Jump to content

DaveW

Members
  • Posts

    5,711
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    253

Posts posted by DaveW

  1. Just thought I would show you the "Kangaroo Paw" in front of our house.

    A bit hard to tell, but that shade overhead is about 7', and the plant is right up to it.

    The second photo shows why it is named that.

    By the way, sorry about the lawn out front - I am trying to green it, but we are in drought now. Today is a cooler change, so only in the mid 30's -well into the 90's F, but we have had a fair string of days above 30 and into the early 40's. Not the hottest part of summer yet.....??

     

     

     

     

     

    20191225_121133.jpg

    20191225_121146.jpg

  2. I am currently dealing with a man who spends more time listening to internet theologians than being around good christian influence - including coming to church. He is listening to "good independent baptist preachers" (his words), but I know from his current directions that he is primarily being influenced by Anderson and his disciples. The things he is coming up with are clear, and although he doesn't realise it, dangerous. And his family will be damaged by it, but there is apparently nothing I can do to convince him.

    He believes everything Anderson says, but questions every statement I make.

  3. I gotta say..... Of all the things mentioned in my critique of the original post, there is not one answer, not one objection, not one disputed point - except that the person has taken offense at my use of the word stupid - which as I said was not directed at the person but at the proposition.

    Seems to me that the person was seeking for something to be offended at....

    I did after all clearly display how the proposition was indeed a stupid one.

    Oh well...…...

  4. I didn't post in this thread until now because I was not interested in the straw man proposition at the very start.

    I finally stuck my nose in when the OP proposed a clearly unbiblical form of baptism, but now that my nose is "in here" I am going to waggle it around a little.

    The original post is so full of false premise that it simply isn't funny.

     

    On 12/8/2019 at 1:42 AM, JimR said:

    An article found in the Gospel Coalition site reported that two hundred years ago no baptist church would baptize anyone younger than 18.  Ages have declined steadily and now kids as young as eight or ten are being baptized.  We have all heard stories about adults who said their childhood baptisms had more to do with peer pressure than actual conversion and they did not consider them to be valid.  Yet the practice continues.  Kids are not becoming emotionally mature at younger ages; just the opposite.  Many are childish while in college.  

    When ten-year-olds are baptized in baptist churches, we must conclude that the difference between catholic churches and baptist churches is only  10 (10 minus zero is 10).  This is not much of a difference and while i understand that an exceptional child might be able to make a serious informed commitment at a young age, most cannot.  This is disturbing.  Presbyterians, like Baptists, do not believe baptism saves, but they go ahead and baptize babies anyway, then later they give the kids a confirmation class and have them standup in front of the church.  They get the process done backwards but they get it done.  Is this any worse than baptizing a ten year old?

    Some Grace dispensationalists say that Paul stopped baptizing after he stopped going to the Jews and the gentile church does not need to do that anymore.  Honestly, I would be more comfortable in a church that does not baptize at all than in one that baptizes babies or small children.  

    Sorry for the long post but I am curious as to what others will say about child baptisms and the declining age of baptism.  

     

    Who cares what the Gospel Coalition says (whoever they are...)?

    I know from my own experience that when I was saved 30+ years ago, and then a few month later baptised, people were already having the discussions about children with false professions "getting saved" again as an adult. I will note to you that the discussion was NEVER about those people getting baptised at a young age, but about whether or not they got saved at that age. I have spoken to many people older than I who made a profession of faith for salvation at ages as young as three, but mostly around the ages of 6-10, who then doubted their salvation and later "tried again". That means that this "trend" you propose has been stable for at least the last 50 or more years.

    On 12/8/2019 at 1:42 AM, JimR said:

    We have all heard stories about adults who said their childhood baptisms had more to do with peer pressure than actual conversion and they did not consider them to be valid. 

    I gotta say that I have never heard this in an IFB church - about salvation yes, but not about baptisms, and the way you word this appears to be suggesting that baptism is a part of salvation...…. Maybe that is simply sloppy wording on your part, but that is the way it looks......

     

    On 12/8/2019 at 1:42 AM, JimR said:

    Kids are not becoming emotionally mature at younger ages; just the opposite.  Many are childish while in college.  

