Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

LindaR

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Posts

    2,027
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    12

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    LindaR got a reaction from wretched in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    No, we don't have a website.
    What difference does it make where we "operate" or how many people are present  at a worship service?  Why are you so "into" numbers?  Whether there are five, ten, twenty, or whatever number are present is not important.
    Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

    Soul winning should not be an "extra curricular" activity of the born again Christian.  It should be an everyday event in the life of the born again Christian.  We are to be about sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ daily.  We are not going to "win" everyone....we are to plant seeds and God will bring in the increase.
    1 Corinthians 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
    1 Corinthians 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
  2. Like
    LindaR reacted to Ronda in Is a home church a biblical church?   
    Matt.18:20 "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
    1 Cor.6:17 "But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit."
    1 Cor.6:19 "What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?"
    1 Cor.12:12-14
     "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
     For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
     For the body is not one member, but many."
    I suppose it all depends on what one believes... what they've been indoctrinated to believe? Or what God's word says?
  3. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in Is a home church a biblical church?   
    1 Corinthians 11:18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

    In the Church...

    The Church is not a brick-and-mortar edifice.  It is a living, breathing organism.  God no longer dwells in Temples made with hands, but now dwells in a people.

    "When ye come together in the Church" simply means "when ye come together as a Body... because... the Church is a Body. 

    Colossians 1:18 And He is the head of the Body, the Church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

    Christ's Body is not brick and mortar.  It is those who have trusted Him as the propitiation for their sin.
  4. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    The first century AD Church had 3,000 added to it in one day.  Funny thing, thirty-six years later, when the Epistles of John were written, there were still house churches. 

    I don't recall a single admonition given by the Apostles in the Bible, for people to stop having house churches.  I may have missed it though.  I've only been reading and studying the Bible for thirty-eight years now.  If you know the verse that says people are discouraged from meeting in houses, please post it.  I'd really love to see it.

    If our church grows to where it is too big to meet in a home, we may get a bigger building.  Or, we may emulate the pattern seen in the first century AD... we may go from house to house preaching the word and breaking bread. 

    Why is a big building necessary?  Why take on such an overhead?  Big buildings mean that, not only does the pastor have his home electric bill to pay, now he must pay on another electric bill.  Not only do the church members have their own electric bill to pay, they now must help pay another electric bill. 

    If they are using the electric in their homes anyway, why not meet in their homes while the electricity is being used? 

    Then, there's the rent of the building.  People are paying their rent and mortgage payments already.  Why burden them with another rent payment?  It seems more economical to emulate the first century AD Christians and meet house to house and lay off the overhead costs of another building that they would only meet three times a week on average?

    I thought about that $6,000/mo. cost of renting a place to worship in a strip mall.  I think how such an exorbitant amount could feed many hungry in the community.  Now, your pastor may feel justified in renting such a big place.  I could not.

    Even if the Church I pastor grew to 3000, I could not justify paying for a big building.  I would instead train others to pastor and teach them to go house to house, breaking bread and sharing God's truth.
  5. I Agree
    LindaR got a reaction from Martyr_4_FutureJoy in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    The Biblical agricultural tithes which God commanded for the children of Israel (farmers and herders) were to FEED the tribe of Levi during their time of service working in the tabernacle (not in the wilderness) and later the temple, when they were living in the land of Canaan/Israel. 

    What do your man-made monetary tithes sustain?   Your pastor's lifestyle (which doesn't have to be lavish), paying the rent in the place/building where you meet to worship, extra-curricular activities, perhaps missions, etc.   This was NEVER the purpose of the Biblical agricultural tithe.   Tithes were EATEN....do you eat money?   Free will, sacrificial and grace giving works fine to sustain all that a church requires to meet their needs.  What you give as biblical tithes are not biblical tithes....but simply 10% of your gross income.  Biblical tithes were never monetary throughout the Bible and nobody has ever given Scriptural proof that a monetary tithe was EVER commanded by God.  It is a man-made doctrine.
    Matthew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

    Your opinions don't justify the compulsory monetary tithe, so you can stop bragging about how your man-made tithes are used.  I'm not impressed.  And as for house churches......that's a matter of opinion also.  The first century church met in houses DAILY to break bread and fellowship/worship.  Three thousand were saved on the day of Pentecost.  The upper room was somebody's house.

