Jump to content

Pastor Scott Markle

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content Count

    2,387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    146

Everything posted by Pastor Scott Markle

  1. I see. So then it appears that you view the second half of the verse as contrasting those who do not fast and those who do -- 1. Those who do not fast - "He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks." 2. Those who fast from food - "And he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." On the other hand, I would view the verse as speaking concerning the SAME matter that has been within THE CONTEXT since verse 1 -- "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things [comfortable eating meat]: another, who is weak, eateth herbs [not comfortable eating meat]. Let not him that eateth [comfortable eating meat] despise him that eateth not [not comfortable eating meat]; and let not him which eateth not [not comfortable eating meat] judge him that eateth [comfortable eating meat]: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth [comfortable eating meat], eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not [not comfortable eating meat], to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." Consider the contextual parallels between verses 2, 3, 6. As such, I do not see the matter of fasting anywhere at all in the context.
  2. Ah, but this report is wherein the incorrect estimation lies. Actually, some Christians have Christmas trees "in spite of Jeremiah 10" because they do NOT believe that Jeremiah 10:1-16 is talking about Christmas trees, but that it is talking about idols formed and carved from trees. They are not seeking to stand in stubborn disobedience against the Lord. Rather, they simply do not believe that this passage at all reveals our Lord's viewpoint concerning Christmas trees, but only His viewpoint concerning idols. They believe this because of the statements made throughout the WHOLE context of Jeremiah 10:1-16 -- "Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They [the heathen people] deck it with silver and with gold; they [the heathen people] fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. They [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold] are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold] must needs be borne, because they [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold] cannot go. Be not afraid of them [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold]; for they [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold] cannot do evil, neither also is it in them [the things made from the trees, decked with silver and gold] to do good. Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O LORD; thou art great, and thy name is great in might. Who would not fear thee, O King of nations? for to thee doth it appertain: forasmuch as among all the wise men of the nations, and in all their kingdoms, there is none like unto thee. But they [the heathen people] are altogether brutish and foolish: the stock [the thing made from the tree, decked with silver and gold] is a doctrine of vanities. Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder: blue and purple is their [the things made from the trees] clothing: they [the things made from the trees] are all the work of cunning men. But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion. When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; he maketh lightnings with rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasures. Every man is brutish in his knowledge: every founder is confounded by the graven image: for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them [in the graven image made from the tree]. They are vanity, and the work of errors: in the time of their visitation they shall perish. The portion of Jacob is not like them: for he is the former of all things; and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: The LORD of hosts is his name." Take notice of the word "vain" in verse 3, the word "vanities" in verse 8, and the word "vanity" in verse 15, which all help to tie this entire context together. Certainly, I agree that there is much hypocrisy within the Fundamentalist movement; and it grieves my heart deeply. (Although it is also likely that there is yet such hypocrisy within my own heart to which I remain blind.) However, when we Biblically assess the position of others on a matter, it behooves us to do so with as precise accuracy as possible. (There, I have finally contributed to this thread discussion.)
  3. Amen, and AMEN! This is as I have been trying to communicate - The issue IS a heart-priority issue.
  4. Indeed, when the Lord Himself became the first love-priority of their lives. There is always a distinct difference in attitude and behavior when this occurs.