    So what? What has this to do with "emotional maturity"? It is about understanding your position as a sinner, and understanding the offer of salvation through Christ.  It is not about emotional anything......

    On 12/8/2019 at 1:42 AM, JimR said:

    When ten-year-olds are baptized in baptist churches, we must conclude that the difference between catholic churches and baptist churches is only  10 (10 minus zero is 10). 

    This is utter stupidity. The difference between baptism in a catholic church and baptism in an Independent Baptist Church is nothing to do with age, and everything to do with doctrine. Catholics baptise as a part of their salvation ritual process, IFB baptise as a testimony of what the Lord HAS ALREADY done in a saved person's life. You either have ZERO understanding of what baptism means or...…. no that's it...….

    And your proposal means that the position of an IFB church would have to change with every baptism. A couple of baptisms ago, our church baptised two 13 year old, a 14 year old, and a 73 year old. Do we average them to find out how close to a Catholic church we are? So we were 28.25 years away from being a Catholic church.

    But the last baptism was a mother of about 38. So now we are 38 years away from being Catholic? See, it is a stupid proposition.....

     

    On 12/8/2019 at 1:42 AM, JimR said:

    Presbyterians, like Baptists, do not believe baptism saves, but they go ahead and baptize babies anyway, then later they give the kids a confirmation class and have them standup in front of the church.  They get the process done backwards but they get it done.  Is this any worse than baptizing a ten year old?

    Who cares what Presbyterians do? But here again you display a lack of understanding about baptism. It takes very little Bible research to see that the order is set out in a plain way - salvation then baptism. Find one instance of a man in the Bible being baptised before being saved..... (I assume Judas was baptised but he never was saved......so he doesn't count.)

    And yes it is worse than baptising a ten year old, because in every IFB church that I have ever been associated with, the ten year old would only be baptised AFTER he has professed Christ as his Saviour. No baby who cannot even speak the words, is of sufficient understanding to be able to be saved.

     

    So in short, your proposition of a trend towards baptising younger is not true over the last 50+ years anyway, so your beginning premise is wrong.

    Your attempt to associate baptism with "emotional maturity" is simply unbiblical.

    You appear to be associating baptism to salvation in an essential way, which is unbiblical.

    Your attempt to make the difference between Catholicism and Baptist churches into one of "age of baptism" is ridiculous, unbiblical, and quite frankly, stupid. 

    And your attempt to minimise the "process" difference between the Presbyterians and the IFB indicates that your purpose here is not just for a good discussion, but to gently spread dissent and false teaching.

  5. Romans 6

    4  Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

     5  For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

    Likeness of his death.......

    Don't ya hate it when the Bible disagrees with you?

     

  6. 10 hours ago, JimR said:

    Some weeds end up mixed with the wheat.  That cannot be helped.

    If i was going to baptize/dip/immerse someone, i would want them to get down on their knees in front of tub filled with water,  Their heads would be submerged three times, once in each name.  When that was over, they would definitely feel like they had died and rose again.  

    Maybe folks who were less sincere would not be willing to submit to a triple dunk.

    My German Dunker forbears did it three times forward,

    There is ABSOLUTELY no biblical instruction nor example of this.

    How does this show the death of Christ?

  7. And Pomegranate juice from the streetside stalls is mmmmmmmmmmmmwonderfuuuuullllllmmmmmmmmm.

    Cut, squeezed, and served over ice - as fresh as it comes, and so refreshing..... - although I think at that time it might still be a little chilly there....

    And the streetside coffee is yum if you like it strong, but if you have never had Arabic (or Turkish coffee - not quite the same - different spices, but similar...consistency...), just a warning - the last half inch is not meant to be drunk. ?:4_11_3:?

  8. Oh...… I forgot....

    Whilst in Jerusalem, if you have spare time, you MUST MUST MUST go to Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum.

    The whole complex is astounding, the main museum walk is exhausting - not because of the length - it is not all that long, but the subject matter is so well presented, but so hard to endure - and I already knew about much of it. But to be confronted in the way they do there is...…. essential.

    When you exit the museum section you come out into a lovely serene view over a valley, and a beautiful cool breeze blowing across you - just what is needed to reflect for a while.

