Jump to content
Online Baptist

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/22/2018 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    No Nicolaitans

    What would you do?

    Please forgive me for what I'm about to say... Folks here know my stance (I think). I see nothing wrong with women wearing pants...if they are modest. Same with dresses. Sometimes, I feel that I'm the only one who draws a parallel between modern-day IFB "rules and regulations" and the Pharisees who placed the emphasis on outward appearance. Whitewashed tombs? Clean the outside of the cup? Christ certainly wasn't in favor of those who "made proselytes". I've said it before. I'm saying it now...and I'll continue saying it... Allow the Holy Spirit to change a person as they grow in the knowledge and admonition of the Lord. When the change comes from him (and within), the change is real. When the change is forced by others...it's not real. It's done to please man. All of this emphasis on forcing a change on the outward appearance usurps what Christ is doing on the inside. Often more than not, it forces people to seek to please man...and often more than not, it leads to man-worship. I would much rather see a lady (who wears pants to church) yearning to know more of Christ...than to see a woman (who wears dresses only) that gives those who don't "measure up" looks of disgust and disdain, because they wear pants ...and the same for men. Preach standards...yes! However, don't force them on people. Allow the Holy Spirit to change them through the preaching of his word. Please?
  2. 5 points
    DaveW

    Leadership conferences?

    Interesting thought........... 😂
  3. 5 points
    Doc Flay, Thank you for your testimony. It helps us understand how a sincere Catholic thinks and how it is best to deal with them. You also reminded me of the time a year or so after I was saved and had a discussion concerning a couple of Catholic beliefs to a Catholic Chaplain in the Air Force. Although both of us were friendly to one another, the result was somewhat the same. As I was a new Christian at the time I was I was somewhat taken aback as he did not really care for what the Bible had to say and said that because I did not know the Greek language (which I admitted I did not), and that due to my ignorance in not knowing what the church taught (which at the time I was), I did not know what the Bible really taught. I was dumbfounded at the time as I felt he just didn't care what the Bible clearly taught. Afterwards, it came to my mind that he was religious but lost and cared more about his denominational beliefs, traditions, and ceremonies then the scripture. In my eyes, he used the Bible but did not believe it. He reminded me of the Pharisees. The Lord used that conversation that day in the Chaplains office to help me grow spiritually. Alan
  4. 5 points
    Jim_Alaska

    The Local Church.

    Well done Alan, I wouldn't change a word of this lesson. The thought you put into this is very obvious, correct and something that most lessons on the local church do not teach. They might correctly teach against denominations and hierarchies, but never attain the depth you have here.
  5. 5 points
    Not to beat a dead horse now that Davidjayjordan has been banned, but I want to say one last thing... To Davidjayjordan (if you return here to see what has happened since you've been banned...and I know you will), You need to repent, Repent, REPENT!!! You didn't like my usage of the word "repent"; in fact, you asked me not to use that word. I wondered, "Why would someone who claims to be a believer be offended at the use of a biblical term?" Pride? Perhaps... So I asked if this was more palatable to you... ...which is what "repent" means when enacted. However, you didn't respond to that. I don't claim to be right all of the time. In fact, I'm always glad when I'm shown that I'm wrong about things. I will say this as humbly as I can... You need to take some time to figure out if you're wrong about many things concerning God's word. From what you have personally shared here (and on your website), I have VERY strong reservations about anything you have to say concerning God's word and its interpretation. When I see the things that you say...and the things that you believe...I fear for you. I admire your boldness, yet your boldness is misplaced. God doesn't speak to us audibly today (as you have asserted in your testimony). We live by faith...faith in his word...the written word of God...the Bible. If you are trusting in an experience or signs (audible voices), then your faith is in the wrong thing. Yes, I said "thing". (Romans 10:17) So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by...what? THE WORD OF GOD!!! Not voices. The written word of God is what gives us our faith...anything apart from that is false and to be shunned and avoided. I adjure you...look in retrospect at all that you have placed your faith in. Is it solely based on the written word of God?
  6. 4 points
    Jim_Alaska

    What would you do?

