Jump to content

John Young

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content Count

    554
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

John Young last won the day on May 30

John Young had the most liked content!

About John Young

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Kalamazoo, MI
  • Denomination
    Non-Denominational
  • IFB?
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

9,576 profile views
  1. I've never had to decide between the two and they are both for my family's good. If I can't spare 10% of my worldly goods to provide for my spiritual family and the spiritual well being of my physical family then the 100% of my worldly goods going to only physical things won't help me or them either.
  2. I've always taught a freewill tithe. The New Testament church is structured after the Melchizedek priesthood and Paul makes it clear that he has a right to be paid, as does other ministers of the Gospel. (1 Corinthians 9). If they are to be paid then our example to teach is the tithe but not of commandment or constraint but of a free will and cheerful heart. I've studied the tithe and Christian giving in depth at church as well, which can be found here for those interested in the freewill tithe of Christians: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPBnTVkjTpCIMXwSG6O5iqZUl3LCiqrGf
  3. That's why the KJV isn't called the New Bishops bible. It was meant to be an an authoritative revision of all those that came before it. Modern Critical text revisions by their very nature are not authoritative works as they exclude the tradition of those faithful works that came before them in favor of "new discoveries" of manuscripts not historically used and passed down in the churches. The NKJV while claiming authoritative lineage favors and inserts into its text critical text revisions of doubtful origin and therefor it is not a KJV nor faithful to the text it claims to merely "update".
  4. Sin is the symptom and not the disease. Sin is born of lust, which comes from a rebellious heart. Until one repents by turning back to God by faith in Christ, they cannot be saved from sin. It is not the repentance of sin that brings grace but rather repentance of rebellion by turning in humility to God. Romans 2:4-5 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; James 1:13-16 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. 16 Do not err, my beloved brethren. James 4:5-7 5 Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? 6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. 7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Here is my view of why the word "repent" is not in the book of John: We studied the subject of repentance in Sunday School at our church and went through every bible passage which used the word. I f anyone is interested in those lessons, they can be found here:
  5. One Book Stands Alone: The New King James PerVersion (part 4 of 4) Deals with the internal inconsistency of the NKJV word choices and the fact that it changes meanings and does not just update language and grammar of the KJV.
  6. Well, technically if you do tithe whenever you do have income, and have the desire to tithe even when you do not have income, then you are still tithing... I've also always considered the tithe more than just income but rather includes all that we have been blessed with. Time, talents, treasures, and our praises, etc
  7. Yet, the source of this theology is not Ellen G. White and the SDA, as it can be clearly found in the notes of the reformers in the Geneva bible. I wonder if this is not just an SDA doctrine but if other Catholic and Protestants still hold to this as well? d. Daniel 10:13 Though God could by one Angel destroy all the world, yet to assure his children of his love, he sendeth forth double power, even Michael, that is, Christ Jesus the head of Angels. a. Daniel 12:1 The Angel here noteth two things: first that the Church shall be in great affliction and trouble at Christ’s coming, and next that God will send his Angel to deliver it, whom here he calleth Michael, meaning Christ, which is published by the preaching of the Gospel. n. Daniel 12:13 The Angel warneth the Prophet patiently to abide; till the time appointed come, signifying that he should depart this life, and rise again with the elect, when God had sufficiently humbled and purged his Church. n. Revelation 12:7 Christ is the Prince of Angels, and head of the Church, who beareth that iron rod, the fifth verse. See the notes upon Daniel, Dan. 12:1. In this verse a description of the battle and of the victory in the two verses following. The Psalmist had respect unto this battle, Ps. 68:9, and Paul, Eph. 4:1 and Col. 2:15. o. Revelation 12:8 The description of the victory, by denying of the thing in this verse, and by affirming the contrary in the next verse. As that Satan gained nothing in heaven but was by the power of God thrown down into the world, whereof he is the prince, Christ himself and his elected members standing still by the throne of God. p. Revelation 12:8 They were cast out, so that they were never seen anymore in heaven.
