Bride And Family

[John81]

I married a Baptist bride!

[candlelight]

  And, I am certain she is very lovely, brother:)

[Arbo]

Candlelight-  I already explained that  "  " was a general OBservation and comment about the state of the thread... not an accusation.  Regarding the quip about the music, I can see (though it was not meant to be) how you could think that I was referring to you.  Again, it was not my intent, but I think an apology may be appropriate so you have mine.

[candlelight]

Candlelight-  I already explained that  "  " was a general OBservation and comment about the state of the thread... not an accusation.  Regarding the quip about the music, I can see (though it was not meant to be) how you could think that I was referring to you.  Again, it was not my intent, but I think an apology may be appropriate so you have mine.

 Yes, I  took it as that, as it was after I commented on the hymn being an RC hymn.  Thank you for the apology Arbo, although it was really not necessary.  I apologize for the misunderstanding, as well.    

[Dr James Ach]

I married a Baptist bride!

I bet that made her husband mad

[Dr James Ach]

I already answered the question in the OP ---- 0-1 that I'm aware of. If any others are, they haven't responded (thus far, but it might take a couple of weeks before they see it).

 

It looks to me (don't accuse me of saying you are, I said MY IMPRESSION) as if Ach is seeking to circuMVent locked threads (that's been done by over a dozen people here when mad).

 

All legitimate complaints aside (and you have some), ask Bro Matt if you can moderate. The reality, however, is that the nature of your anti-mod rants have actually been directly insulting the administrator. How so? When you say "don't call it IFB" you're not attacking mods (they didn't set up or name the site) but admin. 

 

Things take too long to suit you, you would have the mods replaced, etc.? You are stating that Bro. Matt is inadequate to handle this site -- I guess you should request he turn the site over to you as the new administrator.

 

Realize that as a mod you would have to moderate within the rules found on the bottom right of the home page and not make them as you go. Ah, but as the administrator you can change the parameters to suit you.

 

Would I do some things different? Yes, but that just tough -- it's not my site.

 

 

I know you will prOBably want to respond to this -- fine. I would suggest you limit it to ONE response lest you get this thread locked also.

It wasn't a circuMVention of any locked thread as I did not have any "unfinished business" with Arbo which is typically why someone would 'circuMVent' a thread. He made a literal pot shot at me in another thread and I ignored it. But then he made a post here that clearly was intended to "stir the pot" because regardless of his claim to not name names of anyone in particular, he blamed his motivation on the "recent animosity in other threads" which means that unless there are some threads operating without any names or users at all, he was at least referring to someone(s) in particular. 

The reason that his OP stirs the pot is because in a nut shell what he is saying is that others feel they have the greater right to demand that IFBs have exclusion because they are the only ones around that are really saved, which would essentially make them Baptist Briders if they really believed that. 

And sure, it's been heated, but is my complaint, regardless of whether Matt is at fault or just the mods, really that much to process? Is it really that unreasonable to expect to come to a forum that says Independent Baptist Community, that is KJVO , and fellowship with other believers who know what that means? who attend IFB churches and know why it is an IFB church? who eschew Calvinism and blatantly heretical doctrines? I am not the only one complaining about this, you have lost a very large amount of members because of, some like Swathdiver who have posted his reasons for leaving and others who have not, who have simply written me personal messages thanking me for inviting them, but "no thanks". 

Is what I am complaining about really that unreasonable? Or have those of you who claim to be independent Baptists simply given up and lost your bulldog? You can kick me out if you want, I have several other very successful websites with many great contributers, and I will be just fine. But I hope that on my way out I have at least rattled enough cages to get you folks to take this seriously and do something about it, before you end up like every other IFB forum or church, and then in a few months from now I'll be writing an article about called "I TOLD YOU SO".

[candlelight]

I agree wholeheartedly with your posts and thread, Dr. Ach.  I for one, and glad that you have spoken up on this forum.  After all, Online Baptist is "An Independent Baptist Community since 2002."  Again, I came back to have fellowship with my IFB brothers and sisters in Christ, and learn more about the KJV.  As I have stated, I don't have a prOBlem with people who join to learn more about the IFB.  I welcome them.  However, I have been discouraged for a long time with the way the mods have chastised me for calling a spade a spade.  I have respected the wishes of the mods for some time, but enough is enough.  I can no longer be silent.  I can't watch this site fall apart with false doctrine.  It is too important to me.  After all, aren't I supposed to contend for the faith?

"Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." ~ Jude 3 

[Arbo]

It wasn't a circuMVention of any locked thread as I did not have any "unfinished business" with Arbo which is typically why someone would 'circuMVent' a thread. He made a literal pot shot at me in another thread and I ignored it.

 
To quote the post in question in its entirety, "     ".   If you will reread my post number 12 of this thread, you will see that I have explained that it was a general OBservation of the state of the thread.   
 
And it was not "literal".  
 
You seem to be trying to pick a fight.  Look elsewhere for your skirmish, for I am not interested.
 

The reason that his OP stirs the pot is because in a nut shell what he is saying is that others feel they have the greater right to demand that IFBs have exclusion because they are the only ones around that are really saved, which would essentially make them Baptist Briders if they really believed that.

 

You seem to know me and my intentions better than I know myself. You have incredible insight...     What I was asking is how prevalent Baptist Bridism ( if that is the proper term)  is on this site.   It is that simple. 

 

 

 

Again, you have made undue accusations based on supposition.  Again, I forgive you, and will continue to for the next 488+ times.