Pensacola Bible institute

[SAB76]

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.

 

[No Nicolaitans]

SAB76,

I've answered you biblically. I've answered the questions that you proposed in your last post. In fact, my answer(s) are in the post that immediately precede your latest post.

I no longer see the purpose in continuing this "back and forth" conversation on my part.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's going nowhere except in a circle. 

Take care.

[Yeshuafan]

On 11/18/2006 at 2:50 AM, bibleworm said:

I want to know what everyones views are on this college.i plan on going next year.right now my two cousins,brother,and sister and her fiance are going there and honestly i can hardly wait to go because i love to study the Bible.theres alot of truth in Dr. Ruckmans stuff but there are some things that arent true(no ones perfect)such as they teach a gap theory which i do not believe in. right now im going to north star bible institute.which teaches the exact same stuff but not as many classes.so im also wondering what you alls think i should do.stay home and keep going to NSBI or go to PBI? i couldnt stand to be away from home. but i want to learn!

sincerely,
Amie Jo

if you ain't got a KJV you ain't got the truth kiddos

Would stay away from that place, as under the cult of Ruckmanism!

[SureWord]

10 hours ago, Yeshuafan said:

Would stay away from that place, as under the cult of Ruckmanism!

Thread is 14 years old. I think he's decided by now.

[Bro. West]

No Bible teacher is infallible and none have all their ducks in a row. Bro. Ruckman was no exception, but no one can promote a love for the KJV as he did. He taught me how study the BOOK on my own. I am a street preacher and get cursed out all the time, so Ruckman's tone does not brother me one bit. What bothers me is Christians who want soft words and fair speakers and have no backbone.

The author of this work believes without reservation that the King James Bible is more than just a priceless work of literary art, which it is. But it has indeed been preserved without error by God's providence as an infallible book that the common man in the English speaking world can hold and own, and the light it can give rests entirely on that man's faith in it and its Author. And all those who believe otherwise have either been duped, have an unclean motive, are just ignorant or see no issue of importance in having God's word readily available in an infallible form. No amount of linguist ability can give any extra light if there is doubt to its content, the Holy Spirit will not honour anyone that wants to subject this English Bible to an inferior position.

 

 

[Bro. West]

According to the Bible when flesh joins flesh that is marriage(Gen.24:67,29:21,30:9, 38:8,Deu22:9, and numerous other verses), there is not one verse in ether Testament where a priest or a pastor have the authority to pronounce the start of marriage. That is why virginity is so important both male and female for the saints. But this nation and the body of Christ has gotten so far away from this it is irreversible, leaven has done it’s work. Who started this false doctrine, why the Council of Trent (1439) with their sacrament of marriage. This Catholic doctrine festered to other churches and before the 18 century it was common practice to believe that once a pastor or such said “I now pronounce you man and wife you were married. Then of course the government step in the early 19th century and said no, no you have to have a marriage licensee and of course there is revenue there. The teaching of one wife 1Tim 3:12 for a pastor has come to mean one marriage license on paper. They bypass any flesh joining flesh is marriage, they have done in the past. Many have had multiple marriage accord to Scripture. And Jesus' definition of adulatory is overlooked also (Matt 5:28). These Pharisees have deny or removed many a man from being a pastor. They would have a heart attack if they read and study 11Sam20:3 and Ezra 10:19. 

 

[BrotherTony]

33 minutes ago, Bro. West said:

According to the Bible when flesh joins flesh that is marriage(Gen.24:67,29:21,30:9, 38:8,Deu22:9, and numerous other verses), there is not one verse in ether Testament where a priest or a pastor have the authority to pronounce the start of marriage. That is why virginity is so important both male and female for the saints. But this nation and the body of Christ has gotten so far away from this it is irreversible, leaven has done it’s work. Who started this false doctrine, why the Council of Trent (1439) with their sacrament of marriage. This Catholic doctrine festered to other churches and before the 18 century it was common practice to believe that once a pastor or such said “I now pronounce you man and wife you were married. Then of course the government step in the early 19th century and said no, no you have to have a marriage licensee and of course there is revenue there. The teaching of one wife 1Tim 3:12 for a pastor has come to mean one marriage license on paper. They bypass any flesh joining flesh is marriage, they have done in the past. Many have had multiple marriage accord to Scripture. And Jesus' definition of adulatory is overlooked also (Matt 5:28). These Pharisees have deny or removed many a man from being a pastor. They would have a heart attack if they read and study 11Sam20:3 and Ezra 10:19. 

