Jump to content

Ukulelemike

Moderators
  • Content Count

    4,391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    164

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Alan in Post-Trib Rapture?   
  2. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from wretched in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    Not at all meant to 'discredit' his teaching, but to disagree. I have no axe to grind with David Cloud, and if you're at all familiar with me and my posts, I am often a great supporter of him. But this is the problem: to so many today, to disagree is to 'discredit', or to 'hate', (not said nor implied by you, just speaking generally." I disagree on the timing, and I disagree that it is a fundamental, but I don't seek to discredit him in any way. 
    As I said in my above comment, I also see issues with ALL the positions, because the Bible doesn't teach any one clearly enough to take a fundamental stand on it. As for the three you mentioned, I only know Anderson, and I am hardly a follower of his, and I came to my understanding before I even knew him, and not based on any man's writings or teachings, save for a study of scripture.
    I suppose my only thing with Brother Cloud's position is that, though we agree on pretty much everything else, because of this, he would never consider speaking at our church, or probably speaking with me in any way, and I think that's a great loss, but that said, I respect his position on it and don't seek to have our church in his lists, nor do I seek to argue the point with him. 
  3. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Invicta in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    And again, you are misrepresenting what I said. I merely said that David Cloud holds the Pre-trib rapture to be a fundamental of the faith, and that, according to MY understanding as a Fundamentalist, (AT LEAST IN THE EYES OF SOME FUNDAMENTALISTS), a fundamental is a matter of salvation. I further clarified that David Cloud has said that it is a subject worthy of separation, BUT NEVER SAID HE BELIEVES IT TO BE A MATTER OF SALVATION. If I seemed to imply that, I apologize, I didn't mean to.
    WHETHER or not he holds to Fundamentals as salvations issues, I don't know-I suspect NOT because he, like myself, holds to many more things as fundamentals than the basic five that many believe to be the fundamentals of the faith, being:
    "1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9).  2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27). 3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14). 4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15). 5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20)."
    In no way have I misrepresented David Cloud-I do not know if he holds that all fundamentals are salvation issues, but I DO know that he believes the pre-trib rapture IS a fundamental and it is worthy of separation. If you disagree with that, you can read it yourself:  https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/another_church_enters_post-tributional_wilderness.php     Here is a small quote from the article:     "I am sad to report that Pastor Charlie Haddad and Joshua Koura of Grace Bible Baptist Church of New Castle, NSW, have abandoned the fundamental doctrine of the Pre-tribulational Rapture and are wandering in the aforementioned wilderness. Though they admit that they haven’t come to a settled position (and therefore should be keeping their mouths shut as learners instead of teachers), they have become sowers of doubt and confusion.

    I have a personal stake in this, because last October I preached a Bible conference at Grace and assisted in the ordination of Joshua. Now I must withdraw my participation in that ordination and my support of that church. "
    My main point I sought to make, is that the Bible does not clearly teach any specific timing for the rapture, though it DOES clearly teach a literal pre-millennial return of Jesus Christ-but please, show me clearly where we see Him returning before the tribulation period. I was raised pre-trib, grew up pre-trib, and after a considerable study, I changed my position because I found it wanting.  But that's just the problem, ALL the timing positions are wanting, all are full of assumptions, and every one of them lacks anything specific, EXCEPT, as clearly seen in Rev 14:14-17. This is the only passage that clearly shows Jesus in the clouds reaping the earth, the ripe harvest, just prior to the outpouring of the vials of wrath. THAT is the beginning of wrath, not Rev 6, THAT is tribulation-there is a clear separation between them, as seen in the trumpets and the vials. Trumpets are judgments, vials are wrath. Those with the Spirit of God are protected from the judgments through being marked by the Holy Spirit, which means we could potentially be living then, but protected from God's judgment. 
    And again, I do not declare this as an absolute doctrime, because again, I am making assumptions, as well, but the bottom line is, while I greatly respect Dr. Cloud in , as I said, 99.5% of his teachings, I disagree here. I am not angry at him, and I don't take his stance personally, I merely state what we has made clear in association with the OP. I do not hold that anyone who disagree with me is my enemy, and I don't even see it as a reason to separate, UNLESS, as some I know on all sides of the aisle, it becomes such a  matter of contention, that the contention, itself, becomes reason for separation. 
    By the way, for what it matters, I use quite a bit of Dr. Cloud's material-currently I have a class going using his 1 year discipleship course, and am awaiting his Digital Baptist Library. I have greatly appreciated and benefitted from his work and material, I just happen to disagree with him in this. 
     
