Jump to content
Online Baptist

chev1958

Advanced Member
  • Content count

    2,915
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

chev1958 last won the day on April 9 2011

chev1958 had the most liked content!

About chev1958

  • Rank
    Super Contributor
  • Birthday 09/10/1959

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

7,345 profile views
  1. chev1958

    Pastoral Qualifications

    Sorry, Pastorj, but lust is not specificially listed as a disqualification for the pastorate. Neither is adultery. Yes, both are sin, but neither is listed as a disqualification, according to 1 Timothy 3. And that's the Scripture you're basing your argument upon. However, I think we all agree that a pastor caught in adultery should leave the pastorate, and any good report he may have had would be destroyed. He may have even been ruling his own house well, just not his own life. But you like to say "show me the Scripture," and I'm asking you for your scriptural proof that lust and adultery specifically disqualify a man from the pastorate, and you can't do it. Because there is none. Same goes for pastor's wife being under subjection - not in Scripture. You say there are no qualifications specifically mentioned for pastors' wives - only for deacons' wives - and I agree. 1 Timothy 3 says nothing about a pastor's wife, which you have clearly and correctly stated. But you also claim Scripture says a pastor's wife must be under her husband's subjection, and I've asked you to produce that Scripture. You can't, because it's not there. If "ruling his own house well" applies to family, why are children singled out? Scripture does say that all wives are to be submissive to their husbands, but nothing specifically says a pastor's wife must be. The point I'm trying to make is that you trumpet that Scripture gives qualifications for deacons' wives but not for pastors' wives, except for subjection. I'm pointing out that Scripture doesn't say anything about your subjection claim. Therefore you're adding something to 1 Timothy 3 that's not there. You have a tendency to say "show me the specific Scripture" when you disagree with someone, but when someone turns the tables on you, you do the same thing you accuse them of doing.
  2. chev1958

    Jean skirts

    That's why I gave up golf and learn woodworking, besides the fact that I would usually returned from golf more stressed than I was before I went.
  3. In dealing with the fall of a fellow pastor (see Prayer Requests for details), the idea was brought up that some sins permanently disqualify a man from the pastorate while others don't. I think most of us agree that divorce permanently disqualifies a man from the pastorate, but what about theft? If the pastor repays the money he claims to have borrowed (without telling anyone about it), can he remain in the pastorate? What sins disqualify a pastor permanently, and what sins disqualify a pastor temporarily, allowing him to return to the pulpit eventually?
  4. chev1958

    Pastoral Qualifications

    Please show us the Scripture that says a pastor's wife must be in subjection to her husband. 1 Timothy 3 says a pastor must have his children in subjection, but doesn't say that about his wife. You're arguing against simple common sense. There are numerous principles throughout Scripture that outline standards for Christian women. I don't know why Paul singled out deacons' wives - maybe Timothy was having problems with the wives of that church's deacons. But those "qualifications" should apply to all women, not just to deacons's wives, and to all Christian men as well. And continuing with your "show me the Scripture" mantra, where does Scripture say lust disqualifies a pastor? It's not specifically listed as a disqualification. Yes, lust is sin and the pastor should deal with it, as any man should. Scripture doesn't list lust - nor a whole host of other sins - as disqualifications. So, unless he manifests that lust or other sins outwardly, then the pastor is not disqualified.
  5. chev1958

    Tradition - what are your thoughts?

