2Tim215

Praying

Thanks all - still in state of terrified confused panic - it'll sink in eventually.

I am confused on your post is 15 years of marriage you celebrate and didn't have children before or your celebrating 15 years and having another ? My husband and I been married almost 10 and we have not scored yet.

14 yrs and first one .

After 14 yrs of marriage I would have thought that I was past the danger, but noooooo, God had other plans (thanks for letting me know God!), So I was woken up at 2 this morning with "you are going to be a daddy" well, no sleep after that! (and it's her birthday day!!!) So we need all the prayers I can get now. Business needs to bring in a reliable income now or a good job would be on top of that list being the pragmatic person I am.

Thanks All

I know of two Baptist churches that I attended for a time that went through this. The one pastor demanded 60k a year plus the house with all expenses paid. This was back in '95 so that was a pretty good clip. The other church which was relatively small and poor couldn't find a pastor for a long time because they couldn't afford the outrageous salaries they wanted. The one pastor who'd recently graduated from Hyles-Anderson would only preach on Sunday morning until he got the pay he wanted. The last I heard this church was still looking for a pastor.

That's just wrong. I know men here in SA that drive 400 kms to preach for free! That go out every Saturday to street preach and give out tracts. I would happily preach if my needs were met, not my wants. As a bladesmith and artist blacksmith I can work after hours for extra money. I think the problem is that there was a short period of time where churches were full and pastors could get positions that offered a building and a "manse" and it became an expected thing. My brother in law is a Presbyterian pastor and for a long time suffered because they have this thing - you can be "called" by a church or the church can offer you a contract. In the beginning he was given a contract and had to preach and do as the elders and deacons commanded, when he refused to compromise they told him that though they could do nothing now, he better start looking for another "job" as they would not renew his contract. He has recently been "called" by another Presy church - this means that he can stay or go as he is led by the Lord and and the church has no say in the matter. He can preach the Word and though the elders and deacons have a say, it holds no weight in the sense that they can fire him. He now has a nice big church with generally good people and a house next to the church - but it took ten yrs of hard work and staying true to his calling.

What has it come to when churches control the pastors preaching by tightening the purse strings? And pastors must be forced into positions where they must choose to compromise or not by the elders if they want to feed there family?

It's the same with the youth of today, they want dads house and car right after getting there first pay check yet don't want to work the 20 yrs it took for dad to get the nice house and car.

Brother, if God has called you, you will know it as sure as your salvation.
If God has called you, then my suggestion is as follows:
Pack up and move to an area where there is a really good Bible-Believing church where you can grow and learn. And then see if doors don't begin to open.
We are living in the days of Amos 8:11-12. If there is not a good church near you now, the chances of one starting are very slim. But if you leave, God may send someone in there to start one.

I am sure you can list many reasons why it would be impossible for you to move, but I believe the local church is what God ordained for us to support in this age, and it therefore is our DUTY to find one and be a part of it - regardless of loss, situation, etc. And don't worry - I would not give you this advice if I have not already done so.....tough choices, but Christ always comes first - ahead of money, jobs, family, extended family, mom, dad, brothers, sisters, friends, etc.

I am sure that if you follow this advice, God's will for your life will become more clear through the preaching and teaching of the Bible, and through actively participating in the ministries of the church.

My purpose here is not to be mean or cold-hearted, but rather to help.

In Christ,

My wife (god bless her strength) and I did exactly that. Sold everything, packed what was left in the backie (truck to you in the USA) and moved - don't quite know what happened but it's a long story full of bitternes and disenchantment and lots of anger on my side so after 18 months I decided that enough was enough and we moved back home to the support structure of family to start over again.

Faith is not always rewarded like some think and teach that it will be. I am mature enough to know that the problem was not God but me, so we'll leave it at that for now.

How about the other side of the picture. I have approached many "missionary" organizations in the past and because I don't go to a church as the closest IFB church that I trust is over 950 kms away and they only have 20-30 people on a good Sunday, I am not an "acceptable" candidate for missions work. I have been to most of the churches here in my town and their doctrine is so far off I usually end up walking out during the service.I do not have a trust fund, I do not believe in asking for money and God hasn't supplied as yet so I have stopped trying. Many a young man has been called and short of God Himself depositing money into their bank account are unable to afford to study or enter the ministry. Many churches these days I find are tight fisted with their funds and will usually only assist those who have been involved in the church for some time. You can't really blame them though as many have abused the trust placed in them over the years.

