Jordan Kurecki

https://www.ttb.org/programs/the-5-year-study/study-contents

Yes, I am working on a Master of Theology in Biblical Languages. I would recommend Andersonville, I have learned and been challenged quite a bit in my classes.

I am currently enrolled in Andersonville Theological Seminary, and while I disagree on some minor points it has been generaly very solid.
https://www.oneplace.com/ministries/thru-the-bible-international/listen/persian/

While there are clearly some differences that change meaning, shew and show are the same exact word, just different spellings, Shew is British spelling and show is American, also needs and needeth are the same thing. The morpheme -eth is archaic and has been replaced in today’s English with the morpheme -s.
there is also no difference in meaning betwixt the word between and betwixt. 
Same for “wit” and “know” they both mean the same thing as well.
Same for “nigh” and “near” both mean the same thing.
I lament the fact how people do not understand the English language the way they think they do. There are plenty of real changes to point out that exist between the KJV and other versions. But modern equivalent of archaic words are not changes in meaning, nor are spelling changes either..On that note, have you ever seen a 1611 KJV? Son was spelled Sonne. Does the version you use have Son or Sonne? 
I am a through and through KJV bible believer and defender, but can we please stop making issues out of non issues?

August Most likely. 

The "left behind" series are to be taken with a grain of salt. Although entertaining, thought provoking, and an element of truth, they are not entirely scriptural doctrine. They were written with more thought on making money in the Christian market than teaching biblical doctrine.
Your question is not silly. It arises due to the confusion in false teachers teaching salvation by our works. So, we understand that your question is logical.
First of all, nowhere in the Bible, in either the Old or New Testament, in either under Law or under Grace, nor even in the 7-Year Tribulation Period, will anybody be saved by works.
Second, false teachers take verses out of context and give their own reason why they think people must work to be saved.
I do hope that my short explanation helps. In other areas of OnLineBaptist the issue of working for one's salvation has been minutely studied. I am only giving you the conclusion of our studies.
If you have any specific verse that you want us to study please let us know.

Tyndale used Passover and Easter interchangably in his text. In fact Tyndales NT said Christ is our Easter lamb. 
The anglo saxon NT used the word Easter every place where the Greek word “Pascha” was used.
Easter is the same as Passover in Acts 12.
And no the days of unleavened bread starting does not mean it could not have been Passover.
Ezekiel 45:21 KJV
[21] In the first month , in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.
I dont think William Tyndale was so stupid that he thought Christ wasn’t the passover lamb. Its clear from his translation, and the anglo saxon bible that Easter at one point in the English language was a synonym for passover. 
This rediculous idea about a Pagan holiday being called by the same Greek name in NT time as the Jewish Passover is nonsense and it makes it hard for people to take us seriously when we defend the KJV. 
Easter in Acts 12 is not a pagan holiday and neither is it a “goof”, It was simply a synonym for Passover in the English language at that time. 
 
According to Webster 1828
E'ASTER, n.
A festival of the christian church observed in commemoration of our Savior's resurrection. It answers to the pascha or passover of the Hebrews, and most nations still give it this name, pascha, pask, paque.
According to Smiths Bible dictionary    Easter. Act 12:4. In the earlier English versions, Easter has been frequently used as the translation of pascha, (Passover). In the Authorized Version, Passover was substituted in all passages but this; and in the new Revision, Passover is used here. See Passover.
Easton:
In the early English versions this word was frequently used as the translation of the Greek pascha (the Passover). When the Authorized Version (1611) was formed, the word “passover” was used in all passages in which this word pascha occurred, except in Acts 12
 
 
 
 

I have dealt with Roby on another board several times. I have already refuted him on Easter (Though I personally disagree that Easter in Acts 12 is a Pagan holiday, my position is the word Easter was a synonym for Passover when the KJV was translated)
Roby will continue to spout his same old talking points over and over and over again even after being refuted and so I refuse to engage him on this topic. 
My suggestion is that he should be banned because he is not willing to have an honest discussion on the KJV but has his own agenda that he wants to push. 