  5. Some further thoughts in relation to the confrontation and condemnation of Ezekiel 34:1-10. 1. Is there anything in the surrounding context that might reveal the character of a faithful prophet/pastor/preacher of God? Yes, there is in Ezekiel 33:7-16 -- "So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live? Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth. When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it. Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right; If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live." So, the faithful prophet/pastor/preacher of God is to warn the people of their sin through reproof and rebuke and to exhort the people to turn from that sin with broken-hearted repentance. 2. Is there anything in the surrounding context that might reveal the manner in which many will respond to the faithful prophet/pastor/preacher of God? Yes, there is in Ezekiel 33:30-33 -- "Also, thou son of man, the children of thy people still are talking against thee by the walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one to another, every one to his brother, saying, Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that cometh forth from the LORD. And they come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness. And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument: for they hear thy words, but they do them not. And when this cometh to pass, (lo, it will come,) then shall they know that a prophet hath been among them. Consider also Ezekiel 3:4-11 -- "And he said unto me, Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them. For thou art not sent to a people of a strange speech and of an hard language, but to the house of Israel; not to many people of a strange speech and of an hard language, whose words thou canst not understand. Surely, had I sent thee to them, they would have hearkened unto thee. But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted. Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house. Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, all my words that I shall speak unto thee receive in thine heart, and hear with thine ears. And go, get thee to them of the captivity, unto the children of thy people, and speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear."
  6. Indeed, I agree that the warning of Ezekiel 34:1-10 is a serious and solemn warning unto all pastors of the Lord's flock. Thus it is worthy for us to understand the sinful behavior of the pastors who were confronted and condemned by our Lord in that passage. (Note: I am not aware that any of the true prophets of the Lord God, the true preachers/teachers of God's Holy Word, were included in this confrontation and condemnation. Rather, this confrontation and condemnation was laid against the false, ungodly pastors of Israel, as referenced in other places of Ezekiel (See 13:1-16; 22:23-31), as well as in Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.) 1. They fed themselves upon the flock, rather than faithfully feed the flock. (vs. 2-3, 8 ) 2. They ruled over the flock with force and cruelty, rather than care for the flock with compassion and spiritual healing. (v. 4) 3. They scattered the flock through their cruelty to become a prey before the enemy, rather than search and seek after them with spiritual diligence. (vs. 5-8) On the other hand, it is also worthy of notice that in the very same chapter the Lord our God ALSO confronted the selfish and ungodly members of the flock -- "And as for you, O my flock, thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the rams and the he goats. Seemeth it a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? And to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet? And as for my flock, they eat that which ye have trodden with your feet; and they drink that which ye have fouled with your feet. Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD unto them; Behold, I, even I, will judge between the fat cattle and between the lean cattle. Because ye have thrust with side and with shoulder, and pushed all the diseased with your horns, till ye have scattered them abroad; therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey; and I will judge between cattle and cattle." (Ezekiel 34:17-22)
  7. Well now, IF I am compelled to take up personal experience as my guide in this matter, then all that I have said thus far is emphatically verified by my own experience in the ministry. Through my own experience I could provide a long list of cases, including names and details, that would support my point. In my own experience the very same preaching/teaching of God's Word feeds some as the savor of life unto spiritual growth, while it also is found to be dull unto others as the savor of death unto spiritual withering. In my own experience our Lord's warning is quite appropriate, "Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have." (See Luke 8:18) In my own experience those who attend only for one Sunday service generally do so out of some religious duty, and then live for the priority of self and the world throughout the remainder of the week. In my own experience the problem truly is a matter of sin in priorities, not only concerning church attendance, but also concerning the entire focus and direction of their lives. In my own experience the Word of truth has been choked out in their hearts by the cares and riches and pleasures of this life. In my own experience the only real solution is for such individuals to come unto a broken and contrite heart of repentance over the sin of wrong priorities. But remember, that is only my own experience. Apparently it is not everyone's experience. (1st Note: Throughout this discussion I have maintained the premise with firm conviction that the problem is the sin of selfish and worldly priorities. Nothing thus far has moved me from that conviction.) (2nd Note: Any preacher/teacher who "does ministry" out of religious duty alone, and who maintains selfish and worldly priorities is also in sin. And such a preacher/teacher also needs to come unto a broken and contrite heart of repentance over his sin.) ____________________________________________________________ So then, what is the Biblically faithful preacher/teacher to do in such cases? I would present the following: 1. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20:28) 2. "Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." (1 Timothy 4:15-16) 3. "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15) 4. "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and doctrine." (2 Timothy 4:2) And one of the reason that you need to be so firmly consistent is because "the time will come [not might, but WILL] when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they SHALL turn away their ears from the truth, and SHALL be turned unto fables." (2 Timothy 4:3-4) 5. "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will." (2 Timothy 2:24-26) (Note: I am sorry. I pushed a wrong button on my keyboard, and the posting posted before I was finished. Such is the reason for the lengthy "addition-edit.")
