Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Wilchbla

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,411
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from wretched in Remarriage   
    Yes, but this could be cleared up if the Christians make the right kind of animal sacrifices on Yom Kippur.
  2. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from dmedicinus in Can someone please explain to me why the KJV Bible is superior?   
    The "proof is in the pudding." The KJV has produced more fruit than all the other versions combined. All your great revivals have ended in America since the new version came out. Except for Sunday and Graham who both used KJVs. (We'll, Graham was quoted once as saying, "When I want results I use the KJV").

    The men behind the translation. Though the may have not all been straight doctrinally they were some of the holiest and God-fearing men. And they were very, very intelligent. Many of your new versions were had unsaved reprobates and perverts TRANSLATING the bible. (Whatever may be said about King James, whether true or false, he DID NOT TRANSLATE the KJV).

    The KJV is the only version that claims preservation and has supporters who claim it is pure and without error. You will not find this with any other English version that I know off.

    Finally, though lazy Christians claim it is hard to READ it has been scientifically proven to be the easiest version to UNDERSTAND. There is something about the King's English that is very clear and to the point. The English launguage was at its best at this time in history.
  3. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from Miss Daisy in Can someone please explain to me why the KJV Bible is superior?   
    What you just said doesn't make sense. It sounds BIG, but it doesn't make sense. The lady asked for LAYMENS terms, which you did not respond in, in why the KJV is superior ( I assumed she meant to all other ENGLISH versions). Going into mss or textual evidences is NOT LAYMENS terms. It's more of the same endless debating which doesn't edify. She asked why the KJV is superior and I gave her EMPIRICAL EVIDENCES which cannot be argued.

    As Christ said, "by their fruits, ye shall know them."
  4. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from Alan in New Name for IFBs   
    No matter what term you come up to explain fundamentalist it will always be turned into a negative meaning by the media.
  5. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from Doc Flay in New Name for IFBs   
    No matter what term you come up to explain fundamentalist it will always be turned into a negative meaning by the media.
  6. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from Ukulelemike in New Name for IFBs   
    No matter what term you come up to explain fundamentalist it will always be turned into a negative meaning by the media.
  7. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from PastorMatt in Christian Day at the Ballpark   
    I credit my salvation to the guy who was holding up the John 3:16 sign at the Red Sox/ Mets World Series in '86. I kept wondering what it meant then finally for some reason it occurred to me that it was a bible verse so I looked it up in my mother's old KJV bible. That was probably the first clear presentation of the gospel I ever received. They banned that sign at Shea Stadium the following season.
  8. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from KAT in The Gap (Daniel 11:33-35)   
    John Darby did not "invent" dispensationlism he was just the first to lay it out in systematic form. The theology had been around in one form or another since 400 AD.

    The fact that it took this long to lay it out in systematic form does not suggest that it is heresy but rather that the church was not ready for the teaching yet and that people were still crawling out from the imposed spiritual darkness of the Catholic Church for 1,500 years. Jesus said that the Comforter would reveal "things to come" and would bring things to rememberance to the believer. Well, he had a lot of catching up to do. Don't forget, in Darby's time the Exquistion (the last of the four of them) was just coming to an end. The same argument about being no evidence of dispensationalism before Darby is similar to the argument used against KJV bible believers about the location of the pure word of God before 1611. It's the same line of reasoning. Anotherwards that if you couldn't find it that means it must not be true.

    Also, the fact that we are getting closer to the end and the day of the Lord and with Israel back in the land it only makes sense that these deeper truths of the scriptures would be revealed. Dispensationalism was a major reason the Jews were placed back in Palestine in 1918. Try studying that some time and you'll find it's true. So true that many so-called Christians are blaming C.I. Scofield for the mess in the Middle East right now.
  9. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from KAT in Are Pastoral Disqualifications Permanent?   
    This "husband of two wives" thing is crazy. I know of a Christian man who wanted to be a pastor but was told by a pastor that he would have to leave his saved wife whom he married not too long after being saved and go back to his unsaved wife he was married to while he was unsaved. If not then he was disqualified because he had "two living wives".

