Jump to content

John Young

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    John Young reacted to Jim_Alaska in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    This thread topic was about effeminate men, it has moved away from that to encompass men in a leadership role, women's place in marriage, clothing, etc.
    To me being effeminate is not about any of these things. Rather it is more about how a man thinks of himself, his speech being more like a female and even exaggerating the female speech patterns, it also encompasses such things as mannerisms being more female than male.
  2. Like
    John Young reacted to JimR in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    This discussion of hard versus soft preaching is interesting.  It is entangled with angry, indignant, meek, mild and weakness.  Very confusing.
    But i know what works for me a listener.  I want the preacher to focus on scripture and keep control over his emotions.  If he occasionally slips into passion, ok.  But as a preaching style, it feels a bit like being bullied.
    God’s wrath is legitimate, but the preacher is not God.  I need to be admonished but not yelled at.  I need to be taught and that requires objective analysis of scripture.  I need to be inspired, and that requires positive emotions.
  3. Like
    John Young reacted to heartstrings in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    I was taught, in church, that the reason that a family is out of order is solely the man's fault for not "leading". it was also taught, and still is, that if the husband will just "lead" the wife will "follow" and everything will be Ok, But common sense itself should tell anyone that isn't always the case.  Under this teaching, the ladies were given flowers and praised for being great moms on Mother's Day, but whenever father's day rolled around the men were always castigated. After these sermons you left with a helpless feeling that, because of all the innate shortcomings of church-men. the only "real man" in the house was the pastor. Consequently I've also known wives to say things like "I'll submit when my husband learns to lead". That kind of attitude is certainly not what the Lord intended ladies to have but you can't place too much blame on them when they're hearing teaching which is nowhere to be found in the Bible.  Paul, and Peter, on the other hand addressed BOTH genders in the same message and there was a reason for this. Even women are commanded  to "lead". How so? Notice the next verse;
    If that is not "leading" I don't know what is. So, instead of having an attitude like "I'll submit to my 'hubby' when he mans-up and leads", the Bible plainly tells women to "submit" anyway. Are men ignorant or just afraid to preach this? And while we're on submission, I don't recall ever hearing anyone expounding much on stuff like 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. Wow! That one passage could save alot of marriages in this sad, wretched world. I know people have to want to change, but they need the whole counsel of God. Love feeds off of love. How? Wife submits to the husband and makes him want to love and honour her, conversely, the husband loves and honours the wife and makes her want to submit. If that cycle is broken, it's not time to quit. Fix it by doing your part anyway instead of sitting back and saying I'll do mine when they do theirs. What's the title to this topic. Oh yeah, effeminate men, I'll get back to that. 🙂
    The World demeans men and manliness every day and I've often wondered; has this hateful world taken away so much of the joy and honour of being a man, that it no longer appeals to many males? I'm not condoning effeminacy or anything; just an observation. But Christians are not to be like the World are we? No, we're supposed to build each other up, instead of tearing each other down. .God loves that.  BTW, Our eldest son, just took our grandson to Kentucky last weekend on a deer hunt. At 11 years old he got his first deer with a crossbow, and 3 more with a rifle. Man-stuff. 🙂
  4. Like
    John Young reacted to heartstrings in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    The word "respect: is not used in this scripture but the idea or principle is there. We are to respect or "be subject to" the "power", vested in certain men, that God has ordained. The only time we are to "fear" is when we do evil.
    1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
  5. Thanks
    John Young reacted to heartstrings in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    I'm sorry for going off topic, but I would like to interject:  If a pastor, or any other man wants a woman to do something; the right way is to come to her HUSBAND first.
    5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
  6. Thanks
    John Young reacted to heartstrings in Where did the whale spit out Jonah?   
    On the seashore 🙂
  7. Like
    John Young reacted to DaveW in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    What verse?
    Remember that you suggested that fear AS WELL AS respect are required.....
    So which verse supports that?
    I can't see anything in Roman's 13 that stands out as saying what you are saying, so help me out a bit here.
