Baptist?

[DaveW]

Dave, such a fine name
I take posting breaks from time to time. When the world really gets disgusting it is nice to have an escape (OB)
even with the trolls occasionally appearing. So, don't burn any bridges...besides I like your accent

I'm not going anywhere, I am just posting less for now.
Tell me why anyone would bother posting anything when you get chased through several different threads being falsely accused, and then get PM's accusing you of being childish?

But let me assure everyone that I am still reading, so those that wish to, can continue to try to offend me.
Others have left or are thinking of leaving for similar reasons.

It used to be that the IFB section was the "safe haven" some have spoken of in this thread, but that is plainly not the case.

[candlelight]

I'm not going anywhere, I am just posting less for now.
Tell me why anyone would bother posting anything when you get chased through several different threads being falsely accused, and then get PM's accusing you of being childish?

But let me assure everyone that I am still reading, so those that wish to, can continue to try to offend me.
Others have left or are thinking of leaving for similar reasons.

It used to be that the IFB section was the "safe haven" some have spoken of in this thread, but that is plainly not the case.

I hear ya, Dave.  I have been posting much less than I have been.  I don't understand why people who hold to strange doctrines would want to stay on OB.  Maybe it is b/c they are allowed to post such things.  I was used to OB, years ago, when the moderators would get on people for posting non-Biblical things.  Now it is a free for all.  Anything and everything goes on here.  It is quite frustrating.  IFB's that don't believe in the rapture?  I told my church that a few weeks ago at our Bible study and prayer group on Wednesday night.  My pastor had never heard of an IFB that didn't believe in the rapture.  I had to inform him.  He was shocked.

I have talked with many former OB members on Facebook who have no desire to come back.  They are tired of all the heresy.  I am past tired.  Ukelelemike mentioned that we should be able to get along on a Christian forum.  Well, I don't when I am seeing false doctrine put forth daily by members, and they are not corrected.  The mods, years ago, did their jOB.  And, we can't blame the Ruckmanites for the heresy.  They aren't on OB, anymore.  I get along great with my IFB brothers and sisters in Christ, in my church, and on Facebook.  This place is nothing but stress.  I can't say anything without someone coming against me.  And, I know that I go to a doctrinally sound IFB church.

The IFB section isn't safe, either.  Sharing opinions?  Nope.  They are met with much resistance.  And, I will say again, why is it that non IFB members are allowed in this forum?  Where are the rules?  Oh, I forgot.  They are only chastising people who talk against such heresy.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

I'm not going anywhere, I am just posting less for now.
Tell me why anyone would bother posting anything when you get chased through several different threads being falsely accused, and then get PM's accusing you of being childish?

But let me assure everyone that I am still reading, so those that wish to, can continue to try to offend me.
Others have left or are thinking of leaving for similar reasons.

It used to be that the IFB section was the "safe haven" some have spoken of in this thread, but that is plainly not the case.

That's not within my power, the clearance comes from Bro Matt.

[Steve Schwenke]

I have not been on here for awhile simply because my schedule gets really overwhelming busy at times. 

So far as the OP goes, Baptists have ALWAYS have great differences in doctrine across the board - anyone familiar with Baptist History knows that.  In the colonial era, there were the Regular Baptists, General Baptists, and Separate Baptists.  They all had differing approaches to Calvinism, the Second Coming of Christ, and other issues, such as the liberty to "shout" in church services.  There were many things they were united about - such as separation of Church and State.  So, differences in Baptist doctrine is nothing new.

However...

Within our modern day Independent Fundamental Baptist movement, we have soundly rejected Calvinism.  The prOBlem with Calvinism is that it always lurks in the shadows of the places of higher education, so it always creeps back into anything that is Biblically based through the educational system. 

 

And I would hesitate to use the term "traditional" teachings.  While the apostle Paul used the term, it was in reference to what he had taught them directly.  I think it is safe to say that our "traditional teachings" are based on the Bible, since the most important Baptist Distinctive is that the Bible is the SOLE AUTHORITY for faith and practice.

 

As far as the people who are constantly stirring up strife on this forum, there is a really neat feature that I have employed.  You can choose to "ignore them" and then all of their posts are invisible to you (unless someone quotes them.)  It makes the conversation much easier for me, and much less annoying having to deal with the same contentious people, who in my opinion should not even be on here anymore since all they do is force their tired old garbage on everyone regardless of the topic at hand.

