Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/11/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Consider that the context of the effeminate passage which lists those who are "abusers of themselves with mankind" directly after effeminate. Wouldn't it make more sense to define effeminate as the transvestite types, trannies or the flamboyant homosexuals whom purposely wear make up/clothing to appear feminine and not the purposely meek and humble men who look like men but rather follow Christ's example and not Adam's anymore? 2 Tim 2: 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. (I can list many like this all true to their contexts) There is the Biblical answer, these who puff themselves up as harsh, manly men in the name of Christ, are simply not the true servants of Christ. They serve another father unwittingly through the pride and lusts of the flesh....mammon is not money only, recognition and making a name for oneself is also mammon. They deceive themselves but still have time to repent if they would turn from using God's Word as merely a reference for their "theology" and feed on it daily as the BREAD OF LIFE.
  2. 3 points
    I'm sorry for going off topic, but I would like to interject: If a pastor, or any other man wants a woman to do something; the right way is to come to her HUSBAND first. 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
  3. 3 points
    As someone who loved, lived, and breathed "hard preaching", I can attest that for me personally (and my wife), it became tiresome after a couple of years of it and left us wanting. I could give my thoughts on it, but I won't...there are too many rabbit trails that it could lead to. I've sat under all types of preaching...the type that has helped me the most is expository preaching. Pastors should preach the word, and that covers everything...from "hard preaching" to "soft preaching". As Solomon said in Ecclesiastes 3 (and he was pretty wise)... ...and "time" includes preaching to the church.
  4. 2 points
    Rick Burton

    PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy

    I hate to interject myself here but it just hit me square in the face. Someone has a very limited knowledge in the Inerrant Word of God. Judas did not directly buy the field. The money was blood money and could not be placed back into the treasury. The potters field was purchased with the money by the Priests. It was still blood money and it still belonged to Judas. The priests had to do something with the money and they purchased the potters field with it. There is a lot of preaching in this passage and when it is all said and done the KJB is in perfect harmony here. As far as the divorce laws, there is perfect harmony here as well. Christ himself said; Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. That is what is wrong today. Hard hearts that will not except he true and inerrant WORD of God.
  5. 2 points
    I think that "local" church speaks more to the issue of "Universal" vs "Local, rather than distance. For instance, when I moved to the location I am now in it was mandatory that I live here, I had no choice. But I consider my church membership to be local simply because it is not part of any Universal movement. I drive 1 1/2 hours one way to go to church. There is one church pretty close to me, but it is a community church, which is a denomination and not a valid NT Church.
  6. 2 points
    This thread topic was about effeminate men, it has moved away from that to encompass men in a leadership role, women's place in marriage, clothing, etc. To me being effeminate is not about any of these things. Rather it is more about how a man thinks of himself, his speech being more like a female and even exaggerating the female speech patterns, it also encompasses such things as mannerisms being more female than male.
  7. 2 points
    Brother Wayne, I know a pastor who preaches both confrontation and commendation unto both the men and the women of the church at appropriate times and through appropriate passages. Indeed, I even know that that same pastor has preached on 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 in the public service of the church (carefully, yet publicly).
  8. 2 points
    The word "respect: is not used in this scripture but the idea or principle is there. We are to respect or "be subject to" the "power", vested in certain men, that God has ordained. The only time we are to "fear" is when we do evil. 1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
  9. 2 points
    That's why we are to study the whole Bible. Because many other scriptures do and, like I said above, the Lord is meek too. https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=meekness&t=KJV#s=s_primary_0_1 There is a time for "the rod" and a time for "meekness": but a steady diet of just one of the two is very unhealthy.
  10. 2 points


