Jump to content

1Timothy115

Members
  • Posts

    2,661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    88

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Genevanpreacher in Where do we draw the line for IFB?   
    ​Well said but, I caution, not so much that it becomes monotonous and forms into an agenda.  
  2. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to John81 in Presbyterian Minister Doesn’t Believe in God Yet Defends His Christianity   
    Indeed there are many false preachers and teachers (prophets) around us today. They preach false messages of God just wanting everyone to be happy...you aren't so bad so God will welcome you into heaven...or even that God will ultimately take everyone to heaven...or hell will only have the devil, Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson and a handful of others residing there...God is love (only love) who is non-judgmental, a pampering, doting grandfather in heaven...God loves and needs our country too much to punish us...our country (wherever we may live) is better than others so God will bless us...God isn't against homosexuality, pre-marital sex, shacking up, divorce and remarriage over and over again, filthy movies and music, our doing almost whatever we want for the sake of happiness; which God wants more than anything for us...and of course the most destructive message that Jesus either isn't the way to God/heaven or that Jesus is only one of many ways to God/heaven.
    Christ and His followers preached repentance, salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone, the unsaved are lost and condemned to hell with only one means of getting to heaven and being right with God, and that through Christ alone. Those who preach this today are, like Jeremiah, often the target of vile attacks and the false prophets seek to drown them out with their damnable lies.
  3. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Alan in Presbyterian Minister Doesn’t Believe in God Yet Defends His Christianity   
    I ran across a verse, Jeremiah 29:9 it was during the time when Jerusalem had been carried away to Babylon. There were a number of false prophets and prophecies, as many of you will recall. We see much of the same thing around us, evil leadership, evil religion, wickedness, and the example of false prophesy above. I suppose it must be Satan's further attempt to discourage us but, the words of Jeremiah 29:13 were spoken as a comfort during those times and should also be a comfort to us. 
  4. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Ukulelemike in Holding wages overnight   
    Everything about modern culture and society is set up in such a way that its virtually impossible to pay people daily in a majority of jobs. Now, I'm not saying its right, just saying that its how it is and good luck trying to change it back. We know that society would get worse and worse, because wicked men are waxing worse and worse. A lot of what the Bible forbade in the Old testament is not done anymore, anywhere. But also remember, it was written FOR Israel, not for everyone, everywhere. Like the rest of the law of Moses.  Is it a good principle? Of course it is, but its not a good society we live in, not a godly society, so we should not expect it to run like God demanded of Israel.  I suppose if a church has the ability to have paid staff, they could pay daily if they chose-but even there, when you are dependent upon the money coming in one day, maybe two, per week, even then you need to work the pay according to when the money comes in.
    The OT biblical principle is based upon people who, as was said above, generally worked as day labour. It was to make clear that, whatever agreement was made by the one hiring, would be made good according to the agreement. If he hired them to be paid that day, they were to be paid that day; if he hired them with the understanding that they would be paid weekly, then he was to pay them weekly, not keep it extra time over the agreement.
  5. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to John81 in Presbyterian Minister Doesn’t Believe in God Yet Defends His Christianity   
    I was also thinking on these things. The great falling away, which has already occurred across Europe is proceeding fast apace here in America too. For a long while now there have been many preachers who were unsaved, yet they believed in God and somehow thought they were serving Him, but now we have a growing number of preachers who outright deny God even exists, or they deny the Word of God is perfect and actually God's Word, or they deny Christ Jesus is the only way of salvation, or all of these things and more. How much more fallen away can a church and professing Christians be when they deny the very God of Christianity, His blessed Word and His Saviour Son?
    Such preachers have to have hardened their hearts and allowed themselves to be blinded by the enemy to engage in such wicked foolishness. The creation denying their Creator exists and thinking themselves wiser than the Creator they deny.
    No doubt men such as Finney and other staunch men of God from days gone by would be outraged. Not only would they be outraged, they would be preaching multiple Holy Ghost empowered sermons a week against this outrage. They would be preaching with fire in their bellies the reality of God, heaven and hell, sin and the one and only means of salvation, Christ Jesus, the Son of God.
  6. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from John81 in Presbyterian Minister Doesn’t Believe in God Yet Defends His Christianity   
    Sad, Finney would be outraged.
  7. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Ukulelemike in His hat is in the ring   
    ​​You got the "L" in the wrong location
  8. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to John81 in Killing Jesus [Movie]   
    ​My wife and I were talking the other day about how we have several channels but mainly only watch about three of them. Unfortunately, without the cable connection we have now, we couldn't pick up any of those channels. Without some form of "cable" we could only pick up two local channels (one NBC, the other CBS), and possibly sometimes pick up the PBS station.
    I've enjoyed watching some Hogan's Heroes on TVLand, one other station sometimes has the old Batman on. We don't have Star Trek on any of the channels. They did just add a new channel, without even telling us, and it seems to play old movies. I stumbled across it a couple days ago while channel surfing as I waited for the local forecast to come on. I got to watch some of an old Lone Ranger movie from way back in the day.
  9. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Pastor Scott Markle in Some "Formatting & Use" Questions   
    To whomever may be able to provide answers, I have a few "formatting & use" questions --
    1.  In the past setup of Online Baptist, we could create an automatic "ending element" (I am not sure of the technical term) for all of our postings.  Mine used to read as follows:
    For the Excellency of the Knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord,
    Abiding in Christ, and Christ in us,
    Pastor Scott Markle
    www.shepherdingtheflock.com
    Does this new setup for Online Baptist still have such a formatting element?  If it does, I cannot find it; therefore, could someone direct me to it?
    2. I notice that the present formatting for Online Baptist causes a double space at the end of every "paragraph."  I like this feature for regular paragraph writing.  However, it is not so preferred for something like a complementary closing, where each line of the closing should be together without spacing.  Is there a way to turn off the "double space at the end of a paragraph" feature for certain sections of a posting (or even for an entire posting)?
    3.  In the past set up of Online Baptist, when I entered a thread I would be taken automatically to the first posting of that thread since my last visit.  However, now I am taken to the very first posting of the thread every time.  As a thread becomes much longer, this occurrence becomes more "annoying."  Is there some formatting method that I have missed, that would allow me to go automatically to the first posting of a thread since may last visit, as in the past?  If there is, could someone reveal it to me?
    Thank you, whomever, for whatever help you may be able to provide in these matters.
    Pastor Scott Markle
  10. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from John81 in Killing Jesus [Movie]   
    ​Yep and...I'm sure glad you got rid of the "dog" avatar
  11. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Ukulelemike in His hat is in the ring   
    My primary issue at this time is his eligibility.   The first continental congress set a precedent that a natural-born citizen was one who was both born within the borders of the United States, and both parents were born there, as well. Now, we have since seen others make changes in that, going baclk and forth, some saying only the parents had to be, or that even only one parent had to be a born citizen, and the candidate could be born anywhere. So it really brings up a lot of questions. There was a lot of noise over Obama;'s birthplace, now nary a peep over Cruz's Canadian birth. I think its time to set something in stone over this.
  12. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from John81 in board rules?   
    O.K. it was my question, meant in all seriousness but, now I believe I will just consult the thesaurus and post it below. I personally believed you meant [baiting] attempting to trip up a brother or sister [taunting] would be deliberately attempting to pick a fight.
    [baiting] verb lure
    Entice, seduce, allure, attract, bedevil, beguile, draw, fascinate, tempt, lead-on