  8. Like
    John Young reacted to Jim_Alaska in Matthew 12:40   
    Good call Salyan, I agree. The OP has had almost seven years to get an answer in agreement with him from at least one person. In seven years he has not, it's enough.
  9. Like
    John Young reacted to Jim_Alaska in The Local Church.   
    Bro. Alan is right on the money with this lesson. Only a local New Testament Church has the authority to ordain, and that ordination is to be accomplished through the oversight of other pastors to assure that a man meets the qualifications laid out in Scripture. I might mention also that it is my personal belief that this ordination by a local church is also an affirmation of God's call of a man to the ministry by a local church.
    So then, if ordination is to be carried out only though and by a local church, this begs the question of ordination by any organization outside of a local church being valid at all. 
  10. Like
    John Young reacted to Jim_Alaska in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    Meekness is not weakness. Meekness is power under control. This is why Scripture describes Jesus as meek; He certainly had the power, but He also had it under control.
    As to the effeminate issue I cannot speak to it, I have never seen it in a church setting, only in the world in general. Perhaps it would be profitable for you to stop "church hopping" and find a church home to settle in to.
  11. Like
    John Young reacted to No Nicolaitans in Patriotism   
    I served in the Coast Guard.
    My dad served in the Air Force, Navy, and National Guard.
  12. Like
    John Young reacted to Paul Christian in What are Your Thoughts on Effeminate Men in the Name of Christ   
    As the world seeks to blur the lines between men and women, it seems that Christians are often found to be following suit with the world on this matter. Christians that seek to justify their position in doing this are often found to be toting a false bible version that blatantly changes God's words in order to make God Himself effeminate. In the KJV, Genesis 1:27 clearly separates the creation of man in His image from the creation of "them" as it pertains to the creation of two genders. Again, in 1 Corinthians 11:7, the bible clearly separates the man's creation in the image and glory of God from the woman, which is the glory of the man. 
    i am now seeing men teach from the KJV that they are both created in the image of God. Christian churches, including baptists, have seemingly succumb to the idea that a Christ like man should appear to be weak, quoting verses of meekness. While, surely, we must come to Christ in meekness, as a little child, and entreat the brethren with such an spirit, is there no other attribute by which Christ is manifest, for what shall we say, that Christ beareth the sword and the key to hell in vein? 
    What of the prophets of old, who were commanded to cry aloud and spareth not? Was John the baptist sought out by the multitudes for his soft raiment and easy words? Was he not a voice that crieth out in the wilderness? Are we to perform better in meekness than Christ Himself, sparing the volume of words which He spake concerning false prophets and teachers of hypocrisy? 
    As for myself, I hear better when a voice is raised from the pulpit. My ears, which are dull at times, receive the message as if it were not a light thing. My heart is pricked by words as of a trumpet sounding, but when loud words out of context flow abundantly, I perceive that it is not right, yet when no words ever trumpet out from the pulpit, I perceive there to be no zeal, at least not according to knowledge.  
    It is as though man was created in the image of God for the purpose of leadership. What do I perceive when I hear a woman preach, or her voice trumpeted in a congregation or a home? Is the man to remain silent, being held in obedience as if it were of the law? I've been to two baptist churches in as many weeks where the women gave the message, and when I spoke of it, was yelled at by women while the men remained silent.
    I have encountered many men who would otherwise speak as men, but when speaking of the things of God soften their voice, and loosen their shoulders. They then speak in a smooth voice that can only be likened to that of a meek and mild woman. They can go from normal speech and demeanor to an instant smile of happiness and joy speaking in the voice of a woman.  If these men speak as such all of the time, it only fosters thoughts of doubt in me concerning their manhood. 
    If a man turns this effeminate demeanor on and off, it appears to be fake, and if it is never off, it appears as sinful effeminacy. An effeminate christ has been promoted for centuries, beginning at least with Catholic idols and pictures of Christ with long flowing hair, and wearing a skirt rather than breaches. Even if we reject these idols and images as fundamental baptists, are we projecting a false image of Christ in our mannerisms? Do we err on one side due to fearful offense to others when another side of Christ is revealed? 