    You mean this kind of music?
  11. 1 point
    I would like to recommend IFB churches to prayerfully consider taking on Brother Jordan & Alicia for support. Jordan has been a part of Online Baptist for a few years now and just last week I was able to meet him in person for the first time. When Brother Jordan contact me about coming to our church to present his ministry, I talk him we are a small church and that we are not in a position to take on new missionaries at this point. That usually discouraged missionaries, but Jordan said, they will come. Brother Jordan and his wife Alicia did a wonderful job singing for us, and our hearts were blessed after watching his video presentation and hearing him preach. This young man has a big passion for the Nubi people and you can tell he and his wife can't wait to get there to start their ministry. All I ask is two things for the pastors that read this. Pray for the Kurecki family!!! Pray about financially supporting them Our church has a missions conference in March and we will be praying about adding them to our missionary family at that point. Thank you and God bless.
  12. 1 point
    I can't recall being in a church where an "effeminate man" preached from the pulpit. I have heard some relatively soft-spoken ones, I suppose, but wouldn't label them effeminate. The original poster seems to be trying to convey that if a man doesn't yell from the pulpit, he isn't being manly. If so, I disagree. But I just haven't been around any sissy preachers to be able to relate to this topic. Maybe Joel Osteen is like this? But even false teachers, get all red-faced, run the pews, pound the pulpit and scream. Some are pretty tough guys!
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    This discussion of hard versus soft preaching is interesting. It is entangled with angry, indignant, meek, mild and weakness. Very confusing. But i know what works for me a listener. I want the preacher to focus on scripture and keep control over his emotions. If he occasionally slips into passion, ok. But as a preaching style, it feels a bit like being bullied. God’s wrath is legitimate, but the preacher is not God. I need to be admonished but not yelled at. I need to be taught and that requires objective analysis of scripture. I need to be inspired, and that requires positive emotions.
  15. 1 point