I live in the Southwest Suburbs and go to a great Bible believing and teaching church in Tinley Park. I invite you to come:
https://www.calvarybaptisttinley.com
For me,  my Church was instrumental in God changing me, and that is the way God intended for the Church to be. 
Please listen to this very short message about Church that I put out years ago for new and growing Christians:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4Cyo2ykALwGd28zR3lYWldDaWM/view?usp=sharing
If you have a problem playing the file, just download it and it will play. 
https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/church_membership.html
 

I have dealt with Roby on another board several times. I have already refuted him on Easter (Though I personally disagree that Easter in Acts 12 is a Pagan holiday, my position is the word Easter was a synonym for Passover when the KJV was translated)
Roby will continue to spout his same old talking points over and over and over again even after being refuted and so I refuse to engage him on this topic. 
My suggestion is that he should be banned because he is not willing to have an honest discussion on the KJV but has his own agenda that he wants to push. 

I live in the Southwest Suburbs and go to a great Bible believing and teaching church in Tinley Park. I invite you to come:
https://www.calvarybaptisttinley.com
For me,  my Church was instrumental in God changing me, and that is the way God intended for the Church to be. 
Please listen to this very short message about Church that I put out years ago for new and growing Christians:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4Cyo2ykALwGd28zR3lYWldDaWM/view?usp=sharing
If you have a problem playing the file, just download it and it will play. 
https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/church_membership.html
 

I will grant that FBWWM seems like a less restrictive board than BIMI

I believe CMC is a worthy mention for this thread. 

I believe CMC is a worthy mention for this thread. 

Of course they always have “reasons” for their rules. The rule book will tell you something about the board though. I am going to just use facial hair for one example, the bible absolutely is not against facial hair, therefore if a board is going to make a rule about that it tells me they think thats important. If a board is going to tell you that you cant have facial hair what else will they dictate? To me that tells me that they feel strongly about something that is not biblical or significant in the big picture of missions. To me it seems like a bit of a legalistic spirit. I am yet to see any mission board admit that they are controlling. Every mission board says that they are “local church”. But the proof is in the pudding when you get down to the nitty gritty details. Listen, if someones wants to give up some of their autonomy for the help and aid of a mission board then thats fine, I wont condemn anyone for that. But for me personally I would not go with a Board that gives evidence to me that they will try to micromanage my ministry and life. Unfortunately there is definately a legalistic spirit out there amongst Independant Baptists, There is a serious problem with people pushing their own personal preferences on others and I see this with mission boards. I have just watched how one unnamed mission board has tried to destroy a godly missionary and his family and get them kicked out of the country simply because he did not agree with their missions philosophy and he wasnt even under their board. 
I am not against Mission boards, but we need to be honest and realize that many missions boards do restrict the missionaries freedom. You have to realize you are trading some freedom for help from the board.
And of course you can talk to the people from the boards, but realize they are probably not going to tell you the negative consequences of being with their board and they are of course going to have “reasons” for all of their rules.
I am not trying to attack any mission boards or person. I respect Pat Gordon and what he is doing. For me though I looked into them and it wasnt a fit for me. Maybe it is for someone else, but not for me. 

I believe CMC is a worthy mention for this thread. 

What about "OK David talks as though he is pretty certain"?
It has nothing to do with what is preached in any church - it has only to do with what the Bible says.
David's words are words of certainty - He says "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me."
I will grant that the Bible doesn't actually say in this passage that he will go to him in Heaven, but the meaning is almost as certain as David's belief that they would be together again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of the question I have started a quick study - I am by no means finished, but am already learning and enjoying it greatly.
I thought to myself "If David could speak with certainty in the passage above, then surely he would have spoken something of it in the Psalms.
So I started reading through Psalms with an eye to salvation specifically. 
It is important to understand that often the "salvation" that David speaks of in Psalms is physical salvation from attacking enemies, so we have to be careful to ensure we are talking about actual salvation, and not just the battles of this life.
But I couldn't wait to add a couple of these in even before I have come close to finishing this study.
And please read the passages fully, not just the portions I have quoted - context, context, context folks - don't just believe me.
Psa 17:15
(15)  As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.
Notice again the language of certainty - not maybe, but shall....
To me this sounds so much like:
1Jn 3:2
(2)  Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
And it sounds like David was looking forwards to this:
1Co 15:51-52
(51)  Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
(52)  In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
Praise God for this promise, that apparently David knew about also. 
 
Psa 20:1-9
(1)  To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The LORD hear thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob defend thee;
(2)  Send thee help from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion;
(3)  Remember all thy offerings, and accept thy burnt sacrifice; Selah.
(4)  Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfil all thy counsel.
(5)  We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners: the LORD fulfil all thy petitions.
(6)  Now know I that the LORD saveth his anointed; he will hear him from his holy heaven with the saving strength of his right hand.
(7)  Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
(8)  They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright.
(9)  Save, LORD: let the king hear us when we call.
I know it doesn’t talk about eternal security as such, but it is a wonderful explanation of salvation by David.
 