    I find it interesting that this thread has taken the direction it has. The Op was in regard to a lost woman wearing inappropriate clothing to church. I has now taken a turn for the wearing of suits and ties for members and leaders. While not strictly off topic, I would still contend for my original reply above that said in effect, "she is lost and we can't, or shouldn't dictate to a visitor how she should dress." Which is more important for the ministry of our church, what a visitor wears, or the fact that their very attendance might have a saving, life changing influence, resulting in proper Christian qualities?
  7. 4 points
    Salyan

    What would you do?

    Wow... sounds like a good recipe to make sure the new person never comes back!
  8. 4 points
    Alan

    The Local Church.

    Acts 15:41, “Confirming the Churches” “And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.” Acts 15:41 As we study the history of the church in the book of Acts we need to remember a very important fact. Just about everywhere Paul went the unsaved Jews, heretics, and false apostles, verbally attacked him and incited mobs to cause him physical harm and embarrassment. After Paul left the area these religious zealots, false brethren, false apostles, heretics, and even brethren in the pew tried to infiltrate the local assembles and corrupt them with false doctrines. “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” Acts 20:29 & 30 Paul clearly stated, “Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” As I speak, Charismatics, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, Calvinists, Progressives, and even men claiming to be independent, fundamental Baptists, will enter local assemblies, or spew out their perverse teachings on the internet, and teach false doctrines in order to corrupt the local assembly and draw people out of the local church to their own church or entice them to be a part of their audience on the internet. Confirming Because of the need to assure that the churches already established were doctrinally correct, to give further instructions to the brethren, and to warn the brethren against false teachers, the Apostle Paul and Silas began their second missionary journey “confirming the churches.” Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines confirming as, “Making firm or more firm; strengthening; ratifying; giving additional evidence or proof; establishing.” i As the Apostle Paul and Silas travelled they made more firm, strengthened, and gave additional instructions on the organization of the local churches that were already established. The Apostle Paul, through the revelations given to him and the other Apostles before the completion of the New Testament, gave additional doctrines, instructions how to establish a church, the qualifications of the pastor and other instructions as revealed to him as he met the saints and won folks to Christ. “It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.” 2 Corinthians 12:1 Furthermore, the word “confirming” clearly indicates that where a church was not established, the two missionaries established a local New Testament, independent, indigenous, church as revealed in Acts 14:21-28 Churches - Plural At the start of the second missionary journey of Paul the Apostle with Silas, went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia confirming the “churches.” The scripture is very clear that it is not just one church but more than one: 'churches' The accepted definition of “The Universal Church” is an invisible assembly of all the saved. Quite clearly, Paul and Silas did not confirm “The Universal Church” in any sense of the word. Therefore, the Apostle Paul and Silas did not confirm “the universal church,” but they confirmed several individual, local assemblies, or churches, of the saints. i “Confirming” Webster, Noah American Dictionary of the English Language. 1828. Cincinnati, OH: C.J. Krehbiel Company, 2000.
  9. 4 points
    Alan

    The Local Church.