  8. Indeed, accuse me of sin, then depart the conversation . . . It is interesting to me that your postings on the subject were founded upon experience, rather than upon God's Word of truth. In John 6:66 God's Word reports, "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." I wonder who was to blame for this? Was it the fault of the Preacher/Teacher for not being "engaging" enough? GOD FORBID! Our Lord Jesus Christ was/is the perfect Preacher/Teacher. That which He preached/taught was perfect truth in the most perfect manner. Thus the fault was the sinful, selfish hearts of those who "went back" from His preaching/teaching. Yet if He could not retain "many" with His absolutely perfect preaching/teaching, how are we faulty preachers/teachers supposed to retain people with our imperfect preaching/teaching? Well, I have presented an actual BIBLICAL case wherein the fault was that of the PEOPLE (and I could present a number more). Could you present an actual BIBLICAL case wherein Scripture lays the fault upon the preacher/teacher of God's truth (not talking about those who preached/taught falsehood)? ________________________________________________ By the way, your postings appear to contradict one another. Consider . . . Are we talking about those who actually are preaching "Biblical truth," or are we talking about those who are falsely "teaching for doctrine the commandment of men"? These two cases are most certainly and significantly different. One is preaching/teaching truth; the other is preaching/teaching falsehood. The truth of God's Word feeds because it is spiritually alive. The falsehood of men destroys because it is spiritually corrupt.
  9. Hebrews 10:24-25 -- "And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." Being "dull of hearing" is sin. Not enduring sound doctrine is sin. Not receiving the Word "with all readiness of mind" is sin. Being a hearer only of the Word, and not a doer also is sin. Seeking preaching/teaching after one's own lusts is sin.
  10. Sorry, but each individual's sinful choices are THEIR OWN sin, not someone else's. When the children of Israel in the Old Testament rejected the preaching and teaching of the Lord God's prophets, the Lord our God did NOT blame the prophets. Rather, He blamed the stubborn, rebellious, worldly hearts of the people. When the apostle Paul warned under inspiration of the Holy Spirit that "the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine," he did not blame the preachers of the Word. Rather, He blamed the people who had become dull of hearing, seeking "after their own lusts." So, do we have any Biblical examples wherein the Lord our God blamed the preacher/teacher of His Word? If so, then what principles can we learn from those cases? If not, then . . .
