Jump to content

1Timothy115

Members
  • Posts

    2,661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    88

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to SureWord in "Counseling"   
    I recently read of a pastor of a KJV Only church in Missouri who shot and killed a man because he thought his wife was cheating with him. She was recklessly galavanting around with the man but no evidence she was sleeping with him.
    "Abstain from all appearance of evil"
  2. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Jerry in "Counseling"   
    I believe all the counselling a child of God needs should be based on the Bible - not on the world's philosophies (which psychology and psychology are - and usually what is often included in the general title "Christian counsellor" when it is referring to someone with a degree or a title). Also, Psalms 1 deals with not following the counsel of the ungodly - of which both psychology and psychiatry come from.
    That being said, I do believe Christians that do counsel based upon the Word of God should take whatever steps are appropriate and necessary to protect themselves and those they counsel. Men should counsel men and women should counsel women - or at least the men who counsel women (ie. like a pastor counselling a member of his flock) should have another woman present at all times to prevent any problems - perhaps a husband and wife could counsel the female member together, if the issue was such that the pastor's perspective was needed.
  3. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to heartstrings in "Counseling"   
    The way I see it Biblically, I would suggest that women get help from Godly women counselors, and that men see only Godly men. That should remedy the problem.
  4. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to HappyChristian in "Counseling"   
    Read the book Wolves Among Lambs by Stacey Shiflett. It is a very well written book about sexual abuse and things like counseling...he sets out some ideas in how to avoid the pitfalls of it. One of those is something that my husband and I have already discussed: never be alone with someone of the opposite sex. ESPECIALLY behind closed doors. And in a counseling situation? When the emotions are involved? Alarm bells! Anyone who thinks they can withstand temptation is simply deluding him/herself ("Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall"). 
    I see no problem with pastors counseling folks. And, really, just because the Bible doesn't say something like "thou shalt counsel" does not make it wrong to do so. However, biblical principle needs to be applied in that area as well. Wisdom as to just how much counsel the pastor (or pastor's wife) can/should give needs to be sought from the Lord. Heart, I think your caveat "as it is practiced today" is important...there are changes that must be made.
    I've known folks who've gone to Christian counselors - licensed, "professional" - whose lives were ruined as a result. So there is no guarantee there, either. Bluntly, I would rather receive counsel from someone who is immersed in the Word of God and not the world's view of psychology (and, yes, I do know that's what Christian counselors study...I was on that path myself, so I am aware of the things they need to learn). I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to know how the human mind works; it is dangerous to take the world's philosophies and "Christianize" them, which is what many Christian psychologists (not all, so no attack) do. There are some good ones out there, but they do need to be carefully vetted before going to them for counsel. And one must realize that, no matter how "professional" any counselor is, the possibility of temptation is still there. While it is not as popular, currently, to talk about the abuse perpetrated on patients by counselors, it is there. When counseling is involved, the emotions are involved, and that is where the temptation can begin. (again, not saying Christian psychologists are bad, just saying one must be as careful of them as any other counselor)
    Is it any wonder that Christ asked if He would find faith on the earth when He returns? Woe to the pastors that scatter my sheep, God says. And there's an awful lot of scattering going on. ? 
  5. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to heartstrings in Three Questions for Calvinists   
    Our Sunday sermon, yesterday, was from Luke Chapter 14
    15And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.16Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many: 17And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready. 18And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused. 19And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused. 20And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come. 
    21So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind. 22And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room. 23And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 24For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.
    Did the man actually invite those who gave the excuses?
    Did those who made the excuses know that they were being invited?
    So, if the man originally wanted them to come, why did they end up with no supper?
  6. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Alan in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Bro. Wayne is not the only person here on OnLineBaptist, and in some fine churches, with the personal conviction about  women wearing pants at church.
    To call those who have that conviction, out of a heart to develop holiness in their lives, and to cleanse themselves from the worldliness in the church, "Pharisees," and having modern day "Pharisaical tendencies," or "legalistic," or "under the Law," is not the best way to have a brotherly discussion on this, or other issues in the church.
    Some of the brethren have a sincere desire to develop holiness in their household that they develop their own convictions about the clothing issue and not because somebody "requires" it.
     
