Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Seth Doty

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Posts

    803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in Where do we draw the line for IFB?   
    I would suggest you look at his teachings more carefully. He teaches that the word of God in the original greek and hebrew was/is corrupted & or lost, that the KJV translators were inspired, that some new revelation was given in the KJV, and that only the KJV is valid. By definition that is re-inspiration. In contrast a Non-ruckmanite KJVO position would be that the word of God in the greek and hebrew is not and never has been lost, and that the KJV is the only available accurate translation of  the proper texts in the English language. Therefore the the KJV is indeed inspired, but it is inspired because it is the preserved word of God translated into english, not because it is somehow superior to that which it was translated from.
  2. Thanks
    Seth Doty reacted to PastorMatt in Welcome Our New Moderators   
    Thank you so much for all of you that applied to be a moderator. Unfortunately we could not choose everyone that applied. The staff of Online Baptist has reviewed all of the applicants and has selected three new moderators. If you did not get chosen, you will be strongly considered when we add more staff in the future.
    Ukulelemike OLD fashioned preacher Salyan Again thank you to all that applied, your involvement here blesses many.
     
    Please join me in welcoming these 3 members to the staff of OB. 
  3. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from KAT in Reply to a Schaap Supporter   
    I watched that video too and it certainly contained a lot of garbage. Some of it can indeed be dismissed as just personal opinion but some of it is stated as if it is fact too. Beside the fact that his projection of Mary as an "older" lady is pretty far fetched given that biblically we know Mary had at least seven children counting Jesus, Schaap also goes pretty far in trash talking Joseph when there is zero scriptural basis for doing so. He condemns Joseph for being minded to "put mary away privily" when he found out she was pregnant prior to their marriage. He talks as if this was somehow evidence that Joseph wasn't really a very good guy and didn't love mary very much. Nevermind the fact that Matthew 1:19 says that he was "a just man" and "not willing to make her a public example". Also nevermind that when the angel appeared to Joseph to tell him it was ok to take her as his wife the angel said "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife", showing that he wasn't exactly getting "rid" of her as schaap seems to be implying but was doing it because he feared God and believed it was the right thing to do. Schaap then goes on to say(around 6:25) that Jesus grew up in a "disfunctional family", a home of strife and contention, and that Mary was the only one in the family who believed he was God. While his brothers truly did not believe in him according to the scriptures we have no record of what his sisters believed one way or another and from the fact that Joseph believed the angel it is quite safe to assume that Joseph did indeed believe Christ was God.Schaap is qualifying some of this completely unsupported and oddball stuff as opinion but is also presenting a lot of it as if it is fact. Whew, it has been a while since I have listened to hyles anderson style preaching, I had almost forgotten how shallow on substance, careless with truth, and big on opinion and entertainment much of it is.


    Even if you don't think anything in that crosses a line into "real heresy", at the very least building such an elaborate and lengthy story without any basis in the scriptures is taking great liberties with the truth and God's church.

    I mean if you look at the biblical model:

    "1 Timothy 3:2-5 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) "

    You will see a signification portion of the qualifications have to do with being a careful person not likely to lead anyone wrong either with word or example. Frankly from behind the pulpit is a poor place to launch an extensive and dubious story line without scriptural basis. If such an extensive story line cannot be supported by scripture then what is the point of presenting it from the pulpit at all? Does a lengthy personal opinion on biblical matters without any scripture to back it up matter much? Way to many preachers seem to forget that they are standing behind th pulpit to teach people Gods word not to speculate and make stuff up. About the only reason I can think of to present such a story is to entertain and tell people something they probably haven't heard before. I don't think that is very worthwhile at the best, and at the worst it is pretty shameful. See, this kind of thing where a lot of hyles anderson style preachers loose credibility. On the one hand many are very big on talking about how they are "Gods man" and so forth, but when you hear them preach rather than honoring the word of God and acting like a man of God they do it a disservice by a great amount of unfounded speculation. A man of God's job is to bring the word of GOD to the people. When preachers are in the habit of generously mixing in their completely unfounded opinions with the word of God it is a serious red flag. After watching that video, ask yourself seriously, doesn't it come across more as a man preaching his opinions and mentioning the word of God occasionally rather than a man preaching the word of God and occasionally giving an opinion?

    I certainly don't expect preachers to be perfect, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect them to preach Gods word rather than their baseless opinions.

