Ukulelemike

On the marijuana issue, we have to remember that there is a whole lot of assumption and guessing that goes on in archaeology. The presence of marijuana residue doesn't mean it was used for worship-it could have been from any time between the time the altar was used for worship and the tie of finding it. Maybe 200 years later, 500 years later, some guys stopped for a smoke and sat on the old altar, who knows? What we DO know, is that there is no scriptural mandate for the use of marijuana, or that I am aware of, that it was ever cultivated in ancient Israel, so we know if there was true worship of God going on there, we know it wasn't part of that. Anything else is conjecture and doesn't really matter. 

I only limit God where He has limited Himself, and never obligate God, save where He has obligated Himself.

This church should have never been involved in a secular mess like doing a production of Annie. I seriously doubt this was an Independent Fundamental Baptist church. Why are you here, to accuse? Get into a godly church that preaches the word of God faithfully, stays out of foolish things like school plays, and just serve God. 

Anyone else ever notice the word "Sovereign" isn't in scripture? Yet the word is bandied about like crazy by Calvinists.

Sure. For instance, scripture tells us God cannot sin-therefore I limit God on His inability to sin. Since he is, indeed, the very fount and definition of "Good", He could not sin. 
God has said, "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee", therefore I limit God in ever being able to take my salvation away, because to do so would be to forsake and leave me. Therefore He is limited by His own word.
As for the other, in obligation, last Sunday I preached that many believers have been taught that if we have enough faith, and ask earnestly enough, God will heal our bodies, however, nowhere has he obligated Himself to heal our flesh, only our souls. It doesn't mean He WON'T or CAN'T, just that He is not obligated to do so. He has, however, obligated Himself that when we ARE afflicted, that in our weakness his strength will be made perfect, so He is obligated to strengthen us when we are infirm, so that we might continue to serve Him, even in our infirmities.

Sure. For instance, scripture tells us God cannot sin-therefore I limit God on His inability to sin. Since he is, indeed, the very fount and definition of "Good", He could not sin. 
God has said, "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee", therefore I limit God in ever being able to take my salvation away, because to do so would be to forsake and leave me. Therefore He is limited by His own word.
As for the other, in obligation, last Sunday I preached that many believers have been taught that if we have enough faith, and ask earnestly enough, God will heal our bodies, however, nowhere has he obligated Himself to heal our flesh, only our souls. It doesn't mean He WON'T or CAN'T, just that He is not obligated to do so. He has, however, obligated Himself that when we ARE afflicted, that in our weakness his strength will be made perfect, so He is obligated to strengthen us when we are infirm, so that we might continue to serve Him, even in our infirmities.

I only limit God where He has limited Himself, and never obligate God, save where He has obligated Himself.

My response is in green in the body of the quote.

Anyone else ever notice the word "Sovereign" isn't in scripture? Yet the word is bandied about like crazy by Calvinists.

Anyone else ever notice the word "Sovereign" isn't in scripture? Yet the word is bandied about like crazy by Calvinists.

Zechariah 14:
"1Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee."
Clearly, this is speaking of Jerusalem and Judah, and speaks of those if Israel that will be currently living in and defending it from the armies of the earth.
Zechariah 12: 
7The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.
8In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.
9And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
11In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
12And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;
13The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
14All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.
Again, clearly here speaking of the return of Christ to Jerusalem and the saving of the "House of David", and them receiving the "spirit of grace and supplication". Sounds like they'll be saved.
Today the Israel we see is not, clearly, just Israel, though many area, and from many of the tribes. Today they are the valley of dry bones, with flesh, but without yet the Spirit of life breathed into them-that will happen when Christ returns, as seen in the verses above. 

Appreciate that, brother, but that was pretty short notice in that case. But I will definitely let you know. 

Probably baked chicken tonight. Been off food since Saturday when I got quite sick-was better by Monday, as in, I could get out of bed and function, but haven't been terribly hungry. Better today, so I can see some chicken. 
We rasie chickens and collect our own eggs, and often don't refrigerate them; the problem here is it is very dry and the eggs will dry out pretty quickly-I lost a few dozen that way recently, just dry in the shells. 

Well, Zechariah seems to say that Israel, in general, will be saved when they actually witness Christ return at the end of the falling of God's wrath: those Jews who were born again prior to that will be part of the church, these will, it seems, enter into the kingdom of Christ in the flesh. Jesus referred to them as the virgins awaiting the bridegroom, but not as the bride, itself. I admit that it is somewhat confusing to me exactly what position they will hold-I don't believe the church has taken their place, but of course, I also am not sure that the church is actually the bride, as it is the New Jerusalem we see ascending from heaven adorned as a bride for her Husband. 

