Genevanpreacher

Not appointed us to wrath, but that surely means that he has appointed unbelievers to wrath.

What Do Hitler, Alice Bailey, and Replacement Theology Adherents Have in Common?
Hmmm...
A HA!!! They all have the letter L in their names!
Oh dear...so do I...
LOLOLOL! Sorry, but I couldn't resist.

Agreed.
But that is the end result of their non-belief in Jesus Christ. Not his 'creating them for wrath'.
Just as Believers are appointed to heaven - as the end result of their belief in Jesus Christ.

Yep, sometimes I re-read ya'll's posts from years ago and wonder, " what were they doing?"
 This should be a post that makes me shake my head later.

A day of comfort for the saints but a day of trembling for the unbeliever.
For the unbeliever  2 Peter 2:9  The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:  and .Revelation 20:2  And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13  And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14  And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15  And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.  And  those whose names are in the book of life?  The saints.
For the saints 
1 John 4:17  Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
Yes, a day of trembling for the unbeliever and a time of comfort for the believer.
 

thank you for these answers.. and the lessons on lambs.. I did learn alot about them... and the meaning of rod and staff... you all are so helpful and I appreciate it

I like the great size of this one - In 1 Samuel 17:7
"And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him."
Goliath held a hefty staff of a spear - the spearhead weighed about 15 lbs! 

Since this topic has such seeming importance to you, about the best I can do is refer you to one of the many excellent Bible programs that have wonderful search features. If you feel frustration because no one has been able to source the OP, then you should then source it yourself. Once you finish it would be only right to come back and tell us your results.
The fact that Jesus said it and the Holy Spirit inspired the wording and God saw fit to preserve it for all mankind, is good enough for me. Here we can read the words of God himself and I don't feel that He needs a human interpreter, He said what he meant and he meant what he said.
 Mt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
I guess my thought patterns are simple enough that I trust God to be able to impart His Word to me in a manner that I can understand it.

This may seem odd to some, but I both agree and disagree with GP on this issue for reasons of my own. I won't go into my reasons on this locked thread out of respect for the mod that locked it, as well as the direction this thread was taking.
As far as the subject is concerned, I think it is a valid subject that should be discussed. Just because it has come up before doesn't mean we can't discuss it again. If no consensus was reached in the past, it would seem that arguments for and against may be beneficial to those who simply don't know or are on the fence in regard to it.
If those that are interested in pursuing this subject would like to continue, I would suggest a new thread and also suggest a couple of conditions. This thread was locked because it seemed to start down the road of members baiting each other in a manner that would drag this subject off topic and create an avenue for members to  accuse each other of doctrinal error. In other words, it got personal.
In this respect I would suggest these two conditions for reopening this discussion, if the mods agree.
1. Each contributor agrees to post his or her arguments in a Christian manner and adhering strictly to the original     subject.
2. No personal baiting, bashing, flaming, ridicule, innuendo, or attempts to belittle any other member or their view. In other words; Be Nice.

Until I joined this message board I had never even heard of the F part of IFB. I, and any other Independent Baptists I fellow shipped with simply described ourselves as Independent Baptists, I always thought and continue to think that this simple designation is all that is needed. I think that at this late date the term "Fundamental" has come to be associated with extremists, especially outside of Baptist or even Christian ranks.
I use the term IFB here on these boards simply because it seems that this is the term that has been used here historically. But as for myself, I think it is an unneeded and possibly even a confusing descriptive term, especially to those outside of Baptist ranks.
I will never drop the name, "Baptist" because I believe that the truth has, and still does, reside in Baptist ranks. I will also continue to use the term "Independent" in my every day life to describe what kind of Baptist I am. I believe that our designation as "Independent" is born out by Scriptural examples of how the Church That Jesus Built is to function.

Sounds like the judgement day to me.

The Bible does not say a woman can't wear pants.
I have seen women wear dresses and skirts more immodestly than pants much more often.
Many times I think the 'modesty' question has more direction toward the mind of the man and less toward the dress code of the woman.
If us guys could contain our minds better, less questions about pants would be involved. Modesty is the point.
"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."
There it is.

Well, I certainly do NOT know what was given in the "private message" response.  On the other hand, I have noted Brother Pittman's two attempts at asking his "controversial" question.  I am aware that this question originated out of contention with Brother Alan's thread discussion.  I do NOT know what the position of the moderators might be concerning whether this question should be discussed.
With all of that preface, in answer to Brother Pittman's question -- Although I STRONGLY hold to the pretribulational, premillennial rapture of the saints, I myself do NOT believe that the opening verses of Revelation 4 are speaking concerning that matter.