  7. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Certainly, Brother Wayne, I am aware of the cultural element to this issue, which is the very reason for my series of questions above.  In the present-day Fundamental Baptist movement, this issue is being preached with such statements as -- "Men wear pants; pants-wear IS men's wear."  Yet such statements are NOT precisely accurate.  It would be somewhat more accurate to say something like -- "For the last few hundred years, in European and American culture, pants-wear has been men's wear."  However, if we actually acknowledged the cultural element to this issue, then we would also have to acknowledge that culture itself can change, and even has changed from past times.  For example, hosen was originally men's wear; but I most certainly do not intend to wear hosen today.  For another example, high heels were originally men's wear; but I most certainly do not intend to wear high heels today.  For yet another example from a different perspective, culottes are defined in a dictionary as "a women's or girl's garment consisting of trousers made full in the leg to resemble a skirt;" yet although many in the Fundamental Baptist movement declare that pants-wear (trousers) are men's wear and are therefore an abomination for a woman to wear, they still allow (and even recommend) females to wear culottes.
    Now, let us consider another point.  It is taught that the principle of Deuteronomy 22:5 still has application today, and I FULL-HEARTEDLY AGREE.  It is further taught that the application of that principle for today is to forbid women from wearing pants-wear (except possibly culottes).  However, it is my understanding that we should NOT seek to apply a principle unto our present situation until we FIRST understand the original meaning of that principle in its original Biblical context.  So then, I am compelled to ask -- What did the instruction of Deuteronomy 22:5 originally mean when it is was originally delivered by the Lord God through Moses unto the children of Israel?  Do we even know?  (By the way, having done a fairly extensive word study JUST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES concerning Deuteronomy 22:5, I am prepared to contend that the phrase, "that which pertaineth unto a man," did NOT originally refer unto a piece of clothing (a garment made from clothe) AT ALL.)  For example, an argument was made in an above posting that if an individual cannot discern whether someone is a male or a female from 200 yards away, then a line has been crossed.  Well, I am compelled to ask -- During the time when Deuteronomy 22:5 was originally delivered by the Lord God through Moses unto the children of Israel, when BOTH males and females wore a robe-type garment, could an individual discern whether someone was a male or a female from 200 yards away simply from the type of clothing that was being worn?
    Yet another thought - I have a pastor friend who often makes fun of the Roman Catholic priest for his priestly garment, claiming that the priest's robe-garment is a dress (since that would be somewhat accurate within present-day American culture), and thus that the priest is wearing woman's wear.  Now, if that pastor friend is correct that a robe-garment is equivalent to a dress and thus to women's wear, then our Lord Jesus Christ Himself wore women's wear when He engaged in His ministry on the earth.  To me, implying any such thing is highly offensive.  Maybe, just maybe, we need to be a little more precise and a little more accurate with our arguments and our declarations about this issue.
  8. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to 2bLikeJesus in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Heartstrings stated, "Bruce Jenner, the once mighty athlete is now "Kaitlin Jenner" wearing a dress".  Why?  Because wearing a dress clearly pertains unto a woman, which Bruce Jenner and other transvestites, effeminate, and gay people understand more than it seems many Christians.  You don't find those that are trying to look like women wearing blue jeans for some reason.
    Deuteronomy 22:5 King James Version (KJV)
    5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.
    The issue is clear and the clothing can even differ in many cultures, but in EVERY culture and time there is always a clear difference between what is considered women and men clothing.  For me, if I can't tell from 200 yards away whether someone is male or female by what they are wearing, then the line has already been crossed.  If I have to look and examine closely parts of a persons body that I should not be resting my eyes on just to determine whether it is a man or a woman in those pants, then it is clearly clothing that pertains unto a man.  The strongest word God uses when listing anything as a sin is "abomination".  I try to steer very clear of even approaching anything called an abomination by God.
    2bLikeJesus
    In His will.  By His power.  For His glory.
  9. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to swathdiver in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Going back even further, it was the men who carried hunting pouches, possibles bags and such.  Now the ladies where them and they are called purses!  
    If an activity causes one to sin, then maybe one shouldn't be doing it?  Just a thought!  My children ask me about dressing properly and then ask about water sports like diving or hunting and I reply that if you cannot dress for the Lord in that activity, you should not do it.  Cheerleaders, ballerinas, most competitive sports all put the woman into immodest forms of dress.    
  10. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to heartstrings in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Well, let's see. We have a country where it's been fashionable to "come out of the closet" and proudly proclaim that you're "gay" for a few decades now.  But just 5 decades ago, when I was learning to read,  Janet, Mark and Spot had a "gay" old time and it meant they were "happy". Now, Girls are going out, hunting bears with bows and arrows, fighting in combat and boys are now dainty little sissies. We DISHONOUR and emasculate our men, deeming them worthless buffoons, take away the things associated with manhood and give them to the women. How did we get here? Little baby steps. For one thing, we gave them our clothes. Women began dressing like men a loooong time ago and now the men have relented, we have little left.  Bruce Jenner, the once mighty athlete is now "Kaitlin Jenner" wearing a dress..  Y'all do what you want, as for me and my house, my wife and daughter wear dresses and and are not the least bit interested in deer hunting. 
  11. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to swathdiver in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Not addressed in this post is that to dress like a man is an abomination.  Men wear pants.  It was the leftists, the God-haters, who began the unisex movement.  Why would a Christian want to follow after them?
  12. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Pastorj in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Modesty is the key to clothing and both Men and Women fail in this area far too often, even in church. I am amazed at the clothes Christians wear. The short shorts, the low necklines, tight clothes, etc.  
  13. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Jim_Alaska in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    The Bible does not say women should not wear pants. This whole issue is a non-issue as far as I am concerned. This is a doctrine of and by man based on man's bias, not Scripture.
  14. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to No Nicolaitans in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Hello! Welcome!
    You will receive differing views here on that subject.
    My view is that there's nothing wrong with women wearing pants as long as the pants are modest...the same with dresses, skirts, blouses, shirts, etc...
    Modesty of the apparel in how it adorns a lady is the essential key...not the make of the apparel.
    (1 Timothy 2:9-10) 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.
  15. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Salyan in Is it time to practice gun laws here in America, like they do in Canada   
    The liberal central government in Canada is imposing additional gun control completely opposite to the will of many of the people. You know what happened the last time they tried to make a long gun registry? Everyone simply chose not to comply. ? So they finally scrapped it, cause it wasn't working. But now they're putting it in sideways by trying to require everyone to register when they sell or purchase a firearm.

