Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Yesterday
  3. Quite frankly, the title of this thread is misleading and somewhat deceitful. The title implies that Baptists do not fast and therefore Baptists are not spiritual and do not obey the admonition to fast. This is one of the reasons why I have never commented on this thread the years that I have been on Online Baptist. In other words, the title of this thread already insinuates that "Baptists" do not fast which is an error. Quite a few "Baptists" do fast; they just don't tell everyone about it. Why? The Lord Jesus said, "Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father, which seest in secret, shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:16-18 Normally, when I fast, and I am a Baptist, only my wife knows as she cooks the food I would normally eat and maybe the children. 'nuff said.
  4. If the sun went backwards, then scripture would have said so. It doesn't say that.
  5. Maybe someone new visiting this topic who believes the Messiah died on the 6th day of the week and who thinks He was using common figure of speech/colloquial language in Matthew 12:40 might know of examples to support the idea of commonality.
  6. Last week
  7. Our church has a WhatsApp group which is mainly for prayer requests.
  8. I heard the first are actually going to be last so does that mean the one who started this thread is the real winner? lol
  9. I had leftover Shepherd's Pie from my daughter's fridge. Kay had a Mozzarella and Red Pepper Parcel from Aldi. Tomorrow for lunch my daughter is doing hosptallity for church. I supplied salmon which I bought last time we went to France, It was raised in Scotland and believe it or not it was considerably cheaper in France than here in UK and food in France has VAT added, but here it doesn't. I am doing the vegetables and allowing for 14 servings.
  10. Being originally from the oldest fishing port in the nation, I feel that I must say that HC's recipe sounds like a perfect one for completely destroying a good fish dinner. (Although I really do understand that it was perfect for Randy's needs.)
  11. Maybe, maybe not. Rumour has it that the the, Last one to post in this thread wins,' is not in the original Greek. So, it depends one which manuscript you are reading.
  12. It's been a month, so I win. May I have my prize?
  13. Randy is, by doctor's order, supposed to eat fish 2-3 times/week now. He doesn't mind it at all. =D So I fixed rock fish for him again last night. Usually I pan fry it, after dredging it in egg, cassava flour, and coconut flour. Makes a really good crust that is totally grain free. I decided to fix it differently last night. I chopped veggies into a baking dish, cut the fish into quarters, scored the fish, and put coconut aminos on the fish. Coconut aminos is a soy sauce replacement (he is not supposed to have soy). I fixed some riced cauliflower, mixed in the baked veggies when done, and put the fish on the veggies. I mixed some aminos and hot mustard in with some mayo (homemade so there is no sugar or soy) as "tartar" sauce. Apparently it was quite the success. =D I had a bowl of hot cereal.
  14. As an administrator I would like to insert a word of caution regarding certain negative replies that have been made in this thread. The word of caution is simply that due to some replies that have been made, the moderators will be keeping a closer eye on this and other threads in an attempt to better moderate our message board and keep posts inoffensive and more "Christ Like". Please consider others when posting and try to do unto them as you would have done unto you, with Christian love and consideration. Thanks folks.
  15. That verse isn't talking about the "gifts and calling" of what God calls men to do...aka...spiritual gifts. If you take it in its appropriate context, it's talking about God's promise to save his people Israel. He "called" certain men (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) and gave them "gifts" (promises) that will one day be fulfilled. Those are the gifts and calling Paul is speaking of, and God will not repent of them. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. If all scripture is profitable for doctrine, that includes the old testament and when Christ was still on earth before his resurrection and ascension. The issue is that it must be rightly divided. Why did I quote Christ and what he said about divorce? Well...first, because of 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Secondly, because while we aren't under the law, the law DOES show us how God views sin. No man could live up to the law, but God gave them the law to show them that they were sinners. So indeed...the words of Christ do apply. The law is a reproof of man's sin, it provides correction and instruction in righteousness. We may not be under the law, but we certainly can learn a lot from it. If God was opposed to "something" in the old testament, he's still opposed to it. What? Where did that come from? No sir...please read the verses again... 1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. It appears to me that all of the qualifications appear to apply to when the bishop is in office. Naturally, if a man desires to be a bishop, then he should also meet these qualifications beforehand. If we can't use what Christ said when the law was still in effect, why did you say the following... Wasn't he speaking to Israel? Weren't they still under the law? If I misunderstood you, I apologize. However, I still stand by what I said. I notice that you enlarged and made the font bold in one part, but you neglected to do so on what followed. I remember as a child, I would have much rather my dad spanked me as a punishment, because when he would instead talk to me about what I had done wrong, it was more effective. That "hurt" me more than a spanking, because I realized that I not only had done something wrong...I not only understood why it was wrong...but I had disappointed my dad. If you are married, and if your wife ever does anything that goes against God's word or what you (as the leader in your home) have tried to instill for your family...are you saying that you wouldn't even say anything to her about it? I ask because, if you do say something to her about it, you are trying to assert your will over her. You are trying to "bring her back in line". You may not be mean about it. You may not raise your voice. You may do it with love and compassion. However, if you try to assert your will over her, that is a form of punishment.