    Is not wrath in His power as much as grace? If we speak of His wrath lightly, and quietly, who then shall hear us but those who have already heard? Who, being dull of hearing, shall see the fullness of the power of God through those who claim to have His spirit in them? Are we to cast off the spirit of Alias, John the baptist, or even Christ himself when he rebuked the false prophets, calling them vipers, and hypocrites with the the jot of exclamation? Do we speak of hell fire as much as Jesus did, being more than that of heaven? 
    Jude 22  And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. If some have compassion, and some save with fear, who are those today which are saving with fear? If we all save with compassion only, what saith the Spirit of fear, or what saith you of it? What doth even nature tell you that a woman would most likely do? Would she tend to save with fear, or compassion? What saith even nature concerning the man in this matter? 
    As God created man in His image, so therefor should men speak, and to that which God hath given unto the woman, let her also speak of it. 
    God bless,  
  13. Like
    John Young got a reaction from Salyan in Steven Anderson   
    It is precisely because I follow Christ that that I'm speaking out against misrepresentation and false narratives regarding Anderson. If you see this as my defending him, then that is what you chose to see. But if you look closer, and consider what I have been saying all along, then you will see that I have been trying to defend my brothers from getting caught up in believing and sharing lies to "defeat" a errant/false teacher. We should not and cannot overcome lies with lies but rather only with truth.
  14. Like
    John Young got a reaction from Disciple.Luke in Steven Anderson   
    In regards to Brother Anderson, I am neither a supporter or a detractor. I consider him a Christian Brother who holds to errant doctrine. I do not recommend him, his church, or his errant Covenant doctrines to anyone and I think he and his followers should be corrected when they try to promote those doctrines. (My attitude toward recommending him and his camp is the same that I have for Ruckmanites or contemporary Baptist groups). However, I also am not interested in promoting lies about him (or any fellow Christian) and these lies should also be confronted as well.

    To be sure, many people on either side of this want me to go further than his doctrine and take a stronger stand on him as a person. They want me to either say he is an "unsaved false prophet" and partake in condemning him, beyond what I believe there is actual evidence for, so they can label me friend or foe as well but I'm not really interested in being an enemy to any Christian but instead to correct and help them and if I can, give them the benefit of the doubt.
  15. Like
    John Young got a reaction from Disciple.Luke in Authoritative Sources on positions taken by Independent Fundamental Baptist Pastors/Churches   
    IFB churches are independent. They hold to clear cut provable doctrines from the Bible so that would be their regulating authority. Aside from pastors discussing doctrine and having simulare views there really is no set document. 
  16. Like
    John Young reacted to Alan in The Day of the Lord   
    I will be sending, "The Day of the Lord," study to a proof-reader in preparation to put this study in pdf format so that whoever wants to use it for their own personal study, or a series of lessons at church, or for whatever reason, can do so.
    So, if anybody has any comments, dis-agreements they want to bring forth, thoughts, bring out any mistakes that I made, or suggestions, etc... now would be a good time to bring them out in the open. I do listen to constructive criticism from those I respect (and sometimes from those I do not).
    God Bless!
  17. Like
    John Young reacted to Alan in Pastor / Church Planter / Soul Winner Needed: Fulton, MI   
    Thanks for the information.
    I would like to add that that the folks at Maranatha Bible Baptist Church are friendly, love the Lord, and would be behind the man of God who would accept the position of pastor both in prayers, encouragement, and support.
  18. Thanks
    John Young reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    By the way, the reason that whole nations and people groups were converted unto Christ throughout church history was NOT because of the scientists, but was because of faithful preachers and missionaries who sacrificed all for the cause of Christ and His gospel.
    (Note: "Logic" CANNOT carry forward its process correctly if it does not handle all information with precise accuracy.)
  19. Like
    John Young reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    (Hmmmm, I am having to try this a different way because the forum is giving me troubles about posting.)