I agree that SFIC is a bit strong in his view concerning "deputation" and "begging" for assistance, but is he wrong concerning the faith issue? Not in my opinion. Too many pastors, missionaries and others doing church work are in it for the wrong reasons and are not called and shouldn't be doing it. They cause more harm than good. So if God doesn't provide then you can be sure that you shouldn't be there because if He has called you He WILL make a way. He didn't make a way for me so I have to believe that my "calling" was my desire and not His will for me. This is just my opinion from my own personal experience. So without some form of making it known that God has called a young man into the ministry how else are they to proceed?

Calvary, excellent exposition, well laid out. Can't get better than that. It's as plain as day.

For the most part I agreed with your post, except for the interpretation of Hosea 4:11.

If it is any consolation, at one time I thought that verse was about drunkenness, but a close study of it and the word "tirosh" caused me to rethink my thinking. lol

Had a closer look and agree with your assessment. With the amount of wine, strong drink, adultery, etc, etc in the Bible with Gods chosen people, one can't but wonder why He hasn't destroyed us all yet.

Sorry 2Tim, but I have to disagree with you on your interpretation of Hosea 4:11

Hosea 4:11 is not speaking of drunkenness at all. It is speaking of the heart turning toward something other than God.

In Hosea, the heart is turned from God and to whoredom, wine, and new wine.

New wine in that verse is tiroshe, which is always interpreted as a grape juice and not as an alcohol.

I stand corrected.

Children, like dogs (oooooh, think I might upset a few with that) need to learn boundaries. I train both the same way. The RULE OF THREE. Once, twice - then the applicable punishment. Most times they stop at two :knuppel:

@ 1 Tim.

Brother, I don't think God has commanded any one to drink booze. But grape juice and strong drink ain't the same thing.

You said: The terms wine and strong drink often mean grape juice, fermented grape juice (alcohol) and have also been used to describe wine that has been boiled down into a syrup that was later mixed with water.

I agree that grape juice was reduced to a paste, similiar to our frozen juices, but not frozen of course, but it was stored that way. And then mixed with water to make it juice again.But I don't think your correct by saying that the terms wine and strong drink often mean grape juice. Not one of the 20 verses where the phrase "strong drink" appears speaks of grape juice. The bible won't support that.

God bless,
calvary

I disagree. Many verses that use the term "wine" mean alcohol. I proved that in my earlier post. So I will prove it again.

Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; - wine as alcohol.

1Ti 5:23 Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities. - do you think that Paul would condone that Timothy drink alcohol for medicinal purposes? If this one doesn't prove it then the next few should.

Hos 4:11 Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart. Here wine and "new wine" are alcoholic.

Jer 23:9 Mine heart within me is broken because of the prophets; all my bones shake; I am like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine hath overcome, because of the LORD, and because of the words of his holiness. Wine as alcohol.

Isa 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. Here sweet wine means alcohol.

Ecc 9:7 Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works. Is this alcoholic wine or juice of the grape? In context with God accepting the drinking of it with a merry heart?

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. Would the priest of the most high God give out alcoholic wine?
Gen 14:19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
Gen 14:20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
He then blesses Abram "of the most high God" - and then praises God - "blessed be the most high God" so is this alcohol or juice?

Num 15:7 And for a drink offering thou shalt offer the third part of an hin of wine, for a sweet savour unto the LORD. Is this "sweet savour" unto God alcoholic wine or juice?

Num 28:7 And the drink offering thereof shall be the fourth part of an hin for the one lamb: in the holy place shalt thou cause the strong wine to be poured unto the LORD for a drink offering. Here strong wine is an offering to God - alcohol or concentrated juice?

Jdg 9:13 And the vine said unto them, Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? Is God cheered by alcohol here?

My question is this: If wine can mean both alcohol and juice of the grape in the bible why can not the term "strong drink" mean both alcohol and concentrated juice?

If we are to believe that both the terms "wine" and "strong drink" meant alcohol then there are too many verses that condone the use of one or the other and strictly forbid one or the other. This would be a contradiction in the Word of God. So either we trust that the character of God is to be trusted when understanding a term used or we don't. If God allows the use of alcoholic wine then that means that we can drink alcohol. By this reasoning beer is 3 -5 % alcohol and if wine was 14% in those days as some "experts" say, then I can have at least 3 beers a day!! Or a glass of table wine!!