    Acts 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.   
    Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 
    Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,   
    Acts 5:42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.   
    Acts 20:20 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house,
  6. Like
    LindaR reacted to OLD fashioned preacher in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    ??????????????????????????????????
    Trying to understand what this has to do with anything???????????????
    There's not a church, Kingdom Hall or any other "place of worship" within 100 miles of where I am that ever have more than 125 in the building AT ALL!
  7. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    Nope... we meet in a home.  Cuts out a lot of overhead, since we are already paying the electric bill ourselves.

    Even if we were in a big building, we wouldn't be lying to our congregation in order to garner finances to pay the bills.  Instead, we would do what I did in the last two churches I pastored... we would tell them when a bill came in and how much it is.  Then, we would pray, asking God to move hearts to give what they could afford.  And we would exercise our faith, believing God would move hearts. 

    Worked with the church in Virginia, and with the one in North Carolina as well.  Pretty sure, it would work here in Mississippi too.  Lies about tithes weren't necessary.  We teach people the joy of giving.  Forced giving breeds contempt.

    Jesus did have a Treasurer.  However, neither He, nor His Treasurer, collected tithes of His Disciples.
  8. Like
    LindaR got a reaction from Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    Our church meets in a home...not a tabernacle.  We don't tithe, we give from the heart.  The biblical tithe was always agricultural, NEVER money!
    Church functions on grace and free will GIVING and we pay our own rent and utilities.  Giving and tithing are not the same....giving is a "heart" principle and tithing is an ordinance of the Mosaic law. 
    All you said was how wonderful your pastor is and how everything was free.....then you turn around and say your rent is $6,000 a month.  Ever hear about free will and grace giving???  Since biblical tithing was never money, the purpose of the biblical tithe (which was always agricultural from the land of Canaan/Israel) was never meant for paying bills, but to sustain the tribe of Levi. 
  9. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    It is biblical to tithe... it's just not biblical to tithe money.  Nor is a monetary tithe requirement sermon biblical.

    As for Malachi 3:6-12, Malachi was admonishing the Priest's of Israel.  They had removed the agricultural tithes from the Temple storehouse and God wanted them back.

    The passage had absolutely nothing to do with monetary tithing when Malachi delivered it to the Priest's, and it has nothing to do with monetary tithing today.  As verse six says...

    I am the LORD God; I change not;..."
     
