Wilchbla

Can you please tell me what you know about what Baptist Briders believe?

They believe that the true church is the Baptist church and especially if it is in reference to their local church. If you aren't a baptist you may be in heaven but you won't be part of the bride. I guess you'll be a servant at the marriage supper. So men like Martin Luther and John Wesley will be serving dinner to the fat lady in the choir who loves to gossip. They reject the teaching of a "universal invisible church" i.e. that the true church is made up of all believers no matter what denomination. This teaching stems from an overzealousness to get Christians to join their particular local church. Also, if you haven't been baptized in their particular church but maybe in another denomination then you need to be rebaptized since to be a member of the true church (i.e. their local church) you need to be baptized within that church.

Honestly, this doctrine always makes me chuckle cause it's one of the silliest ever.

How many Catholics, Orthodox and other "Christians" have taken stripes, thinking it was for the Lord, yet they were unsaved and not actually serving Christ?

Untold thousands have suffered and died thinking they were doing so for the Lord yet they were serving the devil.

And many of them may have been saved. You don't have to be a IFBer from the southern US of A in order to be saved. You are equating having you doctrine down perfectly with being saved and I'm telling you that beside one's testimony of who they are trusting in for the salvation of their souls suffering in the name of Christ and in his service is one of the surest signs a man is saved. The Galatians that Paul wrote to were a saved people but had their gospel message messed up.

I am not familiar with the man whom you are referring to, however I believe that it is VERY important how screwed up someone may be in their doctrine. I don't want to get up into whether or not the person was born again, whether or not they have taken stripes in the name of the Lord. That is not the purpose of this post. I just wanted to emphasize that doctrine is something that we need to be very careful about and follow it the way the Bible explains it.

On the flip side you can have your doctrine perfectly and still be as useless to God as a two dollar bill. Sometimes I think that a testimony of suffering in the name of Christ trumps having doctrine down perfectly. It's through suffering with Christ that we are made joint heirs with him in the Father's kingdom. Not through having our doctrine down correctly.

To think Wurmbrand is an unsaved man is absolutely ludicrous. Calvin saved, Wurmbrand unsaved. You can have people burned at the stake but if you have your doctrine down correctly (which he didn't) then you are definitely a believer. Forget how you live.

The book of him I'm reading is sort of his life story, mostly about his time in communist prisons. It's worth the time for me to read because I'm getting first hand evidence of his lack of biblical understanding, his improper use and interpretation of Scripture, his unbiblical ecumenicism and his wrongful ideas of what counts as salvation. This will be useful to share with those who think him a Christian martyr but only because they are unaware of the truth.

It's also interesting historical material regarding that time period.

That said, I certainly wouldn't recommend a non-Christian or babe in Christ read it.

John, the man lived behind the "iron curtain" within an atheistic communist nation that was previously Russian Orthodox. There were no IFB churches (IFB churches are mostly located in the security of the southern USA) and probably very few bibles. You think you can cut him a break?

Nobody is going to get their doctrine from the man but they may be embolden to face persecution because of his testimony.

I'd be careful what you say about a man who has taken stripes in the name of the Lord no matter how screwed up he may be in his doctrine.

I don't recall where it came from but I have one of these and it's a great disappointment. There are a few good things in it, but even then they are so abridged as to be of limited use. The rest of the book features many who likely were not even born again Christians.

I'm reading a bokk by Richard Wurmbrand, the "reverend" who survived communist prison, came to the West and eventually formed what would become known as Voice of the Martyrs. So far, from reading this book he wrote himself, I'm not yet convinced he was a born again Christian himself. In fact, many things he's said so far in this book lead me to think he wasn't.

How many stripes in the name of the Lord does a man need to take to prove he's a Christian?

I don't see to many obese IFB pastors taking stripes for the Lord these days.

Here seems to be a more easily readable copy of Acts and Monuments.

http://www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxecont.htm

FOX's BOOK of MARTYRS

Marty, Irishman mentioned the above book, you can click on the link above & read this book online.