  11. Indeed, Brother Wretched, I also am not concerned about winning debates, but am much concerned about exalting Biblical truth. Even so, I must contend that my primary point from my posting above still stands - (Even if we remove any reference unto 1 Peter 1:23) There are NO tares in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15. You implied that there were, but our Lord Jesus Christ Himself NEVER mentioned them therein. Indeed, in relation to this my primary evidences also still stand: 1. In the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, there is ONLY ONE seed that is sown. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself defined that ONE seed as the Word of God. (Luke 8:11 -- "Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God." Mark 4:14 - "The sower soweth the word.") However, in the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-43, there are TWO DIFFERENT seeds sown: (1) The good/wheat seed and (2) the tares seed. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself defined the good/wheat seed as "the children of the kingdom" and defined the tares seed as "the children of the wicked one." (Matthew 13:38 - "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one.") It is worthy of notice that our Lord Jesus Christ did NOT even define the "good" seed from each of these two parable in the same way. In the parable of the sower, the "good" seed is the WORD of God; whereas in the parable of the tares, the "good" seed are the CHILDREN of the kingdom. (For your consideration, our Lord Jesus Christ did NOT define the two different seed in the parable of the tares as: (1) the Word of God rightly divided and (2) the Word of God corrupted by misuse. Indeed, I would plead with you to consider your own warning above about seeing and using God's Word as a reference for already settled "theological ideas.") 2. In the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, there is ONLY ONE sower of the seed. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself did not directly define this one sower, but He did only reference ONE sower. However, in the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-43, there are TWO DIFFERENT sowers of seed: (1) the sower of the good seed in his own field and (2) the enemy who sowed tares among the wheat. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself defined the sower of the good seed as "the Son of man" and defined the enemy as "the devil." (Matthew 13:37 - He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man." Matthew 13:39a - "The enemy that sowed them is the devil.") Now, in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, there is NO enemy sowing a different seed than that of the "good" sower of God's Word. Indeed, the wicked one, Satan, the devil IS present in the parable of the sower; however, he is NOT sowing any seed in that parable. Rather, he is taking AWAY the seed of God's Word out of individual's hearts. (Matthew 13:19 - When anyone heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side." Mark 4:15 - And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts." Luke 8:12 - Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.") So then, since there is ONLY ONE seed sown in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, the seed of GOD'S HOLY WORD - IF there are tares in the parable of the sower, then the seed of God's WORD had to produce (germinate into) those tares. Furthermore, since there is ONLY ONE sower in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, the "good" sower of God's Word - IF there are tares in the parable of the sower, then the "good" sower had to be responsible for sowing them. Yet since in the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-48, the ENEMY who sowed the tares is the devil, and since in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, the devil is NOT SOWING ANY SEED, but is actually STEALING AWAY the good seed of God's Word, then we have NO grounds for inserting the idea of tares into the parable of the sower. The correct context for tares is the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-48, NOT the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15. Thus I repeat again - There are NO tares in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15. __________________________________________________________________ Concerning any correlation between the seed in the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15, the seed in the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-48, and the seed in 1 Peter 1:23, consider the Biblical definition for the "good" seed in each case - 1. The case of the parable of the sower: Luke 8:11 -- "Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God." Mark 4:14 - "The sower soweth the word." 2. The case of the parable of the tares: Matthew 13:38 - "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one." 3. The case of 1 Peter 1:23: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." It appears to me that in BOTH the case of the parable of the sower and the case of 1 Peter 1:23, the "good" seed is Biblically defined as the same thing, as "THE WORD OF GOD." However, it appears to me that in the case of the parable of the tares, the "good" seed is Biblically defined as something completely different, as "the children of kingdom." So then, I would ask -- Of the three cases, IF there is any correlation, which cases correlate between better with each other?