    Based on what your denomination teaches, I would disagree that we are united. For example, your belief that other forms of baptism – including infant baptism – are as equally valid as immersion baptism prevents you from being a member of the church I pastor. I'm not saying I believe baptism is a requirement for salvation; my point is that I believe other forms of baptism don't follow the example taught in Scripture and are not in accordance with Scripture. This is not bringing into question your salvation, but Anglicans and fundamentalists are worlds apart in doctrine. Since I have searched the Scriptures, I believe the doctrines taught of the Bible and IFSB is the closet “label” to my understanding of Scripture. (I hate labels because no one seems to have a solid definition of each label. I agree with parts of various labels, but I didn’t know I leaned dispensationalist until someone called me that. When I researched the term, I discovered that the theology best fit my understand of Scripture, but I’m not a tee-totaler. I guess it’s like being a two-point Calvinist, a five-pointer, or a seven-pointer; I agree with some parts of it, but not all.) Now, you say you have searched the Scriptures, yet you’ve come up with vastly different doctrines than I and the majority on this board have. Both of us can’t be right. That’s what I meant by interpreting Scripture through filters; we all view Scripture through our own biases, upbringing, and background. We’re all confident that our interpretation of Scripture is correct, and that’s based on the filters we have at our disposal. If I thought Anglicanism has the correct view of Scripture, then I would be an Anglican. For the life of me, I can’t understand from where Anglicans get their doctrines, just like I don’t understand Mormons, Catholics, 7th Day Adventists, and such. And I’m pretty sure you could say the same thing about IFSB. While I was in the military, we had to find new churches at each duty station. The first churches we would visit were IFSB churches, because we knew the basics of what they believed and taught. My prayers and research led me to an IFSB church that I believe best fit Christ’s definition of church. Being IFSB gave us a starting point. But we didn’t join the first IFSB church we found in the phone book and then proceed to tell the pastor where he’s wrong. After one move, we visited four different IFSB churches until we found the one God led us to. From previous post: I'm pretty sure many posters have given "proofs" to dispensationalism; you just don't accept those proofs, just like those IFSB folks who have given those proofs don't agree with your "proofs" either. It’s obvious that you’re not IFSB, so the problem is someone who isn’t IFSB joining our forum, saying we’re wrong, and then trying to proselytize. While there are differences in what IFSB folks believe, there are more similarities. When we disagree, it’s a family disagreement. When someone outside the family sticks their nose in, though, we push our differences aside and circle the wagons to protect ourselves from outside attack. So, while there are some IFSB members here who may agree with covenant theology, they can discuss that here because they're “family,” i.e., fellow IFSB. The same can be said for IFSB'ers who hold to dispensationalism, Calvinism, Arminianism, close/closed communion, the women-in-pants issue, etc. They have the similar upbringing and background. And there are limits even to that; several members who claimed to be IFSB were so extreme that they were shown the door. But non-IFSB folks are not family in this context, and they are patiently tolerated until they cross the line. I don’t know where that line is, but in my opinion, you have crossed it.
  6. Bible Study Ends in Bloodshed LAGIUNA BEACH ( Fla.) -- What witnesses say started out with Bible study took a strange turn before ending with the arrest of a 39-year-old Panama City Beach woman. While there are two versions of what happened, deputies say that Hiedi Rhodes was nearly too drunk to tell her version, and that it was vague and didn't match what the other three witnesses told them. That inconsistency, and the testimony of the other three women gathered for the Bible study, is likely what led to her arrest. Deputies arrived to a call for help to find two women in a physical fight inside a home on Laureno Place, in the Laguna Beach area. After breaking up the fight, two deputies separated the women to hear both sides of the story. During what deputies describe as a "rambling" testimony, Rhodes said that the other woman had attacked her because she'd called her boyfriend earlier, and told him that his dog was roaming the neighborhood. The other version of the story does not paint Rhodes as the victim, but rather as the aggressor. According to that version of the story, Rhodes was sitting in the living room of the home with three other women after Bible study when she pulled out a marijuana cigarette and started to light it. The resident told Rhodes not to smoke in her home, and that she should leave. The witnesses say that sparked an argument, and Rhodes hit the other woman in the face. (Deputies noted that the other woman did in fact have a bloody nose.) As the woman tried to call the police, the fight spilled into the kitchen, which is where the two women were when deputies arrived. Aside from the victim's bloody nose, Rhodes had a small bruise on her forehead where she said the other woman had punched her, and some blood coming from an ear piercing, where Rhodes says the other woman pulled her earring. Deputies placed Rhodes under arrest. A marijuana cigarette was found on the living room floor, which each woman said belonged to the other.
  7. Archaeologists Find 'Gay Caveman' By ninemsn staff April 7, 2011 It has taken five thousand years, but it appears a caveman has finally been able to come clean on his sexual orientation. According to archaeologists, the way the "gay caveman" was buried suggests he was considered more effeminate than other male peers, the Daily Mail reports. The skeleton of the early homo-sapien was recently unearthed during excavations in the Czech Republic, and is believed to date back to between 2900 and 2500 BC. Experts say during that period, men were traditionally buried lying on their right side, with the head pointing towards the west, alongside weapons, hammers and flint knives. In this case, the man was on his left side, his head facing west, and surrounded with household jugs, not weapons — usually symbolism reserved for women. The team carrying out the dig said because of the layout of the grave, it was likely to indicate the person was a transvestite or "third gender", which is sometimes associated in Western Culture with being gay. The late Stone Age man was also buried with an oval, egg-shaped container, usually associated with female burials. "From history and ethnology, we know that people from this period took funeral rites very seriously so it is highly unlikely that this positioning was a mistake," said lead researcher Kamila Remisova Vesinova. "Far more likely is that he was a man with a different sexual orientation, homosexual or transvestite. What we see here does not add up to traditional Corded Ware cultural norms." Another member of the archaeological team, Katerina Semradova, added: " We believe this is one of the earliest cases of what could be described as a transvestite or third-gender grave in the Czech Republic."
  8. Japan Disaster Caused by DADT Repeal By Stephanie Samuel Christian Post Reporter Controversial self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs has linked the natural disasters in Japan to the U.S. repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and is calling on Americans to repent. In a video last week, Jacobs, president and co-founder of missionary training group Generals International, asserted that her prophetic message that natural disasters would result from the December repeal of the 1993 ban on open homosexuality in the U.S. military has come true. “I know some of you don’t understand the warning that I gave. … When we break God’s laws then it actually causes cycles of nature to come afterwards. It’s like we have disrupted the laws of God. I said if this is true, then what we will see is natural disasters, we’ll see weather patterns going crazy, we’ll see major storms, we’ll see floodings and so forth,” she said, citing the biblical passage Hosea 4. “And this has happened.” Jacobs first issued a warning about consequences to the repeal of DADT early this year. She spoke of a possible link between allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military and the unusual phenomenon with the thousands of dead birds and fish in Arkansas. President Barack Obama signed the DADT repeal legislation in December. Weeks later, on New Year’s Eve, some 5,000 blackbirds fell from the sky, lying scattered throughout the town of Beebe, Ark. Then a couple days later, a 100,000 fish were found dead on the shore in the same state. Jacobs is now tracing last month’s earthquake and tsunami that decimated Japan’s shoreline and ignited problems at the Fukushima nuclear power plant back again to the DADT repeal. “I had received some criticism by people who did not understand the warnings that I gave about natural disasters coming as a result of us repealing in the U.S. ‘don't ask, don't tell,’ opening up our military to open homosexuality,” the GI head said, noting that Scripture defines a union to be between a man and a woman. “Everything I said has happened,” she asserted. “We need to repent for turning away from God.” Just after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, which killed at least 25,000 people, others have made similar comments about the disaster being warning signs from above. The Rev. David Yonggi Cho, senior pastor of the Yoido Full Gospel Church – the world’s largest church – came under fire when he said the Japan disaster was likely “God’s warning” to the Japanese people, most of whom are not Christian. Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara also pondered whether the disaster was divine punishment. He later apologized for the remark. In the U.S., Republican television pundit Glenn Beck said of the disaster that “a message is being sent.” Beck is a Mormon. It is unclear what faith, if any, Shintaro professes. A Public Religion Research Institute and Religion News Service news poll, released last month, foundthat nearly six in ten white evangelical respondents believe that natural disasters are signs from God rather than a sign of global climate change. A majority also believe that natural disasters are evidence of what the Bible calls the “end times.” An additional 53 percent of white evangelicals believe that God punishes nations for the sins of its citizens. Jacobs, speaking to viewers of the GI News webcast, urged for prayer for the hurting people in Japan while calling for repentance for disrupting God’s law. At the same time, she reminded the audience that God is a merciful God. “If we’ll pray … these things do not have to happen.”
  9. chev1958