You can also find the unabridged version of Foxe's Book of Martyrs online. It's called Acts and Monuments. This has actual letters from the Pope authorizing persecution of Christians and also other interesting things like the Statement of Faith of the Waldensians. This is a massive collection of 12 books. Not an easy read though.

http://www.johnfoxe....e=foxe&x=15&y=9

Dude, why do you have to make this into a Plymouth Brethren thing? You are always start an argument over dispensationalism so then some folks in here can blame us for stirring up the trouble.

No. "Protestant "is a term invented by the Roman Catholic Church to make you think that we are wayward members of the true church (i.e. the Roman Catholic Church) who became upset over some minor shortcomings within the RCC and decided to revolt and protest. Hopefully some day will return to the fold of the "one true holy apostolic church" whether by force or deception.

Many Baptists like to say that the Baptists were around since John the Baptist. This is ridiculous. John the Baptist was an OT prophet and was not part of the bride of Christ. This is just another attempt by man to make his particular denomination or church the "one true church of Christ". Independent Fundamental Baptists, though do come the closest to the early believers in doctrine IMO and have the strongest biblical foundation of all the denominations. But the denomination as it is today began around the time the KJV was translated. So the denominatiion didn't come directly out of the Protestant Reformation.

What was the fate of those born and died before Christ Birth

Click here to view the question

They went to hell or paradise (aka Abraham's Bosom).

The Jews had to keep the law and sacrifices. The sacrifices were a temporary covering until Christ came and made the atonement.

The Gentiles had to follow the law written on their hearts (i.e. conscience) and probably any other dreams or visions given.

Of course, these things were imperfect since most Gentiles seared their conscience and the Jews broke the covenant at every chance. That's why Christ had to come and make the perfect final atonement for the sins of the world.

Romans chapters 1 through 5 will shed some light on all this.

Anyone who posts after me loves Hitler and denies the holocaust.

Ha ha, I win.

dog

Ban myself for ruining all the fun in here.

Ban Sarah for being corny.

Ban Wilchbla for calling me a Strawberrie. :-P

Ban Sarah for discriminating against blueberries.

King of Love My Shepherd Is

Ban John for thinking laughing Strawberries does the body good.

Calvin did some good things in his time but even he, like most of the theologians during his day, still had a lot of Catholicism in their blood. The RCC ruled the landscape for 1000 years until this time. You don't just snap out of it over night. It takes time to rediscover the doctrines of the bible. Calvin desired to build a church/state just like a papist would want to do. Luther considered himself Catholic until they day he died even though he got bounced from the RCC. It's time to move on from men like Calvin, Luther, Zwingli, Melanchthon, Knox, etc. to men whom God revealed more of his scripture too. I truly believe a lay person of today who loves God, lives and holy life and believes that God's word (KJV) is pure can know more of the "deep things of God" (I Cor. 2:10) then the fathers of the Reformation.

Psalm 119

[99] I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.
[100] I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.

Thanks for everyone's help! After thinking about it more, I guess I just need one that better explains out-dated words. I don't necessarily need a commentary on the verses, as much as I would like a built in dictionary!! I don't know if one even exists...

I've heard that this one helps with "outdated" words.

KJV Sword Bible

KJV-bibles/study-bibles/KJV-sword-bible-large-print.html'>http://www.theKJvstore.com/KJV-bibles/study-bibles/KJV-sword-bible-large-print.html

This one too.

KJV-Study-Bible/dp/0310919606'>http://www.amazon.com/Zondervan-KJV-Study-Bible/dp/0310919606

Other than that a dictionary should help. Or just look online for the definition than write it in the margin.

If Scofield were around today doing and saying what he did back then, many IFBs would be distancing themselves from him, condemning his lifestyle and false teachings, giving warning sermons about him. Yet for some reason, the passing of time and much tradition seems to make a difference for many which allows them to put on blinders towards him.

Yes, the same goes Abraham, Peter, Paul, David, Solomon, etc. etc. Many IFBers would have nothing to do with them. Yet, somehow John Calvin is still worshiped even after condemning people to death, setting up a church state and birthing some of the most heretical doctrines. But like someone has pointed out, a broken marriage is the only unforgivable sin among IFBers.

