1Timothy115

I've found material he produced for Christian families to be very helpful. Particularly 'The Christian Home.'
 

I've found material he produced for Christian families to be very helpful. Particularly 'The Christian Home.'
 

I have never heard Dr. Robert's preach, but I do agree with you that politics is becoming an issue with many pastors. I'm not talking about Biblical issues like abortion and homosexuality, but rather political issues like second amendment, election fraud, CRT and others. 
I may agree with what some of these pastors say, but there is no need for the pastor to tell people how to vote. Once the Word of God gets in ones life, they will know how to vote.

Herein lies the danger I am forever warning against: That danger is listening and watching preachers and services from churches other than your own.
For proof of the validity of this concern, just consider than this preacher has gone off the tracks and there  is no way to tell where or when else he has done so.
God put us in a local church for valid reasons, one of those reasons is so that we will not be exposed to things such as this that was posted, and especially from a preacher that is SBC. Many times those that follow these preachers from outside of their own church do not even realize that they are following a man instead of being Spirit led. This makes them susceptible to following false doctrine and error without many times even knowing it.
In posting about this issue, I especially noticed that Bro. Tony said this: "I'm seeing quite a bit of this in nearly every sect of the Baptist church". This would indicate to me that Bro. Tony is visiting many other churches, other than his own. But even more disturbing is his indication that he may think that Baptist means universal church. This is what is indicated when someone says, "the Baptist church", in the singular voice, but meaning all churches instead of local churches. When I hear this phrase I always want to ask, "which Baptist church?" 
Please understand that I am not picking on Bro. Tony here, I am specifically warning against following preachers other than our own and indicating the error of universal church as opposed to local church.
Just some thoughts as I read the forum early this morning and saw this post. If I offend anyone including Bro. Tony, please understand that is not my intention, my intention is simply to warn against error and preachers that have the capacity to lead others in their error.

Paul had just been to our church a month prior. He looked in wonderful health then. God knows when to take us home.
 

Paul had just been to our church a month prior. He looked in wonderful health then. God knows when to take us home.
 

He was a good man. I was his oldest daughter's K-5 school teacher at Freedom Christian School in Belpre. We did "Dimes for Deems" as they were getting ready to go to the Philippines. The whole church got involved, but the kids really loved it. We had cardboard with slots for dimes. I think once filled it was about $10. I was also his sister-in-law's roommate. Paul and Debbie were good people who loved the Lord (Debbie still is).

Bill, I hope you are old enough to understand that socialism is the precursor to communism. No more reply to you, so you may as well stop contacting me. Communism 'the form of government' not some obscure situation you may have personally encountered is godless. People living under communism who desire Christianity want to leave their country for that reason.  I reject your left wing ideas out of hand. You on the other hand, although deceived, may very well be a nice guy.
P.S. I voted for Donald Trump and Mike Pence already.

Bill, I hope you are old enough to understand that socialism is the precursor to communism. No more reply to you, so you may as well stop contacting me. Communism 'the form of government' not some obscure situation you may have personally encountered is godless. People living under communism who desire Christianity want to leave their country for that reason.  I reject your left wing ideas out of hand. You on the other hand, although deceived, may very well be a nice guy.
P.S. I voted for Donald Trump and Mike Pence already.