  12. Brother Wretched, I certainly appreciate your respect toward me (now and in the past). Although we have not always agreed, I have definitely come to respect you a great deal through our various interactions. Even so, I desire that the following post not be taken as disrespectful; for I do NOT intend it as such. Nevertheless, I do intend it to be somewhat corrective (which some take as disrespectful). (Note: I have pondered much on how to present the following. I pray that it will truly be "good to the use of edifying.") With your linked phrase (tells us "believe"), you make reference unto the parable of the sower as recorded in Matthew 13:3-8, 18-23, in Mark 4:3-9, 14-20, and in Luke 8:5-8, 11-15. In relation to the parable of the sower, you speak about "tares" and seem to indicate that "they on the rock" should be viewed as such "tares." However, I am compelled to contend that there are NO "tares" whatsoever at all in the parable of the sower. The ONLY seed sown in the parable of the sower is the "good" (incorruptible - see for reference 1 Peter 1:23) seed of God's Word; and the ONLY sower in the parable of the sower is a "good" sower of the incorruptible Word (as implied by the fact that he is sowing the "good" seed of God's Word). From my perspective, to indicate or imply that the incorruptible seed of God's Word can produce (germinate into) "tares" is somewhat offensive against the incorruptible character of God's Holy Word. On the other hand, the only place wherein "tares" are directly referenced in the New Testament is in the parable of the tares as recorded in Matthew 13:24-30, 37-43. In the parable of the tares, there are TWO DIFFERENT kinds of seed that are sown: (1) "the good seed" and (2) the "tares" seed. Furthermore, in that parable there are TWO DIFFERENT sowers of seed: (1) the good sower of the good seed, "the Son of man," and (2) the "enemy" sower of the "tares" seed, "the devil." If we seek to correlate the two parables, it would seem to me that the correlation between them is at the point of "the good seed," the incorruptible seed of God's Holy Word. This good, incorruptible seed of God's Word produces (germinates into) wheat, NOT tares. Thus I would further contend that the "belief" presented in Luke 8:13 is genuine faith in the gospel of Christ, through which the Word of God germinates in their hearts and through which they pass from death unto life (as indicated by the very fact that there IS plant growth). The germination and LIFE of God's Word in an individual's heart is itself an evidence that an individual is "born again." (See for reference 1 Peter 1:23)
  13. Indeed, I understand that sentiment. Yet as a pastor I AM responsible - in two different directions: 1. On the one hand, I am responsible to obey God's command to guide new born babes in Christ unto the obedience of baptism and to be "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." 2. On the other hand, I am responsible to guard the flock from deceivers and from corruption. (Certainly not an easy task, yet possible under the guiding and empowering influence of the indwelling of Holy Spirit of God.
  14. Ahhh, yes. That does help to clear things between us a little more. So then, if your concern is primarily that of a trend, which appears to be revealed as faulty when the children get older, I would contend that the problem is NOT at what age we baptize, BUT is how poorly we are handling the matter of gospel faith with our children.
  15. Sister Salyan, I do NOT stand in disagreement with your point. However, I did wish to spring off your thoughts with an important distinction in the matter of this "debate." According to God's Word the issue is NOT whether a church does or does not baptize babies because of their age. Rather, according God's Word the issue IS whether a church does or does not baptize UNBELIEVERS regardless of their age. In accord with the teaching of God's Word, I will NOT baptize anyone from babyhood unto "ancient-hood" that does not have a testimony of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as personal Savior. If a baby cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that baby should not be baptized. If a young child cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that young child should not be baptized. If an older child cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that older child should not be baptized. If a teen child cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that teen child should not be baptized. If a young adult cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that young adult should not be baptized. If an older adult cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that older adult should not be baptized. If an "ancient" (Bible word) adult cannot or has not believed in Christ, then that "ancient" adult should not be baptized. However, if ANY INDIVIDUAL has placed genuine faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as personal Savior, then that individual IS Biblically qualified to be baptized. Thus we return to the question - At what age can a child come unto genuine faith/belief in the Lord Jesus Christ as personal Savior? This is the doctrinal question that needs to be answer FROM THE TEACHING OF GOD'S WORD.
  16. Brother JimR, What does God's Holy Word instruct me to do in this matter? Do the New Testament Scriptures indicate that I should baptize "on profession of faith," or that I should "insist on some education first"? Consider the order that is revealed in the instruction of Matthew 28:19-20 -- "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen." Do the New Testament Scriptures indicate that I should baptize "on profession of faith," or that I should "insist on . . . evidence of a changed life"? (Note: I would contend that the "evidience of a changed life" is actually the evidence of spiritual growth unto spiritual maturity, NOT the evidence of the new birth. I would further contend that the evidence of the new birth is simply an evidence that spiritual life exists, NOT an evidence of being transformed in character. A seed does not provide its first evidence of life when it bears fruit. Rather, a seed provides its first evidence of life when it germinates and thus begins to grow its first baby root.) My authority of belief and behavior is GOD'S HOLY WORD. What it teaches is what I SHOULD do. What others teach that cannot be found taught in God's Word is simply the doctrines of men according to the authority of men. As per my comment above that God's Holy Word is my authority for belief and behavior, I do not find this "evidence" for you position to be relevant. WHAT DOES GOD'S WORD TEACH? Yet your postings have raised a question in my mind. Throughout this thread discussion, thus far you have not referenced a single passage of Scripture. This moves me to wonder - What is your chosen authority for belief and behavior? Is it the teaching of God's Word, or is it the traditions of Baptists? From your postings in this thread discussion thus far (noting that I have not examined any other postings in any other thread discussion to which you have contributed), it appears to me that your chosen authority is the traditions of Baptists. At least from my perspective that appears to be the authority unto which you have continued to make your appeal.