    Edited to include: From this article, https://www.wayoflife.org/database/is_fundamentalism_merely_five_fundamentals.html  David Cloud makes it clear that he does NOT hold to the idea of the fundamentals only being "the Five" and all salvation issues.  So I do, indeed, recognize that fact, and again, if I seemed to imply otherwise, I did not and I apologize. 
     
  4. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from weary warrior in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    And again, you are misrepresenting what I said. I merely said that David Cloud holds the Pre-trib rapture to be a fundamental of the faith, and that, according to MY understanding as a Fundamentalist, (AT LEAST IN THE EYES OF SOME FUNDAMENTALISTS), a fundamental is a matter of salvation. I further clarified that David Cloud has said that it is a subject worthy of separation, BUT NEVER SAID HE BELIEVES IT TO BE A MATTER OF SALVATION. If I seemed to imply that, I apologize, I didn't mean to.
    WHETHER or not he holds to Fundamentals as salvations issues, I don't know-I suspect NOT because he, like myself, holds to many more things as fundamentals than the basic five that many believe to be the fundamentals of the faith, being:
    "1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9).  2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27). 3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14). 4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15). 5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20)."
    In no way have I misrepresented David Cloud-I do not know if he holds that all fundamentals are salvation issues, but I DO know that he believes the pre-trib rapture IS a fundamental and it is worthy of separation. If you disagree with that, you can read it yourself:  https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/another_church_enters_post-tributional_wilderness.php     Here is a small quote from the article:     "I am sad to report that Pastor Charlie Haddad and Joshua Koura of Grace Bible Baptist Church of New Castle, NSW, have abandoned the fundamental doctrine of the Pre-tribulational Rapture and are wandering in the aforementioned wilderness. Though they admit that they haven’t come to a settled position (and therefore should be keeping their mouths shut as learners instead of teachers), they have become sowers of doubt and confusion.

    I have a personal stake in this, because last October I preached a Bible conference at Grace and assisted in the ordination of Joshua. Now I must withdraw my participation in that ordination and my support of that church. "
    My main point I sought to make, is that the Bible does not clearly teach any specific timing for the rapture, though it DOES clearly teach a literal pre-millennial return of Jesus Christ-but please, show me clearly where we see Him returning before the tribulation period. I was raised pre-trib, grew up pre-trib, and after a considerable study, I changed my position because I found it wanting.  But that's just the problem, ALL the timing positions are wanting, all are full of assumptions, and every one of them lacks anything specific, EXCEPT, as clearly seen in Rev 14:14-17. This is the only passage that clearly shows Jesus in the clouds reaping the earth, the ripe harvest, just prior to the outpouring of the vials of wrath. THAT is the beginning of wrath, not Rev 6, THAT is tribulation-there is a clear separation between them, as seen in the trumpets and the vials. Trumpets are judgments, vials are wrath. Those with the Spirit of God are protected from the judgments through being marked by the Holy Spirit, which means we could potentially be living then, but protected from God's judgment. 
    And again, I do not declare this as an absolute doctrime, because again, I am making assumptions, as well, but the bottom line is, while I greatly respect Dr. Cloud in , as I said, 99.5% of his teachings, I disagree here. I am not angry at him, and I don't take his stance personally, I merely state what we has made clear in association with the OP. I do not hold that anyone who disagree with me is my enemy, and I don't even see it as a reason to separate, UNLESS, as some I know on all sides of the aisle, it becomes such a  matter of contention, that the contention, itself, becomes reason for separation. 
    By the way, for what it matters, I use quite a bit of Dr. Cloud's material-currently I have a class going using his 1 year discipleship course, and am awaiting his Digital Baptist Library. I have greatly appreciated and benefitted from his work and material, I just happen to disagree with him in this. 
     
    Edited to include: From this article, https://www.wayoflife.org/database/is_fundamentalism_merely_five_fundamentals.html  David Cloud makes it clear that he does NOT hold to the idea of the fundamentals only being "the Five" and all salvation issues.  So I do, indeed, recognize that fact, and again, if I seemed to imply otherwise, I did not and I apologize. 
     