    The passage is clearly about polygamy.

    The gifts and callings of God are without repentance. If God calls a man to the pastorate then he is a pastor no matter what and this can't be taken away. He may place himself in a difficult position to be a pastor through certain behavior though. If a group of people don't care if the man was divorced and they want him as their pastor then he should be their pastor no matter what some IFB pharisee says.

    The "qualifications" which Paul spoke of were qualifications before society NOT God.
  10. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from Ukulelemike in Good Study Bible   
    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.
  11. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to John81 in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    The folks where they plan to open want to eat there. Just because corrupt politicians don't like biblical values doesn't mean the people of Chicago care about that when it comes to going out to eat.
  12. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to HappyChristian in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    Why would they lie? For the same reason so many do. Repeating it long enough causes people to believe it. I don't know what's going on for sure, but I have my doubts that things are as cut and dried as the original articles made it seem.
    ~~~

    I don't see where he's trying to compromise. I posted their recent statement - which is a reiteration of what they've always said, as a corporation. Cathey in no way backed down from his support of true marriage. CFA simply said they would not support political or social agendas. Meaning gay marriage. He participated, personally, in a pro-true marriage event and is being criticized by The Advocate. It isn't any of their business who he helps raise money for.

    Tempest in a teacup is what this is. The media blowing something up out of nothing to try and smear Cathey and CFA yet again, IMO.
  13. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to HappyChristian in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    And from Cathey via Mike Huckabee:

    I talked earlier today personally with Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick Fil-A about the new reports that Chick Fil-A had capitulated to demands of the supporters of same sex marriage. This is not true. The company continues to focus on the fair treatment of all of its customers and employees, but to end confusion gave me this
    statement:

    “There continues to be erroneous implications in the media that Chick-fil-A changed our practices and priorities in order to obtain permission for a new restaurant in Chicago. That is incorrect. Chick-fil-A made no such concessions, and we remain true to who we are and who we have been.”
  14. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to MatthewDiscipleOfGod in Faithful Baptist College?   
    He doesn't call himself a brider even though he says some would claim him that. There are many definitions when it comes to "Baptist Brider". I find nothing in his doctrine that would cause me to shy away from promoting the school. No one will ever agree 100% with the doctrine of a school. All the free schools I have looked into have much greater problems. Even the ones you have to pay for online I have found have bigger issues with when it comes to doctrine.
  15. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to swathdiver in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    Those were common terms a couple of decades ago, among others! Wait, they even had their own television show a few years back with the first word in it.
  16. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to JerryNumbers in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    I may be wrong, but it seems they're trying to make both sides very happy, talking out of both sides of their mouth, pulling a Bill Clinton.
  17. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from 20JC12 in Faithful Baptist College?   
    Bible believers have always existed, not Baptists. The mistake is made that Baptists have been around since Pentecost (or some say since John the Baptist) because Baptists generally make up the largest block of bible believing Christians. There may come a day where the Baptist label will not be used any more by bible believing Christians because of apostasy among Baptist churches.
  18. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from swathdiver in Chick-Fil-A Will No Longer Give Money To Anti-Gay Groups   
    They'll eventually cave like everyone else. They'll start feeling bad after enough Christians start quoting bible verses to them about how mean and unloving they are or that they need to sit and have a dialogue with the queers. Their conscience will falsely accuse them then it will be "Celebration Homo Day". (See, even some of you twitched when I used the words "queer" and "homo".)
  19. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from 20JC12 in Homeschooling Advice?   
    Make sure you know the laws of your state and county. Join one of these homeschooling groups too if you can. There is strength in numbers and when the state comes after you for something usually it helps when you are part of one of the associations.