  16. I gotta say that I am distressed at the broad accusations made by SAB and directed at ANYONE who disagrees with his view..... I find it offensive. And juvenile.
  17. Wow. It is not Pharisaical to give God our best and to be Qualified. To say that it is Pharisaical to hold men to the NT qualifications of a church office is certainly not right. No one ever said they could not serve or be very valuable to God. Nor that "we are better than they" or that they have no forgiveness. Only that they should not hold on to an office to which they are not qualified.
  18. This is fine, because I feel the same way. We and everyone that has contributed to this thread since I spoke up are going round and round. I feel I have stated my view of the scripture as it reads, as opposed to all others giving me the “meaning” of the scripture as they teach it. And while it has been enlightening to learn how the IFB brethren view themselves, and others of “lower caliber”(John Young), it is also extremely disheartening to learn that there is such Pharisieism among the group that is supposed to be the closest to the sound doctrines of the bible. With that said I will respond to this post, but understand if there is no reply. I honestly thought that I would have gotten some support on this subject here, and that there wouldn’t have been the immense Phariseical push back that I have received. Do any of you actually pray “God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.”? And if you say you don’t, I implore to reread what is being said in your posts, because that is exactly what is being said…You are teaching that the bishop is to be “better”(married to one wife is better than being married more than once, because he is a man of “higher caliber”) than other men in order to be a bishop. As I said in my introduction, I came across this site seeking info on PBI. And when I saw the negative things being said about Dr. Ruckman, and the false teaching, that he or anyone was “disqualified” from what God called him to do because of a misinterpretation of the words OF and WIFE, I wanted to give my 2 cents as it were, and then the rebuttals started pouring in. I have tried my best to show God is forgiving and forgetting of all sin, and never goes back on what he has called anyone to do (Rom. 11:29), and that anyone can get back up after being in a pit (of either his or someone else’s doing) (Jer. 38:6) and continue preaching and teaching others the word of God, continue preaching to the masses in an attempt to see souls saved, go and stand on a foreign field and preach and teach others blinded by the god of this world, and go out and preach to the lost, and rebuke, correct, instruct and exhort the church with a humble attitude, knowing that no one is perfect, and everyone needs time and patience to grow into what God wants to make them, not what “the church” expects them to be. Again, I never thought that a teaching of forgiveness and exhortation to those that are or have been through a difficult and troubling time would be met with such a confrontational and perhaps a slight rebuking spirit. As I am being told that I am teaching false doctrine by encouraging others to free themselves from the shackles of false hindrance and guilt, realize that just because the Devil was able to score a home run on destroying their marriage, that our great Captain still wants them on the pitcher’s mound, and to get back out there, brush off the dust of doubt and depression, pick the book back up, and keep pitching the word of God out to the lost and to the Christian, correctly and rightly divided. Can’t you see the simplicity in this? If you were the coach of Roger Clemens, and his wife left him, and took his kids while he was employed by you, you wouldn’t demote him to ball boy, or any other “lower office” on the ball field. You hired him to pitch. So why would you think that God wouldn’t do the same? He called the man to preach…he didn’t call his wife or his children. If the wife and kids stay, thank the Lord. If the wife and kids leave, thank the Lord. (1 Thess. 5:18) It does not change what God called you to do. I would like to take an objective view to this. In 1970 divorces, in America, skyrocketed, and have steadily risen since. So what happened? According to the view on this thread, men on a national scale, seemingly over night at the turn of the decade became hard hearted. Or, did a Governor, named Reagan, sign a “no fault” divorce bill into effect that every state afterward adopted and have made divorces as easy as changing clothes. Did a man open a flood gate for rebellious spouses (MEN and WOMEN) and give them an easy way out of a promise and vow they made? And, according to the scriptures you quote in Matthew, if it is the men that are hard hearted, aren't they the ones supposed to be putting away wives? So, why is it that wives file for over 80% of all divorces? These are hard objective facts. There is so much more to the issue of divorce than just blaming most fault on the "unloving" "hard hearted" men. In the cases I have seen, my subjective view, it is mostly the men that were doing their best to be good husbands, love their wives and provide for their them and the children, and it was the mostly the men that were willing to work on improving the marriage when issues arose, and it was mostly the women that chose the easy way (No Fault) out of the marriage, taking with them nice fat child support and alimony checks in order to be able to live very comfortably without being in subjection to a man. Yes, some men are dogs, abusive, and downright horrible and dishonorable, but it has been my experience that they are the minority. First, it seems I am seeing a very common thing amongst all on this thread. It seems that most if not all keep going back to the