  5. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Salyan in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    And I agree with you completely. While I really like David Cloud and a lot of how teachings, I am disturbed a bit over his insistence not only that the pre-trib rapture is CLEAR biblical doctrine, but that it is to be considered a fundamental of the faith, meaning, if I understand Fundamentalism properly, that it is a salvation issue, and that anyone who is NOT pre-trib must be separated from, that is even more disturbing. 
    A concern I have is, if it ISN'T pre-tribulation,  and all those pre-trib believers begin to clearly see events of the tribulation taking place, how might this affect their faith? Will they think they were left behind? Will they be angry at God for leaving them? I so often hear the argument that God would NEVER cause His children to go through such terrible tribulation, but then I wonder, Have they read Foxe's Book of Martyrs? Have they read how believers have historically always been treated? The millions slaughtered by the Romans, the Jews, the Catholics, the Muslims, the communists? I am afraid we have become too soft in America with the lack of real persecution. 
    So I am all for Him taking us before the trouble begins, because I certainly don't want to go through it, even protected, but if we must, better to be ready, at least for the possibility, so if it DOES occur, I am at least mentally prepared.
  6. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from wretched in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    I lean to the post-trib/pre-wrath position, not because of any covenant theology or any such thing, I just find the arguments for pre-trib to be weak. Mind you, I say I LEAN that way, because I don't see, after considerable study, that the Bible clearly shows any of the positions to be proven.
    The various arguments for a pre-trib all include a considerable amount of assumption connected to the passages, and a few are, actually, contextually incorrect. For example, 1Thes 4:
    13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
    14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
    15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
    16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
    17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
    18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
    I read time and again, that if we were to go through the tribulation period, how could we be comforted, as it says here we will be? How can we comfort one another, with this hanging over our heads?  Well, if we read this in context, (and sadly, many who use this argument are usually big proponents of the importance of context), we see the timing of the events of the tribulation have nothing to do with it; rather, it is the fact that our loved ones who have died in Christ, we will see again, that they will come back with Christ and receive their glorified, resurrected bodies, and we will join them AND Jesus forever. THAT is our great comfort, not missing the tribulation, which is never mentioned here. 
    There there is the assumption that, since the tribulation period is called the time of Jacob's trouble, and that Israel is in primary view here, that means we will be removed from earth first. Except there's no precedent for that idea-Noah is pointed to, but he and his family weren't spared the flood, rather, they were lifted above and rode out the flood-yet they still were there, protected, but watched as their friends, neighbors and loved ones died, heard their cries for help outside the ark. Then they had to ride it out for a year and a month in the ark, and were let out to survey the mess it left, and scrape together a new life from the ruins. So it is possible we will be here to witness the mess, kept safe by the mark of the Holy Ghost from many of the troubles the Lord sends upon the wicked. 
    My point being, there is nothing in scripture that says we will escape the triblulation, just the wrath at the end. As for Jesus' imminent return, well, in 1Thes 5 we read:
    "But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."
    We see that the reference to the thief in the night it to the lost, but WE, His people, are NOT in darkness that is should overtake us as a thief. WE will not know the day, but we will be aware of the times and seasons. We will know it is nigh when it is nigh. 
     
     
     
  7. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Post-Trib Rapture?   
    Those who look upon Him whom they pierced clearly refers to the Israelites who are in Jerusalem when Christ returns, because it is the Jews that pierced Him. Yes, the Romans did the actual act, but it was the rejection of the Jews that placed Him there, and they will mourn when they realize who He is and all they have lost in rejecting Him for so long. 
  8. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Music help?   
    My experience shadows yours-I am baritone, so setting music for all to sing is hard. As well, none of our folks can carry a tune in a bucket. 
    Before I became a pastor, and was working toward that end, I decided to learn an instrument so I could use it for music. I chose the ukulele, (in case you didn't guess that from my name). It is simple, easy to learn, and very portable. 
    Also my wife downloads hymns in piano online and has a program to adjust the key and tempo, as well as add or remove numbers of verses, so it is very versatile.
  9. Thanks
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Satan does not exist!   
    Let's go back to the original issue at hand, the temptation of Jesus Christ
    We're told: 
      "Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. " (Heb 4:14-16)
     Jesus went through that time of temptation, as well as other temptations through His life, many which I suspect we don't know of, in order that, though God, yet He might be able to be approachable to us, having been tempted as we were. Jesus was, and is, indeed, God in the flesh; yet He is also the Son of man, fully God but fully Human, else He could not pay the price for the sin of the world. Therefore He was tempted for OUR sakes, that WE might see Him, while as God, yet also as one of us, YET without sin. Could Jesus have sinned? The jury is still out on that-personally, I believe He could have, being all man, because otherwise, what comfort can we obtain in His being tempted, yet without sin? But I will not speak that dogmatically, and am certain there is some disagreement there. But the point being, Jesus HAD to be tempted, that He might be a fitting High Priest for us.
    As for Satan, well, the Lord simply used him; Satan thought he was in control, but even at the end, Satan will only be able to do that which the Lord allows, and he will be stopped when the Lord deems the time for him to be stopped. There is no power but of God.  
    I have been in this group for a long time, Totoosart, and I urge you, not to take their words as unkindness-they are all good folks, but we are all quite zealous for the Lord and His word. You are still new to Christ, in a place that is difficult for you to find good discipling-be patient and listen, because there are many, many years of walking with the Lord in this group. Be encouraged, hold tight that which is good!
         