 

Genesis 1:27-28....creation of man and woman....Genesis 2:21-25...God instituted marriage, not the Council of Trent. The first recorded historically from what we were taught in Bible college many years ago, occured somewhere in Mesopotamia around the mid 2300 BC time frame. Again...not the Council of Trent. 

The religious authorities took the blessing of marriages on them around that same time period, or just before and it's continued on into every other religion. I don't believe it's a perversion of what God intended. Joining of the flesh is a marriage of the two people, but isn't a legally binding contract. I believe you're trying to inject your own prejudices here, at least it seems that way...onto what the church has traditionally done over the past few centuries regarding marriage. I agree that the government shouldn't be involved in marriage as far as licenses, etc., but, we live in a fallen world, and it's happened whether we like it or not.

[Bro. West]

7 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

Genesis 1:27-28....creation of man and woman....Genesis 2:21-25...God instituted marriage, not the Council of Trent. The first recorded historically from what we were taught in Bible college many years ago, occured somewhere in Mesopotamia around the mid 2300 BC time frame. Again...not the Council of Trent. 

The religious authorities took the blessing of marriages on them around that same time period, or just before and it's continued on into every other religion. I don't believe it's a perversion of what God intended. Joining of the flesh is a marriage of the two people, but isn't a legally binding contract. I believe you're trying to inject your own prejudices here, at least it seems that way...onto what the church has traditionally done over the past few centuries regarding marriage. I agree that the government shouldn't be involved in marriage as far as licenses, etc., but, we live in a fallen world, and it's happened whether we like it or not.

 

[Bro. West]

 

I never said that marriage began with Trent. They took that authority. I quoted verses to show that the Scripture define marriage as flesh joining flesh. How many times have you been married (do not answer). It matter not what your college taught you they are not the final authority the BOOK is. And any historical position be it from 2300 BC or now from any church is not the final authority the BOOK is.

Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife. Gen 28:9

Here they are called wives, nothing is said about being legal. It is not a perversion to teach this the Holy Spirit called them wives. This is not a prejudice of mine. Felix and Drusilla were husband and wife (Acts 24:24) am I wrong for saying for saying so. What does being legal have to do with it. God’s standard for marriage has been abased.

If a man has had 20 women and the twenty first he marries and now he has a piece of paper does this bypasses the prior 20. I wonder how many whoremongers we have out there. This debases the physical act to be nothing more than physical exercise.

And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the ten women [his] concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them in ward, and fed them, but went not in unto them. So they were shut up unto the day of their death, living in widowhood. 2Sa 20:3 Guess what? David was still alive. Who was their last husband?

Good old Absalom. And it matters not what the “churches” tradition maybe.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8

I pray brother your final authority will be the BOOK and not your college, ambiguous history or tradition.

Yours truly Bro. Bill

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, Bro. West said:

 

I never said that marriage began with Trent. They took that authority. I quoted verses to show that the Scripture define marriage as flesh joining flesh. How many times have you been married (do not answer). It matter not what your college taught you they are not the final authority the BOOK is. And any historical position be it from 2300 BC or now from any church is not the final authority the BOOK is.

Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife. Gen 28:9

Here they are called wives, nothing is said about being legal. It is not a perversion to teach this the Holy Spirit called them wives. This is not a prejudice of mine. Felix and Drusilla were husband and wife (Acts 24:24) am I wrong for saying for saying so. What does being legal have to do with it. God’s standard for marriage has been abased.

If a man has had 20 women and the twenty first he marries and now he has a piece of paper does this bypasses the prior 20. I wonder how many whoremongers we have out there. This debases the physical act to be nothing more than physical exercise.