    Acts 15:40, “The Authority of the Local Church” “And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. ” Acts 15:40 After the local church at Antioch recommended that the Apostle Paul start a second missionary journey Paul chose Silas to go with him. The only church involved in the process of recommending Paul and Silas to journey as missionaries was the local church at Antioch. There were no other churches, or a universal church, or a denomination, or a bishop over the churches, or any church hierarchy, in the process of recommending the missionaries. The Chief Shepherd of the Churches “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not sway.” 1 Peter 5:1-4 The Lord Jesus is the Chief Shepherd of the individual, local churches. The pastor is the under-Shepherd of the individual, local churches. The pastor is the visible head of the local church and the Lord Jesus is the invisible head of the local church. As in the individual family, the local church is only in subjecttion to Christ and is not to be in subjection to any man outside the local church. “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Ephesians 5:24 As with the family, the husband is the head of the family and any other individual that attempts to be head of the family is the one that is causing disorder in the family. An Example of Christ as Head of the Local Churches The scriptures give us a clear illustration of the spiritual leadership of Christ as the invisible head, the Chief Shepherd, of the local churches. The Apostle John saw the Lord Jesus as the invisible head of the 7 churches in Asia. “I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, Saying, I am the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, what thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.” Revelation 1:9 & 10 As with the 7 churches in Asia, the Lord Jesus is the Chief Shepherd of the individual, local, New Testament churches. The pastor is the under-Shepherd of the Lord Jesus Christ and is the visible authority of the local church. As we see in the example of scripture, the only authority to send out missionaries resides in the local church. The pastor of an individual, or local, church is the final visible authority in sending out missionaries to the foreign field to preach the gospel. Church Hierarchies Ever since the start of the Roman Catholic Church denomination, the various denominations created a hierarchy in sending out missionaries to preach the gospel. Instead of the pastor being the final authority of the local church, a denominational headquarters becomes the final authority. The supplanting of the authority of the pastor of the local church as the under-Shepherd of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the leading of the Holy Spirit, is the objective of the every denomination starting from the Roman Catholic Church to our day. Also, in these last days we are witness to the rise of, “The Ecumenical Movement,” as a method to supplant the authority of the pastor as the head of the local church and the Lord Jesus as the invisible head of the local church. In order to accomplish this corruption of the local church, the leaders of the denominations are banding together in “Church Councils” and using Acts 15:1-30 as a pretext. The primary reason for the doctrine of “The Universal Church,” is the supplanting of the authority of the pastor of a local church and placing the authority of the local church to a denominational headquarters. All of the leaders of the denominational churches want to be “lords” over God's heritage. In order to create a system that requires the pastor to be loyal to the leaders of the denomination, all of the denominations have a religious hierarchy, an organization, outside of the local church, that keeps the church in subjection to the denomination and not to the scriptures. The system uses the following methods: 1. A denominational school, or seminary, teaches the doctrines, practices, beliefs, traditions and ceremonies of the denomination. As the individual goes through the denominational school, he is also taught that only his denomination is correct and that those churches not in agreement with their doctrines are heretical. The school also creates an ill-feeling towards those churches who are outside of the authority of the denomination. 2. A denomination will create a system of professors and pastors who will spend the vast majority of their time writing books that promote their doctrinal beliefs. This includes the writing of “Church History” books that promote the denominations history and belittle, twist, begrudge, slander, local church history and Baptist church history. The man of God needs to realize that God only preserved the scriptures. God did not preserve a record of the true history of the church. All, may I repeat all, of the denominational “Church History” books are written by professors who are more loyal to the denomination than to the truth. 3. All of the denominations will eventually have a retirement program for the professors and pastors. If a pastor, or professor, forsakes the loyalty of the denomination than he forfeits his retirement. The retirement program makes the pastor, or professor, loyal to the denomination and not to the scriptures. A retirement program is offered by most businesses in order to keep their workers loyal to the system. As with businesses, the denominations of the world are full of men who love “filthy lucre.” The love of “filthy lucre” is the primary reason why men enter a denomination, remain loyal to a denomination, and err from the truth. “For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” 1 Timothy 6:10 4. All of the denominations will have a system of bishops, or elders, or chain of command, over the pastor of the church. Conclusion The local church at Antioch recommended Paul the Apostle and Silas to proceed on a second missionary journey and not some, “universal church,” denomination, a bishop that is over more than one church, or other church hierarchy. A true New Testament church will follow the example of the church at Antioch.
  10. 3 points
    Jim_Alaska

    Leadership conferences?