Old Testament law or during the time of Christ when the law was still in effect in order to prove your doctrine. I am really curious why this is? Are we not in the New Testament, and no longer UNDER the burden of the laws and ordinances? Christ nailed these to his cross, why are you pulling them off and putting men under it? Why do you think he said that "his yoke is easy, and that his burden is light"? Second, besides the fact the question being brought up is about Mosaic Law, as stated above, I would point you to the first 4 words of verses 8 & 9 of the scriptures you are quoting in Matthew. Who is Christ talking to? Where is the church located in these passages? If the church is not there at this time, why do you keep bringing her back to a passage spoken by a Jewish Messiah to Jewish people receiving instruction for a Jewish kingdom? I say again we are not under Jewish, Mosaic Law, nor should we be looking for instruction for an earthly kingdom. Third, if a second marriage is a sin, and you are married to two women, how exactly does God forgive something that you are willfully doing every second of your life? Do you have to ask for forgiveness for being married to this adulteress woman every night, and she must ask forgiveness for being married to an hard hearted adulteress man every night? And if remarriage is a sin, please enlighten me on 1 Cor. 7:27-28, where it clearly says it is NOT a sin, and I find no conditions or reasons for the spouse being loosed to change it into a sin. And lastly, I would like to point out the double standard of your doctrine. When I brought up about the bishop not being a brawler ever in his lifetime….You said and I quote “We're talking about a man who is in the position of a bishop not being a brawler...not what he did as a child.” Yet, of your own admission, the application of the word “in” only applies to every qualification except the one about his marriage. So your own teaching has double standards, when it fits your choosing. They either ALL apply while "in" office, or they ALL apply for his entire lifetime. Which is it? There is no time restraint conditions when he lists the qualifications, AND to point out the biggest hole in your argument, there is the fact that the man is NOT "in" the office as you stated...Paul says "If a man DESIRES the office..." he is to be blameless in all areas of the list. So, if the qualifications apply to his entire life, then he must be blameless his entire life. I'm sure we can agree this is impossible, therefore it must apply at his "desire" which means that he could have been a brawler, he could have been not apt to teach, he could have been not of good behavior, and he could have been married to two women at the same time. Therefore, I teach it is not a man TO one WOMAN, but that he is to have ONE WIFE while he is a HUSBAND, or as it states ..."the husband OF one wife" And finally, I NEVER said you punished your wife. Another example of words being put where they are not. You said, and I quote “I feel we are running in circles. We both believe the same definition regarding "rule"...the different aspects of it. Yes, I would say that punishment applies to the wife as well; however, how one deals with a wife is far different than how one deals with all of the other examples you gave. Yes, there have been times; in which, I've had to "enforce rules" with my wife.” I said, and I quote “And I disagree with you on “punishing” a wife in any fashion or form.”
  19. Looking forward to that day: especially chapter 20-22.
  20. In my limited experience I have not seen one, I see many with websites, but no apps. Now the JW's have extensive apps for their people.
  21. I can't remmber how much it was, but probably not more than the equivalent of about 4$. I bought it when it was reduced for quick sale. It was quite big and thick. I only buy meat when it is on offer or reduced. Our 2 main supermarkets, Tesco and Sainsburys often send vouchers for a 10% off if you send a certain amount, in Tesco recently it was £70 with a larger amount off on the first voucher. We don't often spend that much at one time. We had three vouchers last month and didn't use any of them. In Saisburys we had a number of weeks where thay offered £4.50off a £30 shop as well as voucher giving extra points on their Loyalty Card, usually on things we have bought recently. My daughter uses the local butcher as she likes to support local businesses. Tonight I did tomato and bacon omelette,
  22. I love how Jesus references Jonah in the book of Matthew. Matthew 12:38-41 Jesus confirms that Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights. How far can a great fish travel in three days and three nights? The route suggested above is quite lengthy. I have to admit when I saw where Nineveh was on a map I had to reconfigure the mental image I had in my mind from reading. However, that happens often as we read and then see a visual of the places and regions we are learning about. I'm completely comfortable with the possibility that wherever God had Jonah spit out, that he may have had to walk in obedience for some time to get to Nineveh, 3 days or more days. Many interpret the three days mentioned to be in relation to the size of Nineveh, the amount of time it would take to canvas the entire city with the message the Lord sent him to share.
  23. I'm heading out to preach at Vision Baptist College tomorrow, when I get back I'll see what I can do. Thank you.
  24. I'm not sure I've seen an IFB church have one. I'm in the process of making one for our church, and was just curious if other churches of like faith had one.
  25. Alan

    Church Apps

    Can anybody give us an example of an IFB church having a church app?
  1. Load more activity

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...