Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/19/2021 in all areas

  1. Just to clarify: Mary is not the mother of God. She is the mother of Jesus, of His human nature. I have heard various messages through the years about Mary's faith, about how the Lord used Mary, her as an example to us, her words "whatsoever He saith to you, do it"). She was only a virgin until after the birth of Jesus. She had at least 6 other children (four sons, and at least two daughters, because the passages say "sisters"). She certainly was a godly woman, a woman of faith. Of course, we should teach about her as much as any other Bible character - but not exalt her or focus on her more exclusively than anyone else (not saying you are trying to do that - just want to clarify, as I came from a nominal Catholic background).
    6 points
  2. Before I became a Baptist, I was part of three different Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches (cannot remember if I was a member of them or not, it was so long ago). Right now I am attending the second IFB church that I have been a member of. I found out a few months ago that in January of this year that the one I was part of in Kelowna, BC, since 1998 is now not assembling together. The families have moved on or are attending an IFB church in Vernon, BC. With Covid fallout, we don't have that many people at our church in Abbotsford - but at least it's still solid in preaching, IFB, KJVonly - better than any other alternatives in my city.
    4 points
  3. I was just thinking about this and realized some posters here are thinking backwards on the translation issue. It DOESN'T matter if some words are hard to translate from another language into English or be able to be translated word for word into another language - what matters is: Is God's Word able to be translated into those languages accurately? Languages develop over time - however, the three Bible languages are now dead languages (not modern Greek, but Koine Greek); therefore their meaning is static, unchanging. God - who is all knowing, who knows the end from the beginning - chose specific words when He used the Bible prophets to pen His Word. Regardless of how a newer language may have since developed (and how difficult it may or may not be to translate THAT language into another), is God's Word able to be translated INTO (not FROM) that language? That is the primary issue. If God cannot oversee an accurate translation of His Word into a receptor language, that's on God. If man created some words/phrases/ideas that are difficult to translate from a receptor language into another language, that doesn't matter. We are not referring to a Tribesman from (insert random name here) translating his written or spoken words into English or whatever other language you pick, we are determining whether God's preserved words in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek can be translated into these receptor languages?
    4 points
  4. My brother in law's birthday is today. When I sent him a "Happy Birthday" wish on FB, he sent me a Message saying my sister Michele in Augusta, GA was in the hospital. She had a very serious flare-up of her MS yesterday and went into convulsions. He was at work (he works as a Richmond County (Augusta) Sheriff's deputy. He couldn't get ahold of her when he called, so he asked a friend to go and check on her. The friend found her in serious condition and called Al at work. His supervisor sent him home. He got some meds into her, and she slept until 6 PM last night. When she got up, it had started all over again. So, he took her to the ER....They admitted her. Blood work has come back and the doctor told them that the drug gabapentin wasn't being excreted through her kidney's like it's supposed to be (the same reason I quit taking this drug about 10 weeks ago), and that he would need to keep her at least overnight, and if no improvement, with the tests she needs, until at least Tuesday. Al HAS to work today...plus it's his 68th birthday. He's stressed and needs your prayers as well. I'm not sure if he's told my mother yet or not. I'm going to try to call her in just a few minutes to make sure she knows. This whole situation could use some prayer...I know Al and Michele would appreciate it, and so would the rest of our family. This is the second worst MS episode Michele has had in the past six months. The disease is progressing. Thank-you in advance.
    4 points
  5. My brother-in-law has been in the hospital in Augusta, GA for nearly a week now on oxygen...they just told his wife he has pnuemonia (Covid), and they are planning on putting him on a ventilator tonight if his breathing hasn't improved by 9 Eastern. His wife is still recovering from covid, as are his two sons who live in the same mobile home park in N. Augusta, SC. Many in our family in the Augusta area have covid right now. Many HAVE BEEN vaccinated...I'm sure they ALL would appreciate your prayers.
    4 points
  6. Indeed, let us claim that EVERYTHING which Christ said matters; but then let us ignore an entire half of the verse. If everything that Christ said really mattered, then it would be necessary to consider the ENTIRE sentence of the verse, and to demonstrate the grammatical and contextual relationship of the second half of the verse to the first half of the verse.