So do we trust the character of God or "MAN'S" interpretation of GODS WORD!! We are KJV BIBLE BELIEVING BAPTISTS and if we believe that the KJV bible is true, inspired by God and that God does not lie nor contradict Himself then we HAVE to interprate these terms in light of His character. The problem with the church these days is that the Word is interpretated to suit man and most modern commentaries reflect this!!
Is this the road us IFB's are going to take now? Are we going to trust the words of man or the Word of God? Do we study the Word of God with the guidance of His Holy Spirit or do we study the commentaries of man with the guidance of "lets not upset the apple cart"?

Do we really believe that God would allow the consumption of alcohol when in some even a little cuases harm? Is it His "permissive" will for us to drink alcohol?
Possibly, but I do not believe that the Word reflects this.

There's a difference between spanking and beating. Good parents spank in love, bad parents beat out of anger, frustration or just pure vindictiveness. I think that those that punish children out of love and discipline with the right reasons are few and far between. So I suppose that's why we also have laws that forbid corporal punishment. Protect the children and all that. I'm one of those that was spanked alot, single Christian mom with three kids. Most time out of love, others just pure frustration. I rebelled badly but like the bible says "Pro 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."

My point was to direct Rick to the possible reason for the disparity in Deut. 14 with his OP. Beer to me is strong drink. I imagine one can of it would put me in a great stupor, drunk and unable to function. I'm not sure why you would think strong drink is equal to grape juice, That doesn't make any sense to me at all.

God bless,
calvary

If you read my above post (# 23) explaining my reasoning you would understand. I will not and can not accept God commanding the drinking of alcohol when so many verses strongly refute this. I will go as far as His possible permitting, but not commanding. It goes against the very character of God.

I am sorry, but one mans opinion is not enough to convince me that "strong drink" means beer. You can not take a Babylonian word and a similar Hebrew word and combine them and make beer out them. If we truly believe that the KJ is the true inspired Word of God then the word beer would have been used. They knew what beer was when they wrote the KJV 1611. I still stand on my previous post that strong drink here meant concentrated grape juice and that it always comes back to context.
Any one that accepts this disregards the character of God.

The terms wine and strong drink often mean grape juice, fermented grape juice (alcohol) and have also been used to describe wine that has been boiled down into a syrup that was later mixed with water. I do not think that God was endorsing alcohol in this verse, that would contradict Him and we know that is not the case. It is important to always look at the context of the verse. If we look at that verse in Deut 14 we need to consider the nature of God and use that as a guideline for understanding the meaning the word was used in. God does not endorse sin, so would not condone alcohol in a situation where "thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household," I believe the word means the boiled down syrupy wine that would be made after the harvest as a drink that does not corrupt, much like our fruit juice mixes today.

Another example is the term "wine" used in my previous post in 1 Tim 3 and Tit 1. If we look closely at the context we see that a bishop and deacon are to be moderate in there behavior. It is taught that wine here implies alcohol but I believe that this is not the case. Romans and wealthy citizens of the period (and today) would live lives of largess, excessive binging at feasts and this excess often took the form at feasts of drinking much wine. I believe that the verse teaches that moderation must be taken in all aspects of a leaders life and in the lives of believers as this set them apart from the world where excess is the norm to fill empty lives.

Why do I believe this?

Because the bible is not for confusion and its author - God - is not the author of confusion (1 Cor 14: 33). And if we are told that 1 Tim 3:8 that a deacon must not be given to "much" wine and in 1 Tim 3 and Tit 1 that a bishop not be "given" to wine it implies that some is still alright. In none of these verses does it outright forbid it. We know that the bible is clear concerning things we must do and must not do.

Here is an example of what I mean:

1Pe 4:2 That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
1Pe 4:3 For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
1Pe 4:4 Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:
Note that this excessive behavior seemed to be the norm amongst gentiles and by their moderation they publicly separated themselves.

I did a word search on the term "strong drink" and there are too many to post yet in most of them where the term implies alcohol the context is of sin or wacky behavior. For example:

Isa 29:9 Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink.

Isa 28:7 But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
The context is sin.

Pro 20:1 Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.
Both mean alcohol

Isa 5:11 Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!
But you will note that in the above verse it is wine that inflames them.