    [taunting] noun provocation; teasing
    Barb, derision, gibe, insult, jab, jeer, put-down, ridicule, brickbat, censure, comeback, crack, cut, dig, dump, mockery, outrage, reproach, sarcasm, slam, slap, swipe, backhanded, compliment, dirty, dig, parting, shot, snappy comeback 


  13. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Alan in board rules?   
    O.K. it was my question, meant in all seriousness but, now I believe I will just consult the thesaurus and post it below. I personally believed you meant [baiting] attempting to trip up a brother or sister [taunting] would be deliberately attempting to pick a fight.
    [baiting] verb lure
    Entice, seduce, allure, attract, bedevil, beguile, draw, fascinate, tempt, lead-on


    [taunting] noun provocation; teasing
    Barb, derision, gibe, insult, jab, jeer, put-down, ridicule, brickbat, censure, comeback, crack, cut, dig, dump, mockery, outrage, reproach, sarcasm, slam, slap, swipe, backhanded, compliment, dirty, dig, parting, shot, snappy comeback 


  14. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to 2bLikeJesus in When a FBC decides to give to a new mission, should the members of the church have the opportunity to vote or should that just be up to the Pastors and clergy?   
    In my church the Pastor will thoroughly vet which missionaries are invited to share their field with the congregation.  Then if their ministry looks like something we could support the pastor will make a recommendation of support and a vote is brought to the church.  We have not been able to approve every missionary that presents their field, or sometimes we support them as much as 2 years down the road as funds are made available.  Note:  Sadly we have also had to call for a church vote to pull support from a mission work because of doctrinal errors, disqualification of the missionary due to sin, or a change in focus.  We require our missionaries primary focus be that of church planting with the purpose and ultimate goal of training up local nationals to take over that church and then the missionary moves on to establish another church.  We once decided to pull support from a missionary who had stayed on as pastor of the work they started for over 15 years and had a congregation of 2,500 and was collecting a salary from that church that exceeded our entire monthly church offerings combined.  We currently have a wonderful group of 20 missions fields our church supports faithfully at $50 per month plus special offering donations as needs are made known, for instance we recently paid for the air fare for a missionary family in China to travel back the U.S. after the death of the father of the missionaries wife.  They had not been back home in many years.  It was awesome to be able to see and entertain the Maricle family missionaries to China for a few weeks.
    Bro. Garry
  15. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Alan in board rules?   
    ​The doctrines that are traditional IFB are biblical, sound, correct and not 'perverse,' like the aforementioned heresies. I agree wholeheartedly with you. An example (Revelation in particular) some may argue water has some salvation quality but, they can't argue against my favorite verse in that regard...Revelation 1:5 "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood," Nothing but the blood.
  16. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Alan in board rules?   
    The phrase, 'Bible doctrine instead of IFB doctrine,' is very similar to the term, 'legalism.' Both terms are indefinable, vauge, terms that are normally used to deny true, may I repeat, true, and correct Biblical doctrine, and the term 'legalist,' is used to slander pastors whenever a saint does not agree with Biblical preaching against sin. 
    Often the term, 'Bible doctrine instead of IFB,' is designed by brethren tying to deny: the literal intertpretation of the Book of Revation, the events surounding the Second Coming of Christ, 'preterist,' teaching,' and 'Replacement Theology,' heresy.
    Almost every time I hear that prase, 'Bible doctrine intead of IFB doctrine,' I feel the writer is trying to intimidate the individual trying to teach good, sound biblical doctrine.
    The doctrines that are traditional IFB are biblical, sound, correct and not 'perverse,' like the aforementioned heresies.
     
  17. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from John81 in board rules?   