    4 points
  7. We have some friends who have been hit with covid. The wife recovered, but it still recuperating and tires very easily. Her husband got pneumonia from it and is now in the hospital on oxygen. It looks like he is improving as they've lowered his oxygen, but please pray for healing. She would like him to come home, believing that he would rest better (we all know that's likely true), but not while his oxygen is iffy. Please pray for recovery. They are missionaries, home on furlough. Their country of service is very harsh about covid, and they have had a lot to deal with. They come home and after just a few weeks get sick. The advantage is they will now be immune, but it wouldn't surprise me if they weren't required to get the jab to get back in country. She has not shared this on social media, just privately. So I'm not going to give names. God knows, and I do appreciate your prayers.
    3 points
  8. Todays' update: My friend is home from the hospital! He still has to be on oxygen a bit, but it doing much better. Recuperation is now the goal for both of them. Thank you so much for praying!
    3 points
  9. I have been a member of two Independent Baptist churches. 1. Two Rivers Baptist in Fairbanks Alaska from 1977 to 2003. 2. Country Baptist in Yreka California from 2007 to 2021.
    3 points
  10. There's no way you can love God and hate Him at the same time. If you hate God in any sense, you are dead wrong and backslidden - if you indeed are saved. Also, Biblical love is obedience to Jesus and His Word. If you are not obeying what is revealed in the Word of God - especially what is stated in the New Testament (for simplicity's sake - the instructions to the NT believers, to the churches), then you do not love Him. John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
    3 points
  11. Our church does not pay our housing...we take care of that. We chose - via God's leading - where we live. We also choose what we want to drive. We have another vehicle that hubs drives mostly (the car the church bought is for church use or emergency use if our van is down). If you were a member of our church you could have voted against buying the car, but you would have been the only one. lol We aren't poor nor are we rich. God takes care of us, and my hubs gets a sufficient salary from the church. And we are progressing fine in life...monies/gifts/benefits from the church have nothing to do with our progressing in life. And as to our children - our son is in his 30s and paid his own way through his education, like we did. I'm sorry, but I don't agree that it's a "right" to send our children to college via the church paying "enough" money for someone to do so. IMO, that's overreach of pastoral pay. Kids need to get jobs, save money, and pay their own way. Yep, I'm one of those hardnosed people (not to say we wouldn't help our ADULT child in college if need be - but most certainly we would never pay the way and allow said ADULT child to slough off working and paying his/her bill - that is teaching them to be irresponsible, and that is unbiblical). Any pastor who goes into the ministry with $$ on his mind should just not go into the ministry. God provides for His servants. Yes, the laborer is worthy of his hire, and he should be paid if it's possible. Not all times is it possible, and so God works things out different ways (some with pastors getting a second job, some with other churches supporting until the church can be indigenous). I think it's nice that you would like to provide a pastor with sufficient income to pay for everything they want, but that isn't true even of a secular job. Money is only a means to an end. And not always available. Trusting God works much better...
    3 points
  12. Textus Receptus Only nonsense? If you are knocking the TR manuscripts, then how can you be in support of the KJV? It was faithfully translated from the OT Masoretic Text and the NT Textus Receptus. Also, your second statement above is less than a half truth. Scrivener's Greek NT is the one that was put together after that translation of the KJV (ie, he put it together in the 19th century to backup the mansucript support of the KJV when Westcott and Hort were pushing their corrupt Greek text); however, he didn't create it but based it upon all the manuscript readings that were in line with the KJV. There are other editions of the Textus Receptus that were way before the KJV - such as Stephanus'. I don't know all the names, but these manuscripts existed since the first century and weren't just invented in the last four hundred years.
    3 points
  13. Well, I have already presented earlier in this thread discussion my position concerning the continuance of "inspirational AUTHORITY" upon preserved copies and accurate translations of the Holy Scriptures (which I can accept as "derived inspiration," depending upon the definition of this phrase). However, when handling the opening line of 2 Timothy 3:16, let us be sure to handle it with grammatical precision -- "All scripture IS GIVEN by inspiration of God." Yes, this statement DOES speak in the present tense. However, this statement ONLY speaks concerning the GIVING of Holy Scripture. The statement is NOT that all Scripture is COPIED BY (by means of) inspiration of God. The statement is NOT that all Scripture is TRANSLATED BY (by means of) inspiration of God. The statement is ONLY that all Scripture is GIVEN BY (by means of) inspiration of God. The Lord our God GAVE His Holy Word by means of inspiration, wherein holy men of God spoke/communicated it specifically as they were moved by the Holy Spirit of God (See 2 Peter 1:21). As such, I am not aware of any passage which teaches that the copying or translating of Holy Scripture would be done BY (by means of) inspiration of God. On the other hand, there DOES remain the doctrine of PRESERVATION to be considered.