Deu 29:5 And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot.
Deu 29:6 Ye have not eaten bread, neither have ye drunk wine or strong drink: that ye might know that I am the LORD your God.
Here it does not mean alcohol as there were no grapes to tend and harvest during their wanderings. This would have been the normal juice or concentrated juice of the grape.

I hope that in my convoluted manner I have managed to show that both words can mean both alcohol and juice. That it is always important to study the context and ALWAYS hold the NATURE and CHARACTER of God to the verse in question. He is the light brings forth understanding and the "spirit level" that you use to measure what is straight and true if you will.

1 Tim 115, I have never heard of Acts 15: 29 "used to preclude Christians from tithing" - can't even see how anyone would get it in the verse. But to answer the question - "Can this verse, Acts 15:29, apply to Gentiles who are not in Asia? Would it apply to us Gentiles in the West?"

Yes it does.

My reasoning: lets look at the verse and the context of the chapter.

The context of the chapter starts off with works based salvation versus salvation through faith alone, also a division was growing between the newly saved Jews who were struggling to reconcile the old way of works with this new covenant of faith with Christ and the gentiles that practiced "barbaric" rites involving strangled sacrifices, blood etc who were also struggling to leave their old ways and not mix it in with their new faith. These two groups were now in this together - Jews and gentiles in one faith, one church -the same God (have you ever noticed that auto correct gives Jews a capital J yet gentiles is always a small g - we don't even get a capital! ) .
The Jews were telling the gentiles that they had to be circumcised, etc (vrs 3), they all had a meeting and resolved this by vrs 15. It is then decided that a letter must be written where this decisions be made know to the gentile church (vrs 23 - the letter / vrs 24 - the decision). In this letter they tell them that they are sending someone to tell them the letter - why? Added weight to the importance of the message. What message? VRS 29!! Why? That they must now turn from their old ways where they practiced strangled sacrifices, offered meat to idols, practiced sex rites with temple prostitutes and blood offerings, etc.

The chapter deals with both Jews and gentiles, the new church, that faith in Christ is the ONLY way to salvation and most importantly - the false doctrines being brought in by both Jew and gentile. The Jew = works based salvation. The gentile = shamanic and animistic practices they would not let go of.

Is this applicable in the "west" - yes!! There are a number of quasi Christian churches here in SA where tribal practices have been incorporated into the church and also a few charismatic African churches that have brought their tribal practices back in. Ancestral worship, the sacrificing of animals, etc - even some very sick sexual practices have started surfacing. This is not only here but in many places where the background is tribal or even some modern super spiritual churches that incorporate angels and quasi spiritualism.

Some examples where this has gone too far: Rastafarian, Zionists, Catholic even Voodoo has some bible in there somewhere.

It is always important to look at a verse in this manner:

Who was it written too?
Why was it written?
When was it written?
Who wrote it?
In what context was it written?

Vrs 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Also, very NB!! How was it written? What manner of speech and the manner it follows itself. An example. They are told in the above verse that they must abstain from these things. Yet who was Paul (and the sent disciples) speaking to? Saved believers. How do we know this? The letter was for the church. So can these things they must now abstain from cause them to lose there salvation? NO!! why? Because even though they were told to abstain, they only warning was "you won't do well", not "you shall surely die" or any other number of things that could imply damnation. Then they are given a blessing - fare ye well.

So here's a question? Why was Timothy who was a believer, whose mother was Jewess and whose father was a geek now circumcised by Paul after they had just stated that circumcision was not needed?

But that was for the Jews. I thought you dispies insist that the Jews and the Church were always separate?

Here's a heads up. We "dispies" know the difference between doctrine for the Jews and doctrine meant for the church. That means we know what we are TOLD to do and what we can LEARN from - two different playing fields with separate rules. Unless you want us to start circumcising all our boys and turning our churches into slaughter houses. I don't think Rick was throwing out a doctrinal question, more a hypothetical one that we can learn a lesson from. I'm reasonably sure that he already has an answer.

Rick

Here's a question:

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

Tit 1:7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

Here we see a bishop must not be fond of wine, or possibly partake of it. Most teach that a bishop must not drink alcohol using these verses. Most also teach that wine was grape juice and the bible differentiates between juice and alcohol by using the term "strong drink" - you also seem to be of that teaching by your statement "including grape juice or even fermented wine". They use this to gainsay anyone speculating or stating that Jesus turned water into wine as in alcohol. So why is the term wine in these two verse used to imply strong drink? Does this not contradict the teaching that wine was fermented grape juice and is a bishop now not to drink grape juice?