I'The infamous Scofield was utterly discredited by his personal life & abandonment of his wife & children. Not to mention his grossly slanted "Bible" intended to popularise Darby's dispensationalism.

ve never used Thompson, though I hold to a preterist amil position. Matthew Henry is very good & very helpful on background & difficult passages, giving the info we need to come to an understanding.

From the time I began serious Bible study (over 50 years ago) I have used Bibles with cross references, as they enable the study of parallel & related passages without man's comments.

The online Blue Letter Bible is a very powerful resource, a particularly useful resource being Strong's numbering which enables definitions & word studies.

I'm sure John Calvin would have had him burned at the stake if he was around at the time.

Shame on me! Here's one I forgot and owned at one time. A very good study bible with many wonderful appendices in it.

Henry Morris Study Bible (previously The New Defenders Study Bible)

http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=henry+morris+study+bible&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=11179147044&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=1822644020501745906&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=e&ref=pd_sl_7ebi6k7rdi_e

I owned The New Defenders Study Bible by Henry Morris. I'm not sure if the new edition is any different or how much he had hands on with the new one since he's gone home to be with the Lord. From my research it seems pretty much the same. Henry Morris believed the new versions and this bible will reflect his belief though he still believed there were mistakes in the English translation. You can say he was more of a TR man than a KJV only man


That being said, this is a very good study bible.

I have Bullingers Companion, always have really been challenged by many of his appendices.

Yeah, of the lot Bullinger's Companion Bible is the biggest challenge. Actually, it was a little too meaty for me but for a seminary student I would recommend it.

Anybody who's interested you can find the complete Companion Bible online.

http://www.companion...econdensed.com/

Strand Study Bible by H.L. Wilmington.

http://www.strandstudybible.com/

Rock of Ages Study Bible (a.k.a The New Pilgrim Study Bible)

http://www.roapm.com/roabible.html

Common Man's Reference Bible

http://www.purewords...leEdition2.html

The 1917 Old Scofield (stay away from the New Scofield)

http://www.amazon.co...eld study bible

The King James Study Bible

http://www.amazon.co...n/dp/0785209158

The Companion Bible

http://www.amazon.co...companion bible

The Ruckman Reference Bible

http://www.KJV1611.o...ibleorders.html

The Ryrie Study Bible

http://www.amazon.co...ie study bibleKJV

Thompson Chain Reference Bible

http://www.amazon.co...eference-Bible-KJV-Charles-Thompson/dp/0887073301/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1341867170&sr=1-1&keywords=thompson+chain+reference+bible+KJV

Dake's Annotated

http://www.dakebible...large-print.htm

The Subject Study Bible

http://www.amazon.co...n/dp/B001K2H2KI

The Rainbow Study Bible

http://www.amazon.co...ow-Study-Bible-KJV-Studies-International/dp/1581700253/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1341867357&sr=1-2&keywords=the+rainbow+reference+bible

The John R. Rice Reference Bible (out of print but you may still be able to hunt one down)

http://www.amazon.co...n/dp/0840705069

Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible

http://www.theKJvstore.com/KJV-bibles/study-bibles/KJV-tim-lahaye-prophecy-study-bible-package.html

The Reese Chronological Bible

http://www.christian...ological-bible-KJV/9780871231154/pd/30115

All study bibles have their problems. Dake was a Charismatic, Thompson was a amillenialist, Bullinger was a hyperdispensationalist, a lot of the brethen think Ruckman is the devil, Rice and Wilmington will correct the KJV on occassion. You just have to pick out the gold from each one. All of them really do have some good stuff in them. Especially the references. Maybe start off with Ryrie. He corrects the bible on occassion also. This was the the study bible I originally learned the major doctrines of the bible from. Thompson is good for word studies. I've heard that the Strand Bible is really good. Wilmington is out of Liberty U. but his stuff has been pretty solid.