    3 points
  14. This arrangement was done by Ms. Heather Sorenson...She's a very gifted young lady. I hope you enjoy this piece of music as much as I do.
    3 points
  15. Update on my sister....She's been released from the hospital and has been home for a day now. She was very dehydrated and had taken gabapentin while dehydrated. They told her that this could cause kidney damage, to NEVER take this drug while dehydrated. She didnt KNOW she was dehydrated, and the combination of being dehydrated and the gabapentin kicked her MS into gear. She's a bit weak, but she's doing better than she was. Thank you all for the prayers.
    3 points
  16. I have never heard Dr. Robert's preach, but I do agree with you that politics is becoming an issue with many pastors. I'm not talking about Biblical issues like abortion and homosexuality, but rather political issues like second amendment, election fraud, CRT and others. I may agree with what some of these pastors say, but there is no need for the pastor to tell people how to vote. Once the Word of God gets in ones life, they will know how to vote.
    3 points
  17. 3 points
  18. Acts 2:21 (KJV) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Acts 16:30 (KJV) And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? Acts 16:31 (KJV) And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 4:12 (KJV) Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 11:14 (KJV) Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. Acts 15:11 (KJV) But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Romans 5:9 (KJV) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Romans 10:9 (KJV) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:13 (KJV) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Isaiah 45:22 (KJV) Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
    3 points
  19. I take no offense at what you stated, Brother. For the record, I've been with the North Fork Baptist Church of Shelbyville, Tennessee for over five years. Before that my wife and I were members of a church in our area that split. I was a laypreacher for the church before it split, and then after serving AFTER the split, because of the anymosity towards the split, my wife and I went WiTH the split. As far as "visiting many different Baptist Churches" incorrect. We've belonged to several because of splits in churches, my being involved with other churches ministries, and helping to plant churches. So, no offense taken. You're always welcomed to have the opinion you have about listening to ones own pastor..and I have to say that I agree with that...they ARE the undershepherd for the people whom they have as church members and should take that very seriously. I should clarify that because this IS A BAPTIST board, that's why I specifically mention that I've seen it in many BAPTIST churches...not just over a period of a few years, but for over 50 years. I know it's present in every denomination. But, again, I want you to be assured that I take no offense here...just wanted to clarify some things. One last thing, because of health issues, I'm not always able to be in church physically. My own church doesn't put their services online any longer, so I am pretty much resigned to either watching other Baptist preachers, or preachers whom I know are doctrinally sound, and believe me, they are getting to be far a few between. Still, I do have spiritual discernment and know how to compare to Scripture what is being said. That's one reason I brought Jeffress' comments to the news cycle! I used to listen to him years ago, but, during the Trump administration, he became far too political in nature for my tastes. My wife still listens to him, but I often hear her sayiing "Um...that's not right, Robert!" She starts pointing out in the Bible what's wrong with what he's said! I've taught her pretty well over the years. Blessings, my friend and Brother! BT
    3 points
  20. So you are an unsaved man who is trusting in another gospel, a gospel of works, to save you. Faith plus water baptism. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38 There are two possible definitions of this verse, based on the Biblical usage of the word "for" here: 1) To be baptized in order to be saved/forgiven. 2) To be baptized because our sins are forgiven through faith in Christ. How do we know which interpretation is true? The Bible never contradicts itself, and everywhere else it only teaches one Gospel for salvation - therefore a gospel of faith plus baptism is obviously arriving at a wrong conclusion and making the Bible disagree with itself.
    3 points
  21. God does not say is word is purified seven times. he says it is like silver purified seven times. The comparison is the to the end product of the purified silver, not the process of getting to the silver. God tells us that Holy Men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit and that the scriptures are given by inspiration of God. To claim that God's originally inspired word given in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek needed any kind of purifying is heretical nonsense. There are no impurities in what God gives by Inspiration and it needs no purifying. Also the purifying verse has nothing to do with translation. When David wrote that Psalm under Inspiration he was just talking about the pureness of God's word, not some need for it to be purified. End product is in mind, not the process of purification of silver.