    How long would "leadership conferences" last if no one attended them? This speaks more to the "mindset" of some church pastors today. If a man is truly called of God to lead a flock, he already has a leader. Johh 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. Inevitably leadership conferences produce little clones of supposedly "successful" leaders. The attendees take on not only the methods taught, but also the personal preaching habits, speech patterns and peculiarities of speakers at the conference. So,, ironically the attendees of the leadership conference become "followers" rather than leaders.
  11. 3 points
    Pastor Scott Markle

    Leadership conferences?

    Seriously now - For such a conference to be SPIRITUALLY successful, the speakers would have to be the most BIBLICALLY (TRULY) humble individuals that could be found. Not necessarily one of the "well-knowns" who has a supposedly "successful" ministry, but very possibly some of the "un-knowns" who have a truly humble walk with the Lord.
  12. 3 points
    Who would LEAD the servanthood conference? 😜😧🧐
  13. 3 points
    Alan

    The Local Church.

    Acts 16:1-5, “Churches – Established & Increased” Verse 1-6, “Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek. And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.” A Map of Paul’s Second Missionary Journey Derbe, Lystra and Iconium Background After traveling north from their home church in Antioch, Syria, The Apostle Paul and Silas continued preaching the gospel and establishing churches in Cilicia. In Cilicia they turned westward towards they region of Galatia and Asia (Minor). Chapter 16:1 finds them in Derbe were they encounter a young man, Timotheus, or Timothy, that will have a profound impact on the gospel in the life of the Apostle Paul. As they traveled, and as folks got saved, they established individual churches in every location and delivered the decrees from the first church at Jerusalem as discussed in Acts 14:1-29 Important Church History Note “…they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.” A New Testament church is a continuation of the first church established by the Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem. A true New Testament church will follow the decrees, the methods, the practices, and the doctrines of the apostles as written in the scriptures. The denominations, and or churches, and or Para-church ministries, who deviate from the decrees, practices, methods, and doctrines of the scriptures, are not New Testament churches. Churches – Plural - Established “And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.” As the Apostle Paul and Silas traveled churches were established in the faith and increased in number. Although the number of churches, or local assemblies of believers, are not recorded, the scripture is very clear that they were numerous and local, and independent of any denominational authority. Also, in no manner, or fashion, was there a “universal church” established or even hinted of.
  14. 3 points
    I used to be a drug addict and alcoholic. I have been clean and sober since September twenty-first of 2000. When I got sober, I had absolutely no interest in 12 step programs or Christianity, but when my drinking and drugging friends found out that I was sober, none of them wanted to have anything to do with me. It was like I had leprosy. I white knuckled it for about a year before I finally went to an A.A. meeting. Then, I attended as many meetings as I possibly could and even worked behind the counter at an alano club, slinging burgers and processing membership dues. I worked the 12 steps, but I avoided the ones that had anything to do with a "higher power." My sponsor told me that if I didn't find Christ, then my sobriety would eventually fall down like a house of cards. After a while, I got involved with Buddhism and I continued to attend A.A. meetings. One night, while I was playing a gig at a bar and was on a set break, I was reading a book by the Dalai Lama and a friend of one of my bandmates sat down with me and started asking me about my book. That started an innumerable amount of conversations, between the two of us, about Christianity and, eventually, I had a "coming to Jesus" moment with him around a campfire in northern Michigan, although not anything close to a biblically based faith. Fast-forwarding a few years, I began to become disenchanted with A.A., as it just seemed like the same people kept telling the same stories and the meetings just seemed like dry bars filled with a bunch of miserable dry drunks. I no longer felt any desire to drink or to use drugs and I stopped attending the meetings. My discovery of true Christianity is another story, but, suffice it to say, I eventually came to rest in a Independent Baptist, KJV only, Bible based faith. I had, however, always credited my sobriety, and my eventual coming into my faith, with my roots in A.A. Tonight, out of curiosity, I decided to attend a meeting at the old alano club at which I used to work. In addition to the new faces I expected to see, I recognized several people from when I used to attend years ago. They were still struggling with the same types of issues they had when I met them almost seventeen years ago and still seemed just as miserable. The subject of the evening was the second step: "We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity." They spoke of a vaguely defined "higher power" or "god as I understand him," and spoke of a "happy, joyous and free" life in the same tone that a prisoner in solitary speaks of his one hour of yard time. When it was my turn to speak, they listened intently to me. However, when I spoke of the joy that I have found in Christ and the feeling of liberation I experienced in having received the gift of salvation, they started looking noticeably uncomfortable and a few of them left the table early. Afterward, the leader of the meeting took me aside and told me that people don't like it when people "preach or proselytize" at the tables and that, if I come back, that I should keep things confined to the idea of just a "higher power" because "a lot of people just don't like hearing about Jesus." I believe that, although A.A. may have helped me at a certain point, I came to a saving faith despite of A.A. and not because of it. I really believe that such programs can be a great hindrance to people coming to true salvation. Similarly, although I met a man that was instrumental in my eventually being lead to Christ, I would not recommend that people frequent bars looking for Christian conversations. This leads me to the question in the title of this topic. Would it be a good idea to try to create a different kind of meeting, for people who are struggling with addiction, that looks nothing like A.A., but is biblically based? I had been to a few "faith based" 12 step programs years ago, but I remember them being more non-denominational in their approach and leaning more toward quick-prayerism. Does the idea of a more biblically sound program sound like a good idea to pursue? I would really appreciate your feedback on this.
  15. 3 points
    Salyan