Shekel 43 times
Shekels 96 times
Silver more than 300 times
Gold more than 300 times.

The tithe could be sold for silver if it was too heavy to carry, but had to be bought back with the silver and eaten.
Slaves were bought with silver.
land was bought with silver
burial plots bought with silver.
Joseph was sold by his brothers for 20 pieces of silver.
The list goes on and on.

You really have not studied out the customs of the Old Testament, have you? Money was indeed prevalent in the Old Testament.

And yes, I do call Moser a pharisee. He requires a tithe of money where it is clear God never instructed such.. He is guilty of doing the very thing the Pharisees did in Jesus' day. They required people to follow commands that were not given by God. Moser commands people to do something that was not instructed by God.

And no, that verse in Matthew 23 does not apply to me. I have not taught a single thing that can be disputed using God's Holy Word.

Any one stop to think that because money is a object that does not decay, and that gold and silver is universally accepted that God purposely used the fruits of the harvest as a tithe in order to curb corruption as it could not be stored for long and to show that Gods provision was renewable and daily, not to be hoarded? Just a thought I had.

SFIC, I am curious to your reasons behind this non negotiable viewpoint that you have taken a very strong stand on. I have read all your posts concerning the tithe and also your stand on the MV portraying Jesus as a liar. I have also had some words with you in the past on other threads regarding salvation. You always seem to take a stand on some fine point of doctrine and argue it to death, regardless of the out come (if there is ever one) and regardless on whether no one agrees with you and they often end up locked by a mod.

So I have some questions if you would please answer:

• Do you think it a sin to teach the tithe as an example or guideline for NT giving?
• Do you think it a sin to teach salvation from any other bible version other than the KJV?
• If it is a sin to teach tithing as an example, then if that person does not repent of that sin, are they going to hell?
• If it is a sin to teach salvation from a MV, then if that person does not repent of that sin, as a soul winner doing God's work are they going to hell?
  

Where do you get this drive to argue a point to death when the bible clearly tells us in 2 Tim 2:14 and Tit 3:9 to "strive not about words to no profit" and to "avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law" because they "are unprofitable and vain" and are only good for "the subverting of the hearers"

Is it not then a sin to continue on arguing your one point on any particular thread once you have made your original point? And by this deduction I now ask in accordance to your standpoint on salvation requiring repentance, have you not now sinned and must therefore repent in order to secure you salvation? Or is the repentance only once off in order to be saved? I'm just curious concerning your doctrine and from where it comes having never heard this before.


And to those that disagree with me concerning settling for second best from God - some food for thought in the below verse :

1Ti 6:17 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;
1Ti 6:18 That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;

• Through personal witness, support of our local church and all its outreach, the missionaries our church supports and a missionary in India we help support.
• God nowhere promises believers the best of everything, he promises to meet our needs.
• Since you referenced the car, that 15 year old car with 200,000 miles on it has served very well and being an older car the insurance is lower. Had God sent us a new car, that would have required much more insurance and would have cost a great deal more.
• As Paul said, he knew how to be thankful and content when God provided only his most basic needs and also when God supplied him abudnantly.
• God knows the beginning from the end. He knows what is absolutely best for us at all times.
• God wants His people to be seen following him in faith, joy and contentment no matter their situation. He wants others to see Christ in us and be drawn to that. God doesn't give his people great riches and earthly success for the world to notice and lust after.
• Riches can be a terrible snare. Those who have riches in this life, but don't have Christ, have already received the best they ever will. Those of us in Christ, whether rich, poor or in between, have a blessed eternity filled with treasure much greater than anything on this earth to look forward to.
• As the three young Hebrews told the king, God is capable of saving from the fire, but whether He does or not, they will be faithful to Him. The same should be true for us. God is capable of giving us all things on this earth, but whether He gives us abundance, a goodly amount or just the basics, we should be faithful to Him.
  