    3 points
  22. Jerry

    Highway to heaven

    It was a generic god that loves everybody. No truth or Gospel presented in the show at all. No one could have gotten saved from its worldly, religious influence.
    2 points
  23. Actually, the primary definition and context is that he be a man/husband who is Biblically and relationally committed and devoted to only one woman/wife, which encompasses BOTH the polygamy issue and the divorce/remarriage issue, as well as wife abuse or neglect issues (dealing treacherously with her as per Malachi 2:13-14). Indeed, the Biblical elder/overseer (bishop) "MUST be BLAMELESS," especially in his marriage relationship with his wife (considering that in both of the qualification passages of 1 Timothy 3 & Titus 1, the responsibility of his marriage relationship follows immediately after the necessity to be "blameless"). As such, the qualification to be "the husband of one wife" (to be "a one woman/wife man/husband") would encompass ALL of the Biblical truth concerning a godly marriage relationship. (Note: I would contend that viewing the phrase, "the husband of one wife," only as being contrary to divorce/remarriage is a narrowing of the Biblical intention for the qualification.)
    2 points
  24. And what they did was in direct disobedience to God's Word as per the Law of Moses: Deuteronomy 17:14-20 - "When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: and it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel."
    2 points
  25. They have answered the question though. They say it's because the species of ape humans descended from are not the same species of ape that exist now. There was a split way back when and one species evolved into what are now humans and the others evolved into the apes that are still apes. The other answer is because during the evolutionary process any ape species that began to evolve higher intelligence were killed by the evolving humans so we alone became the superior ones. The other ape species could only survive by not evolving higher intelligence.
    2 points
  26. My childhood church, the church I attended college, church after college, church upon being married, church hubby co-pastored, 4 churches after moving out of state. We've been at our current church about 8 years. Every church we went to we intended to stay at, but different incidents and circumstances made it necessary to move.
    2 points
  27. Morales, why do you keep calling her the Virgin Mary? She was only a virgin until the birth of her first child. She was a virgin - but is never called the Virgin Mary in the Bible. You are referring to her in a Catholic sense that is not right or appropriate.
    2 points
  28. I think the title comes straight out of Catholicism - and most Protestants that use it (unless they are heretics) use it without thinking about it; however, it is a title that is idolatrous and should be avoided. On another note, there is enough on the actual Biblical Mary that someone can do an excellent, Biblical, character study on her, her life, her faith and response to Gabriel (ie. response to God's message), her reactions to seeing Jesus in the temple at 12, her words at the wedding, seeing how Jesus accepted His brethren (ie. those saved) over His physical family, watching the events of the crucifixion afar off (and relating it to her song in Luke 1, about the sword piercing her own soul), comparing her song with Hannah's, her gathering with the 120 believers praying in the upper room). I think some avoid preaching about her because of the many falsehoods told about her - but we should learn from what the Bible says about her as we would any other Bible character. You could preach on motherhood, on the events around Jesus' birth, on seeing those you love suffer, on how important following and obeying Jesus is - even use the passages about her to preach against false teachings on her.
    2 points
  29. I believe I've mentioned my BIL on here one time already, ,but this is an update if I have....We just got word that Terry has been moved to 100% oxygen and the next step to keep him alive would be the ventilator. He's been in the hospital for over two weeks now, and has made progress and then taken a downward spiral time and again. The doctors said that they believe the ventilator is the only way they'll keep him alive. Please pray that this isn't necessary and that his condition will improve. I know he'd appreciate your prayers, as would the rest of his immediate family. Thank you.
    2 points
  30. @SureWordI just wanted to add to my statement above. Just because the INSPIRED ORIGINALS have been translated, doesn't mean that they have lost the power that comes with that inspiration. The Holy Spirit doesn't have to breathe into the translations since his Word and his actions are eternal. That life that was breathed into the originals isn't made null and void by translation, unless it's not a faithful translation. God is faithful and won't let his word return void. It would be like trying to rescucitate a living human being when he needed no rescucitation to have the Holy Spirit breathe into a translation, essentially saying that his initial work wasn't done correctly.