    The last Book in the Old Testament section of our Bible holds many precious nuggets of truth that so many people today never realize are in there. They do not realize these nuggets are in Malachi for two reasons,..   1. Their Pastor’s do not tell them these nuggets of truth are in Malachi. 2. They themselves do not study the Bible as they should, but instead allow their Pastor’s to turn their eyes from these nuggets of truth..   Let us look at just a few of the nuggets we can find in the pages of the Book of Malachi, shall we?   a) The storehouse Malachi is speaking of is attached to the Temple in Jerusalem.   b) The Church that I pastor is not the storehouse Malachi was speaking of.  
    c) When Malachi said, that there may be meat in mine house,..." he was speaking of food... not money.  Not once in the Bible is money ever referred to as "meat"
    . d) Malachi is not saying to tithe your monetary income to God’s House.    e) Malachi was speaking to a people living under the Mosaic/Levitic Law.   f) Malachi could not have been speaking of any other kind of tithe than that which was required by Mosaic/Levitic Law, i.e.; a tithe of agricultural crops, flocks and herds.   g) Malachi 1:6; & 2:1 reveal that Malachi was speaking to the corrupt Priest’s in Malachi 3:6-12.  He had a commandment for the Priest's.  That commandment is not seen until chapter three.   h) The tithes and offerings had been stolen by the Priest’s,… not by the congregation.  Both Numbers 18:21-26 & Nehemiah 10:37-38 reveal that the congregation could not tithe to the House of God.   i) When Pastor’s use Malachi to teach a monetary tithe, they are guilty of handling the word of God deceitfully.   j) The Priest’s of Israel were guilty of despising God’s name because they exchanged the best animals for lame and blind animals   k) Pastor’s that teach monetary tithing are guilty of despising God’s name because they have exchanged His commanded agricultural tithes for monetary tithes.   l) In doing things their own way instead of God’s way, the Priest’s of Israel were robbing God of His authority in their lives.   m) In doing things their own way instead of God’s way, the Priest’s of God had robbed the nation of Israel of God’s blessing.   n) In teaching their own way instead of God’s way, Pastor’s today are guilty of robbing God of His authority in their lives.   o) In teaching their own way instead of God’s way, Pastor’s today are guilty of robbing God of His authority in the lives of their congregations.   p) In doing things their own way instead of God’s way, Pastor’s are guilty of robbing their congregations of God’s blessing.   q) When Malachi promised that God would open the windows of Heaven, Malachi was speaking clouds giving rain to the land of Israel so that plants could grow   r) The devourer that Malachi was speaking of was the locust.   There are many, many more precious and wonderful nuggets written within the four chapters of the Book of Malachi. I encourage you to take time to study this Book and allow the Holy Spirit to reveal them to you.   1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
  10. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    We could indeed visit the "law of first mention"...
    It never fails, when teaching that tithe is a matter of the Law, someone is sure to argue it is not. (not saying anyone in this discussion said it was not Law)
    Some will say that Abram’s tithe to Melchizedek was BEFORE the Law, and then say that Abram’s tithe is the first mention of tithes in the Bible, and therefore, "law of first mention" should be employed.

    If we go with the "law of first mention...
    The first mentioned tithe, was not from monetary wages.  Nor was it from the benefits of the one who tithed. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, it should not come from monetary wages or benefits.
    The first mentioned instance of tithing reveals that Abram tithed spoils of war… spoils that did not belong to him. He had promised God that he would not take any of the spoils as his own property.  Therefore, if law of first mention applies, those who tithe should promise God that they will give the rest of what they tithe from away.
    Law of first mention? In first mention of tithes, Abram was 79 years old when he tithed to Melchizedek. Therefore, if law of first mention should apply, man should not tithe until he  has reached the age of 79 as Abram was.
    Law of first mention? Abram did not tithe in the town he lived in. He tithed in the land of Canaan. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, tithes need to taken to the land of Canaan and given there.
    Law of first mention? The tithe Abram gave to Melchizedek was from stolen items Abram recovered from kings he had killed in battle. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, the tithe should come from stolen items recovered after killing people… specifically, kings.
    Law of first mention? Abram tithed in an open valley, not in a wooden or brick building called a church. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, tithes should be given in a valley… not in a church building.
    Law of first mention? Abram was childless when he tithed to Melchizedek. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, those who tithe should not have any children prior to tithing.
    Law of first mention? After Abram tithed, he gave the remainder of the items which he tithed from to a king of Sodom. Abram kept nothing of that which he tithed from for himself or for his family. Therefore, if law of first mention applies, the rest of that which is tithed from should be given to a king of Sodom. The one tithing should use nothing of that which he tithes from on himself or his family.

    Law of first mention?  It was a man that tithed in the first mention of tithes.  Therefore, if law of first mention applies, only men should tithe.
    Law of first mention probably shouldn't apply in the case of tithing.  LoL
  11. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    Exactly!  And to show how much the church preaches tithing as a Law (even though they point to Melchizedek) one only notice how they run to the Law to prove it must be done. 