    Tradition - what are your thoughts?

    I agree - you're preaching to the choir. It bothers me when people (including pastors) say, "This is what God told me about this passage" and it goes against what God taught me about the same passage. Both can't be right.
  10. chev1958

    Pastoral Qualifications

    True. Paul also addresses abandonment of a spouse. And while those are true statements, Jesus also said: Matt 19:8 - He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. I believe it was God's intention that husband and wife remain married to each other for life. Mark 10 is pretty clear about God's feelings on marriage and divorce. Malachi 2 indicates that God hates divorce. So while exceptions may be allowed, I don't think God intended for those exceptions to include pastors. I read "husband of one wife" as the pastor can only be married once in his lifetime, unless, of course, his spouse dies, which releases the marriage bond. And if he marries a divorced woman, even though she's his first and only wife, he's committing adultery according to Scripture and therefore bringing into question his blamelessness. That doesn't mean that divorced people cannot serve in ministry, including preaching and missions. But I believe that any divorce (whether his own or his marriage to a divorced woman) disqualifies a man from the pastorate.
  11. chev1958

    What I've Been Working On...

    Looks pretty good, but I think I'd stick to monthly. A weekly will be an awful lot of work "fer shure, dudette!"
  12. chev1958

    Church, Marriage in Trouble

    Well, the husband didn't come to our service last night, so I guess he's made his decision that his family and spiritual condition aren't worth restoring.
  13. chev1958

    Tradition - what are your thoughts?

    Yes, we should view Scripture as God intended, but our own biases/viewpoints/beliefs, etc., can influence how we interpret certain passages of Scripture. That's what has led to the multiple denominations we have today. There are different viewpoints even among IFSB folks, i.e., dispensationalism vs convenant theology. Depending on which of those you believe determines how you would interpret certain Scriptures. In another thread, someone asked if a pastor is qualified if he marries a divorced woman, even though she would be his only wife. I believe that would disqualify a man from the pastorate based on my reading of Luke 16:18. But other IFSB churches don't see that situation as a disqualifier.
  14. chev1958

    Pastoral Qualifications

    The Bible doesn't specifically address that question, but there are other principles that can be applied to answer it. I've heard some folks say "husband of one wife" addresses the rampant polygamy going on in those days, and essentially the phrase means husband of one wife at a time. However, the gospels record Jesus' thoughts on the issue of divorce. Luke 16:18 - Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Therefore, if Jesus equates divorce and remarriage with adultery, then I don't believe a man who marries/is married to a divorced woman is qualified to hold a pastorate, or be a deacon, for that matter.
×