Actually, Biblical Liberality, as I have presented above, is the position that EMPHASIZES PERSONAL responsibility, because it emphasizes my own responsibility to take out of my own pocket in order to give from my own heart of my own material possession unto another in need.  Indeed, the Biblical command of Biblical Liberality is so PERSONAL that if I do not personally give of my own personal possession to help those in need, I personally commit a sin in the sight of the Lord my God, and will personally be held accountable by Him.  Governmental liberalism, however, removes personal responsibility by forcibly removing an individual's material possession through taxes (so that the individual does not need to have any personal heart of compassion whatsoever at all), and by governmentally redistributing that material possession unto those whom the government deemed "worthy" (so that the individual does not have personal say in those to whom it is given, or any personal connection with those to whom it is given).
In fact, in every passage or context that you have presented, the PERSONAL aspect of giving is precisely what is emphasized; whereas the governmental and its authority is completely absent.
Matthew 19:21 -- "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell [personally] that thou hast, and give [personally] to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." (Note: There is NO reference whatsoever at all unto governmental authority or programs in this command.)
Proverbs 22:16 -- "He [personally] that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he [personally] that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want."  (Note: Again there is NO reference whatsoever at all unto governmental authority or programs in this warning.  On the other hand, if you feel that governmental authority or programs is implied within this warning, do you also feel that if the government takes your material wealth through taxes and gives it to the rich, that you yourself with then "come to want"?  You do realize that many liberal politicians in DC are rich, right?  Making a goodly bit more than my own $30,000 per year.)
Matthew 25:31-46 -- "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.  Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye [personally] gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye [personally] gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye [personally] took me in: naked, and ye [personally] clothed me: I was sick, and ye [personally] visited me: I was in prison, and ye [personally] came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye [personally] have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren [note that the specific recipients here are not just any poor and needy, but are specifically the Lord's own BRETHREN], ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."  (Note: Yet again there is NO reference whatsoever at all unto governmental authority or programs in this account.)
Thus I repeat:
 

You clearly don’t understand the role of government. If we followed your logic, should the government also preach the Gospel? After all individual believers are commanded to preach the Gospel.
Do you think the government should take peoples tax dollars and pay ministers to preach the Gospel? If you say no then your thinking process is contradictory. 

You don’t seem to understand that God has different commands and requirements for individuals and for different institutions such as the Church, the Home, and Civil Government. 

Governmental Liberalism - The government putting its hand in your pocket to forcibly take your wealth for distribution to those whom they deem the worthy "poor" (after pocketing some themselves).
Biblical Liberality - You putting your own hand in your pocket to willingly and lovingly take your wealth for distribution to those whom the Holy Spirit directs you as the "poor and needy" (not the lazy and immoral).
Our Lord Jesus Christ and God's Holy Word command Biblical Liberality, but do NOT support governmental liberalism.  Those who use the commands of Biblical Liberality as a defense for governmental liberalism demonstrate their Biblical and spiritual ignorance.
(By the way, I am pretty sure that Bouncing Bill is still not using the King James translation for his Bible quotations.)

Christian Charity given willingly and directly to noble causes is not the same as compulsory giving to the government who then chooses for you where and how money is spent. Jesus asks you to do it directly and willingly. The politician seeks forced payment, forces you to give them your money while promising to only give some of it to the poor and even then to things which are appalling and poorly managed, then many squander what you give them to the point there is never enough for the original cause, so then demands more money which they then take by force from you. NOT. THE. SAME.

I don't remember reading where Jesus taught any of the principles of socialism or those common to liberalism. 
I do remember the Bibles teaching about if a man does not work he should not eat?
and about how murdering children is wrong.
I also never see where Jesus calls for censorship of viewpoints one disagrees with.
nor do I see Jesus ever advocating forced redistribution of wealth by the government. 
Socialism is absolutely not what Jesus taught.
 

It is strange how people say they accept the teachings of Jesus, but when people want to implement his teachings they are called socialist or liberal. 
The GOP certainly is not the party it was before Nixon. When Nixon instituted his Southern Polity they became the bigoted, racist party we see today. It is interesting how the parties switched after Johnson's civil rights bill passed. The old "solid South" which was Democratic became the new "solid South," but Republican. 
My guess is that many on the board are not old enough to remember before Nixon. 

Yes, but in my opinion only if they have no idea what the Dems of today represent or they have no idea what the bible teaches outside of a few Sermon on the Mount verses. Many people, particularly older folks, still think the Democrat party is the party of FDR or John Kennedy. Those days are long gone.