    ...then there's the condescending remarks made about non-tither's that also shows that tithing is made a  Law. for the Church
  12. Like
    LindaR reacted to Ukulelemike in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    I didn't say YOU were silly, I said your assumption is silly, and you did, indeed, make the assumption, though it may not have been intentional, it is how it came across. You said "Don't you non-tithers see the absurdity of not tithing and giving to missions?" so you have said, in effect, if you don't believe in tithing, you don't give, (to you a tithe=giving), and we certainly don't give to missions. And that is completely incorrect, thus, it is silly. And it wasn't your analysis that was silly, it was your accusation that "non-tithers' don't give. Tithing is NOT the only means of giving, even in the OT, regardless of how you feel about it: there were freewill offerings of all sorts: the issue with the tith is that it was NOT freewill, it was mandatory-thus, you believe that tithing is a mandatory giving for all believers, but that is completely false, it is not to be found anywhere in New Testament scripture. And I don't speak this as a moderator, but as a member and a fellow believer.  It just isn't there.
     
  13. Like
    LindaR reacted to Ukulelemike in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    And people sacrificed cattle before the law, as well.
    The tithing that Abraham did before the law was a voluntary thing, but the tithing we usually point to in scripture for use today is all of the law-had Abraham not given a tithe to Melchesidek, would he have been seen as 'robbing' God? No, he chose to give because he wanted to. Later, however, the Jews are told that they are robbing God of His tithe-thus, it was a mandatory giving of not money, but foodstuffs, even though people gave money for the use of the house of God at the same time, but always freewill offerings.
    So when a church teaches a tithe today, it is attaching a legality to it that doesn't exist in the churches today; nowhere can an idea of tithing be found anywhere in the New Testament, and in fact, we are specifically told that we don't give out of necessity. "But this I say, He wich soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver." (2Cor 9:6,7) NOT of necessity. A tithe imples necessity, demand, law. And I have seen it practiced and taught as such before, many times, that our 10% tithe is expected, and anything about that is an offering. That isn't scripture.
     
  14. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    It really doesn't matter what people in other lands did, or do for buying and selling, wages, etc, etc.. 

    God's word is supposed to be the Christian's final authority in all matter of faith and practice.  And God's word reveals that, although the children of Israel used silver for their system of buying and selling, (see my above post) God's tithe was to come strictly from agriculture. 

    I don't base God's tithe on what people in third world countries  do to survive.  Nor do I base God's tithe on what people in the United States of America do to survive.  I base God's tithe on what His word says His tithe is.
  15. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    Many, in their zeal to defend their monetary tithe teaching pastors, will be quick to state that “They didn’t have money in ancient Israel, so they tithed crops and livestock.”  
    But is that true?  Were the ancient Israelites as destitute as so many want to portray them as being?
    A careful study of the word of God will reveal to the reader that silver was the means of buying and selling from the time of Abraham and forward.
      In Genesis 23, Abraham purchases the cave at Mach-Pelah from Ephron for 400 shekels of silver. Verse 16 of this chapter tells us that silver is the “current money of the merchant”.   In Genesis 37, Joseph is sold into slavery for twenty pieces of silver.   In Genesis 43, Joseph’s brethren took “double money” to Egypt to buy food. The word “money” in this chapter is translated from the Hebrew “keceph”. Keceph is defined as “silver." In Exodus 21, if a man’s ox injured another man’s slave, the owner of the ox was to pay the owner of the slave in silver.
     In Exodus 30, every male between the age of 20 and 60 is required to pay a tax of a half-shekel of silver annually,… whether they are rich or poor.
      In Leviticus 27, many things dedicated to God can be redeemed (bought back) with silver. Even a portion of one’s crops tithe could be redeemed.   In Deuteronomy 14. the Feast tithe could be sold if it was too heavy, or if there was a chance of it spoiling before the Israelite reached the place of festivities. Upon reaching the place of festivities, the Israelites was to buy food as the Feast tithe and eat it with his family.   In Judges 9. Abimelech paid people silver to follow him.   In Judges 17, graven image purchased with 200 shekels of silver   In Jeremiah 32, The weeping prophet purchased land from his uncle Hanameel with 17 pieces of silver.   In Matthew 14, ointment might have been sold for three hundred pence. (denarius)   In Matthew 20, parable speaks of workers agreeing to work for a penny.   As to Abram’s tithe to Melchizedek... it was of war spoils, not of his monetary income.  There is not one recorded instance in the entire Bible where Abram is said to have tithed his money, or his possession, to Melchizedek.  
    Abram was living in an era when kings expected tithes of war spoils.  The tithing of war spoils had been practiced for more than 285 years before Abram met with Melchizedek in the Valley of Shaveh.

