Jump to content
Online Baptist Community


Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About orvals

  • Birthday 04/16/1950

orvals's Achievements

  1. Wanted to say I like the new look of the forum, It has been a while since I have logged on but it looks great. Thanks for a change that has style. lol orvals
  2. What would cause me to separate myself from a church? Well I have left two churches over the years for two different things. The first I left because of the preaching of salvation, salvation and more salvation as a matter of fact that was all we ever got was the preaching of salvation, I am not saying preaching salvation is wrong not at all for it is the gospel of Jesus Christ. But scripture teaches us so much more than salvation things like raising family, creating relationships, attacking sin that has gotten a hand hold in our lives, etc. Pants, length of hair, jewelry etc are insignificant in my opinion what comes from the pulpit is of primary concern because that impacts my family and friends. Calvinism, humanism, improper hermeneutics, spiritualizing the text, rabbit chasing out of context all these if they were consistent from the pulpit would probably cause me to leave after a peaceful confrontation with pastor and staff. The second thing that caused me to leave is improper handling of finances what I mean here is expenditures that are not reasonable. I am not speaking of pastor and staff going to a fellowship meeting or going out of state for a training session (like leadership training in Lancaster. Ca.). I am speaking of expenses that just do not look right and when you ask questions you get evasive answers or no answer at all. A pastor who always has a lot of cash in a small church and petty cash that seems to have multiple hits for a few hundred dollars each month. You can
  3. HS, I am not saying they were children when they were hung I am saying there is a very good chance that they were children when the deed was done. orvals
  4. Heartstrings, It is obvious that we are approaching the question from very different perspectives. I am not so much attacking your position (it is reasonable) as I am your stance you are coming across very dogmatically concerning a passage that can truly not be proved either way. If you hold to ?his bloody house? as a precursor proof that Saul?s children and grandchildren were involved in the actual crime then your reasoning would be correct. On the other hand IMO you can not prove that his grandchildren were actually involved in the slaughter of Gibeonites. The actual time frame of the drought is not known but KDOTC suggest that it was early in David?s reign as king. During the drought David was impressed upon to inquire of the Lord as to why there was a drought. And the Lord told David that it was because of ?Saul?s bloody house?. As stated earlier Saul?s house would have included all that were under his authority yet the accusation is specifically leveled against Saul and not Israel. Also it is stated specifically in verse 2 that Saul sought to slay Gibeonites in order to demonstrate his zeal to Israel and Judah thus seemingly eliminating Israel and Judah as participants of the deed. Through out scripture God consistently judges wrong motives and it is my belief that Saul?s zeal was a cover up for Saul?s greed. Saul was a Benjamite and his home was Gibeah where abode the Gibeonites who were indentured to Israel and specifically to Benjamin as slaves from the time of Joshua. Early in the books of history we find that Gibeah was referred to as Gibeah of Benjamin (Judges, 1 Sam 13:2, 15, 16) but after 1 Samuel 14:16 Gibeah is always referred to as Gibeah or Saul?s Gibeah. I deduce that between chapter 13 and 14 Saul tried to wipe out the Gibeonites and claimed Gibeah as his possession alone. Who was involved in this slaughter of innocents? Certainly Saul was involved but also Saul?s servants and Saul?s family all of which give parameters to ?his bloody house?. My thought here is that Saul?s three sons and his daughters would be pretty young. Saul at this point in his life is in his late forties or early fifties. For sake of argument let us say that Saul?s children are in their mid 20?s at best their children could only be in their mid teens hardly capable of combat and murder. The scriptures record that Saul married Ahinoam and they had four sons: Jonathan, Abinadab, Malchishua, and Ish-bosheth and two daughters Merab and Michal (who was childless until her death 2 Sam. 6:23). Saul also fathered two sons with Rizpah: Armoni and Mephibosheth. Ish-bosheth becomes the king of Israel at 40 years of age but is killed when he is 42. Intimating two things: He would have been born the year Saul became king which would have made him 20 years old when Saul was fifty The drought was after his death. In 1 Samuel 17:1 David is offered Merab Saul?s Daughter to wife David accepts and then Saul gives her to another after which David is given Michal to wife about 12 years after he had killed Goliath (years are based on historical research which I cannot duplicate here for sake of time) which would make David around 27 years of age. Most scholars believe David was born between 1037-1034 which would make the time of marriage between 1010 and 1007. David becomes king of Judah when he is thirty so the more probable date is 1010 which would make the years of his running from Saul approximately 3 years. Why do I bring this up? It is very unlikely that Saul?s daughters would have been in their late twenties when offered as brides as a matter of fact it would have been more likely that each would have been under 20 years of age. Saul will die within the next 3-4 years because history records that David became king of Judah in 1007 and king of a united Israel in 1000. David reigns for 40 years or until 970 BC. In all likely hood the slaughter of the Gibeonites occurred before most of the grandchildren were born but if they were not, the grand children would have been very young and definitely did not participate in slaughter. Once again Heartstrings I am not saying your theory is wrong I am saying that your stance does not leave you any room to consider another possibility. To say that David would not break God?s law is a false belief because David did at other parts of his life. Keep in mind David was the king and not a judge whom the law in Deuteronomy was given to. Also remember that David took back Michal to wife even though she was married to another man. Divorce, marriage and remarriage? I am at peace with my study I hope you can now see my side of the debate. God bless I am going on a vacation for a week. Please pray we have no problems. orvals