         
  10. Thanks
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Christians and Politics   
    Simple: In a President, we don't support the man, so much as the office. We also trust that, if God ordains the powers that be, then He ordained that gay man to be president, and we trust He has a reason for it. The rules here don't change-remember, those rules were set in scripture when the Caesars were ruling, and they were horrible, wicked men who considered themselves gods; so then the Lord had Paul write to respect those wicked men-how much different is that from today? God ordains the powers. It is kind of like supporting Israel: We don't support all they do and believe, because they are still basically a secular nation, and are still antagonistic to Christ; rather, we support them because the Word tells us to, and in doing so, we are obeying God.
    As well, there is not a list of qualifications for a temporal leader, the way there is for a pastor, in scripture; that is why we can rightly take a stand against a man who is an open, wicked sinner of that sort. We still take a stand against a homosexual becoming President by voting against him-it is our vote that we will need be concerned to give an account for, not for who wins, in such a case. And if he DOES win, then we don't support his wicked lifestyle, any more than we did Clinton's, but we respect the office and the laws of the land, insofar as it doesn't disagree with scripture.
     
     
  11. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from 1Timothy115 in Christians and Politics   
    Good question. We know Buttigieg is running, openly homosexual. So any true believer ought to use his or her vote to stand against them. 
    Should the tragic occur and he wins, then we obey the government as we ought, in all areas where it doesn't cause us to leave aside the commands of God or the law of the land. Like with Obama, trump, both Bush's, Clinton, etc. And we pray for his salvation and wisdom and blessings, as scripture says we ought.
  12. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from E Morales in Christians and Politics   
    Simple: In a President, we don't support the man, so much as the office. We also trust that, if God ordains the powers that be, then He ordained that gay man to be president, and we trust He has a reason for it. The rules here don't change-remember, those rules were set in scripture when the Caesars were ruling, and they were horrible, wicked men who considered themselves gods; so then the Lord had Paul write to respect those wicked men-how much different is that from today? God ordains the powers. It is kind of like supporting Israel: We don't support all they do and believe, because they are still basically a secular nation, and are still antagonistic to Christ; rather, we support them because the Word tells us to, and in doing so, we are obeying God.
    As well, there is not a list of qualifications for a temporal leader, the way there is for a pastor, in scripture; that is why we can rightly take a stand against a man who is an open, wicked sinner of that sort. We still take a stand against a homosexual becoming President by voting against him-it is our vote that we will need be concerned to give an account for, not for who wins, in such a case. And if he DOES win, then we don't support his wicked lifestyle, any more than we did Clinton's, but we respect the office and the laws of the land, insofar as it doesn't disagree with scripture.
     
     
  13. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Christians and Politics   
    Believers need to get back to the biblical truth that God ordains the powers that be, and that, unless they take stands specifically against God and His commands, we are to obey them as obeying the ordinances of God. That goes for Trump, as it did for Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc, all the way back to Washington. God will have His way in this, and every other country, and He will use the powers that be that He puts into place to do it. As such, we ought to honor them as they whom God has placed into positions, pray for them to do well, to be blessed, to be saved, to have God's wisdom. Trump is far from perfect, but he is far more interested in doing well by the country, by its laws, and at least gives good lip service to God and Christian rights. I don't know if he is saved: he is surrounded by false prophets and money-grubbing wolves who will never dare tell him his need for salvation, but we need to pray the Lord will bring someone who will tell him, and pray he is saved.
  14. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from gracelife in Calvinism or Arminianism? How do you answer?   
    Calvinism is primarily a philosophy, not a doctrine: they take certain biblical truths, (ie, Man by nature is dead in sin,) then leap to philosophy to explain what that means, (if dead, he has no ability of himself to call upon God, because the dead can't do anything), while ignoring the fact that the Bible explains that Jesus lights every man that comes into the world, (gives all men light to have faith), and thus, faith begins with God, for ALL men, and therefore, yes, we can respond, though dead in sins, because God has given us the ability to do so. 