    "Matthew 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."
  4. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from Salyan in Reply to a Pastor About My Warning of Lancaster's Music   
    I personally find that I agree with him about 95% of the time, and of the remaining 5% or so about half the time I disagree and the other half of the time I neither agree or disagree. That is about as much as I agree with anybody and a lot more often than I agree with most. As far as "trashing "good" schools" or Cloud having an "itchy trigger finger" that is always going to be a matter of opinion. Myself I would much rather see people overwarned than underwarned. It might also have to do with a difference in perspective about how "drastic" an action putting a warning out is. Some take it as if giving a warning is a drastic last ditch measure akin to calling someone a heretic, but to me warnings like this are merely an alert to make sure people are not letting the ship drift off course without realizing it. The earlier a change in course is detected the easier it is to right it. If I hear a warning or a caution from anyone whose opinions I consider to frequently be worthwhile(be that Cloud or someone else) about a given school, ministry or what have you I don't automatically reject that ministry or school based on that, but I do tend to be very cautious about it. If they are squarely in the right and desiring to stay on course then the extra scrutiny doesn't hurt them a bit. What does hurt is when some ministry has a good name but has been drifting off course and people get drawn into that current without even realizing what is happening.
  5. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from heartstrings in Who Is Your Favorite Pastor Among John Piper, John Macarthur, Max Lucado, Joshua Harris, Aiden Tozer, And Charles Spurgeon. Why?   
    It isn't necessarily "wrong" but you should be careful. If you read after people with some unbiblical doctrines they can influence you in those areas sometimes without you even realizing it.
  6. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from MatthewDiscipleOfGod in Who Is Your Favorite Pastor Among John Piper, John Macarthur, Max Lucado, Joshua Harris, Aiden Tozer, And Charles Spurgeon. Why?   
    It isn't necessarily "wrong" but you should be careful. If you read after people with some unbiblical doctrines they can influence you in those areas sometimes without you even realizing it.
  7. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in Who Is Your Favorite Pastor Among John Piper, John Macarthur, Max Lucado, Joshua Harris, Aiden Tozer, And Charles Spurgeon. Why?   
    It isn't necessarily "wrong" but you should be careful. If you read after people with some unbiblical doctrines they can influence you in those areas sometimes without you even realizing it.
  8. Strongly Disagree
    Seth Doty got a reaction from Martyr_4_FutureJoy in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    Unless I am mistaken you have to sign up to get those e-mails. Since that is the case the only people that get the "warnings" are those who have at least some interest in what cloud has to say at least some of the time. It is just a person giving his opinion and you may or may not agree with him on any particular issue. How many people do or do not value his opinion or listen to him has nothing to do with anything strictly speaking. I get the impression your biggest problem with it is that cloud has a fairly wide audience and therefore you seem to think he should be more careful about expressing his opinions. To me though these kind of things are just his opinions which people can take or leave as they see fit.
  9. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from HappyChristian in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    Unless I am mistaken you have to sign up to get those e-mails. Since that is the case the only people that get the "warnings" are those who have at least some interest in what cloud has to say at least some of the time. It is just a person giving his opinion and you may or may not agree with him on any particular issue. How many people do or do not value his opinion or listen to him has nothing to do with anything strictly speaking. I get the impression your biggest problem with it is that cloud has a fairly wide audience and therefore you seem to think he should be more careful about expressing his opinions. To me though these kind of things are just his opinions which people can take or leave as they see fit.
  10. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from HappyChristian in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    You know I think we probably agree 98% of the time but I just don't see that. That kind of thinking is one of the things that eventually can lead to pastors going astray. If they are only exposed to people that either say they are wonderful or horrible it can become a temptation to believe the people who say they are wonderful and ignore all criticism. I have seen pastors like that and I am sure you have too. If someone says they consider so and so to still be a good pastor but think they have a fault in a given area what is the great harm in that? We say and believe pastors are just men and fallible so what is the problem with publicly naming names and saying you think so and so is wrong in a given area? You may or may not agree on a particular issue but why is it necessary to sweep all disagreements under the rug and publicly pretend that there is no disagreement until things get so bad they explode?

