after Judas, for then there was a place to bury strangers in. But only after this event, for even in those days it would take time to find, purchase, and organise the land for this purpose. The order of events, and an understanding of history is enough for us to address this "problem".     “1 Chron 21:5 vs. 2 Sam. 24:9 (number of fighting me in Isreal)” 1Ch 21:1-7 (1)  And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. (2)  And David said to Joab and to the rulers of the people, Go, number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan; and bring the number of them to me, that I may know it. (3)  And Joab answered, The LORD make his people an hundred times so many more as they be: but, my lord the king, are they not all my lord's servants? why then doth my lord require this thing? why will he be a cause of trespass to Israel? (4)  Nevertheless the king's word prevailed against Joab. Wherefore Joab departed, and went throughout all Israel, and came to Jerusalem. (5)  And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword. (6)  But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them: for the king's word was abominable to Joab. (7)  And God was displeased with this thing; therefore he smote Israel.     One million one hundred thousand men in Israel (Northern Kingdom), and four hundred and seventy thousand men in Judah (Southern Kingdom).     2Sa 24:1-10 (1)  And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2)  For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people. (3)  And Joab said unto the king, Now the LORD thy God add unto the people, how many soever they be, an hundredfold, and that the eyes of my lord the king may see it: but why doth my lord the king delight in this thing? (4)  Notwithstanding the king's word prevailed against Joab, and against the captains of the host. And Joab and the captains of the host went out from the presence of the king, to number the people of Israel. (5)  And they passed over Jordan, and pitched in Aroer, on the right side of the city that lieth in the midst of the river of Gad, and toward Jazer: (6)  Then they came to Gilead, and to the land of Tahtimhodshi; and they came to Danjaan, and about to Zidon, (7)  And came to the strong hold of Tyre, and to all the cities of the Hivites, and of the Canaanites: and they went out to the south of Judah, even to Beersheba. (8)  So when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days. (9)  And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. (10)  And David's heart smote him after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly.     Eight hundred thousand in Israel, and five hundred thousand in Judah. A seeming difference of three hundred thousand in Israel and thirty thousand in Judah.     My first thought is that in 1 Chron 21:6 it says that Joab didn’t count the Levites nor the Benjamites, so we would expect a difference in the numbers, with the 1 Chron 21 being the lower number, because it specifically says that some were not counted. That might explain the difference from Judah, but the difference in Israel is the wrong way for that simple explanation. We must therefore cast our net a little wider.     And we come to this passage: 1Ch 27:1 (1)  Now the children of Israel after their number, to wit, the chief fathers and captains of thousands and hundreds, and their officers that served the king in any matter of the courses, which came in and went out month by month throughout all the months of the year, of every course were twenty and four thousand.     It seems that there was a system of “reserves” called up each month 24000 from each tribe, which equals a total over the year of 288000. For me, that is close enough to 300000 to make up the difference.     So Joab refused to count the Levites and the Benjamites – I assume they were associated with the Temple and with Jerusalem – I can happily assume that takes care of the 30000 of Judah missing from 1 Chron 21, and if the count from 2 Sam 24 didn’t include all those who were “already on the books” as it were as soldiers of the regular rotation, then we have a close enough number on the second figure to explain it as a “rounding to the nearest….”             “2 Chron 36:9 and 2 Kings 24:8 (was King Jehoiachin 8 years old or 18 when he was crowned).”     This is one of the most common issues we hear – I think that there is a thread from some time ago about this on this site…..   2Ch 36:8-10 (8)  Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. (9)  Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD. (10)  And when the year was expired, king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought him to Babylon, with the goodly vessels of the house of the LORD, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem.     2Ki 24:6-9 (6)  So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. (7)  And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt. (8)  Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. (9)  And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done.     This at first seems like a problem, but in this case we need to look at the situation and see if we can find a solution. In cases like this it would be easier for us if God made it super clear, but He does tell us to 2Ti 2:15 (15)  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.     ….so we really can’t complain if we have to put some effort in…… What was the situation in which he became “king”. In the first place it is interesting that in 2 Chron 36 it says he was 8 when he began to reign in Jerusalem. But in 2 Kings 24 it says he was 18 when he began to reign in Jerusalem. Both accounts mention the same length of reign – I don’t see the 10 days being an issue. In fact aside from the 8 vs 18 the only other difference is the mention of the mother in 2 Kings 24. The point about that is that in the passage which says he began to reign when he was 8 it doesn’t mention his father’s death, and in the passage where it mentions 18 and his mother, it specifically mentions his father’s death. If you look at the situation of his father’s reign, you see Babylon was all around the place causing trouble and laying on pressure. And in fact the last few verses 2 Kings 24 tells us that when Jehoiachin was taken to Babylon the Babylonian king put someone else as King over Jerusalem. This is why he reigned only three months. So is this an indication that Jehoiachin was appointed by his father as co-regent or heir in waiting? With the unsettled nature of the rule under Babylon (see the early part of that chapter), and the resultant replacement soon after Jehoiakim’s death, it is entirely reasonable to think that he may have appointed his son as co-regent in the hope that his claim to the throne would be established. Therefore, he began to reign with his father at the age of 8, but began to reign in his own right 10 years later. In any case, he reigned only 3 months before he was taken by the Babylonians and put into a prison in Babylon, and another man put into the place of  king instead of him, thereby proving his father’s wisdom in making him co-regent, but that not succeeding in its plan. Now, none of these is a watertight answer, but each of them gives a satisfactory answer to the problems presented.
    • We had a good day on Sunday. Not a lot of people, but good services. 

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...