    The account of Abram's tithe is descriptive... not prescriptive.  In other words, there is no instruction in the word of God that says, Because Abram tithed to Melchizedek, the saved of God must tithe to their leaders."
      And, as pointed out previously in this post, Israel’s tithe was of agricultural increase, not of their monetary income.
    Israel’s monetary system, as proven by the verses  referenced above, was silver and not agricultural increase.
      There is nothing in the word of God that indicates anyone being required to tithe their monetary income to either Tabernacle, Temple, Synagogue or Church. God knows everything that ever happened in the past. He knows what is happening in the present. He knows what will happen in the future.
    He made no provision in His word for man in any period of time to preach contrary to what is written in His Holy word. His commanded tithe was agricultural then. It has not changed to money, whether man wishes to make it money or not.
    Man can say God’s tithe is money for the next fifty years from now. But, ten thousand years beyond that, the Bible will still say the commanded tithe is agricultural.
    It is forever settled in Heaven. God’s commanded tithe never was, nor will it ever be money.
  16. Like
    LindaR reacted to Ukulelemike in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    But this, now, would be considered pragmatism. That would be fine if no other principle was taught. However, the OT taught clearly that a 'tithe' was of meat and crops, while a freewill offering could be those, but was also money. In the OT, look up the word 'tithes': every time it is mentioned, it is in context to grain, meat (crops), the fruit of the field, etc. Always.
    The New testament doesn't teach ANY tithe anywhere, just freewill giving, as one has been blessed, and as one loves the work and the Lord, so you give. Not of necessity. A tithe WAS a necessity. So we can't just all pray and see what God wants us to do when He has spoken already-though we Do each need to lok and see how much the Lord would have us give.
    You make the silly assumption that if we don't tithe, we don't give. If I believ in the Bible, then I give. If I love the Lord and His work, I give-THAT is the New Testament principle of giving. Your assumption sounds very much like an SDA who would say, "Oh, you don't keep the OT Law? then you are clearl lawless and are against God!", and of course, you would agree that is foolish-we keep to the many commands of the New Testament, but not the Old, as it is no longer in effect. So, the OT tithe is not in effect for believers, and never way-we practice New testament giving as we are given to. But either way, it is still giving.
  17. Like
    LindaR reacted to Ukulelemike in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    The point isn't in the tithing, it is in the giving. Nowhere in the New Testament (which does not include the 4 gospels as those were still OT under the law), is tithing ever endorsed. It is only mentioned in Hebrews a couple times, referring back to Abraham. If it was a biblical precept for the church, it surely would have been IN the letters to the church as a requirement. Yet it is completely missing-completely, 100% not there. Whatsoever. By saying, 'Well, it works for me!', you are making it pragmatic. If it works for you, it MUST be the biblical truth. Except you can't back it with scripture, and I thought that was where we IFB-types get our truths. Christians should not deal in pragmatism and teach it as truth.
    The point is, we are to be givers-free will, as the Lord gives, we should give again. As we are blessed, so we should bless. It is much more akin to the OT examples of when the temple was in need of repairs, and a box would be put out for people to give into, a freewill offering, or the freewill offerings they would give in sacrifices. They were separate from a tithe, as it was completely by choice-as you felt blessed by the Lord, so you gave. As you wished to help repair the house of God, so you gave, as you chose. Kind of like what the early church did when they sold their lands and properties and laid it at the feet of the Apostles-it was a freewill offering. THIS is what the New testament teaches, not a tithe.
    Some may say, 'Well, I don't see it as any different; I don't give because I think I HAVE to give, but because i WANT to give!' And that's very good, exactly as it should be! But in a church where a tithe is taught, stop giving for a while and you'll probably hear about it, because you haven't given "YOUR TITHE" (that was meant to sound like a deep, bass voice with heavy echos). If a tithe is taught, it is a requirement in the eyes of that church. If you are a pastor who teaches a tithe, but don't believe it is a requirement, then stop teaching a tithe and start teach a freewill offering. You might see your finances drop real quick when people know they don't HAVE to give.
    At least, this has been MY experience.
  18. Like
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    This non tither no longer gives anything to any religious institution that lies about what God's commanded tithe is. 