    This is not referring to this situation in particular as I do not and never have read the "sword of the Lord" nor do I really know that "crowd" and thus have no opinion one way or another. More of a general observation.
  11. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from HappyChristian in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    Obviously she is a little upset because she feels like her husband was disrespected. Perfectly normal reaction. Your out of line and your accusations are foolish. Chill. :coffee2:
  12. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from HappyChristian in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    I don't know why this should be a problem. If the man is willing to speak there than that is a public thing and if cloud or anyone else does or doesn't like that they are free to say so. It is that pastors call about whether or not to preach there, it is clouds call about whether or not to condemn it, and anyone can make their own call about whether or not such a thing matters to them. No big deal.
  13. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    You know I think we probably agree 98% of the time but I just don't see that. That kind of thinking is one of the things that eventually can lead to pastors going astray. If they are only exposed to people that either say they are wonderful or horrible it can become a temptation to believe the people who say they are wonderful and ignore all criticism. I have seen pastors like that and I am sure you have too. If someone says they consider so and so to still be a good pastor but think they have a fault in a given area what is the great harm in that? We say and believe pastors are just men and fallible so what is the problem with publicly naming names and saying you think so and so is wrong in a given area? You may or may not agree on a particular issue but why is it necessary to sweep all disagreements under the rug and publicly pretend that there is no disagreement until things get so bad they explode?

    This is not referring to this situation in particular as I do not and never have read the "sword of the Lord" nor do I really know that "crowd" and thus have no opinion one way or another. More of a general observation.
  14. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    I don't know why this should be a problem. If the man is willing to speak there than that is a public thing and if cloud or anyone else does or doesn't like that they are free to say so. It is that pastors call about whether or not to preach there, it is clouds call about whether or not to condemn it, and anyone can make their own call about whether or not such a thing matters to them. No big deal.
  15. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from Kitagrl in David Cloud Sword Of The Lord Article   
    Obviously she is a little upset because she feels like her husband was disrespected. Perfectly normal reaction. Your out of line and your accusations are foolish. Chill. :coffee2:
  16. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in Majesty Music And Getty   
    I understand that to a point, but realistically people will justify just about anything they want to do in one way or another.
  17. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from HappyChristian in Pants   
    Regardless of your opinion on the subject probably somewhere around 40-50%(though the % continues to shrink) of IFB's think it is either outright wrong or at the least inadvisable. Given that there is no disagreement at all about whether or not it is proper for a lady to wear a dress if it is making a mountain out of nothing then why would someone not defer in this area? Things that are truly "nothing" do not result in significant disagreements because one side or the other simply does not care and is willing to defer to the other. On this issue though deference is rarely shown because one side thinks it is wrong or at the least inadvisable and the other side views it as a convenience issue that they don't want to give up.
  18. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from P_Bear141 in Tithing   
    Well if your as outspoken with your opinions on the subject at your church as you are on this forum it is little wonder he knows. Perhaps he merely means he does not count or generally see who gives what in the offerings. Many pastors try to avoid that for obvious reasons when possible. Makes it easier on them and on others as well.
  19. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from PastorMatt in Tithing   
    Well if your as outspoken with your opinions on the subject at your church as you are on this forum it is little wonder he knows. Perhaps he merely means he does not count or generally see who gives what in the offerings. Many pastors try to avoid that for obvious reasons when possible. Makes it easier on them and on others as well.
  20. Thanks
    Seth Doty reacted to John81 in Why Ron Paul's Big Wins In Maine And Nevada Matter   
    America these days reminds me so much of Israel in the Old Testament. Just as the Jews turned away from God and were stricken with one wicked leader after another, so I can see the same thing happening in America.
  21. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from heartstrings in What Do You Think Of ...   
    Good post. Concerning the OP God did not send his son to die for mankind in order to get glory. Christ DID die for the "happiness" of man. That is not humanism it is bible. John 3:16 should prove that as do many other scriptures. Now a Christian should care about God's glory and glorifying God but that is a product of loving God not the beginning and the end of all things. Look at how God reasons with sinners throughout the scriptures? How often does he say just "worship me because I am glorious and I deserve it and that settles it." Is that true? Of course, but God generally reasons with mankind by saying something along the lines of "if you obey my words it will go well with you, I will bless you and give you joy. If you don't you will be miserable and will suffer for it". Now if God says that it seems rather obvious that there is nothing wrong with that approach. The scriptures say the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and if a person hears and believes Gods warnings and promises it doesn't matter in the least how interested they are in Gods glory at that point and how much is just a genuine fear and understanding of what will happen if they don't. Now, if they truly believe and trust in God their heart will be changed and they will begin to care more and more about honoring and glorifying God as they grow and learn to love him more, but that doesn't change the fact that God loves mankind, and mankind meant enough to God that a holy God was willing to send his son to become sin for us in order to save us. That had everything to do with love and nothing to do with glory even though glory is one of the byproducts.