    Repentance unto Salvation vs discipleship

    Here is one way to think about it. We seek to be obedient children of God but we will be imperfect. No one is good but God and He knows we will not reach his standard. That is why we need his grace. Anyway, we sincerely try to be good disciples but also we accept His forgiveness when we fall short. This is not an excuse for living a wild life. We keep striving toward the goal and we get better. Look in the rear view mirror. See how far we have come. Progress seems slow but the mile markers stack up.
  16. 1 point
    I was taught, in church, that the reason that a family is out of order is solely the man's fault for not "leading". it was also taught, and still is, that if the husband will just "lead" the wife will "follow" and everything will be Ok, But common sense itself should tell anyone that isn't always the case. Under this teaching, the ladies were given flowers and praised for being great moms on Mother's Day, but whenever father's day rolled around the men were always castigated. After these sermons you left with a helpless feeling that, because of all the innate shortcomings of church-men. the only "real man" in the house was the pastor. Consequently I've also known wives to say things like "I'll submit when my husband learns to lead". That kind of attitude is certainly not what the Lord intended ladies to have but you can't place too much blame on them when they're hearing teaching which is nowhere to be found in the Bible. Paul, and Peter, on the other hand addressed BOTH genders in the same message and there was a reason for this. Even women are commanded to "lead". How so? Notice the next verse; If that is not "leading" I don't know what is. So, instead of having an attitude like "I'll submit to my 'hubby' when he mans-up and leads", the Bible plainly tells women to "submit" anyway. Are men ignorant or just afraid to preach this? And while we're on submission, I don't recall ever hearing anyone expounding much on stuff like 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. Wow! That one passage could save alot of marriages in this sad, wretched world. I know people have to want to change, but they need the whole counsel of God. Love feeds off of love. How? Wife submits to the husband and makes him want to love and honour her, conversely, the husband loves and honours the wife and makes her want to submit. If that cycle is broken, it's not time to quit. Fix it by doing your part anyway instead of sitting back and saying I'll do mine when they do theirs. What's the title to this topic. Oh yeah, effeminate men, I'll get back to that. The World demeans men and manliness every day and I've often wondered; has this hateful world taken away so much of the joy and honour of being a man, that it no longer appeals to many males? I'm not condoning effeminacy or anything; just an observation. But Christians are not to be like the World are we? No, we're supposed to build each other up, instead of tearing each other down. .God loves that. BTW, Our eldest son, just took our grandson to Kentucky last weekend on a deer hunt. At 11 years old he got his first deer with a crossbow, and 3 more with a rifle. Man-stuff.
  17. 1 point
    On the seashore
  18. 1 point
    Preach the whole counsel, yes. and doing so, preach to BOTH genders ant the same time, ALWAYS. That way, you're getting the truth out without singling anyone out. Know what I mean? And if the following scripture is implemented and obeyed, the "aged men" will set their example and the "aged women" will teach the younger. This is why, IMO, a good start would be in not having "mixed" Sunday school classes and let those "aged" folks with all their knowledge and experience, teach the younger folks, in keeping with what the Bible says. Titus 2 King James Version (KJV) 2 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: 2 That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. 3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. 6 Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded. 7 In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity, 8 Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.
  19. 1 point
    So for asking for Scripture to back up your statements, I get no scripture, but I do get sarcasm?????? Really?
  20. 1 point
    What verse? Remember that you suggested that fear AS WELL AS respect are required..... So which verse supports that? I can't see anything in Roman's 13 that stands out as saying what you are saying, so help me out a bit here.
  21. 1 point
    Bible reference for this please? Actually Bible reference for any of it please? (And note that I am not necessarily saying any part of what you are saying is wrong, but EVERYTHING we do need to be Bible based.)
  22. 1 point
    Ok, to me the opening post is a bit confusing. Might it be clearly listed -- What specifically are the characteristics (by demeanor and behavior) that are specifically that of the female, by which the male should never be characterized?
  23. 1 point
    Being around an effeminate man just makes my skin crawl. But that's totally different from being "Meek". As Brother Jim says "meekness" is power under control. There were times like when the Lord physically drove the money changers from the Temple but another place where it says He "wept". In both instances He was "meek and lowly in heart". We need more weeping; we need more weeping from the pulpit too. There are times to "cry aloud" but there should always be love and compassion. Too many seem to think that being a man involves asserting authority and control when we should really do everything with the heart of a servant.
  24. 1 point
    Meekness is not weakness. Meekness is power under control. This is why Scripture describes Jesus as meek; He certainly had the power, but He also had it under control. As to the effeminate issue I cannot speak to it, I have never seen it in a church setting, only in the world in general. Perhaps it would be profitable for you to stop "church hopping" and find a church home to settle in to.
  25. 1 point

    The Day of the Lord

    Brethren, I will be sending, "The Day of the Lord," study to a proof-reader in preparation to put this study in pdf format so that whoever wants to use it for their own personal study, or a series of lessons at church, or for whatever reason, can do so. So, if anybody has any comments, dis-agreements they want to bring forth, thoughts, bring out any mistakes that I made, or suggestions, etc... now would be a good time to bring them out in the open. I do listen to constructive criticism from those I respect (and sometimes from those I do not). God Bless! Alan
  26. 1 point
    Thanks for the information. I would like to add that that the folks at Maranatha Bible Baptist Church are friendly, love the Lord, and would be behind the man of God who would accept the position of pastor both in prayers, encouragement, and support.
  27. 1 point

    PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy

    But your premise that many of us are rejecting logic and that we "believe because we want to" is just wrong. Christians should be the greatest skeptics the world knows, but you are not trying the spirits. You truly are starting at the place that Thomas was: "I will not believe, unless I see the scars and feel the wounds." There have been several answers given which you dismiss because you don't like them. They are not "bad answers" as you see them to be, they simply are not satisfying to you. We can't help that. If you do not want to believe, then nothing will convince you - and by all appearances you do not want to believe. You just want to ease your own conscience of the guilt you feel for rejecting the Biblical AND logical conclusions. You reject any and all answers you are given NOT because they are illogical or inadequate but because you WANT TO REJECT them. If you were serious about it would not have rejected for instance my original answers by saying: "To Mr. DaveW: I can't tell you how much I appreciate your long and detailed answer; your effort has greatly moved me, and I am very grateful to you for your time and thoroughness! I have heard these answers or ones similar to them over years of asking these kinds of questions, but I am still uneasy; they are ad-hoc, or like you said, 'put together' and 'not watertight', and some are still strictly speaking errant (even if rounded in the inconsistent way suggested, the numbers of soldiers in the army are still not the same, and couldn't bereferenced in an exact sense, like in a scientific paper or a court of law, to which standards surely God's own word should meet). This doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the strict Biblical Inerrancy either, and as I'm sure you're aware there are many more contradictions in various degrees to be found through out the texts. However, like I said before, I am very, very grateful to you for your effort and dedication, and any more insight from you would be most welcome!" You would have entered into discussion about what I wrote. You didn't. You simply said it was not good enough for you. You don't appear to be interested in the discussion you say you want. You DO appear to be more interested in what men say about the Bible, but apparently only in men who doubt the Bible. Why do you not quote men like Spurgeon who believed the Bible sart to finish was inerrerant? Or men like Tozer who believed the Bible was inerrant? There are plenty of men who are on record as stating the Bible is without error, but you choose to enlist the words of men who throw doubt on the Bible. And I still maintain that if you put as much store in the Word of God as you do in words of men (even men who do state that the Bible is without error), then you will be 1000 times better off. If the men you choose to follow and defend are doubters of the Word of God, then where are you going to end up? And you have not put up one serious answer to any verse I have posted. I was not posting them for the fun of, but because each of them answers your problems. But you choose to ignore them because they are the Word of God which you do not trust......... We have tried, but you refuse to accept our answers - not because they are inadequate, and not because they are insufficient, and not because they are wrong - they are none of these. You reject them because you do not like them...... I will not beleive unless I see the scars and feel the wounds..... Joh 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. 26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
  28. 1 point
    No one denies that things such as you outlined happen. it is then that you need to diligently search out a church home where you can agree with their doctrine and program. But speaking to the issue I presented, a sixty mile radius of you is not "most everything" or "the majority". That was the statement I was speaking to. I sincerely hope you find what you are looking for.
  29. 1 point
    In trying to find a Baptist church to attend and go soul winning from, I made the mistake of telling a pastor that I didn’t believe that the Jews were God’s chosen people, and that we are. He told me that I shouldn’t attend his church because that was their big “thing”. Their soul winning program was him doing door hangers once a month with his kids. I also asked him if he believed that you have to repent of your sins to be saved. He said that he believed so. I asked him if he could show me from the scriptures, and he could not. He tried to find something, but ultimately said that he wasn’t sure why he believed it, but that he did. He was a Bible college graduate who was a youth pastor for several years, then was sent to this church as the pastor. I am just a 50 year old HVAC guy, but can show you from Genesis to Revelation why you can’t repent of your sins for salvation, and that the Jews are not God’s chosen people, and we are. When pastors cannot defend their beliefs from the scripture, and the focus of their church is preaching about the Christ rejecting Jews in Israel as if they are the biggest concern that we should have, mellenials or no, they are dying.
  30. 1 point
    John Young

    Steven Anderson

    It is precisely because I follow Christ that that I'm speaking out against misrepresentation and false narratives regarding Anderson. If you see this as my defending him, then that is what you chose to see. But if you look closer, and consider what I have been saying all along, then you will see that I have been trying to defend my brothers from getting caught up in believing and sharing lies to "defeat" a errant/false teacher. We should not and cannot overcome lies with lies but rather only with truth.
  31. 1 point