    2 points
  31. Actually, NO Biblical doctrine can "be solved" strictly "through the means of man." Rather, ALL Biblical doctrine requires diligent and careful Bible study (see 2 Timothy 2:15) under the guidance of the indwelling Holy Spirit (see 1 John 2:27), that can humbly learn from God-given teachers (see Ephesians 4:11-14) and from Spirit-filled edifiers (see Ephesians 4:15-16), and that can graciously, yet earnestly contend for the faith (see Jude 1:3). I have NO doubts that we possess God's true Word for us now, or that the Lord our God will preserve His true Word for each and every future generation. He most certainly will because He has promised that He would. However, this discussion (at least my part in it) is NOT about doubting whether God's Word is available to us now or shall be available for each and every future generation. Rather, this discussion (at least my part in it) is about the Biblical DOCTRINES of INSPRATION and PRESERVATION (which is precisely what I said in my previous posting). Indeed, it is about getting those doctrines Biblically correct, and (in my case) about earnestly contending against those who are getting those doctrines incorrect. For I have been convinced by God the Holy Spirit that these doctrines are quite foundational to our system of belief, and that those who get them incorrect are worthy of ministry separation. Whether or not such is "sufficient" really depends upon the quality of the translation, the accuracy of the translation, and whether a translation from the divinely preserved, original language Hebrew and Greek texts was reasonably possible. So, to answer your question more directly - Not necessarily. That is an interesting thought. However, if doctrinal issues are only ever "for local church bodies," then NO doctrinal discussion should occur outside a given local church body, which means that no doctrinal discussion of any kind should occur within this forum. Yet this idea seems (from my perspective) to be in contradiction with the instruction of Jude 1:3 (and other passages) that we should "earnestly contend for the faith." So then, do you have actual Biblical teaching to support your thought above; for I do not wish to disobey the instruction of my Lord without a balancing truth from His own authoritative Word. Actually, (as per my own part in this thread discussion) there is a bit more than these "two debates taking place." As I have previously presented, I myself am contending specifically about the Biblical doctrines of inspiration and preservation - 1. How they are to be Biblically defined? 2. How they relate Biblically to each other? 3. How they relate Biblically to the matter of translation? 4. How they provide for a divinely authoritative Scriptures for us today? (Which is actually the question that encompasses your "two debate" issues - Is the King James translation wholly sufficient for English speaking people, and can we acceptably "go outside" the King James translation for doctrinal truth? However, I myself would contend that this fourth question cannot be rightly answered until the first three foundational questions are first answered correctly.) Actually, I myself have made no accusation of heresy against anyone in this thread discussion (although I recognize that another has made such an accusation). However, I am willing to acknowledge that I am convinced by God the Holy Spirit that the doctrinal position to which Brother SureWord holds is worthy of my ministry separation. I definitely view BROTHER SureWord as a fellow believer and definitely respect him as such; however, I definitely stand against his doctrinal position on this matter and view it as a significant doctrinal error. Actually, I believe that I DO understand Brother SureWord's doctrinal position upon this matter. Actually, this is inaccurate to my doctrinal position on the matter. My doctrinal position would not accept the Modern English Version as acceptable. Furthermore, I have NOT "jived" or "hoorahed" for "tearing another Brother's head off." However, I HAVE earnestly contended against that which I understand as significant doctrinal error; and I HAVE earnestly contended for that which I understand as important doctrinal truth.
    2 points
  32. This isn't an issue that can be solved through the means of man, it's an issue of conviction and ones faith and trust on God's provision for his people. We have his word now. Why should we doubt future generations or past generations don't or won't have it? Or even other nations? If we have missionaries sent out with the KJV, and they translate into the language of their residency, should we not have faith that, that is sufficient by the grace of God? Doctrinally, these are issues for local Church bodies, but even inside those churches they will only be proven through the conviction of the Holy Spirit for the individuals. I believe God wishes Israel to be righteous, and to testify for him, but instead through GRACE he has used another Witness, us the church. And I don't see how that lens cannot be used to view the dispensation of our Bible. Also, to think of it in another way. There is two debates taking place. But they are related. "Is the KJV wholly sufficient" and "Is there a Bible wholly sufficient". The second question should be answered first. And the answer is undoubtedly yes. Now, "Is the KJV wholly sufficient" - Yes, to those who show them selves approved. "Can we go outside the KJV" - Yes, to those who show them selves approved. “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” 2 TIMOTHY 2:15. I would say, any translation done properly, is done by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Anyways, this entire thread is sad and is a perfect example of Modern Christianity. Biting each others heads off for 'heresy'. Church splits over ties and suits. None of you actually understood what Sureword is saying, His complaint about the Textus Receptus is because of translations like the MEV, Modern English Version, which if we went by the how the thread dictates, would be proper. However even that Bible is in error. But yes continue to jive and hoorah for tearing another Brothers head off.
