Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

DaveW

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Posts

    5,691
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    250

Everything posted by DaveW

  1. No...... no it doesn't say that. It says this: Rom 14:20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
  2. Not at all - I thought it might be helpful to give some explanation.
  3. I don't actually remember, but I think the first post (which was mine) was separated from an existing thread. The Original post was posted to lay out the plain and biblical facts of the matter in such a way that the issue was made plain. As can be clearly seen, the plain biblical facts are still denied by some, and excuses are made to allow those to continue to argue, whilst pretending they are not.....
  4. From your description, she doesn't believe in reincarnation but is using that as an excuse to "avoid God". I say that because she changed to "Hell is alright with her", and then changed the subject and led you away from presenting salvation through Christ. A good lesson - don't let the other person control the direction of the conversation - no matter what they say, acknowledge it, then bring Christ into it again. Remember: Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Gove her a Bible, if she will take it, and try not to argue about side issues, as they only serve to distract
  5. Why would you give money to a group that is not biblical, when you could give some money to a missionary that your church supports or knows, and then you know that the money will go to the furtherance of the Gospel, and not into some organisation which will eat half of it up for the running of their "business"? I know that the church I go to has a separate "missions giving account" and every single dollar that is given for missions goes the missionaries who are out there preaching the Gospel and seeing people saved: not one cent of it goes to admin and running costs of this church - that is taken care of from the general offerings (and ONLY from the general offerings). Salvation Army do a lot of good stuff, but they are not God's organisation, the local church, which God commissioned to do the work of the Great Commission.
  6. A. I love that you at once say you do not follow Andetson and then immediately say you do....... B. Sometimes popular doctrine is popular BECAUSE it is right.... C. People here in general do not like Anderson because he is a proven false teacher, and not just in this matter, but in many matters D. Your initial premise is a set up for this argument. You have twice said something like "when I see effeminate preachers"...... I would suggest you stop going where effeminate preachers preach, and stop looking for effeminate preachers to be offended by. You won't find them at the church I attend, nor would I suggest at any other church represented here. Plenty who won't follow Anderson and his false teaching, but none who support "effeminate preachers".
  7. Lunch guests - in the Bush east of Perth. They were on the end of the table, but I didn't think to get a photo until later. Ring necks. Just one of the local parrots we see.
  8. So for asking for Scripture to back up your statements, I get no scripture, but I do get sarcasm?????? Really?
  9. No sorry - YOU are the one who distinctly separated fear and respect, and now you are being evasive when asked to support your proposition with Scripture. It shouldn't be that hard if it is biblical. Verses to support your claim please.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.)
  12. So what? I have heard this argument used many times by his followers and it is ridiculous, because Anderson teaches that they cannot be saved. So you are effectively bragging that you wasted your time preaching to people who by Anderson's teaching are unable to be saved. This is EXACTLY what the Calvinist does when he says that he preaches the Gospel to everyone knowing that only "the elect" (according to Calvin's corrupt doctrines) can be saved. It is MEANINGLESS. And the majority of preachers here are concerned with two things: preaching the Gospel to the lost, and preaching doctrine to the saved, so your accusations are offensive, inaccurate, and misrepresentative.
  13. So only the doctrines that you think are unimportant should be ignored, as long as the Gospel is preached? Thanks for clearing that up.
  14. So are you suggesting that any false doctrines can be preached as long as the Gospel is right?
  15. 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.
  16. Pro 14:12 (12) There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
  17. 2Ti 2:15 (15) Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
  18. The bolded part of the quote says everything that needs to be said. This man ahs done this on several occasions: he quotes a part of a statement and then answers something that was not actually posed. Here is the actual post that Alan made, to show that this guys answer is a false accusation against Alan, for Alan never posed such as this guy suggests. This is plain misrepresentation. He is not here to get an answer for his supposed troubles. If he was he would not misrepresent people, and he would not introduce side issues to cloud the discussion, such as why he introduced the discussion about divorce aimed particularly at SAB, because he knows that it is something that SAB is passionate about. Thankfully everyone has ignored this attempt at causing division. His misrepresentation of people, his disdain for the Word of God, his constant uplifting of man's word over God's, including the words of some men who are absolutely ungodly, and his baiting with side issues, all add together to prove that this man is not here for any purpose other than to cause trouble and division. He is "nicer", and he is more measured, but the evidence is there. If he was genuine he would stick to his first purpose - the veracity of the Word of God.
  19. Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
  20. John 8 31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
  21. Joh 17:17 (17) Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
  22. Psa 118:8 (8) It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
  23. Never happier than when defending fallible men, never sadder than when denying the truth of the Word of God. There's your problem right there - You put more store in the words of men than in the Word of God. How quickly you come to the defense of men, and how quickly you dismiss the Word of God. STOP READING WHAT MEN SAY AND START READING THE WORD OF GOD. Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
  24. Nuff said..... I am out. No accusation - your starting position is the same as Thomas - I WILL NOT BELIEVE...…. This attitude displayed in your responses to anyone who has tried to help, and displayed further in the quotes above tells me that you are not actually after answers You are convinced that the Bible is not true, and until you move from that premise you cannot make any forward progress. You need to worry less about what men like CS Lewis or Peterson say and try studying the Bible in order to answer your own questions. You are obviously not interested in what other people have to say (because you reject it without consideration), so the ONLY course of action for you to take is to diligently study the Word of God and find the answers for yourself. If you are indeed in any way interested in getting the answers...…. Have fun, but I will take no further part.
  25. Your beginning premise is wrong. Your beginning is that the Bible is NOT TRUE, and you are asking people to prove to you that it is true. This is you (and I suspect why you have chosen that name....): Joh 20:24-25 (24) But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. (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. This is the clear attitude that you have displayed in your answers. In contrast to your dismissing of Wretched's comments, I point you to what Jesus said to Thomas: Joh 20:29 (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. Thomas said he would not believe unless he had 100%solid proof, but the Lord said it is more blessed to believe WITHOUT THAT 100% solid proof. I can show you verse after verse after verse after verse that are absolutely 100% true and accurate, and you are sweeping aside any explanation that you do not like for three passages that YOU find doubtful. You are beginning from the premise that the Bible is in error, and asking people to prove to you that what you have already decided is false, is true. From that starting point, you cannot come to real faith in either the Lord or in His Word. I am not asking you to believe in "blind faith", but to start from a position of faith, not a position of opposition.
×
×
  • Create New...