    Making America Great Again

    President Trump is truly a great leader of the United States of America and is using the office of the Presidency for the citizens of the United States in order to make America the great country it used to be and as our Founding Fathers sought it to be. President Trump said, "The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots. The future belongs to sovereign and independent nations." President Trump said, "It is why we in the United States have embarked in an exciting program of national renewal." "Excerpt from The anti-Globalists Speech" President Trump on September 24, 2019 before the United Nations General Assembly
  32. 1 point


    1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV) 34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
  33. 1 point


    So, in actuality, the Bible does not say anything about women being pastors. There is no such thing in the Bible. Any case of a woman being called a pastor is an invention of man.
  34. 1 point
    Jordan Kurecki


    Titus 1:5-6 KJV [5] For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: [6] If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. 1 Timothy 3:1-5 KJV [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?) by definition a woman cannot be “the husband of one wife”.
  35. 1 point
    I assume that in this thread discussion we are speaking only about the doctrine of salvation (soteriology). As such . . . Of the five points commonly argued, I would hold to ZERO points with Calvinism, THREE points with Arminianism, and TWO points with neither one.
  36. 1 point


    Do the Amish live simply because they believe it will somehow work towards their salvation, or because they are choosing to eschew the temptations of the world? There's nothing wrong with the second option (albeit one can probably eschew temptation while still utilizing some modern conveniences). It's not really a spiritual issue - after all, there's no Scriptural support for not living simply either. The statement that 'knowledge shall increase' is merely a statement of fact, not direction for living.
  37. 1 point

    "Good" Friday?

    The only thing that can be said for certain is that the tomb was empty when the ladies arrived at the tomb before dawn. The actual time of the resurrection is not precisely defined, only the time that the tomb was found open. I might suggest though that Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday for the burial, is not as important as the fact that the tomb is indeed empty.
  38. 1 point

    Why Large Families?

    Why large families? Kids just seem to appreciate things more and tend to be closer knit in big families, from what I have observed. My great grandmother had 14 and my Mom is from a family of 10. My wife has 7 brothers and sisters. We ended up with 3 along with two miscarriages and would have had more but the last one caused my wife terrible problems with varicose veins. My wife and I love kids and I believe if you're healthy, have a houseful, but if health problems arise, STOP. Your spouse comes first.
  39. 1 point

    Steven Anderson

    That is not the point. To Claim "advanced member status" when you haven't been active on the site for TEN YEARS, whilst being correct on the technicality of the statistics, is in reality borderline deceitful. And the fact that you refer to Slayan as a gentleman only serves to prove the point. The fact is that you noticed your status comment and have tried to use it to give your position more weight, but Salyan is a senior member of the forum, a moderator, and a woman, none of which you realised, which proves that you are not in fact an advanced member IN REALITY.
  40. 1 point
    Miss Daisy

    Aside from Sunday morning services.....

    It’s not always a low priority or affairs of the world either. When I first attended my church, I was a lot healthier and mobile than I am now. I did as much as I could. And attended every service. I don’t need to list everything I have done with my church. I’m now married and he’s not in good health either. Especially this year, winter has been brutal in northern IL. The cold is very painful for both of us. Our Wednesday service is not until 7pm. Which for us is late. We go to bed between 8-9pm. Services are recorded and we can watch the next day. A lot of our members are elderly and can’t drive at night also. We need to quit judging so much and assume people don’t love God or isn’t a priority. We don’t know the dynamics of every family.
  41. 1 point
    Sister Rebecca

    He who letteth

    Wouldn't the Antichrist be known when he makes a Peace covenant with Israel? But of course that would be to those who know to look for this! But then again, if the HS is taken away how will anyone get saved?
  42. 1 point
    Amen! I prefer the designation of Biblicist as well. It rather sums it all up pretty nicely.
  43. 1 point