    Mr. Thomas,
    I am not certain that your above posting was at all directed toward my previous communications and challenges toward you; however, I would point out a few problems with your above posting --
    1.  You assert that "God created logic" and that "God made the study of logic."  Have you first proven those assertions by any authoritative means, or are those assertions simply two of your assumed premises?  Remember that "logic" begins with one or more premises; therefore, when we engage in the process of logic, it is of value for us to recognize our starting premises.  If an individual cannot make that recognition, then an individual cannot engage in the process of logic correctly.  (As for myself, I would agree that God created human logic; however, I would also contend that the sin nature in man has corrupted that creation, such that human logic is NOT inerrant, but is actually and often errant.  Thus I would further contend that human logic cannot be trusted as the FOUNDATION for truth.  On the other hand, I am not at all sure that I would agree with your assertion that "God made the STUDY of logic."  I am not aware of ANY divinely revealed principles for following the process of logic, which would be required if God Himself actually made the STUDY thereof.  Now, I myself am quite familiar with the principles and processes of logic; and this familiarity is one of the very reasons why I reject human logic as the FOUNDATION for truth, although I DO employ human logic in my processes of Bible study.)
    (Well, let us see if this posting works.  If so, then more to follow.)
    (Well, look at that, it worked.  Let us now see if this attempt also works.)
    2.  You seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  Through this assertion you appear to make "logic" central to the core of Biblical Christianity.  However, as I study God's Holy Word, I find that CHRIST, not logic, is the central core of Biblical Christianity.  In fact, Colossians 2:3 declares concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."  In addition, Colossians 2:6-8 further adds the following instruction and warning, "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord [that would be - through faith], so walk ye in Him [that would also be - through faith]: rooted and built up in Him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.  BEWARE lest any man spoil you THROUGH PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST."  (As for myself, I most certainly will not listen to ANY philosopher (whether he claims to be Christian or not) who teaches in contradiction "to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness" (See 1 Timothy 6:3).)

    3.  As I mentioned in the previous point, you seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  However, God's own Word in Romans 1:18-23 asserts something different concerning society, saying, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.  For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, WHEN THEY KNEW GOD, THEY GLORIFIED HIM NOT AS GOD, neither were thankful; BUT BECAME VAIN IN THEIR IMAGINATIONS, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEART WAS DARKENED.  PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."  Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 1:20-31 declares, "Where is the wise?  Where is the scribe?  Where is the disputer of this world?  Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?  For after that in the wisdom of God the world BY WISDOM KNEW NOT GOD, it pleased God BY THE FOOLISHNESS OF PREACHING to save them that believe.  For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: BUT WE PREACH CHRIST CRUCIFIED, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.  Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.  For ye see your calling, brethren, how that NOT many wise men after the flesh, NOT many mighty, NOT many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in His presence.  But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption; that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."  (As for me, it would appear then that the real reason we are losing society is NOT because we have cast aside the wisdom of philosophical logic, BUT because we have cast aside the foolishness of preaching Christ.)

    Now then --

    1.  Your foundational authority for truth appears to be LOGIC.
    2.  Whereas my foundational authority for truth is GOD'S WORD.

    You initiated this thread discussion with a challenge against my foundational authority for truth, asking if God's Word is truly inerrant, or if it might actually be errant.
    In return, I have challenged your foundational authority for truth, asking if human logic (and even more precisely - Mr. Thomas' ability in logic) is inerrant, or might actually be errant.

    Can you defend the inerrancy of human logic; and even more precisely, can you defend the inerrancy of your own ability in logic?

  20. Thanks
    John Young reacted to DaveW in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    But your premise that many of us are rejecting logic and that we "believe because we want to" is just wrong.
    Christians should be the greatest skeptics the world knows, but you are not trying the spirits. You truly are starting at the place that Thomas was: "I will not believe, unless I see the scars and feel the wounds."
    There have been several answers given which you dismiss because you don't like them. They are not "bad answers" as you see them to be, they simply are not satisfying to you. We can't help that. If you do not want to believe, then nothing will convince you - and by all appearances you do not want to believe. You just want to ease your own conscience of the guilt you feel for rejecting the Biblical AND logical conclusions.
    You reject any and all answers you are given NOT because they are illogical or inadequate but because you WANT TO REJECT them.