I love the portion from vs 6 and 7
“Some trust in chariots, and some in horses”
“but we will remember the name of the Lord”
Sounds like salvation by grace through faith and not of works……
 
Psa 21:1-7
(1)  To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The king shall joy in thy strength, O LORD; and in thy salvation how greatly shall he rejoice!
(2)  Thou hast given him his heart's desire, and hast not withholden the request of his lips. Selah.
(3)  For thou preventest him with the blessings of goodness: thou settest a crown of pure gold on his head.
(4)  He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever and ever.
(5)  His glory is great in thy salvation: honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him.
(6)  For thou hast made him most blessed for ever: thou hast made him exceeding glad with thy countenance.
(7)  For the king trusteth in the LORD, and through the mercy of the most High he shall not be moved.
 
 
Wow. Just WOW!!!!
The king shall rejoice in God’s salvation, and when HE ASKED LIFE OF GOD, GOD GAVE IT TO HIM, even length of days…… FOR EVER AND EVER!!!!!!!!!!!
Can I just say “Kapow!!!!!” that looks like smoke coming from that gun right there…..
And that is just a quick look through the first part of the book of Psalms, and that is without quoting the Psalms that I came across that imply eternal salvation without stating it plainly.
I could have probably taken a passage from about half of the first 20 Psalms that I think are hinting at it.
 
Thanks for the challenge - I will enjoy the continued study of this subject - probably won't hear much from me for a while now...….
 
 

Col 2:16 clearly refutes the idea of NT believers being obligated to keep the Sabbath. 
 
 
 

As Alan pointed out just above, this is incorrect.  Colossians 2:16-17 states, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moons, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."  This New Testament passage speaks concerning a series of subjects that existed under the Old Testament Law --
1.  Meat requirements.
2.  Drink requirements.
3.  Holyday requirements.
4.  New moon (sacrifice) requirements.
5.  Sabbath day requirements.
This passage teaches us the following about these subjects that existed under the Old Testament Law --
1.  No New Testament believer is to be judged in relation to these matters.  (Thus they are NOT a New Testament requirement.)
2.  These Old Testament matters were only a SHADOW of things to come in the New Testament.  (Thus they were to be replaced by the New Testament reality.)
3.  The body of Christ (the church) has now come as the New Testament reality.  (Thus the New Testament church, having come, has now replaced the Old Testament shadow.)
________________________________________________________
Concerning the first day of the week, Sunday --
1.  Our Lord Jesus Christ was resurrected on the first day of the week, Sunday, making it the day to represent the new life of the new covenant and of the New Testament church.
2.  The first day of the week, Sunday, was the day directly chosen by the God the Father & God the Son upon which to send forth the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit and thereby to empower the New Testament church. (For the Day of Pentecost is and always has been on a Sunday.)
3.  Acts 20:7 specifically mentions the first day of the week, Sunday, as the day "when the disciples [New Testament believers] came together to break bread [most likely a reference to the celebration of the Lord's Supper]."
4.  In 1 Corinthians 16:2 the apostle Paul specifically instructed the New Testament church at Corinth to collect their financial offering "upon the first day of the week."
5.  Remember that the New Testament church is built upon the foundation of the New Testament apostles and prophets, "Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone," not upon the Old Testament law and prophets.

If I was you I would ask to see their guidebook/handbook, that is what turned me off from BIMI and FBWWM, I just saw so many rules that restricted the missionaries freedom and many of the rules had nothing to do with the Bible. Unfortunately today, people sometimes think their own philosophy of missions is the only way to do missions, there are many things the Bible does not address but certain mission boards and missionaries feel so strongly about. I have personally seen where missionaries and boards try to Lord it over another missionary. But you will have to decide for yourself what is best for you. 

If I was you I would ask to see their guidebook/handbook, that is what turned me off from BIMI and FBWWM, I just saw so many rules that restricted the missionaries freedom and many of the rules had nothing to do with the Bible. Unfortunately today, people sometimes think their own philosophy of missions is the only way to do missions, there are many things the Bible does not address but certain mission boards and missionaries feel so strongly about. I have personally seen where missionaries and boards try to Lord it over another missionary. But you will have to decide for yourself what is best for you.