    2 points
  33. I guess the question to ask here is, does preservation make the Bible any less important/relevant?
    2 points
  34. For starters, that's not what I said. I stated, and ti should be pretty clear, it's up to the CHURCH...AUTONOMOUS...to set the terms. I don't believe it's up to us to set their terms. We, if we're members of said church, can voice our opinion in the business meeting, and the church as a whole has to make the decision. Personally, I believe that pastors in a church of a good size should be giving their pastors more than a salary, unless that salary is sizeable enough to cover some of the costs he would incur. Remember, he IS an EMPLOYEE of the church, though he is paid to be it's shepherd.
    2 points
  35. This "baptism" is something quite different from the Holy Ghost empowering the church as an institution. The bible speaks of different kinds of baptisms and for different reasons. Baptism is NEVER a condition for salvation, no matter who it is that is being baptized; speaking of your statement of the Jews being baptized for forgiveness of their sins. Yes, all Israel will be saved, but not by baptism, but by the very same blood as we, the blood of Jesus, when they realize that Jesus really was The Messiah that they had denied.
    2 points
  36. The website the information was from is https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html If you really want to find the statistics listed above in the thread, you need to sift through information, it's not really provided in an easy to access article. Happy hunting. https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html
    2 points
  37. Yes, except "sottish" which I can't recall off hand. You know how I learned what they meant? I got off my backside and grabbed a dictionary and looked them up. In a few cases I could grasp the gist of the word by the context it was used in. There's no excuse for not knowing what a word means especially with the internet. And to hear a college educated person who spent $200,000 on their education cry they can't understand a word is really an embarrassment to our education system. I have an app on my phone that shows the definition of the word and also the root word(s) it is derived from. Nothing but pure laziness or an excuse to not read the Bible is the reason for these excuses. PS: Looking at my app the word "sottish" means a foolish or stupid person and comes from a root word that was used for "drunkard, stupefy". It's where the word "besot" comes from. In England it is still used to refer to a "chronic drinker".
    2 points
  38. Looks like too much dieting on emergent church writings has caused him to think we can't even get the Bible meaning today. Therefore a preference for other writings other than the Bible. But if you cannot study the Bible and get what God is trying to teach us from His Word - through all available sound Bible study materials - then someone has to wonder if there is something wrong. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: 1 Corinthians 1:30 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2:7-16
    2 points
  39. Just to clarify here Bill. When I say I love you and tell my wife I love her. It most definitely is not the same love. I want to clarify that right away. Let's not make it awkward lol
    2 points
  40. Nothing but semantics. Inspired or preserved? At the end of the argument you believe the same thing. The KJV is the perfect word of God The translators who would have PRESERVED God's words would needed inspiration from God to carry it out. If not you would end up with just another "reliable translation". "But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding." - Job 32:8 Inspiration does not necessarily mean revelation though many always read it as such. They are two different doctrines. The men who built the Tabernacle in the wilderness received inspiration from God to do it but Moses received the revelation in how it was to be built. And remember, the Tabernacle had to be built perfectly as God instructed Moses.- Exodus 35:31. As far as I'm concerned this is more gnat straining over semantics to divide the brethren.
    2 points
  41. I'm vaccinated an I felt it was the right choice for my family after much research and speaking with our family Doctors. I'm 100% opposed to the socialist approach to health and oppose forced vaccination. It needs to remain a personal health choice. The vaccine did cause a normal immune response for about a day where we ran a slight fever but were fine the next day. My company under pressure to comply with the illegal mandates so is now asking for a copy of my card as they are considering implementing biweekly testing for the un vaccinated. I told them I'm vaccinated but wont be providing any medical documents as proof. We'll see how that goes. I may decline their possible future request to do testing but haven't decided yet.