    Making America Great Again

    Brethren, I stated the above statement on August 9, 2016. Today, I saw the attached article, "Trump and Reagan Shared a Common Goal, American Greatness." http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/01/20/trump-and-reagan-shared-common-goal-american-greatness.html The article explains my thoughts on the purpose of this thread. I want America to be a great country with high ideals, patriotism, cleanse our government of wasteful agencies, and regulations, run our government on the Constitution of the United States and not on Socialist, Communist, activists, liberal, or Muslim agendas. God Bless America! Alan
  44. 1 point

    Making America Great Again

    Thus far it is also my thoughts that president Trump has succeeded in helping the American economy, the Judicial system, cleaning some of the government bureau's of dead weights, and has accomplished draining the swamp somewhat. Now, if some of the liberals, Socialists, activist groups, and RINO's would stop their relentless attacks, the Lord God above could use President Trump to accomplish more for America.
  45. 1 point

    Making America Great Again

    Thus far he's been quite successful despite the relentless attacks from all sides and within his own ranks. Satan is not happy. There is only so much one man, or a group of men and women can do on their own. With the Lord however, they can accomplish anything. We should keep praying for the President and his salvation, and that of his staff and growing in grace for those who are genuinely saved as I believe VP Pence is. If they thought people hated them now, what if Trump announced his salvation and started following the Word? I reckon it'd be similar to what happened after Moses came down from the mount.
  46. 1 point
    So we have learned that people in Israel are sinners and reject Christ. Now go to Iran, China, or maybe North Korea on an open missions trip and see how they react to you and your presenting the gospel. Didn't Christ say they hated him and they would hate us too? Folks here know that I don't claim to be a "dispensationalist" per se, but neither do I deny God's promises to Israel. It doesn't matter if every male Israeli citizen is a homosexual, wears bloomers with a bow in his hair, and openly practices sodomy with a wink and a grin while putting on lipstick...God is greater and will perform his word. Your post saddened me beyond comprehension.
  47. 1 point

    Making America Great Again

    BabeinChrist and Brethren, I fully understand the faults of President Trump and the degrading power of politics in our country. As I have previously brought out on several occasions, and JimAlaska, a Moderator, found it appropriate to agree with my thoughts, that this thread is limited to only the polices of President Trump is doing to make our country great again by defeating the legislative actions of the previous administrations. As JimAlaska, and I have brought out previously, if you want to bring out President Trumps' bad characteristics, associations we do not agree with, and other detrimental characteristics that he has, please do so in your own thread. As a polite reminder, here are three of the admonitions that I am referring too: I humbly request that only those policies that President Trump creates that will help America great be brought to our attention. All other issues need to be in another thread as per the admonition of JimAlaska. I want to thank all of you for adhering to my request. Alan
  48. 1 point

    Is the KJVO "movement" dying?

    I do not consider the KJV an "issue" at all unless my individual church decides to use something else in place of it. It only becomes an "issue" among those of "like faith and order" when they look outside of each local church and see other versions being used. I also take exception to the idea that IFB is a "movement". Each local assembly is Independent, therefore cannot be considered a "movement." "Movements" come about when God's people look outside of their local assemblies and follow men because of their "strong personalities." Once God's people start down this road it is only a small step in the direction of conventions and associations. The word "Independent" means exactly what is says, independent from any outside influence or control. Once we depart from this simple definition we are setting ourselves up for problems. Scripture records that the churches we read about in the Bible were independent; this is not a name, it is a definition that denotes the stand each church takes for the truth regarding any outside control.
  49. 1 point
    Brother Stafford


    Yes. I mean that kind of music.
  50. 1 point
    Pastor Scott Markle

    Eve's Transgression?