  8. Seems to me, from everything you have posted on this site, is that you actually believe the same as them. Only you and them place a different meaning on the phrase "repent of sin". You both ignore what the other is actually saying.
  9. So, would you agree or disagree with the following gospel presentation? Why?
  10. So what does "Repentance of Sin for Salvation" mean to you?
  11. I have never seen them or their followers state anything like what you claim they teach. They teach that for the lost sinner to be saved they must repent by believing on Christ alone. They teach that after one believes on Christ for salvation they then should repent of sin and be holy as a mater of sanctification and discipleship. Their Repentance, salvation, and sanctification teachings are the same as many fundamental Baptist groups, two of which are Hyles Anderson Baptist college (Where Steven Anderson attended), and Sword of the Lord Publications. The following clips shows their reasoning on the repentance in salvation:
  12. “The Rapture" Part two: What is the rapture, Where do the Major Christian Frameworks place the rapture and why. Please note that this section is not meant to be an in depth study of all “rapture” views and does not represent each view with the same terminology or variants to which adherents to those views may prefer but rather is just meant to, in very broad strokes give an overview of the issues involved along with a title indicating the general origin of those doctrinal views. At its simplest, the rapture teaching is the “catching away” of the church body of Christ, from Earth to Heaven, to forever be with Christ. Those theological frameworks which teach a rapture, in general, agree with this description. However, controversy has arisen as to when this rapture occurs within the Revelation timeline. Division over the timing of the rapture centers over three main questions, “Is the church the same or separate from Israel?”, “Is the Rapture and Return the same event?”, “Is the rapture and resurrection the same event?”. The answer two each of these questions by the major theological frameworks will determine where they place the rapture and how they will manipulate the book of Revelation and other scriptures to fit their assertions. It is the goal of this study of “The Four Returns of Christ.” to show the natural placement of these events in the Book of Revelation and to show that each group and event is separate. To show that the Book of Revelation, or any other passage of scripture, does not need to be rearranged to fit the events or artificial framework's assumptions upon the text about the rapture. Rapture theologies that see a type of rapture are generally pre-millennial (before a future literal 1,000 year Earthly kingdom of Christ on earth) and are considered “Pre” (Before), “Mid” (In the middle), and “Post” (at the end or after) the 70th week of Daniel (also generally called “The Tribulation Week” and "the time of Jacob's trouble”). Pre-tribulation tend to be unique to “Dispensation theology” and the others to a “reformed covenant theology”. Most non-rapture views are “catholic covenant” variants, such as Primitive Baptist, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, etc., are “Post” (after) or “A” (non literal) millennial and tend to associate “rapture” verses, not with the final week of Daniel but with a resurrection at the final judgement or simply allegory of some non-physical event or age of time. So why do these three place the rapture in the areas of the week that they do? The reasoning is theological and derived from outside of the Revelation text. A plain reading of Revelation shows several clear “catching aways” (seven in fact) occurring. Of John in 4:1-2, of the martyred saints in 7:9, of the two prophets in 11:12, Of Christ in 12:5, of the 144,000 in 14:1, the reaping of the earth in 14:16, and of the dead in 20:12. Clearly there will not be seven raptures of the church, however, depending on the theology, each of these “catching aways”, as well as other factors, play a part in each theologies placement and reordering of the Revelation events in order to fit their framework. As seen in our basic outline of Revelation there are four noted sections of Revelation as it is naturally written. The three major categories Dispensation, Reformed, and Catholic generally place their rapture within the noted chapter sections; “before tribulation” in chapters 1-4 (dispensation), “during tribulation” or “before God's wrath” in chapters 5-14 (reformed), and at the end/after tribulation or as part of the resurrection in chapters 15-22 (catholic). Dispensation hold to a separation of church and state covenants (one does not inherit what the other has