    The problem comes not when people come to God out of a fear of what will happen if they don't, but when they don't really come to God at all because they were not afraid ENOUGH to really turn to God. All that happened is they got a little scared and "trusted" God as a "just in case" sort of thing rather than out of a genuine and serious fear of the Lord. As a result they never do grow and they never do care about honoring God because it never was truly and seriously real to them. It was a "what if" situation to them, like when people can be scared or get tense when watching a war movie. That is a feeling, but not really the same feeling as actually hearing real bullets go by. In order to have their heart in a position to be saved a person must be hearing "real bullets" go by rather than just watching it in a movie metaphorically speaking.
  22. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from heartstrings in God's Need To Be Worshiped?   
    No, God does not "need" to be worshiped, but he desires it. It is evident that that an eternal God who is from everlasting to everlasting cannot "need" anyone or anything else outside of himself. As for "whose benefit" worshiping God is for, it is beneficial both to God and to man and produces joy on both ends. As to why we are commanded to worship him it comes down to the fact that he is the only one worthy of worship. Also as we worship God in spirit and in truth in many ways we become more like him and that also produces joy on both ends. After all what did God say when he created man? He created man to be in his image and in his likeness right? Also what does the Holy Spirit try to do in the lives of believers after they turn to Christ? Conform them into Christs image right? I think that it is pretty safe to say that that is Gods goal for man.

    From this point on there frequently comes a major basic belief split depending if one has calvinist leanings or is apposed to that teaching.

    A Calvinist might say that God did this just because he felt like it, which in a sense is true, but Calvinists ultimately tend to feel that God does not really care about his creation he simply cares about himself. A Calvinist's logic is basically when you boil it all down that God's purposes, plans, and actions are frequently what we would call selfish, evil, and so forth if anyone else did them, but because God is God and the creator he can do those kind of things and they are actually good just because he has the right to do them.

    Now, someone like myself who strongly apposes that doctrine does not tend to believe that God has one basic set of rules he lives by and a totally different set of rules for everyone else. Obviously there are a handful of things that it is only right for God to do(such as receive worship) but those things tend to be because God is completely perfect, Holy, and worthy while we are not. By and large I believe the rules God gives us are who he is himself. They are his character. I do not believe God is REALLY the sort of being that would be considered overall to be selfish, twisted, and downright evil if he was anyone but God and that it is ok for him to do that and be that way simply because he is God. NO. That is a very wrong perspective of who God is, and it is why I feel Calvinism is either solid blasphemy or coming very close to it. It isn't about what God has a "right" to do, it is about who he IS. Who he IS determines what he does and who he IS is revealed in scripture. I believe God does not want us to be selfish because he is not selfish, I believe God wants us to speak the truth because he is truth, I believe he wants us to be kind because he is kind. He desires to conform us into his image and make us like him. God is light and in him is no darkness at all. There is a reason why the law written in a mans heart tells him that God as pictured by Calvinism would be evil and not worth serving, creator or not. Now of course God's ways are higher than man's ways and we may not always understand everything he does, but we can trust him because we know his character and we know he is good, and does not merely regard mankind as a plaything to be raised up or smashed at whim just because he "can".

    I know this wasn't about Calvinism per se but it was a question about who God is and why he does what he does and that question is right at the root of Calvinism vs. the biblical view of God.
  23. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from JerryNumbers in God's Need To Be Worshiped?   
    No, God does not "need" to be worshiped, but he desires it. It is evident that that an eternal God who is from everlasting to everlasting cannot "need" anyone or anything else outside of himself. As for "whose benefit" worshiping God is for, it is beneficial both to God and to man and produces joy on both ends. As to why we are commanded to worship him it comes down to the fact that he is the only one worthy of worship. Also as we worship God in spirit and in truth in many ways we become more like him and that also produces joy on both ends. After all what did God say when he created man? He created man to be in his image and in his likeness right? Also what does the Holy Spirit try to do in the lives of believers after they turn to Christ? Conform them into Christs image right? I think that it is pretty safe to say that that is Gods goal for man.

    From this point on there frequently comes a major basic belief split depending if one has calvinist leanings or is apposed to that teaching.

    A Calvinist might say that God did this just because he felt like it, which in a sense is true, but Calvinists ultimately tend to feel that God does not really care about his creation he simply cares about himself. A Calvinist's logic is basically when you boil it all down that God's purposes, plans, and actions are frequently what we would call selfish, evil, and so forth if anyone else did them, but because God is God and the creator he can do those kind of things and they are actually good just because he has the right to do them.