  17. Brother JimR, I do not feel that my toes are "stepped on," nor do I feel offended. I only care with deep conviction and commitment that Biblical authority be that which is used to determine such spiritual and church issues. Thus I would contend that the age for marriage or military service is not at all relevant to the case in question. God's Word indicates (as you referenced) that Biblical baptism is for genuine believers. Thus if a younger child can genuinely believe on Christ for eternal salvation, then that younger child is qualified for believer's baptism. Even so, the real question is whether younger children can genuinely believe on Christ for eternal salvation. From my perspective the very best person to answer that question is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, as per the passage that I quoted from Matthew 18:5-6. Biblical truth is found in the Bible alone.
  18. Personal experience: Saved at the age of 4; baptized by immersion at the age of 5 (time difference due to a fear of drowning); NEVER any doubts or questions concerning salvation. Biblical truth: Matthew 18:5-6 - "And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
  19. Brother Wayne, I myself would agree (I think). For I would contend that the repentance necessary for salvation includes, NOT a repentance from individual sins of unrighteousness (per se) unto a walk of righteousness, BUT a repentance from utter sinFULness in character unto the Savior from all sinfulness. (1st Note: I also believe that the repentance for salvation includes a repentance toward God (unto the truth) and a repentance from dead works (as a means of salvation).) (2nd Note: I would acknowledge that a confrontation of an individual sin may be the means by which a lost sinner comes to recognize his or her utter sinFULness, as per the case of the Samaritan woman in John 4.)
  20. Yes, Brother Wretched, it makes sense . . . IF we are parsing sinful actions from sinful attitudes in relation to the matter of repentance, and IF the wickedness of Simon was the sinful attitude of unbelief. However, I myself would take issue with this for the following reasons: 1. I would NOT parse sinful actions from sinful attitudes in relation to the matter of repentance. Rather, I would contend that the matter of repentance encompasses any and all sinfulness, including BOTH sinful actions and sinful attitudes, BOTH sinful speech and sinful thoughts. 2. I would contend that Simon's wickedness was NOT the sinful attitude of unbelief, but was the thought that spiritual blessings can be purchases with carnal money (in principle - the thought that carnal means are the way to spiritual progress). Consider Acts 8:18-23 -- "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity." Throughout this I do not see any place wherein Peter accuses Simon concerning the sinful attitude of unbelief. Rather, it appears to me that Peter accused Simon concerning the sinful attitudes of materialism (as the means for spiritual progress) and of bitterness. In fact, the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God itself reports that Simon DID believe. Even so, BEFORE the event of Acts 8:18-23, the opening line of Acts 8:13 reports, "Then Simon himself believed also."
  21. Acts 8:22 - "Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee."
  22. Let us just make sure we understand the postings against which the above contributor is speaking so harshly . . .
  23. So, which "God" is being referenced in Romans 1:19? The same "God" that is referenced in Romans 1:18, since Romans 1:19 is grammatically a part of the same sentence as Romans 1:18. That sentence begins at the beginning of Romans 1:18 and ends at the end of Romans 1:19. So then, who is this God? He is the God who reveals His wrath "from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men." (See Romans 1:18). To me that sure seems like a reference unto THE God of heaven and of all-holiness.
  24. Creative use of the money symbol, brother.

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...