 

In Christ,

[candlelight]

The Calvinists also got on board with others, and persecuted the Separate Baptists in the founding of this nation.

I also don't forget what the Roman Empire and RCC did to the Baptists along with the Lutherans.

How can we forget these things?  It is part of our history.

[swathdiver]

There are still Ruckmanites here and still those who hold to Scofield's nutty dispensationalism too which is really the same heretic "camp".

[prophet1]

There are still Ruckmanites here and still those who hold to Scofield's nutty dispensationalism too which is really the same heretic "camp".

And Darby, who made up the pre-trib heresy, begat Scofield's nutty pre-trib and dispy heresey.

Darby, incidentally, came up with his dispy teaching in defense of ..wait for it....Calvinism. Surprise, Surprise.

Anishinaabe

[Steve Schwenke]

And just exactly what is the purpose of the two previous posts? 

How does this edify anyone?

 

Childish and silly, IMO.

[prophet1]

And just exactly what is the purpose of the two previous posts? How does this edify anyone? Childish and silly, IMO.

The only reason the truth would appear childish and silly to you, is that you don't recognize it. Gen 19:14 ...But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law. Anishinaabe

[HappyChristian]

Pre-Trib rapture did not originate with Darby.  

 

 

 

...the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's 'appearing in the air' (I Thes. iv. 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many 'mansions in the father's house' (John xiv. 2), and so disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will be to judge the risen and changed saints; for 'now the time is come that judgment must begin,' and that will be 'at the house of God' (I Pet. iv. 17)..." 

(Quoted in "Morgan Edwards: Another Pre-Darby Rapturist," by Thomas Ice)

 

 

Just and FYI - Edwards died the year before Darby was born....

 

 

"I will add this more, namely, what may be conceived to be the cause of this RAPTURE of the saints on high to meet the Lord in the clouds, rather than to wait his coming to earth....What if it be, that they may be PRESERVED during the Conflagration of the earth and the works thereof, 2 Pet.3:10, that as Noah and his family were preserved from the Deluge by being lift up above the waters in the Ark; so should the saints at the Conflagration be lift up in the clouds unto their Ark, Christ, to be preserved there from the deluge of fire, wherein the wicked shall be consumed?" ("The Works of Joseph Mede," 1672, London edition, Book IV, p.776)

 

 

1672 - even earlier than Edwards...

[prophet1]

Pre-Trib rapture did not originate with Darby.

(Quoted in "Morgan Edwards: Another Pre-Darby Rapturist," by Thomas Ice)


Just and FYI - Edwards died the year before Darby was born....


1672 - even earlier than Edwards...

Darby put the "visión" of a girl in writing, who said that an ángel told her ....
Darby came up with the form of dispensational teaching that Scofield and others propogated.
He did so in defense of Calvinism.

He wasnt the first to say either, he was the Man who put those things on the mainstream map, at the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Show me a school, prior to Darby, that taught either.
Yes, they exist, but they werent so influential.

Anishinaabe

[prophet1]

Pre-Trib rapture did not originate with Darby.

(Quoted in "Morgan Edwards: Another Pre-Darby Rapturist," by Thomas Ice)


Just and FYI - Edwards died the year before Darby was born....


1672 - even earlier than Edwards...

This isnt "pretrib", this is "prewrath", which is actually correct.

Anishinaabe

[HappyChristian]

And pre-trib is also pre-wrath. 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

I'm going up when the trump sounds. Anyone who wants to experience the first three and a half years of tribulation can stay behind if you want. LOL

But it isn't going to be a cakewalk for you if you do.

[Steve Schwenke]

Prophet, this is what this thread is all about.  I was raised in IFB churches, and have been in them my entire life.  My grandfathers were IFB preachers who were trained in IFB schools way back in the 40's and 50's, and they taught a mild form of dispensationalism, along with a pre-trib rapture. 

 

The thread asks the question about what are IFB teachings?  For decades upon decades, and even longer, our IFB churches have been teaching similar things across the board.  During the same time, as the Evangelical movement, and then their spawn - the Charismatics, grew in ascendancy, this post-trib or "pre-wrath" rapture teaching began to grow in popularity.  The IFB soundly rejected this teaching.

 

So when and where did the IFB churches and schools begin teaching this charismatic understanding of Scripture? 

Do you personally attend an IFB church? 

What separates IFB's from other schools of theology? 

 

That is what this thread is all about - not another rehash of your own pet doctrine.  If you want to debate that doctrine, then start your own thread on it.  Not that I'll join you there or anything....