John, I am in no way saying that we should not be content in all things. That God does not provide our every need at the right time. And you are 100% right about the car, in hindsight we can always see His wisdom in His provision, even though at the time it may seem suspect, or not quite what we were hoping for, it's always for the best. What I am saying though is that we have not because we ask not. That we have been conditioned by life, false doctrine, the church and previous unanswered prayers to ask Him for little and not for much. That we give up to easily when it comes to petitioning God for a need. That we expect second best and thus that's all we ask for. God has put principles into play when it comes to prayer that He stands by. I am playing with possibilities of prayer and the outcomes of what we ask for in my thoughts here - have been for a while. And I am beginning to come to the conclusion that He wants us to ask more from Him and not give until we get it, that prayer in the lives of believers and the church is the most important thing to learn right and maintain daily with consistency. That we have forgotten how to pray and need to relearn this and that when we do then great thing will be done in His name for His glory. There is nothing wrong with money, with having it and using it, as long as one knows that it all comes from Him, belongs to Him and that we are only stewards of what He has given us and that EVERYTHING we do is to His glory.

You know. one thing SFIC is right about is the lack of faith in our modern "Christianity". I say this in a broad spectrum as I know of pastors that live by faith alone and I know of many "workers" that don't. My pastor is a IFB pastor who lives by faith alone and is poor by the worlds standards, my friends uncle is a charismatic one that has three cars, a 6 million Rand home in a exclusive town in the Cape and travels the world preaching and staying in luxury.

I myself have had a heart for missions since I was 6 and have learnt the hard way concerning mission boards and missionary organizations. If you don't have the funds or a big enough church to back you then don't bother trying. I have also stepped out in faith and seen what that can do. Have seen God provide where it seems impossible to make it week by week let alone month by month.

SFIC has always "seemed" to come across arrogant, hard, unwavering and unilateral in his doctrinal views. Is this a bad thing? Must he bow to the pressure of those of us who disagree? I say no and can grudgingly respect him for his ability to stand firm on what he believes on this forum. Whether this is true in his life I do not know, but I do PERSONALLY feel he should be more open to being teachable. That being said, I also believe that because modern Christianity has abused the financial issue and others, we have thrown the bath out with the dirty water. Why must pastors who preach sound doctrine and stand fast to the original principles (fundamentals) be poor? Why do we seem to expect second best from God? Why must we get the old car? Thrift store clothing and hand me downs? Why must those who have a calling to do Gods work struggle and make do? We say because this keeps us on "our knees". That it strengthens our faith and teaches us to pray and seek out God. That if we have too much we become self reliant and not God reliant. Must a pastor work outside a church to provide and thus be self reliant, or must he work in the church full time and be God reliant. Are churches to blame that force pastors to sign employment contracts where the church dictates their every move? How much of today's standards concerning the payment of God's workers is worldly based or scriptural?

Personally, I have decided in my own life that I will not be a slave to a mans church, that I will not "beg" for food. That I will not be forced to work two jobs, one for the world and one for God (we cannot serve two masters). That I will NOT expect NOR accept second best to serve the GREAT I AM. A man I went to school with circumnavigated Africa on a bicycle and came up with this - No food for the lazy man - we know it's biblical version - Gen 3:19. I have yet to meet a pastor that preaches the truth that is lazy - their lives are always consumed by their service often to the detriment of their health and family, so why do they not deserve the best from God or the church they serve. Many give up personal dreams and desires to serve God so why is the expected norm amongst fundamentals that they must "dumpster dive" to live? Are we not the children of the Most High?

I know without a doubt that I am called to preach. I started my studies in faith alone. I stopped my studies because I will not accept second best from God nor from His church. I will not dumpster dive because its expected as a character builder, nor will I live in poverty because some believe that as I pastor I am not "working" for my living.

Is SFIC right concerning his viewpoint on faith?

We say the Word of God is our final authority in all manners of faith and practice, but do we really believe this to be true? It sure doesn't look like it.

Yes he is sadly. But If God is the author of our faith why is our faith never enough that we must incorporate worldly practices to meet the needs of those who serve Him.? Is it because we are so used to expecting second best from God.

John stated :

I would rather have bread and water provided by God than luxurious food I got by some other means.

Why are we conditioned to expect so little from God? Why does this seem to be the prevalent attitude amongst bible believers and not modern charismatics? They seem so blessed while we seem so poor. Is this right? Have we lost sight of God's power to give abundantly? Is our faith lacking somehow yet theirs is not? Or do they milk the system and this IS the way God blesses us? With the scraps from the table?