    But the gardens, the children's walk.... all worthwhile.

    Each "flame" in the darkness represents a child taken in the Holocaust, and names are spoken continually of those children.

     

    IMG-20190411-WA0011.jpg

  9. If it is not part of the tour, the Garden Tomb is worth the time.

    But if it is anything like the trip I took, the hotel room with eyes closed will be the best place. So tuckered by the end of the trip.........???

    Tel Aviv - it depends where you are staying - we were close to the sea and a cafe strip and shopping area. Stood and watched the sea a while and had a lovely cafe meal.

    You will enjoy yourself.

  10. Why has this been posted in a totally unrelated thread ? (Fasting was the OP....)

     

    For the record, I doubt that anyone on here would even try to defend the sinful actions of wicked men, but you have presented no scripture to back up your accusation that this is directly related to "Once saved always saved". However, eternal security IS a Bible doctrine - NOT Calvin's way, but the Bible way.

    The many names you mention in your post are criticised by many on here whenever their names are put forward, because they are hateful AND unscriptural in many of their teachings and actions.

    This is why your connecting of eternal life to this sort of sin is unbiblical:

    Rom 5:20-6:2
    (20)  Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
    (21)  That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
    (1)  What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
    (2)  God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
     

    No truly saved person WANTS to live in sin.

     

    I will finally note to you that God is the one who determined the terms "eternal life" and "everlasting life", and anyone who wants to teach that a saved man can lose his salvation must first overcome the actual terms that God determined should be used - How can eternal life be eternal if it can end? How can everlasting life be everlasting if it is can end?

    If it ends it NEVER was eternal or everlasting.

     

    None of that justifies the kind of sin you are talking about by the way.

     

  11. Hey Weary and NoNics, some bloke on here posted this in another thread, which is relevant to this subject also:

    (It was here: https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27985-why-large-families/?do=findComment&comment=447673")

     

     

    Quote

     

    God will let Christian parents know in some way when enough kids are enough. His methods vary; the mom (or dad) may develop a medical issue, attention may be drawn to available finances & resources, or parents may know in their hearts they have enough kids.

       And the couples who produce  the children who are best-prepared for adult life have given each child enough ATTENTION.

      Remember, even a woman in her 40s still has about a thousand healthy eggs in her ovaries, and a normal man produces millions of sperm per batch of semen, so for most, fertility is no prob. That doesn't mean a couple should try to use every one of them!

     

      But let each Christian couple follow GOD in the number of children it has."

     

     

  12. Not at all suggesting that this isn't happening, but I have never had a real problem with windows versions and updates. My systems have always just worked - only problems I have had are old systems getting junked up with updates (slowing down), and attacks from scammers.

    But it was pointed out to me that if you type 4x4 whilst holding down the shift key you get $×$, and that CAN'T be a co-incidence!??????

  13. 4 hours ago, weary warrior said:

    DaveW, if my tone in my post came off as cheeky or disrespectful, I do want to apologize. That's not how I ment it. 

    Not at all - I thought it might be helpful to give some explanation. ?

  14. 2 hours ago, weary warrior said:

    Does Romans 14 not answer this whole question clearly, completely and simply?

    I am so confused right now as to why this discussion even took place.

    If you're going to have an argument regarding which day of the week we "must" meet on for church, we will, if we are both intelligent and honest, have to include a separate argument regarding which calendar God was looking at whenever He set everything up.

    The SDA's argue against Sunday worship because "it was invented by Rome" while observing the Hebrew "Sabbath" on a Gregorian calendar, given to them by ... Pope Gregory! ???

    Humans...they boggle the mind.

    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.....

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 5 hours ago, Paul Christian said:

    1 John 2:27 tells us that because we have the Holy Spirit to teach us, we don’t need a man to teach us. Anderson was the man who pointed me to that. 
    The reality is that when a person casts down the presuppositions of past teaching by men, and reads the Bible for themselves, they will find many things that contradict popular doctrine, and that is what people really don’t like, so they blame it on one man teaching it, rather than refuting the doctrine with scripture.

    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".

  • Member Statistics

    6,088
    Total Members
    2,124
    Most Online
    shlomo
    Newest Member
    shlomo
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...