    2 points
  42. Wait a second. BB, you said and I quote, "I don't need scripture", and then ask what Scripture I use? I'm curious why you want Scripture you said you don't need? You're deflecting from your original statement to get others defensive. Stand by your statement and stop deflecting when called out. All I said was God has qualifications for Pastors. If you don't that, take it up with God, I'm just the messenger. BTW...Scripture is my final authority, not man. God set special qualifications for a Pastor and deacons, which means he expects more out of them. Does not mean they are to be lifted up, just that God expects more than the member sitting in the pew.
    2 points
  43. We find in Scripture how Christians are supposed act and live which includes pastors. However, Pastor and deacons then have qualifications above and beyond the church member. God expects more from the pastor and gave them qualifications.
    2 points
  44. We just got another update on my BIL...he has a couple of blood clots in his lungs now. We wish we knew more, like whether or not they're going to intubate him. He said that he was positive that if he was intubated he wouldn't make it. He's got a strong will, and is a fighter. I just texted him and told him that I expect him to pull through. We're supposed to go fishing next summer!
    2 points
  45. Nah. It's simply a moral romance novel. Although by library genre standards it would be classed as Christian fiction, by the biblical meaning of Christian it falls far short.
    2 points
  46. Improper interpretation of the the Scriptures here...you're taking one verse and trying to create a whole doctrine out of it....Read the whole passage. That next phrase says that "he who BELIEVETH NOT shall be damned." You need to learn context and content, Jeff. If the baptism was a part of all of it (baptism only being an outward expression of an inward change) along with the salvation FOR salvation, then Christ would have quoted it in the second part of that passage. If the BAPTISM was part of salvation, then the thief on the cross wouldn't be in paradise with Christ. It doesn't follow here, Jeff. You need to learn some theology.
    2 points
  47. BrotherTony

    Baptist Buffets…

    I agree. In our church we have several "security" people...all carry guns, and i believe at least one is an officer somewhere nearby. In our church, being small (between 80 and 140 people on any given Sunday), our fellowships usually have the ladies and some men leaving the service just before the invitation to get the food warmed and put onto the tables. It doesn't take long. Fellowships are a great way to make sure that visitors feel welcomed if they've come on that particular Sunday, and we've had several come to the Lord because of the time spent on them on those Sundays. That's one thing I do love about our church. It was also, for my wife and I, a GREAT WAY to get to know other people who were in our SS class, in the church as deacons, and just to meet others our own age or a bit older. I wouldn't change a thing.
    2 points
  48. BrotherTony

    Baptist Buffets…

    I've never heard of a Baptist church that has buffets or fellowship every week after service....I'm not against buffets or fellowships after church, but don't believe they should used every week. In most of the IFB churches I was in growing up and in my early married years, we usually had one fellowship on a Sunday evening a month. To say what each church should or shouldn't do is becoming legalistic, as each church is free to choose how they run their own worship, their own fellowships, etc. It's really NONE of our business how another church conducts their fellowships, unless of course, they're bringing a reproach upon the name of Christ.
    2 points
  49. A check of the actual 1956 Republican platform shows that the claims are false. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1956 There is no mention of low-income communities. It does mention supporting states in dealing with economic problems, not the Federal government doing it themselves. "We shall continue to seek extension and perfection of a sound social security system." does not mean "extension of social security" because SS was very different back then. It hadn't been raided by Congress so it meant preventing it from becoming a political slush fund. Now that it is, any "expension" means continuing its use as a slush fund, and ignoring whether or not it's sound. The "refugees" they referred to were people escaping communist countries. Democrats today try to hamper them from coming here, and welcome people who would rather feed of America's prosperity than work toward making their home country better. Extending the minimum wage laws did not mean raising the minimum wage, but making sure all businesses obeyed it. The wording for these promised were to make each of these more efficient, not to wildly expand them and throw taxpayer money at problems (making sure there would be enough kick backs for the politicians pushing the added spending) Claiming this is like the DNC today is like saying a drug addict is the same as gramma picking up some aspirin at the grocery store.
    2 points
  50. This was when the parties were closer together in what they wanted....Today's two parties are so far divided that they could NEVER work together for the good of this country.
    2 points
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...