been given and each will receive what they have been promised) and a division of “dispensations” (time-frames in which they perceive that God has “changed the rules”) therefor will naturally look for the rapture in association with the “church” section of revelation and not with the “Israelite” or “judgement of the world” sections. Overly simplified, chapters 1-4 is the only “return of Christ” section within the “church dispensation” and the rest is “hereafter”. Therefor, dispensationalist, to be theologically consistent, must place the rapture in this section “before the tribulation”. Reformed view holds that “the church” is “spiritual Israel” and a New Testament replacement for the Old Testament physical nation of Israel that has been “done away with” everything physical Israel had been promised in the OT, the NT church will now receive along with the NT promises. Over simplified, this means that when Israel or the tribes or “saints” are mentioned in Revelation it is actually speaking of either OT Israelites from heaven restored to earth in the tribulation as witnesses (chapter 7) and then saints being gathered in chapter 7 and 14 by the angels, as the “church” rapture. This “exchange” of NT church saints to heaven and glorified OT Israelites to earth becomes their key section, to take place “mid-week” or “After the tribulation but before God's wrath”. Because “the church is Israel”, the reformed view attempts to “overlap” the events of Revelation, so that the events of chapters 7 and 14 coincide. Therefor, to be theologically consistent, they have to place the rapture somewhere in one of the middle two “return of Christ” sections. Catholic views tend to believe Israel has become the church, both physically and spiritually, and that they have already received “the Kingdom” that was promised in Acts 1. In this view, they tend to see parts or most of Revelation as being allegory and either has already been fulfilled or is currently being fulfilled in current events, metaphorically. They tend to see the church age as consistent with the millennium and the only things to happen is the “giving up” of the kingdom to God at the end of the age, after we have subjugated the world to Christ. This view to be theologically consistent will either not believe in a rapture or will associate it with the general resurrection of the dead “at the end of the age”. Therefor, they must place their allegorical “rapture” or resurrection in the fourth “return of Christ” section of chapters 15-22. In these three general views, most rapture theories can be placed to coincide with their chosen “rapture” and “return” and still be “theologically consistent”. Yet, Just as we know that there are not “seven raptures of the church” but one, and that there are not “four returns of Christ for the church” but rather one, we also know that only one of these general views can be correct in regard to the rapture of the church. It is at this logical point that adherents to the three major views then attempt to justify “their version” by reordering Revelation events so that the “returns” and “raptures” either are eliminated as such or are aligned to be the same events. In part three of “The Rapture” we will asses in more detail the biblical passages associated with the rapture and why I believe the Rapture of, and the return of Christ for the church, is in Revelation 1-4 and why this is the view we will adhere to in our study of “The Four Returns of Christ.” in the book of Revelation.
  13. I like Brother James L. Melton's simplified view of the issue and the linked articles give a good balance view of repentance. "REPENTANCE ISSUE SIMPLIFIED There are generally three views of repentance, and only one is correct. Sure, one can offer up a dozen views, but they will all end up being very similar to one of the following . . . The EMPTY-BELIEVE view. Just pray a prayer and make a profession. You get eternal life as a Christian because you professed to have changed your mind about believing, even though your sinful life never changes and you bear no fruits of the spirit. The WORKS-BELIEVE view. You profess to believe on Christ, but you also mingle that belief with turning from your sins TO BE saved. The fruit becomes the root, which amounts to salvation by works. The BIBLE-BELIEVING view. Seeing no hope in any self effort, you receive Christ and become a new creature, born of His Spirit to now live a new life with the fruits of the Spirit manifesting themselves as you grow in the Lord. If you want it all stewed down to three simple explanations, there they are. If you need Scripture references, see our web site: http://www.biblebaptistpublications.org/doctrineofrepentance.html?fbclid=IwAR2A-HM8WkpDW1NgF5gPqQV-0yH7PngpB1h8g5ustUzq3xoL8pQ4NrgAcHI "
  14. Thank you for your service Brother. Looking forward to what God will do with you as you enter into ministry.

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...