  5. Heartstrings, Once again let us go through this reasonably. First David inquired of the Lord the cause of the drought Secondly God told him it was for Saul and his bloody house because he slew the Gibeonites. It was by the order of Saul that the Gibeonites were attacked, he was the king and he had the power of life and death. Thirdly David enquired of Gibeonites as to what could be done to make Saul?s transgression right. Fourthly the Gibeonites choose the punishment (not David). The Gibeonites were a heathen nation living under the protection of Israel and her king. Fifthly the Gibeonites asked for seven sons of Saul, Why? Because Saul had attacked the Gibeonites without a justifiable reason for doing so! David could have given the son of Jonathan but chose not to because of the oath between David and Jonathan. Mephibosheth could have been sent and yet there was no way Mephibosheth could have been guilty of blood because he could not be a warrior because he had a lame leg from his early childhood. Sixthly David chose seven sons of Saul?s family and delivered them to the Gibeonites. David did not kill them the Gibeonites killed them. Deuteronomy 24:16 was a law given to the judges of Israel not to the judges of heathen nations. You cannot enforce biblical principles on a heathen nation they will not understand. I certainly see what you are trying to say but I believe you are forcing the passage to say something it does not say. orvals
  6. Revelation, Actually it is the same Michal that was David's wife but I believe you are correct that they were not all her sons born of her body. I did not research originally I just looked at the passage but upon further inspection the sons seem to have been the sons of her elder sister. Perhaps one or two might have been hers but there is no way to know that. Thanks for pointing this out to me. orvals edited for clarity of thought
  7. Heartstrings, I have watched your response to the various posters for someone who has some questions you seem to be very defensive toward anyone who does not respond like you think they should. Here is something else to consider Saul?s house would not have been just his family but also anyone who was employed by him including generals, servants, aunts, uncles, sisters, brothers, butchers, bakers etc. Secondly look at who was given to Gibeonites the five sons of Michal. I am sure they were involved at 2 to 10 years of age in the killing those Gibeonites. You seem to be hung up on one verse Deuteronomy 24:16 in a response to that verse let us go to Exodus and ask if the father refused to put the blood of a lamb on the door posts and lentils of his house; who died? orvals
  8. No this does not make me mad these pictures and the thousands more like them make me sorrow. As a young man I enlisted in the Marine Corps because I believed America is the greatest nation on the earth and with all our woes I believe that truth still stands. But I sorrow for our future for we are becoming a third world country before our very eyes. Our education system is no longer the best education system in the world, our dollar can no longer hold its own against foreign currency, our politicians cannot be trusted to be honest and speak clearly, and as a nation we have recently proved that we can no longer stay the course of retribution for longer than 3 or 4 years. I sorrow because we are a nation of illiterate adults and youth who can no longer reason beyond the food on our table and the most recent tv program. I sorrow because we have placed God in the wasteland of our hedonistic desires and having cast of God and the scriptures now expect the government to give us everything our heart desires. I sorrow for our nation and our people who are getting what we have desired a nation without God. I sorrow because most of our churches have quit preaching the word of God and begun offering a variety of entertainment in the accompaniment of a sermonette in which Jesus Christ may or may not be included. I sorrow for my grandchildren and their children because I know a great America will not be there for them when they turn 50 and I secretly I wonder if we are the last generation to see the contrast between what we were and what we have become. I sorrow that people have turned a deaf ear to the gospel of Jesus Christ, I sorrow that much time is spent in debating the latest modern version instead of preaching the gospel of Christ, I sorrow that religion has become what ever I chose to believe served ala carte at the local corner church of heresy. I sorrow most because I know that God is not mocked that as nation we will be turned into hell. I long to see great preachers like Dr. Rice, W.E Dowell and many others who preached salvation on Sunday Mornings and held 1 and 2 week revivals return to the landscape of America. I remember Curtis Hudson preaching 3 straight days on soul winning, on being bold, and having a plan to win people to Christ. I can still hear Doctor Rice preach on ?Men ought always to pray and not faint? never raise his voice but give illustration after illustration and see the altars filled with brothers and sisters begging God for the power of God in their lives. I can still hear Lester Roloff, Jack Hyles, Hyman Appleman, Oliver Green, Earl Little, and so many more. I am aware of some of the things that have been said and proven concerning some of these men none the less and for one reason or another their preaching seemed to be blessed by God in so many ways and I am thankful I had the opportunity to hear them preach. Oh that men would praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men. orvals :sad
  9. It has rained here the last two days but then last night the snow moved in. I suspect if the ground had not been so wet we would probably have a foot or more but instead we now have about 4 inches give or take an inch. Lord knows we neet the water our winter wheat may be shot even with it but all in all it has been a peaceful day. I am doing my SS lesson for Sunday morning and the wife is watching a womans program or movie on the tv. orvals
  10. All my tulips are up and we are in the midst of a large snow fall. I will sure miss them this year if they don't get to blossom fully. How about the rest of you any flowers up that you might lose because of the late snowfall or ice? orvals
  11. good to have you on board orvals
  12. Another good read John. Thanks for the post. I am a little thick sometimes but by the time I finished the article I finally caught onto what he is saying. If we collected all the currency in America there would not be enough to pay any of our debt only our principle. That is a staggering thought. Orvals
  13. Thanks for the post John. It was very insightful. Just a thought to add many schools especially in California are fearful of not enrolling students because of the financial gains, they get x amount of dollars per day for each student on the roll. Orvals
  • Create New...