    Now, someone like myself who strongly apposes that doctrine does not tend to believe that God has one basic set of rules he lives by and a totally different set of rules for everyone else. Obviously there are a handful of things that it is only right for God to do(such as receive worship) but those things tend to be because God is completely perfect, Holy, and worthy while we are not. By and large I believe the rules God gives us are who he is himself. They are his character. I do not believe God is REALLY the sort of being that would be considered overall to be selfish, twisted, and downright evil if he was anyone but God and that it is ok for him to do that and be that way simply because he is God. NO. That is a very wrong perspective of who God is, and it is why I feel Calvinism is either solid blasphemy or coming very close to it. It isn't about what God has a "right" to do, it is about who he IS. Who he IS determines what he does and who he IS is revealed in scripture. I believe God does not want us to be selfish because he is not selfish, I believe God wants us to speak the truth because he is truth, I believe he wants us to be kind because he is kind. He desires to conform us into his image and make us like him. God is light and in him is no darkness at all. There is a reason why the law written in a mans heart tells him that God as pictured by Calvinism would be evil and not worth serving, creator or not. Now of course God's ways are higher than man's ways and we may not always understand everything he does, but we can trust him because we know his character and we know he is good, and does not merely regard mankind as a plaything to be raised up or smashed at whim just because he "can".

    I know this wasn't about Calvinism per se but it was a question about who God is and why he does what he does and that question is right at the root of Calvinism vs. the biblical view of God.
  24. Thanks
    Seth Doty reacted to Kitagrl in Divorce, Remarriage And Repentance?   
    I think it is a good question. We have had to figure that one out too. It kind of boils down to, is remarriage a single act of adultery, or is it a continuous act? For one thing, once a person is married, would God want yet another divorce? We know the answer is no. So that means you should remain as you are. Which makes me think its a one-time adultery Are divorced/remarried people supposed to be church disciplined? No...which means, again, its probably a one-time adultery.

    Actually my feeling is that God understands it much better than we do. We feel that divorce and remarriage is the modern day equivalent of polygamy. God sees each marriage as "marriage". God said not to multiply wives...every time in the OT when a man had several wives, he also had several problems! Nothing good ever came from multiple wives. God did allow it, but did not bless it. In the NT, He commands us to stay with our spouse...and says pastors and deacons should not be divorced...husband of ONE wife....and if its true that divorce/remarriage is similar to polygamy in God's eyes, then that furthers the idea of a pastor or deacon not being divorced. On the other hand (and the good news) is that if divorce/remarriage is similar to polygamy in God's eyes, then He can still use people like this! Obviously people who have been divorced and remarried have their own sets of problems...generally child support and custody issues, sometimes nasty ex's....and other issues. It kind of brings about its own "punishment" if you will, just like any other poor life decisions.

    However I do not believe God looks on a remarried person as living in sin. I believe its more like...well...you shouldn't have remarried. But now you did. So now you need to go on from here and do the right thing and serve God. Be repentant for not seeking God in your life decisions....but repenting doesn't mean breaking yet another marriage that God now sees you in.

    Hope that makes sense! It doesn't really mean "Oh its just one sin, I can get remarried"....on the other hand...God used many polygamists...they just received the "fruit" of their decisions in some pretty miserable ways. And God's only punishment is that you can't be a pastor or deacon.

    Homosexuality on the other hand is considered an abomination to God and something that only people basically given over to the devil do. I know that's horrible to have to say, but its in the Bible. Marriage is natural...homosexuality is definitely NOT natural.
  25. Thanks
    Seth Doty got a reaction from sandimat in new years resolution   
    I always found it rather humorous in a not so funny sort of way that the rainbow has been adopted as a symbol of a evil lifestyle considering what God created it for according to the scriptures. Given that the worldwide flood was sent to destroy man for the utter corruption man as a whole had given himself up to, and given that God, according to the scriptures, created the rainbow as a visible covenant that he would not again destroy the earth by flood it always seemed funny to me that they would chose it as their symbol and wave their rainbow banners in their parades. Sort of like they are unconsciously "reminding" God that he promised not to destroy the whole earth again with a flood for their utter corruption. They failed to read the fine print though, no more worldwide floods, judgement will eventually come as worldwide fire instead...
×
×
  • Create New...