    ​Yep...it should have read 'Biblical' and established IFB doctrines. I just ignore it if it doesn't line up (1) with scripture and (2) with scripture...ad infinitude. I was in a hurry this morning on my way to church. I should have waited until I had more time. Also, I  left out a KEY word in the last sentence "...are just a distraction here and I ignore them."
  18. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Pastor Matt in The moderation tools   
    Okay, the ability to edit your posts should be working again now.
    Unfortunately, the developers of the software removed the ability for members to lock their own threads. I'm going to look at coding that functionality back in.
  19. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Alan in board rules?   
    ​I like everything you said. I was not involved in the personal things between you and others here. However, being grounded in the faith through sound doctrine, good local church, and daily a walk with my Savior, these folks bringing 'other than IFB doctrine' are just a here and I ignore them. 
  20. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to John81 in board rules?   
    Alan,
    I thought we had moved past this and restored our good fellowship. Several people here, including a Mod, pointed out clearly that no one ever called you a traitor. In fact, it was pointed out that it was one post of your that seemed as if you were calling me a traitor. I have no ill will toward you, and I will say the following as clearly as I can in the hope you will see, believe and receive this: Alan, I have not called you a traitor, I do not think you are a traitor.
    Patriotism is love of ones country, not blind acceptance of what a countries leaders do (to be clear, I'm NOT saying you are blind to the leadership of our country). I've been a staunch patriot from a very young age and even a staunch supporter of Israel from a young age as I watched what they were going through over there on the news. Regardless of what leaders in this country do right or wrong, regardless of what leaders in other countries do right or wrong, nothing changes that.
    Baptists, including IFBs have always been a diverse lot. That was one of the important points of the "I" in IFB. While there were primarily 5 core fundamentals IFBs agreed upon, there were other areas where some amount of difference existed and it was recognized that was between them and God, but at our core we could have fellowship. Baptists in a broader sense, if one looks at their history, have held to many various views on issues outside the five fundamentals of the faith. That's why there are so many varieties of Baptists and we have to look carefully to each individual Baptist church to determine just where they stand.
    By the grace of God I was discipled by a fine Baptist pastor and a young man who was a member of his church. One of his teachings was that we let nothing of this world come between our walk with and service to Christ; not politics, not hobbies, not sports, not our emotions, nor any other thing. We are called to give Christ our whole heart and life, to pursue personal holiness (which means laying all our earthly things aside or casting them away). We are called to fellowship with the brethren, support of the brethren, prayer for one another, to weep with those who weep and rejoice with those who rejoice.
    Praise God for Online Baptist which has been such a blessing to myself and so many others. Bro Matt has done a very good job with this site, both in terms of putting it together, maintaining it, and with regards to the moderation of the site. By the grace of God I've been here many years now, I've seen many actual troll attacks, infiltrations by various "others" and similar things. More importantly, I've had some wonderful fellowship here, good friendship, much opportunity to learn and grow, to share and receive, to pray for others, to ask for prayer, to help others and receive help.
    For the most part we have a very excellent membership here, especially of those who post frequently and I'm thankful for my brothers and sisters in Christ here. That includes you Alan, you have put forth many good postings and you have much to offer. Thank you for your contributions to this board, I'm pleased to know you are my brother in Christ.
  21. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to Alan in board rules?   
    Genevanreacher,
    Excellent thoughts. Sometimes I feel some folks just want to argue and not hold a real discussion. Some folks have an agenda, (a non-independent Baptist agenda,) and are either trying to get converts to their wrong doctrine or get independent Baptist riled up and so things they ought not to say.
    The Apostle Paul said it this way, "For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.' Acts 20:29 and 30
    Non-Independent Baptist, heretics and other miss-guided individuals are creeping into OnLine Baptist to draw away disciples to their own way of thinking.