    God's Church is built on the truths written and spoken by the Apostles and Prophets... not on lies.  The church built on lies will one day fall.

    Instead of giving to a church that teaches contrary to what God said His holy tithe is, we give to people in need in our network of friends.

    Proverbs 19:17 He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again.
     
  19. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    Not only do we disagree with you, but the Bible disagrees with you as well.

    I wouldn't have published the book if the Bible taught monetary tithing.
     
  20. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to No Nicolaitans in The Biblical Tithe: Cash or Crops?   
    SFIC has a new book available for anyone interested.
    The Biblical Tithe:  Cash or Crops?
    https://www.createspace.com/7342426
  21. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in The Kingdom   
    And the original Hebrew word "nephilim" ("n'philiym") is also found in Numbers 13:33, where the joining context of Numbers 13:32 indicates that these individuals were defined as "men [men, not hybrids] of a great stature."  Which truth I have presented in earlier posting in this very thread; however, it must be remembered that Brother "Beameup" has blocked my postings from his observation and awareness.
  22. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to No Nicolaitans in The Trail of Blood   
    In short, Baptist Briders believe that only true Baptists will comprise the Bride of Christ and be seated at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. All other saved people aren't part of the Bride. Those other believers are called "the family of God", and they will be serve those seated during the Marriage Supper.
  23. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to No Nicolaitans in The Trail of Blood   
    Bro. Jim,
    I know through personal experience (through helping an individual in the Philippines) that the Brider position is an issue. The Philippines...not the US.
    The individual was pressured to be a "real Baptist". Only by the individual becoming a "real Baptist", would the Baptist Brider missionary in the Philippines give further help to this individual. Those who claimed to be Baptists...but weren't "real Baptists"...were looked down upon and frowned upon. To be a "real Baptist", one must accept their Brider position. If one didn't, they weren't a "real Baptist". 
    It's an issue, because it promotes a doctrine. 
    It you're not a "true Baptist", it does serve a purpose other than a point of contention and an issue to argue over.
    It's an "I'm better than you" position. A "look at me" position. It's a position of pride. It says that "non-true Baptists" will be lesser than and will serve "true Baptists" in the future.
    I thought we served Christ.
    It paints a picture of the Marriage Supper (that isn't clearly given in scripture) and asserts that their position is the only correct position and doctrine. Perhaps not all Briders are prideful, but it is a prideful position when the rubber meets the road. 
    I'm a Baptist. I'm a Baptist, because I believe that the Baptist "theology" is the closest to what I see in God's word. However, being a Baptist offers me nothing extra in and of itself. My future standing is based upon my acceptance of Christ as my Savior, and my future rewards are based upon my works here on earth...not whether I'm a Baptist or not. 
    There is a free-online Independent Baptist Online College that holds the Brider position. The last time I checked, they were using some of David Cloud's videos in their free courses. I wonder if Mr. Cloud knows this since he opposes the Brider position? One of their tag-lines is that they are "real Baptists". They raised my eyebrows, so I contacted the man in charge. It took a series of several emails BEFORE he finally admitted to me that he was a Baptist Brider. This was a few years ago. I haven't checked to see if it's still in operation.
    The Brider position is an issue, and they are spreading the issue. 
    I wholeheartedly agree (that under ideal circumstances) church members should only get their teaching from their local church. Unfortunately, that's not the world we live in today. Their are no ideal circumstances that I'm aware of...and the internet, TV, and radio make it much too easy for church members to be influenced by unsound teaching. Add to that...missionaries who teach false doctrine and gather members into their churches. 
    We need to reach as many people as we can with the truth of God's word...because others are reaching them too.
     