    If you were serious about it would not have rejected for instance my original answers by saying:
    "To Mr. DaveW: I can't tell you how much I appreciate your long and detailed answer; your effort has greatly moved me, and I am very grateful to you for your time and thoroughness! I have heard these answers or ones similar to them over years of asking these kinds of questions, but I am still uneasy; they are ad-hoc, or like you said, 'put together' and 'not watertight', and some are still strictly speaking errant (even if rounded in the inconsistent way suggested, the numbers of soldiers in the army are still not the same, and couldn't bereferenced in an exact sense, like in a scientific paper or a court of law, to which standards surely God's own word should meet). This doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the strict Biblical Inerrancy either, and as I'm sure you're aware there are many more contradictions in various degrees to be found through out the texts. However, like I said before, I am very, very grateful to you for your effort and dedication, and any more insight from you would be most welcome!"
    You would have entered into discussion about what I wrote.
    You didn't. You simply said it was not good enough for you.
    You don't appear to be interested in the discussion you say you want.
    You DO appear to be more interested in what men say about the Bible, but apparently only in men who doubt the Bible.
    Why do you not quote men like Spurgeon who believed the Bible sart to finish was inerrerant? Or men like Tozer who believed the Bible was inerrant?
    There are plenty of men who are on record as stating the Bible is without error, but you choose to enlist the words of men who throw doubt on the Bible.
    And I still maintain that if you put as much store in the Word of God as you do in words of men (even men who do state that the Bible is without error), then you will be 1000 times better off.
    If the men you choose to follow and defend are doubters of the Word of God, then where are you going to end up?
    And you have not put up one serious answer to any verse I have posted. I was not posting them for the fun of, but because each of them answers your problems.  But you choose to ignore them because they are the Word of God which you do not trust.........
    We have tried, but you refuse to accept our answers - not because they are inadequate, and not because they are insufficient, and not because they are wrong - they are none of these. You reject them because you do not like them......
    I will not beleive unless I see the scars and feel the wounds.....
    Joh 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
    26  And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
     27  Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
     28  And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
     29  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
  21. Like
    John Young reacted to Alan in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    Mr. Thomas,
    Thank you for your replies to my set of questions on the two paragraphs that I quoted from Dan Barker's book, "godless." I could not open the pdf text file that you uploaded, but, the previous answers were sufficient in my quest to know you and your beliefs better. I am not going to debate any of the questions or answers.
    As with DaveW, I also think that your miss-quoting me, and twisting my post, was not good. For the records sake, I meant what I said and will make sure that everyone knows exactly what I meant.
    After studying your answers I have come to the conclusion that you are an atheist at heart and came here on Online Baptist to cast doubt on the inerrancy of the scriptures, promote atheism, and create an atmosphere of debate and quarrels among the brethren.
    If you are truly seeking the truth concerning the supposed contradiction of the three passages of scripture previously discussed, than you will accept the fact that neither one of the three passages discussed do not contradict one another.
    As a personal testimony. I was raised by a father that was a hard-core atheist and agnostic and I believed every word he said concerning the contradictions in the Bible, all religions were fraudulent, evolution was a scientific fact, all ministers were in the ministry for wealth, all ministers were hypocrites, and that the Bible was full of fables, legends, not logical, hell was not real and neither was heaven, and only deluded fools believed in Christ. My father's hatred for God, the Bible, the church (any church), and ministers of the gospel, was intense.  As my father believed, so did I. My father simply believed that when you died you went back to the dust of the earth and that was the end of it all. While in High School I had read, and accepted as fact, the writings of Thomas Paine, "Age of Reason," I still have a copy of "Age of Reason" in my library.
    At 19 years old, looking at my possible death in the face while in the Vietnam War, I decided to read the little New Testament that was given to me in my induction in the military. Long story short, after reading the New Testament, hearing a message on the reality of hell, and a gospel tract,  I came to the logical, and correct, conclusion that the scriptures were true and everything that my father believed, and that I accepted as factual, was not true, but was fraudulent, man's philosophy, and a monstrous lie of immense magnitude.