    What would you do?

    I would modify that a bit to say that women who refuse to wear pants because they consider them to be men’s garments should also not wear culottes. If a woman does not wear pants because she considers them to be too form-fitting and immodest, then wearing culottes would not be hypocritical.
  16. 3 points
    Pastor Scott Markle

    What would you do?

    First, it would be better to say -- "There has to be attire that is gender specific, otherwise Deuteronomy 22:5 would be meaningless." Using the word "clothing" already biases the discussion in a direction that (I believe) is not quite accurate to the original meaning of Deuteronomy 22:5. Second, I myself have already made clear my position on Deuteronomy 22:5, based upon extensive Bible study, in another thread, as per the following: https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440065 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440069 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440074 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440077 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440190 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440193 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440227 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440237 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440249 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440253 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440254 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440260 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440262 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440264 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440266 https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27213-the-morality-behind-christian-women-wearing-pants/?do=findComment&comment=440287 1. In every one of the passages that you have presented in the above quote, the "breeches" are UNDERWEAR garments. Therefore, they would not be equivalent to men's knickers or knee length shorts as outerwear, but would be equivalent to men's boxer shorts as underwear. 2. By definition, since these "breeches" were underwear, they were not to be generally observable to the public eye. Therefore, by definition they did not serve as a publicly observable attire of distinction between male and female. (Unless one holds to the position concerning Deuteronomy 22:5 that it was about the distinction of under-garments, which in fact is the position that I was taught throughout the years of my upbringing.) 3. In every one of the passages that you have presented in the above quote, the "breeches" were a part of the priesthood's HOLY garments, to be worn specifically when the priest was engaged in his priesthood (sacrificial) responsibilities. However, there is no indication that he was required to wear them when he was not engaged in these priesthood responsibilities, or that he ever did wear that when he was not so engaged. Thus these "breeches" were a part of the Holy garments that distinguished him, not as a male from the female, but as a priest in priesthood duties, from everyone else. 4. Exodus 28:42-43 specifically reveals the divine purpose for these "breeches," and that purpose is not given as the distinction between genders. Rather, that specific purpose is one of modesty, to cover the priest's nakedness, which he was to wear when he came in unto the tabernacle or when he came near unto the altar to minister in the Holy Place, lest someone might perchance get a glimpse up his skirt and see his nakedness, and thereby he bear iniquity and die. (By the way, I believe that we Fundamental Baptists could learn something about modesty from this principle, that our women who wear skirt-wear in public should be wearing something similar UNDERNEATH their open-bottomed garments, since platforms and stairways are now such a common part of public life.) 5. It is interesting to me that every time wherein I have encountered the "breeches" argument and evidence has been present to support the "pants are man's wear" position, these others points of Biblical information are NOT mentioned. I wonder if the reason for that neglect is because it