I doubt any of our theology on this subject are absolutely correct-the Bible says actually quite a bit, but things like timing, and time periods between events, are very vague. I hold to the post-trib/pre-wrath rapture position, and have quite a few reasons for it, but I'm not dogmatic about it, either, because the Bile doesn't really lay out the timing clearly, so I have never considered it a 'fundamental', timing-wise, nor anything to separate over, though I know some who do separate over the timing of the rapture. 
By the way, I don't hold to it due to any Anderson teachings, as I have never heard his teaching on it.   I think the fact that it WILL occur is abundantly clear, and that it is yet future, but as for much more than that, all we can reasonably do is speculate, maybe strongly, but still, I give myself space to be wrong.

Yes, I do have that belief; but coupled with it is the fact that in 1Thess. when He comes for us, He in fact "comes". That, to me, is a part of His "coming".

I know all about having to get a "quick bite to eat" from somewhere other than home. My wife and I will be celebrating out 37th wedding anniversary on May 4th, and I'll be 59 on the 3rd of May. I started learning how to cook when I was four years old. My maternal grandfather made me start with bacon and eggs. From there I went on to learn how to make about everything. I've cooked in restaurants as has my wife, and we both are very good cooks! My wife makes spectacular biscuits and sausage gravy and many other breakfast items, as well as many great things for dinner when she's home to cook. Being on the "disabled" list, I'm the one who cooks around here for the most part. My 1/2 brothers from my mother's second marriage also know how to cook very well. I love to cook. It's a form of therapy for me. I hope your wife learns how to cook, and cook well. Start her out on a Betty Crocker cookbook...the OLD VERSION. It's one of the best we've found. We also use Paula Dean's cookbook at times. Lots of helpful shortcuts and hints. Blessings.

Yes, standard Ruckman error. I mean, his tenacity on the reliability of the KJV is commendable, but his reasons were faulty. I believe the Bible teaches the position of preservation, not a second inspiration. Now, I DO believe the translators were guided in the wording they used, because they all believed they were dealing with the very Word of God, and had the right heart as to what they were doing. They wanted an accurate, as well as beautiful, translation, word for word, yet poetic and magnificent. But they didn't need inspiration, merely guidance and wisdom of God in their work. 

I doubt any of our theology on this subject are absolutely correct-the Bible says actually quite a bit, but things like timing, and time periods between events, are very vague. I hold to the post-trib/pre-wrath rapture position, and have quite a few reasons for it, but I'm not dogmatic about it, either, because the Bile doesn't really lay out the timing clearly, so I have never considered it a 'fundamental', timing-wise, nor anything to separate over, though I know some who do separate over the timing of the rapture. 
By the way, I don't hold to it due to any Anderson teachings, as I have never heard his teaching on it.   I think the fact that it WILL occur is abundantly clear, and that it is yet future, but as for much more than that, all we can reasonably do is speculate, maybe strongly, but still, I give myself space to be wrong.

Why do we allow women to sing in church? Interesting question. 
The passage in context deals with teaching in the church, particularly WHO is teaching; clearly, women are not permitted to speak in teaching the church in a general sense, as the role of authority has been given to the man; they are to learn in silence. But singing, as in congregational singing, or even specials, (which I personally believe ought to be done sparingly,) are not in that context, but are more about general edification of the church, and the command was that we sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs to ourselves to others, with no command to specifically male or female, thus it is a general command to all believers. This is why women are allowed to sing in the church. 

Well, I would say that the first is the removal of the church, and the second is the actual second coming, because in the former, He only is in the air, while the latter, he actually descends to earth.

Yes, they weren't there, because they didn't need to be there in the original language-it was added for clarification, because it didn't translate directly into English the way it read in the Greek. So yes, it was added, but the thought was there, it just didn't translate. Some thing. Like Spanish has certain word that are in the female sense, and some in the male sense, Hermano and hermana, both of which translate as friend, but one, we would write as male friend, the other as female friend, because English doesn't have all the words words to specify male and female that way; (those we had, like actress and actor, have been dispensed with, as people think them sexist.) Same idea.

Yes, they weren't there, because they didn't need to be there in the original language-it was added for clarification, because it didn't translate directly into English the way it read in the Greek. So yes, it was added, but the thought was there, it just didn't translate. Some thing. Like Spanish has certain word that are in the female sense, and some in the male sense, Hermano and hermana, both of which translate as friend, but one, we would write as male friend, the other as female friend, because English doesn't have all the words words to specify male and female that way; (those we had, like actress and actor, have been dispensed with, as people think them sexist.) Same idea.

We rent the local community center, very small, maybe 35 people capacity. We only rent it for the day on Sunday, and 2 hours on Thursdays, and we pay $10 each Sunday, $5 each Thursday. Typically, $70, max, per month. I also have use of office space included, so I don't have to haul everything in and out, just set up and break down. Still rather have our own place. Lots of open buildings here, but they all seem to have weird issues with them, so there they sit to fall apart.

Last night, Taco Bell. Blah. Kind of going away from much fast food, as too many carbs. My wife and I are going to try the Keto. Tonight, beef patties with cheese. Probably about it.