    I have seriously studied every, and I mean every, supposed contradiction written by Thomas Paine, Dan Barker, Vincent Bugliosi, and some other recent atheists, and have come to the conclusion that their supposed biblical contradictions are not contradictions. In fact, after studying the above books, and other atheist material, with your postings, I have come to the conclusion that you are an atheist.
    If you are really seeking truth, you need to accept the answers to the previous three passages discussed as truth and seriously consider the previous posts of the brethren here on Online Baptist.
  22. Like
    John Young reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    Mr. Thomas,
    I am not quite certain that I am understanding "the two" that you are intending to reference.
    IF by "the two" you mean (1) inspiration and (2) inerrancy, then I would express the following:
    1.  Divine inspiration is the foundation for Biblical inerrancy.
    2.  Divine inspiration is the source and origin for God's Holy Word, whereas Biblical inerrancy is the result of that divine inspiration.  (That is -- IF Scripture is inspired of God, THEN it follows that Scripture is inerrant, since God Himself is inerrant.)
    That ALL Scripture is inspired of God as per 2 Timothy 3:16, such that God the Holy Spirit specifically and precisely moved the human penmen of Scripture to communicate God's Holy Word with "jot and tittle" accuracy as per 2 Peter 1:20-21, is my personal belief system.  As such, since I would hold that God the Holy Spirit Himself is perfectly inerrant, I would further hold that the product of His personally inspired Scriptures are also inerrant ("true and righteous altogether").  Even so, in ALL Bible study I begin with these premises, such that in Bible study I do NOT set up myself as a judge over the possible errancy of God's Holy Word, but I set up God's Holy Word as a judge over my own errancy.
    (Note: All genuine logical processes begin with at least one or more premise.  In your own earlier postings, you claim to approach the inerrancy or errancy of any portion in Scripture with neutrality, claiming this as the best approach and claiming that your own logic is the means by which you make your judgment thereof.  In this manner, you have taken up some premises, such as:
    1.  Human logic is an accurate tool by which to examine the truthfulness of Scripture.
    2.  You yourself have a sufficient grasp of the "logic-tool" to employ its process accurately in general.
    3.  You yourself have a sufficient grasp of the "logic-tool" to employ its process accurately over the content of Scripture.
    I wonder if you first approached these premises with neutrality BEFORE you began to engage in your "logical" examinations of Scripture.)
  23. Like
    John Young reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    Mr. Thomas,
    Although you presented the above answer to Brother Alan, I wish to make comment on it.  I believe that the above answer reveals the real reason that you are struggling with assurance of faith in the Bible (God's Holy Word).  In your present system of belief, you do NOT fully believe that the Bible is wholly God's Holy Word.  You appear to have a low view of Biblical inspiration, a low view of Biblical preservation, and a low view of providential translation.  As such, you seem to have a system of belief wherein whole portions (and maybe even many portions) of the Bible are simply the thoughts and interpretations of men, not the very (jot and tittle) words of God.  I can agree that IF I viewed the Bible (or at least portions of the Bible) as being simply sourced in men, I would also question its errancy (at least in those portions); for it is a certain fact that men are errant.  On the other hand, since I believe that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16), and that no portion of Scripture originated out of "any private interpretation" of men or "by the will of man," but that "holy men of God spake [communicated] as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (See 2 Peter 1:20-21), thus I believe that all Scripture is "true and righteous altogether" (See Psalm 19:9).  Even so, accepting the sincerity of your plea and truly seeking to help you, I would contend that your real problem and struggle is NOT with the errancy or inerrancy of the Bible, but is with the doctrines of inspiration and preservation.  I would contend that until you come unto full assurance of faith in the Biblical doctrines of inspiration and preservation, you will ALWAYS struggle with the question of errancy.
  24. Like
    John Young reacted to DaveW in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    Pro 14:12
    (12)  There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
  25. Like
    John Young reacted to SAB76 in PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy   
    Mr. Thomas:
    This will be my last post on this thread, as I have come to the conclusion that you are not here seeking what you originally posted. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, and was moved by your seemingly heartfelt plea for help. Yet, at every turn you continue to reject bible scripture, AS IT IS WRITTEN, and would rather hold on to your opinion of how YOU think the scripture SHOULD have been written.  