would weaken the argument of the agenda. __________________________________ Now, it is true that there only two basic ways for the lower half of the human body to be covered -- (1) by an open-bottomed garment, wherein the part of the garment which covers the body down from the waist is precisely called a "skirt." (2) by an split-legged garment which is divided in accord the division of the two legs, wherein the part of the garment which covers the body down from the waist is precisely called a "pant." In the time when Deuteronomy 22:5 was delivered by the Lord God through Moses unto the Israelites, BOTH the men AND the women wore garments with a "skirt." At that time, neither the men nor the women wore a "pant" garment as outerwear. Even so, the ORIGINAL meaning of Deuteronomy 22:5 did NOT concern the matter of "skirts" as women's wear and "pants" as men's wear. Furthermore, I myself most certainly would NOT say that a man wearing "skirt" wear is inherently wearing women's wear. If that were true, then our Lord Jesus Christ wore women's wear (an EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE implication in my estimation). If that were true, then the Lord God HIMSELF designed women's wear for the High Priest of Israel to wear (another EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE implication in my estimation). If that were true, then our Lord Jesus Christ is portrayed as wearing women's wear in Revelation 1 (yet another EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE implication in my estimation). No sir, the reason for so many to claim that "skirt-wear" is women's wear is founded and influenced by a few hundred years of THIS WORLD'S cultural development. It is NOT a Biblical truth. Therefore, your logical argument above about the two possible options for male and female attire is built upon faulty premises. First, it is built upon a premise that the possible attires of distinction must be a form of common clothing. Second, it is built upon a premise that the possible attires of distinction must concern the lower half of the human body. Third, it is built upon the premise that the possible attires of distinction must be through the shape of clothing, as opposed to the coloring or other decor of the clothing. In fact, your viewpoint has to some extent been created BECAUSE OF the WORLD"S culture (from a number of hundreds of years of European culture); and now you attempt to read that culturally influenced viewpoint BACK onto God's Word. IF you had studied the subject of clothing ONLY from the Scriptures themselves, you yourself would be wearing a garment that contains a SKIRT.
  17. 3 points
    Salyan

    What would you do?

    Here's a thought stemming from this point. It's a little bit 'culturally defined', but bear with me. The culture at large has a certain sense of 'appropriate dress' or behavior. It varies by location, and definitely isn't up to Biblical standards, but it's there. No one in the world (with a reasonable amount of maturity and self-awareness) would wear that speedo or bikini to a board meeting, or a symphony orchestra. I think they also have a general sense of what is acceptable for visiting a church, and generally, what visitors wear is acceptable - for all but the most modest churches (which is a sad statement on the state of Christianity at large - I'm thinking evangelical churches - more so than on the world). Unless a church's doors actually opened onto the beach sand, I really don't see any visitor ever trying to wear a swimsuit to church. The 'swimsuit argument' is probably a bit of a straw man. That all said, if a visitor did walk in in something that even the world culture understood was inappropriate for the setting, I think it would be appropriate to kindly challenge them on that. They either already know that it's inappropriate, or they are severely socially challenged. However, if what they are wearing meets the norms of what the culture/churchianity at large accepts as appropriate church wear, than they are actually trying to be appropriate and respectful. To fail to recognize that, and immediately challenge them to meet 'our' standards... isn't good.
  18. 3 points
    Jim_Alaska

    The Local Church.