    Don't copy Canada. Our government are idiots. Actually , cancel that. They're not idiots. They know exactly what they're doing to create an environment where they can exert total control over the populace. Covid gave them a marvellous excuse to start really enforcing socialist laws. Do you know that, as an unvaccinated citizen, I am not allowed to board a train or airplane in Canada? That I'm not allowed to work for the federal government, and a lot of other businesses too? But they're bringing in unvaccinated Ukrainians by the planeload, and the illegal border crossing at Roxham Road is still allowing in illegals from the US.
    For anyone reading this who might actually support gun control, just remember two things. Bad guys don't follow the laws. And no matter how you feel about guns, you should educate yourself with the historical truths of disarmed populations (quote borrowed).
     
  16. LOL
    1Timothy115 reacted to TheGloryLand in Is it time to practice gun laws here in America, like they do in Canada   
    It’s okay, I’m a Independent….  Like Obama ?
  17. I Agree
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Joe Chandler in Is it time to practice gun laws here in America, like they do in Canada   
    Second Amendment to  the U.S. Constitution
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    This is what I go by pertaining to guns and ownership.
  18. Like
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from HappyChristian in Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement   
    A fellowship is something entirely different than a convention. I''ve never been in an SBC church that wasn't required to support the missions of the SBC, they may have their own but they have to kick in for the SBC missions.
  19. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from HappyChristian in Wedding Bells...   
    Praying for a successful wedding.
  20. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to HappyChristian in Wedding Bells...   
    So our son is getting married on June 10. We are beyond thrilled. His wife-to-be is a godly young woman, and had I tailored a wife for him, she is what I would have made. God is so good!
    Wouldn't mind some prayer that things all come together for the wedding. ?
  21. I Agree
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from John Young in Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement   
    On a personal, Bible based note, it would not take long for me to recognize and walk away from any local church which recognized LGBTQ+IA for membership or office. If that is their position then I could not fellowship with them, only pray for them. I would not recognize them as a Baptist church, at all. But, if they have accepted this position then they don't care what I think nor what God's word says.
  22. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Jerry in History Repeating Itself   
    I do love how Webster sought to make many of his definitions refer back to the Bible (and give the definition of that word as used in the Bible). Many old readers used presented Bible doctrine in their lessons and/or referred directly to Bible characters and events, so that was pretty cool. Nowadays, people don't want the Bible at all in schools. How much different would the upcoming generations be if they used the same kind of readers again?
  23. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to BrotherTony in History Repeating Itself   
    I fully believe that Christians can backslide...I've seen it happen, and I've seen them return. 
    Proverbs 3:11-12
    11: My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction:
    12For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.
    I've heard EVERY IFB preacher, and most SBC preachers I've sat under preach sermons on "The Prodigal Son" and how it relates to someone coming BACK to God. I've also heard some from each camp preach on how it is a lost soul coming to salvation. Both had valid points and Scriptures to back up their beliefs. 
  24. Like
    1Timothy115 reacted to Jerry in History Repeating Itself   
    I do not have a problem with your specifically, nor was trying to "show off my superior intellect or view of Scripture" You stated something, and I pointed out what the Bible actually does say about it - in context. That's part of what studying the Word of God is all about - not reading a subject until we've heard enough and find an "acceptable position" to stand on, but studying the whole book to arrive at a conclusion that takes all the passages into consideration. My responses were an attempt to be Biblical, not controversial and not just have a religious viewpoint. If I am off on some things I believe or on some of my conclusions, I welcome input from the Bible. I don't get offended because someone else points out some passages or areas I may have overlooked in my conclusion. If my manner of coming across seemed wrong at any time to you, I apologize - though I do not apologize for attempting to stand upon God's Word or strive to be Biblical in my conclusions. If that is not something you can fellowship over, then we can choose not to reply to each others posts in the future.
    But again, I will restate, it was not my intent to be offensive towards you, just to post further Bible input on this topic.
    Isaiah 28:9-10 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
    Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
  25. Like
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from BrotherTony in History Repeating Itself   
    Those words from the Bible were written well before the "Great Awakening" or the second "Great Awakening". There is no never where God is.
  • Member Statistics

    6,088
    Total Members
    2,124
    Most Online
    shlomo
    Newest Member
    shlomo
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...