He then states :

God promises to provide our needs and He never lies. In our lives He has provided work, food, clothing, appliances, a car, and other things in ways and times that couldn't be seen until it happened. No doubt He has provided so much more, especially considering all good things are from Him, which I have failed to take note of.

True, yet I quote another statement :

I had a car that served me well. Suddenly that car began having problems. I tried to fix it, something else would go wrong. It just kept getting worse. There was no money for another car at that time, not even a cheap used one. Thinking my only option was to figure out how to keep my old car going, I kept looking at that. Yet someone "happened" to overhear our problem and they told me they might be able to help. Sure enough, in a few weeks we were given another car! The car was 15 years old with 200,000 miles on it, but it worked and served our needs perfectly. A few days later as I was going to move our old car, it died completely. God's provision and timing was perfect.

Why could God not give a new car? Why second best? Yes it served their needs perfectly. Yet I have to ask do we ask for second best and that is EXACTLY what God gives us because that is what we expect? I have seen in my prayer life where God has given me exactly what I asked for and what I asked for was second best because I did not believe He would give me the best - some food for thought there!

SFIC stated :

As to how God sent out on missions, He indeed did proscribe a method.... when ye go, take no scrip, nor money for your purse. Funny, He makes no mention of the stopping from Temple to Temple for support. He just says go, and when you get there, abide. And after Pentecost, we see the Apostles going out on missions, but don't see a single instance of them asking for support for themselves. Interesting.

Was this specifically for the disciples or is it applicable to the church? Was the church in effect then? Is this "doctrine" for us? Did Jesus not say this to teach the disciples faith in order to prepare them for when He left? So then why does Paul give instruction to the churches to gather as God has "prospered" them?

1Co 16:1 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye.
1Co 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.
1Co 16:3 And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

That a collection be taken before they arrive? Is this not asking for "funds"? Was Paul not relying on God when he requested this? Was his faith not enough? Was he relying on man and not God?

Yes the 10% tithe is not mentioned in the NT as doctrine for the church, But SFIC, is it WRONG to use it as a guideline? We see above that collections were "ordered" by Paul - an INSTRUCTION to the churches, that we are to give freely as God has prospered us, but I personally have never had God verbally instruct me on how much, sometimes though,we "feel" how much we are to give, yet again, is it wrong to give a guideline to the average Sunday pew warmer who only opens up their bible for ten minutes while the pastor preaches on how much to give? I don't think so IMHO.

You ask :

1. So tell us, where is the verse that says money was titheable?
2. Where is the verse that says a tithe of money is to be taken to your local Church?
3. Where is the verse that says that people other than Levites are qualified to receive a tithe?
   

I ask :

Where is the verse that says the KJV 1611 AV is the true Word of God?

Yet you stand by this belief. We here all do. You go as far as to say that the Jesus of any other version is a liar and sinner, yet without any scriptural evidence to the contrary you believe that the KJV is Gods true and inspired word.

When I left everything behind to go and study to preach I met a cantankerous old man in the IFB church God placed me in. A "brethren" that by his own statements had been asked to leave over 10 churches, even his brethren fellowship. He single handedly destroyed my faith - in God, myself, my calling and the church and to this day I wonder why God put him in my life. Mostly I humored him and though my pastor warned me, out of politeness and respect of his age I compromised my beliefs and principles by keeping quite, believing this to be a lesson in humility as he was paying me to do home repair work that he could no longer do. I was wrong. I needed the funds and believed that this was Gods provision. I was wrong again. His doctrinal viewpoints, attitude to those who disagreed and standing remind me very much of yours and I do not say this to condemn or judge you, but to remind you that men of your age and understanding of the word have a responsibility to the "babes" in Christ, one to be taken seriously, so pray very very hard before making statements or teaching doctrine that could adversely affect the growth of fellow believers, that you cause no offense - teach in love yet don't compromise the truth, but make very very sure that what you teach IS THE TRUTH from GODS WORD not the commentaries of man.

2Co 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:
2Co 6:4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,
2Co 6:5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;
2Co 6:6 By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,
2Co 6:7 By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,
2Co 6:8 By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true;

I hope and pray that I have not offended you by this post and pray that you take the time to pray and know the heart of God, the same God we both serve, the same Word we both read and soften your heart and remember "CHARITY"

Trusting God to provide can and will work. When did God change? Doesn't HIs Word tell us He cannot lie?