    My brother and his wife homeschooled both their kids. They are now both cops in Roanoke, VA. The younger one did attend college and got his associates degree. It's a rough road to travel sometimes. Expect some people to give you a lot of grief about it at first. Especially any unsaved family members. Try to find some good tutors to help you with the studies that may be beyond your understanding. My brother and his wife did this by hiring a girl who lived across the street that was really good in math. They even got her to go to church with them and I think she eventually got saved.
  20. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to Steve Schwenke in Mark 16:9   
    Don't know of an author. The entire question posted in the OP is completely irrelevant. The implication seems to be from your opponent that since nobody quotes Mark 16:9 to defend a change from Saturday worship to Sunday worship that therefore the last 12 verses of Mark are not important and can therefore be removed from the text.

    What a stupid argument. Are we now dependent upon a "published work" to determine the validity of the text????
    "I trow not!"

    The real question is DID GOD INSPIRE AND PRESERVE the last 12 verses of Mark.

    John Burgon answered this conclusively in the 1800's. Out of 620 manuscripts that contain this passage (i.e. Mark 16), only TWO of them do not have the last 12 verses, and one of them has a gap big enough to fit between what would be Mark 16:8 in our Bible and Luke 1:1.

    Of course, those two manuscripts that delete this passage are none other than the notoriously corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (Vaticanus leaving the gap to indicate that there is at least some question regarding the authenticity of the passage.)

    Therefore, my conclusion is that this entire thread is irrelevant and meaningless.

    But since we are here....

    vs. 10-14 show us the unbelief of the disciples, for which Jesus Christ rebuked them
    vs. 15 - the Great Commission
    vs. 16 - shows that baptism is NOT part of salvation - very important verse that I use regularly in that debate
    vs. 17-18 - the signs for the Jewish believers, used throughout the book of Acts
    vs. 19 - the ascension of Christ
    vs. 20 - the obedience of the disciples

    Oh, yes, I would definitely say that this passage is an important passage, regardless of whether or not somebody published any type of book or article using ONE verse to defend ONE doctrine. What an absurd argument to make in defense of removing the entire passage!
  21. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from HappyChristian in Is it possible to renounce salvation?   
    What does the passage of scripture say? If we believe not he abides faithful. He cannot deny himself. If we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone then we are part of him. If he was to deny us in essence he'd be denying himself. The gifts and calling of God is without repentance.
  22. Thanks
    Wilchbla got a reaction from MatthewDiscipleOfGod in Kj Bible College   
    Where do you get this from? Do you have a scripture to back this statement? My bible says ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God. The context of the passage is in reference to copies too.
  23. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to Fixation in Kj Bible College   
    I would like to disagree with you on just one point. The Bible says in Psalms 12:7 -

    Ps 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

    While word for word there are differences, if we take God at what He said, contextually and in meaning you could translate the Bible into any language and not lose any of the purity of Scriptures.
  24. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to HappyChristian in Kj Bible College   
    I agree - Webster's 1828 is a great dictionary. And thank you, Jerry, for saying "many that read Greek" rather than everyone. It is true that many who read Greek believe that they are above others who cannot. But it isn't true of everyone. The dean of our college is one of the most humble men I've ever met (I used to be his teacher, anon many years ago, so I've known him most of his life). I also worked for Joe Boyd (he was an evangelist who trained preacher boys for many years) for a few years. He actually read a Greek New Testament often. And I don't remember him ever correcting the KJB. Nor boasting about knowing Greek (I found out about the Greek NT from someone who saw him - he never mentioned it).
  25. Thanks
    Wilchbla reacted to 2Tim215 in Kj Bible College   
    In the end it's faith. Do you trust that God preserved His Word? We can never know the original meaning nor why the translators chose that particular meaning - but we do know God promised to preserve His Word and even though He did do just that we still read it wrong sometimes and come up with our own translation to suit our own ends from His preserved Word. Must take dogs and wife to beach - will continue later.
×
×
  • Create New...