    If the answers that I have given you, using the scripture AS IT READS, does not satisfy your logic, and you choose it is not the answer you are seeking….then…you already have your answer. That answer being “I see what the scripture says, BUT it is not what or how I would say it.” You have rejected plain, simple, easy to read, English found in the scripture, for your own opinionated idea of logical thinking. You have set yourself up as the foundation, you have set yourself up as the authority as to what or how the scripture SHOULD read if you had written it, because then it would fit your logical outcome. And since you have set yourself and your logical thinking as the foundation and authority…I say, go build upon it. Clutch onto your logic and let it carry you to safety. I can no longer help you, as I do not have the things you desire…“Silver and gold, have I none (Logical things to give a man asking for them); but such as I have give I thee…” (All I have are the words of God written in the KJV) I ask, are you the beggar or Peter in this story? If you see yourself as the beggar, then why do you not receive the help that I have given thus far? You refuse the scripture plainly revealed, yet, have not given one rebuttal, other than your opinion of how you THINK the scripture would read. If you see yourself as Peter, then what are you doing on here at all? Shouldn't you be out offering your hand in help to those seeking "alms"?
    As for me, I have no fear, I have no doubt, and I have no questions on my foundation and my authority. I have a solid Rock foundation (Jesus Christ), and have used the scripture as my authority to BUILD my faith. I am grounded, sure and secure in my foundation and the authority of the scriptures, and have complete faith in them that I will stand the winds and rain when they come…Can you say the same?
    I am sorry to say Mr. Thomas, but you will not find logic in the scriptures (seriously…look it up. Logic is nowhere in the scriptures). So, since there is no logic in the scriptures, and only logic will suffice to convince you to believe, then your only other recourse would be for you to go back to CS Lewis, Aquinas, and Plato, these great godly men you claim were full of logic, and receive your peace, answers and security from them.
    But I am afraid you will find no peace, security or help from these men. You have allowed yourself to be deceived by these men, especially, by your beloved CS Lewis. (And this will be the point you shut your ears, close your eyes, and harden your heart.) Because, how dare I speak evil of this great man of God. I speak evil of him, because he has a “form of godliness, but denies the power thereof”. He is worse than the worst murder this world has known. WHY? Because at least you knew the murder wanted to kill you, but CS Lewis, just like Satan, pretends to be an angel of light, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, sending men and women to hell by LYING to them. HOW? CS Lewis is damning others to hell with his allegorical teachings of salvation by works, and “becoming” saved, rather than what the bible says in Eph. 2:8-9. His teaching is that faith in Christ is what gives man a “second chance” at salvation. In other words that his faith opens the door for him to make the necessary steps to attain eternal life. How is this any different than the Catholic teaching? And then there is the false hope he gives for those that may have had the faith, but did not quite make the necessary steps on earth. That hell is locked from the inside, and that man can choose not to remain there. Hell is NOT locked from the inside. Man cannot choose to leave hell and make a long upward journey to gain eternal life as taught in “The Great Divorce”. Christ is the one with the keys of death and hell. He has control over death and hell. If a man does not want to be trapped in hell, then he MUST receive eternal life through Christ by faith, and FAITH ALONE, to save him from death and hell. No Grey Town, no bus trip to the valley, no upward climb to God, no chance of ever getting out. The rich man in Luke 16 was damned and there was no escape from his ETERNAL burning and torment in the F-L-A-M-E of hell.
    I will leave you with these final scriptures, which I am sure you have read and know. These 2 verses are completely illogical when read by a man devoid of faith, yet, for those THAT BELIEVE they are turned into Niagara size waterfalls of living water that bring comfort and security. But sir, IF you have not come to Christ and asked him to save you, and put “illogical” faith in a man you have never met, nor heard to save your sinful lost soul from a burning lake of fire, these verses will pour on you as gasoline while you burn for eternity.
    “For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I KNOW whom I have BELIEVED, and am PERSUADED that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.”
    “These things have I WRITTEN unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may KNOW that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.”

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...