    This was spot on Alan. I especially liked the last three paragraphs. This lesson really tore apart the "Universal Church vs Local Church" issue. This is one thing I have always driven home when teaching about the institution named Church. And that is that when Scripture talks about more than one church, it always says "churches", it never lumps them together to indicate them as one Universal church. The word "churches" in these verses positively identifies that the word being in the plural affirms that there was more than one local church. The act of Paul "confirming" the churches is exactly correct in indicating how mission works are to be "confirmed" by their sponsoring church. I consider this of paramount importance before any mission work is to be formally organized. It is a grave mistake to just turn a missionary loose and just "rubber stamp" his work without first making sure it is a solid work, ready to be organized into a New testament Church. Thank you for putting this up, it is reassuring to hear these critical truths being taught today.
  19. 3 points
    heartstrings

    What would you do?

    What would I do? Love her, keep my eyes looking up and thank God she is coming to church. She might get saved.
  20. 3 points
    It is just as Paul, whose heart went out to his brethren still under the law, the Catholic clings to his teachings rather than the truth of the Gospel. All of my family are under the bondage of these false doctrines and refuse to veer clear of them. They say they don't know if they are going to heaven or hell when they die; they say I hope that my good works out weigh the bad, but when given the gospel again, they say I was baptized a Catholic as a baby and that should be good enough. Satan has certainly capture them at his own will.
  21. 3 points
    I grew up in the Catholic religion, and I asked someone what there religion was and they said Christian and my response was "oh, that's all religions combined, right? When presented with the invitation at a baptist church that I was invited to, my response was, oh I don't need to do that, my thinking was receiving a wafer and not Christ himself. Perhaps, the Catholic parishioners are ignorant of the truth. I certainty was . A couple of years ago I reach out to a catholic in my family with the Gospel and his response to the notion of being born again was, my priest says that's a protestant doctrine. Then I showed him from his Catholic Bible and it said he must be born again, and he still refused it.
  22. 3 points
    Religion is the following of mandates as established by a hierarchy of men in their respective organizations..., such as the Catholic Church. Christianity on the other hand is following the teachings of Jesus. If you ask ANY of those in the various 'religions' of the world they will tell you that yes, they are following the teachings of Jesus but in truth, only to the point it tickles their ears. Not long ago a person asked me what religion I was. I told him I didn't have a religion. He then asked me if I was an atheist or an agnostic at which time I said, “No, neither. I am a Born Again Christian.” Upon hearing this he said, “Well then, you have a religion!” I again said that no, I was not in a religion but rather, as a Born Again Christian my goal was to adhere to the teaching of Christ. The conversation soon ended. The Catholic religion; the Mormon religion; the Jehovah Witness religion; et.al. In fact, one can become 'religious' over a 1957 rebuilt Chevy Belair Convertible.
  23. 3 points
    Jim_Alaska

    Is all of the BIble the Bible?

    I agree, we have rejected already, now it's time to put it behind us and move on. No sense beating a dead horse. He'll just have to find another place to promote his nonsense.
  24. 3 points
    DaveW

    Is all of the BIble the Bible?

    For the sake of clarity, I was pressing this guy on this point because he is dishonest. Everyone can see the evasive manner in which he answers what others clearly answered in single short posts. Here is part of the reason why: (from his website) "Paul versus Jesus Sometimes Paul wrote his opinion rather than the Lord's ..... 1Corinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission,and NOT of commandment. And yet church people worship His opinions about women, inequality, anti- sexuality, nationalism and patriotism as if they were the WORD OF GOD". This is a gross misinterpretation of this verse.
  25. 3 points
    Catholicism is a sham and there are child molesters even in some independent baptist churches. Whether your sister realizes it or not, by condemning sin in others she is acknowledging that true righteousness does exist. So there is hope. She will have to realize her OWN unrighteousness and that true righteousness can only be found in Jesus Christ.


×