    God IS sovereign, but it in no way lessens His sovereignty that He allows man to choose to follow or not. Calvinistic sovereignty equates to mechanical direction, some will follow, some will not, because they have no other choice BUT to follow or not. So God commands people to follow, but disallows MOST the ability to do so, then punishes those same for NOT doing what He doesn't let them do. There is nothing in scripture to begin to imply anything like that. 
  15. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from E Morales in Christians and Politics   
    Believers need to get back to the biblical truth that God ordains the powers that be, and that, unless they take stands specifically against God and His commands, we are to obey them as obeying the ordinances of God. That goes for Trump, as it did for Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc, all the way back to Washington. God will have His way in this, and every other country, and He will use the powers that be that He puts into place to do it. As such, we ought to honor them as they whom God has placed into positions, pray for them to do well, to be blessed, to be saved, to have God's wisdom. Trump is far from perfect, but he is far more interested in doing well by the country, by its laws, and at least gives good lip service to God and Christian rights. I don't know if he is saved: he is surrounded by false prophets and money-grubbing wolves who will never dare tell him his need for salvation, but we need to pray the Lord will bring someone who will tell him, and pray he is saved.
  16. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Calvinism or Arminianism? How do you answer?   
    Calvinism is primarily a philosophy, not a doctrine: they take certain biblical truths, (ie, Man by nature is dead in sin,) then leap to philosophy to explain what that means, (if dead, he has no ability of himself to call upon God, because the dead can't do anything), while ignoring the fact that the Bible explains that Jesus lights every man that comes into the world, (gives all men light to have faith), and thus, faith begins with God, for ALL men, and therefore, yes, we can respond, though dead in sins, because God has given us the ability to do so. 