If all our Missionaries were like George Muller, what a witness of God's Almighty hand at work would be seen! George didn't ask other Churches to provide for the needs of his orphanage, yet there was always supply. Once, when Muller had emptied the pantries and had no food, he sat the children down at the table anyway. And five minutes before the food was to be served, there was a knock at the door. God had laid it on someones heart to take food to the orphanage!

And although Muller's orphanage was constantly growing, (at one time more than 1500 children in it) God always met the need.

Missionaries could see the same work of God if they would obey Him and go in faith.

It's easy to quote George Muller from an armchair and make broad confident statements like "Missionaries could see the same work of God if they would obey Him and go in faith." Like I said in my earlier post - things always look rosy in hindsight from those that have lived to write the book. Go out on your own in secret and see if your faith will feed you without the backing of the church that God has put into place for a reason. Believe me, I wish it were that simple, that faith would be enough these days to go out and do God's work, that He would miraculously provide your every need. But the sad truth is that we live in a modern world and crazy, ill dressed and homeless preachers living on locusts and honey are not taken seriously.

1 Corinthians 9 is not an excuse for lazy pastors. No, it clearly reveals that the pastor works for his provision. Paul reveals in Acts 120 that the Church is to "support the weak", he does not instruct them to support a pastor who won't work. And the fact that the ox is not muzzled reveals that the pastor needs to work for his wages as well.

Show me where in this day and age a pastor can both work and provide for all the needs of a church. It's difficult enough to find work never mind a job that would allow for the freedom required to pastor a church. And in what world is a pastors calling not "work"? It's easy to sit in a pew and be spoon fed while you enjoy the luxury of a paying job and think that a pastor does nothing but preach a few times a week. I would rather work for a paying tyrant than a thankless church, and believe me, a pastors life is hard and often thankless and churches can be brutal, bullying and hurtful. Paul had a trained and needed skill, he was his own boss and few these days have the opportunity to be able to afford the privilege of being their own boss - these days working for yourself requires far more hours than the average job to meet the required costs. Do you preach full time and hold a job too? If not then you have no place calling pastors lazy.

I certainly can't speak to whatever situation you mention above, but God has indeed promised to supply all our needs and God does not lie. Our needs may not be met how, in the way or exactly when we think they should be, but God will, without a doubt, supply our needs.

One of the problems we run into is thinking we need more than we actually do, or thinking we need something different than what we actually need. God know exactly what we need, when we need it, and He will provide. This I've seen in not only my own life, but many others over the years. Very true John, also very difficult for a man to deal with when he sees those he loves struggling with urgent needs that he can not meet because God is "taking His time" as He often does for His own purposes.

As Esther was told when she hesitated to do what God was calling her to do, if she didn't do it, God would certainly raise someone else up to rightly deal with the situation. Also true

The same is true of any of God's people fail to act when he calls upon them. If God calls upon me to hand a missionary a hundred dollars and I fail to do so, if that missionary needs that hundred dollars, God will get to him through another, more faithful follower of Christ. This in my experience has not always been the case, sometimes believers are more stingy than the worldly rich. Most only give because they think they will get something back from God.

In my life I've gone without a lot of wants. I've also discovered over the years that sometimes what I thought I needed was actually a want. I've thought a need could only be met one way, but found God to supply it another. Through it all, God has never failed to meet my every need. Yes, our needs are often wants, but there is nothing wrong with wanting something if it isn't unbiblical - a home, transport, etc. Sometimes God's idea of our needs is nothing more than some bread and meat and some water (1 Kings 17) a little less than what most of us can live with.

Dr. John R. Rice's book, "Prayer: Asking and Receiving" addresses this very well.

I grew up on the old classics of missionaries that lived by faith alone in secret without man knowing there needs - only making there needs known to God in secret and these needs were met in abundance. I wished for a life of such closeness with God, but in my experience in this world with believers, churches, missionaries and "living by faith" what these authors wrote of is always wonderful and uplifting in hindsight, but never easy, practical or even true in reality - that is why we have this prosperity movement where the church has become a business and the office of pastor has become a career. I often joke with my wife and say that if we wanted a wealthy lifestyle all I need to do is start a charismatic man pleasing church and we would have all we ever wanted, but in my heart of hearts I know too much truth to ever be able to do this and sleep at night.