  24. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to Standing Firm In Christ in Left Behind: Not A "christian Movie." Not Even Close.   
    God does nothing but judge and hate us?

    Sorry, but I disagree.

    2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

    While God is not willing that any should perish, the sad reality is, many will perish.  They will perish because they reject the Son.

    John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

    Yes, many will die in their sins and go into a Christ-less eternity.  Why?  Because they received not a love for the only one who could save them from a fiery hell.  God doesn't hate us, WC.  He is a God of Love and Mercy.  But He is also a Just and Righteous God.  His judgments against the wicked are because they would not accept the only begotten Son of God.

    Psalms 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

    Doesn't sound like a God that "does nothing but judge and hate us".  If He hated us, He would not be wanting us to repent of our wickedness.  He would not be longsuffering as He is.


    Fallen angels felt sorry for men and went to their rescue was Biblical?  Care to show us where such action by the fallen angels can be found in the Bible?

    And you say you are a lay preacher?  Better lay off the preaching until you learn the Bible better.

     
  25. Thanks
    LindaR reacted to No Nicolaitans in GenevanPreacher, do you?   
    Yes; however, Adam was without sin when God created him. How did Adam become a sinner? Did God force him? Did Eve nitpick him to death to eat the fruit? Did the serpent beguile him? No...Adam willingly and purposefully chose to sin. He knew life once without sin, because that's how he was created, and that's the world he was created into. However, now he would know life as a sinner. Alluding to Adam is vain.
    So again; yes, God created Adam...without sin.
    Yes he was; he was a sinner. Unlike his father Adam, Cain never knew life without sin. Did God create Cain as a special creation as he did Adam? No. Cain's murdering of his brother was Cain's doing...not God's. Alluding to Cain is vain.
    Well, I guess it's not hard to believe, but I certainly don't believe it. Why is it hard for you to believe that Satan (like Adam) was created without sin, and like Adam, he chose to sin?
    You do realize that if God created Satan and the devils as sinners, that would make God a sinner.
    Yet, if we accept what you're implying, then that means that all of history...all of the love, grace, and effort given by God from the time of Adam's sin until now (and into the future) to redeem man...all of the opposition from Satan, devils, and sinners...all of it...was God's doing. He created sinners to oppose himself. That means that he unjustly sacrificed the Lord Jesus Christ for the sin that he created. He purposely set off a chain of events so evil, so diabolical...that only a sinful mastermind of supreme power could conceive it...to create beings that would oppose him and his work...yet...just to show who's boss, he will one day force every knee to bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Then, to top it off, he'll have every one of them...Satan, the devils, and sinners cast into the lake of fire...where they'll spend eternity in torment paying for being the sinners that God created them to be. That's a dirty sinful trick. After all, God created them as sinners; they had no choice but to oppose and hate him...
    BUT HE'LL MAKE 'EM BOW AND CONFESS ANYWAY!!! MWUAH HA HA HAAAA! It doesn't matter that they never had the choice to do it before...of their own freewill. 
    So, I ask the question again...since you really didn't answer it.
    Do you believe that God created the devil as the evil, lying, murderer that we know him as? 
×
×
  • Create New...