    God IS sovereign, but it in no way lessens His sovereignty that He allows man to choose to follow or not. Calvinistic sovereignty equates to mechanical direction, some will follow, some will not, because they have no other choice BUT to follow or not. So God commands people to follow, but disallows MOST the ability to do so, then punishes those same for NOT doing what He doesn't let them do. There is nothing in scripture to begin to imply anything like that. 
  17. Like
  18. LOL
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from HappyChristian in These Foods Do NOT Belong Together   
    Ketchup: on meat? depends on the quality and the kind. Burgers, yes, with mustard, maybe bleu cheese. Steak? Maybe, if tough. Eggs? Never. Tacos? Never. 
    Pineapple on pizza? Sure, why not? I like it okay, but prefer pepperoni, spicy, preferably.
    Mayo? Only on a BLT or Club sandwich, or in a tuna sandwich, with some mustard. Nowhere else.
    Turkey and cranberry? Never thought I'd like it til I tried it, and I liked it. Oh, mayo on that, too.
    Onions? Peel, cut, chop, throw in garbage. It is a little known fact that onions are grown directly in Satan's armpits.
    Cheese and apple? Love it! Cheese and peanut butter? Love it, (crunchy only, please) Peanut butter and apple? Love it. Of course, I love good cheese all the time, of all kinds.  
    Tried it once in Australia-reminded me of salty bicycle grease. Never tried salty bicycle grease, but my guess is it would taste like vegemite.
  19. LOL
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in These Foods Do NOT Belong Together   
    Ketchup: on meat? depends on the quality and the kind. Burgers, yes, with mustard, maybe bleu cheese. Steak? Maybe, if tough. Eggs? Never. Tacos? Never. 
    Pineapple on pizza? Sure, why not? I like it okay, but prefer pepperoni, spicy, preferably.
    Mayo? Only on a BLT or Club sandwich, or in a tuna sandwich, with some mustard. Nowhere else.
    Turkey and cranberry? Never thought I'd like it til I tried it, and I liked it. Oh, mayo on that, too.
    Onions? Peel, cut, chop, throw in garbage. It is a little known fact that onions are grown directly in Satan's armpits.
    Cheese and apple? Love it! Cheese and peanut butter? Love it, (crunchy only, please) Peanut butter and apple? Love it. Of course, I love good cheese all the time, of all kinds.  
    Tried it once in Australia-reminded me of salty bicycle grease. Never tried salty bicycle grease, but my guess is it would taste like vegemite.
  20. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Miss Daisy in Jehovah's Witness   
    In another post, I was talking about a young couple in our church that had recently had a short text batle with my wife and I. Well we got it fixed, apologies all 'round for us overstepping our boundaires and them getting mad and ignoring my teachings, BUT, in the process, they agreed to attend the local(ish) Kingdom Hall for a meeting, with a notorious JW in our community who really, is a BAD person-not even one of the 'nice' JW's: con-man, smoker, drunk, almost talked me into giving him the five-fold ministry from running his mouth at me one day. So I told them it was a bad idea, but hey, they are grown ups, do as they please. So, Sunday, (and before that), my wife and I prayed for their protection, and that what they had been taught would take hold. I didn't expect to see them for evening service.
    However, they surprised me and showed up, and didn't have a single good thing to say about their experience. They said everyone was "really-really nice" (love-bombing, the JW's call it), but they said it was boring-the message was read from a book, and had a follow up for about 1/2 hour from the current Watchtower magazine. I came to find out that, despite their hatred toward the Catholics, they do business almost exactly as the Catholics do: the message is prepared and sent to ALL halls, for use that same Sunday, as well as the reading. There is a question time, but even the answers are very closely controlled and anyone who goes into places they don't want has their mics turned off and they are ignored. If they keep 'causing trouble', they are kicked out. So, praise God they were protected from their own folly and came away with what seems to be a somewhat renewed interest in our church.
  21. Thanks
    Ukulelemike reacted to Jim_Alaska in Why Do We Christians Have Christmas Trees When God Condemned the Christmas Tree In Jeremiah 10:1-15   
    Bro. Dave, Bro Mike did not say it was like being a drunk. He said doing those things was like the "activities" of a drunk. The activities of a drunk are nonsense, silly, offensive, etc. Just imagine putting your socks on a mantel and expecting some entity to magically fill them after sliding down your chimney.   😄
  22. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Pastor Scott Markle in Aside from Sunday morning services.....   
    In my own experience, I found that, when I finally decided to get serious about my walk with the Lord, I WANTED to be in service, as much as possible. At the time, there was something going on just about 7-days a week at our church, and I got involved in many of them, though clearly, I couldn't do them all. 
    But my point is, I WANTED to get in because in my heart, I was ready to get in. My pastor's preaching, which was always excellent, didn't change, I changed. Before that I spent a lot of time under excellent preaching not getting much from it, because MY heart wasn't ready. But when I was, I wanted to be there, Sunday, evening and morning, and Wednesday, and special meetings, and visitation. And I lament, til this day, all the time I wasted before that, and these are the things I try to instill in the young men in our church, the importance of making that decision to put Jesus on the pedestal of our lives, to follow Him, and to get in while young and strong. Sadly, it too often falls on deaf ears. Video games and cars and overtime and family events are all too important. 
  23. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from weary warrior in Why Did Paul Say to Follow Him?   
    I don't know that we have to go outside of the three verses, and one in particular. "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."  Paul preached the same gospel of Jesus Christ as any disciples did. He was commissioned by the Lord Jesus as an Apostle of the Lamb, (unlike Matthias, who was appointed by the other Apostles and drawing of lot), and as such, carried an authority the same as the other Apostles. Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles, just as Peter was the Apostle to the Jews, (though Peter first preached to the Gentiles, in fulfillment of Matt 16:19, and Paul certainly preached to the Jews).
    But also, he only expected anyone to follow him as he followed Jesus, so Jesus was the actual authority. The Corinthian church, addressed here, we know had issues with authority-they were called carnal and contentious because they wanted to be known by the name of men, (I am of Paul, I of Cephas, etc), so while they WERE to follow Paul, it was not for Paul's sake, but for the Lord's, in recognition of the authority He gave Paul, and as Paul was faithful to Christ.
    It is the same way we would follow any pastor today-only as far as they are following Jesus Christ.  
  24. Like
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from wretched in Amish?   
    Speaking here as a veteran of the US Navy, I am not sure I agree with your last statement, though it is a difficult position. Scripturally, we are not to yoke ourselves with the ungodly, yet, in joining the military, we are literally doing just that, signing a piece of paper and making a vow to join with them, and placing ourselves as literal servants to the US Government. It was different back when there was no standing military, but all just went to work when the time came-there was no legal binding the same as today. And as I said, it is hard for me to take that position, but when it is literally to be yoked, being placed into bondage, to the government, binding yourself to them and to follow all regulations, (many of which have become very ungodly), I can no longer stand where I once did. (Sorry for going off subject a little)
  25. LOL
    Ukulelemike got a reaction from Salyan in Silly Question: What Exactly are the Benedictines?   
    Aren't Benedictines a sort of a breakfast food, an egg on a muffin with sauce on it?
     

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...