I admit, at times, to seriously considering dropping the IFB title, due to the poor name it has been given by some, preachers that are legalists, abusive and rule with an iron fist-I suspect most of us could name a few in that camp. However, I also realize that if that were the case, I'd have to drop the title of Christian, as well, because it has been so greatly perverted for the last...oh, 2000 years. So as I choose to continue to call myself a Christian, because TRUE biblical Christianity is right, so I have chosen to continue to call myself Independent Fundamental Baptist, because I believe in the meaning of the term(s), and hold to the heart of it. So instead of dropping the label, instead I choose to teach people what it means. I have a brief statement on our church website explaining what it is and did a tract that I pass out with gospel tracts, so people know WHO we are and WHY we are who we are.

I think it was NoNicolaitans that wrote something in the past about even IFB's teach a form of Replacement Theology.

So many do, and don't realize they do.  When it is pointed out that they do, they deny it being a form of Replacement Theology.  But it is whether they deny it or not.

Regardless of which perception you believe, 70 AD, or futurist, the same thing is said here.
Hereafter.
No real need for church ages. That makes no sense either. 
They are examples to our churches down through the centuries - but not church ages - that's another fallacy of teaching.
But back to the question of chapter 4 - this chapter is considered a pinnacle point in Revelation - which needs to be cleared up.
Properly.
1  After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
2  And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.
 
Pretty self explanatory.
 
3  And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.
 
A description of God.
 
4  And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.
 
Another description of some 'elders'. Regardless of 'who' they represent, or if they do represent some people.
 
5  And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.
 
Another description.
 
6  And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.
 
Another description.
 
7  And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle.
8  And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they werefull of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.
 
Another description.
 
 
9  And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,
10  The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
11  Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
 
And a praise.
 
Nowhere is there any evidence that any of this is future being shown to John. 
It is just 'when' John was there, and 'what' occurred when he first got there.
No judgement.
No rapture of the church.
Not anything of magnitude about much - except the power and majesty of God where he lives.  

Thanks, NN, my above statement was more of an assumption on my part - I am sure you are correct.

Unless it has changed, you don't have to have an actual Facebook account to use Messenger on your phone...you just set it up with your phone number. That's how I did mine, and I don't have a Facebook account. ; )
I agree; it's a good service...think of it as free text messaging. I only installed it to message my wife so that my actual Text Messages don't get used up as fast. The only thing though is that you can only "message" (text) other people who are on Facebook and/or Messenger.
I installed it just to use it for the free text messaging; however, you can also do live video chats and phone calls on it. 
All you have to do is download the Messenger app and set up your account...takes just a few minutes...if that long. Once it's set up, you can search through your phone's Contacts...Messenger will detect if they have Messenger due to their phone number being registered with them...or you can "invite" Contacts to Messenger...or you can do a direct search for people on Facebook to message...if you know the name that they use on Facebook.

Yeah. I usually don't get much time to be on OB except right before I get ready for work between 4:30-5:00 in the morning. Kinda my down time. Gives me something extra to think about through my day.

The "supra" words are one of my pet-peeves. 
Suprasandimonianbipolarantidispensationalistsectamightymorphinpowerrangersmickeymouseandgoofyism
Just give me "the B I B L E, yes that's the book for me." 
 

Thanks GP.....in looking over the board this morning it looks like you are going back through a lot of old posts and replying. Must be bored huh?
I do that when the board gets slow in new topics or replies also. I have to physically go back through the forums to see interesting stuff I have not read before because every time I leave the forum I mark the whole board as "read".
That way, as a moderator I can keep up with anything new that members post.

I have read some of Spurgeons sermons. I have been on a Calvinist forum. The two mix like water and oil.
What really turned me off to the modern day site I tried was all the 'supra' mumbo jumbo. They tended to use words I have never heard of and phrases I have never even considered as relating to Christianity muchless the scriptures. I resisted 'looking up' their terms and tried to get a definition from their postings and never could. It's like a special code or something that only they can understand.
Never had that problem with anything I read of Spurgeons.

Ok, am I allowed to express a little bit of humor here?  (Then I will return to the serious discussion; I promise.)
As I was reading the latest postings, my glance took in the title of this thread; and all that I could think was -- "Two lips or not two lips?" 
So, I give my answer -- Yes, I believe in and have two lips.  (Makes it better for kissin' my dear wife, yes?)

Cults do this all the time. They invent words, phrases and manners of speaking that are difficult to impossible for anyone outside of their organization to understand.

Actually, if we had a better grasp of Greek and Latin (as classical education used to teach), we would have a better grasp of our own English language and of many of these terms; for the roots of our English language and of many of these terms are found in Greek and/or Latin.  We would especially have a better understanding of the "-logy" words, such as biology, geology, cosmology, eulogy, technology, psychology, methodology, theology, etc.