And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the ten women [his] concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them in ward, and fed them, but went not in unto them. So they were shut up unto the day of their death, living in widowhood. 2Sa 20:3 Guess what? David was still alive. Who was their last husband?

Good old Absalom. And it matters not what the “churches” tradition maybe.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8

I pray brother your final authority will be the BOOK and not your college, ambiguous history or tradition.

Yours truly Bro. Bill

My authority has always been the book. The church has recognized the authority of law in marriage. Not only that, but the passage you give about Felix and Drucilla..what exactly is your point? They were RECOGNIZED as husband and wife. God recognized Adam and Eve as husband and wife...legal/accepted in the eyes of God. The "law" hadn't yet been written....God instituted it. You're basically playing a game of semantics. 

[Bro. West]

It matters not what “the church” recognizes, it is what God recognizes which is flesh joining flesh. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 1Co 6:16 Why?

I gave you the example of a man having multiple joining of flesh, no answer.

And with Absalom and widowhood, no answer.

If you should marry a cult member (you have better brains than that) while God did not join you together. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Mar 10:9 You would be married the moment you had intercourse.

The ceremony does not consummate marriage the physical acts does, a marriage can be annulled if no physical act is performed in many states.

I asked you to give me one example in Writ where a priest or pastor (elder) consummated a marriage. No answer.

So what is a young Christian couple to do? Get a licensee from the State and go to your Pastor and have him perform the ceremony. So that society will recognize your marriage. If not your children will be considered bastards and you will be accused of living in sin. Also the by produce will satisfy Social Security, Insurance, and inheritance. And please do not believe before the “churches” and the State stepped in that for well over 3000 years, no one was married and their children were bastards. There is no turning back. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Mar 7:9

Our standard for what consummates marriages has degenerated. Many want it so that way they can justify past behavior. Marriage is honorable and takes place in the marriage bed. Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. Heb 13:4

 I believe enough hath been said on the subject at hand.

But I did notice that you were reading works from Calvinist. Are you one?

 May God bless you.

Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins? Lam 3:39
 

[BrotherTony]

No...actually you wouldn't be "married" in the sense that marriage was recognized by Jesus Christ...He went to the WEDDING in Canaan...he recognized the authority of Jewish tradition...the authority of the Jewish RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT. Sorry, but your arguments just don't cut it. 

[Jerry]

So Bro West, instead of being separate from the lost and not living like them, you would actually be in total support with the idea of common law marriages. Immorality for the win, I guess.

And I also guess, in your opinion, all the Bible passages that forbid fornication and adultery were all taken out of context - because according to you, as soon as the sexual act was consummated, they were married - therefore no such thing as fornication or adultery if your view held any water.

Jeremiah 2:13 For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.

Oops, it doesn't...

[StandInTheGap]

I'm a latecomer to the conversation but have studied this topic for years and have a few questions:

1. Bro Tony, what "church" are you referring to why you say " The church has recognized the authority of law in marriage." And how does this relate to the Biblical definition of marriage?

2. Bro. West, what is the act of Adultery defined as in the context of marriage? 

3. Bro. Jerry, as there is more than one kind what type of fornication and adultery are you referring to? 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

John 4:17-18 -- "The woman answered and said, I have no husband.  Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband; for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly."

In this passage our Lord Jesus Christ Himself seems to be acknowledging that the woman HAD a man (was with a man), while that man was NOT to be viewed as the woman's actual husband.  Indeed, when the woman stated that she had NO husband (at that present time), although she had engaged in five previous marriage relationships (as per Jesus' own declaration), and although she was presently with a man (as per Jesus' own declaration), our Lord Jesus Christ directly acknowledged that she had said WELL and TRULY.  She had been married five previous times (all acknowledged by Jesus), but she was NOT married AT ALL at that present time (also acknowledged by Jesus).  She had a man at that very present time (acknowledge by Jesus), but was NOT actually married to him at that present time (also acknowledged by Jesus).  Thus it appears from our Lord Jesus Christ's own viewpoint that physical sexual relationship itself is NOT the defining factor for a divinely recognized marriage.