    So then, our options are as follows: 1. God reiterated the command to both Adam and Eve, yet Eve misrepresented God by adding the phrase concerning not touching. Biblical evidence -- None whatsoever, just human conjecture. 2. Adam reported God's command to Eve, yet Eve misrepresented Adam and God by adding the phrase concerning not touching. Biblical evidence -- None whatsoever, just human conjecture. 3. Adam misrepresented God's command to Eve by adding the phrase concerning not touching, and Eve reported Adam's misrepresentation. Biblical evidence -- None whatsoever, just human conjecture. 4. Adam reported God's command to Eve and added his own standard of not touching, and Eve misunderstood Adam's report by attributing the added standard to God. Biblical evidence -- None whatsoever, just human conjecture. 5. Adam reported God's command to Eve and added his own standard of not touching, and Eve misrepresented Adam's report by attributing the added standard to God. Biblical evidence -- None whatsoever, just human conjecture. Concerning all of these options, I wish to present the following warning of another -- 6. God reiterated the command to both Adam and Eve and added the phrase concerning not touching, and Eve reported God's command accurately. Biblical evidence -- The biblical record of Genesis 3:3 wherein Eve reports this very quote from God, "God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." I myself choose to accept Eve's word on this matter for the following reasons: 1. It is the only option that actually possesses any Biblical evidence whatsoever. 2. Eve made this claim while she was yet in the condition of a sinless character. 3. There is no Biblically recorded rebuke anywhere against Eve for misrepresenting either God or Adam. 4. There is no Biblically recorded indication anywhere that Eve misrepresented either God or Adam. So then, with the Biblical evidence of Eve's claim and without any Biblical evidence to counter that claim, I will accept her claim as the very truth. Yet there is one declaration of absolute conviction that stands against this position, as follows: Throughout, the premise of this absolute conviction and absolute declaration is basically the following: Adam's eyes were not opened to death until after the moment that he ate of the forbidden fruit, not at the moment when he touched the fruit; therefore, touching the fruit could not have been sin and thus could not have been forbidden directly by God. Now, there are a few problems with this premise, as follows: 1. In neither of the two reports of the command, not in the report of God's Word in Genesis 2:17 or in the report of Eve in Genesis 3:3, is there any statement whatsoever about when eyes would be opened unto anything. Therefore, to make claims about when eyes should or should not, could or could not, would or would not be opened throughout the process is not Biblically founded, since God's Word does not reveal this information. In fact, God's Word only gives us the report that their eyes were opened and at what point in the process this happened. However, God's Word does not tell us exactly why this happened at the exact moment that it did. So then, the above premise is based upon a bit of human speculation. 2. The first sin was in fact a process, just as in the case of any sin. First, there is the temptation, the drawing away and enticing of one's lust. Second, there is the conception of the lust, wherein the heart and mind make the decision to engage in the sin. Third, there is the birthing of the sinful activity itself. Fourth, there is the bring forth of death. In the case of Eve's and Adam's sin, this process was also present. First, the serpent tempted Eve. Second, Eve came to agreement in her heart with the serpent, seeing the fruit in her mind as something good for her. Third, she took of the fruit. Fourth, she ate of the fruit. First, Eve tempted Adam by offering him of the fruit and inviting him to join with her in eating. Second, Adam willfully decided to join with his wife in eating, although he was not at all deceived and thus knew full well that it was not at all good for him. Third, Adam took of the fruit from Eve's hand. Fourth, Adam ate of the fruit along with his wife. In both cases the sin began with a decision, not with an action. Yet in this case the decision was acted out within seconds, for the entire process of decision, taking, and eating could not have taken more than 4-5 seconds as a whole. 3. Upon what Biblical evidence may we conclude at what point the corruption of death began, whether at the point of decision, at the point of touching, or at the point of eating? Is there any statement at all in the passage concerning precisely when this occurred? If not, then why would we seek to make absolute declarations of interpretation upon the foundation of information that is not precisely revealed? 4. Finally, simply as a thought question -- How long might it have taken for the conviction of conscience and the consciousness of corruption to open their eyes unto full understanding of their new sinful condition? I would suppose that it did not take long. However, even if it took a few seconds, the entire process of sin (decision, taking, and eating) would have been completed before the opening of the eyes unto understanding.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00

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...