    I came to OnLine Baptists mainly for fellowship and good biblical discussions among brethren of like faith. But since I came I found out, the hard way, that this sincere intent is not the true intent of some of the brethren. This is supposed to be a On Line Forum Board for independent Baptists. Since I came on board I have been slandered, baited, taunted, miss-representated, because doctines that are common among the independent Baptist that I associate with are pounced upon, and I have a feeling there are some, 'wolves,' among the sheep.
    Also, most independent Baptist are patriotic, American loving, brethren. Liberals, and anti-Semetics, are almost unknown from most of the independent Baptist churches I attend. Every time I stood up for America I was pounced upon and pretty well denounced as a traitor. So much for honest and sincere discussions when it comes to politics. In fact, almost all of the 'Current Issus, i.e. political,' posts have been taken over by brethren who blame America for every problem in the world. Yes America does has problems; but, why not, once in a while, put the blame on other countries leaders of the world?
    I was publicly berated for promoting America, backing Israel and denouncing Communist Russia. The moment I promoted American patriotism and pro-Israel posts I was pounced on without mercy.  These wolves have no mercy and are intolerant of those brethren that do not have the same political viewpoint. Shame, shame, shame. This ought not to be. Those who promote non American values, and post non-supportive articles about Israel, should be disbarred from posting.
    The fellowship I have desired is slowly being taken away by having to watch every word I say. Sad to say, it takes some of the joy away from the fellowship of true brethren.
    At one time I could see the reasoning to allow non-independent Baptist on board for discussion purposes: now I do not agee. The wolves are taking over.
    I am of the opinon that better guidelines need to be developed to prevent people just wanting arguments, down grading traditional independent Baptist beliefs, and American patriotism. These guidelines should be clearly written down and adheared too.  Unless we have clear, sound, traditional independent Baptist beliefs, and adheared too, the wolves will tear the flock apart.
    One last item, The Pre-millenial Second Coming is a traditional Baptist belief. The literal interpretation of the Book of Revelation is not only a scriptual doctrinal belief, but it is a traditional independent Baptist belief. These two beliefs need to be inserted into the OnLine Baptist guidelines and adheared too.  Calvinism, 'Reformed Theology,' the 'Replacement Theology,' or 'Preterists,' have never been considered traditional Baptist beliefs. As Paul said, they are, 'preverse.' The promoters of these erroneous views of scripture have destroyed a lot of good posts, caused discension among the brethren, are contiually 'baiting,' and using unbeoming Christian tactics to promote their erroneous views. Those brethrern are posting on OnLine Baptists not for discussion; but they are posting to promote their erroneous views. The guidelines need to prevent these folks from posting.
    Again, I have some faith in the Moderators of OnLine Baptist to address some of these views to make OnLine Baptist a fine, enjoyable, forum in order to have fellowship and discussion with others of like faith. May we sincerely pray for these men, and women, to accomplish the task they are in considration of doing.
     
     
     
  22. Thanks
  23. Thanks
    1Timothy115 got a reaction from Covenanter in 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:   
    It's not the lie it's "a lie". So, a lie would be...
    Anything spoken in opposition to God's truth causing person or persons to reject Jesus Christ as Lord.
  24. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to OLD fashioned preacher in When a FBC decides to give to a new mission, should the members of the church have the opportunity to vote or should that just be up to the Pastors and clergy?   
    As has been stated already, we don't know all the ins and outs (and you may or may not, also).
    It's going to vary church to church -- some may be decided by "elders", some by the pastor, some by pastor and deacons, some by congregation, etc.
    We had a missionary that a family in the church has been giving support to (through the church) for 25 years. This is an excellent missionary in Papua New Guinea. They were in need of some medical supplies. We made a box (size determined by shipping regulations and shipping cost) and made a list of needed items (with recommended quantities). We then asked members to pray and donate what they believed the Lord dealt with them about. A week later we shipped it. (There were also 2 packages of candy inclosed!)
  25. Thanks
    1Timothy115 reacted to DaveW in When a FBC decides to give to a new mission, should the members of the church have the opportunity to vote or should that just be up to the Pastors and clergy?   
    On the bald facts that you present, it would seem inappropriate, but, if you will forgive me a moment, making a decision on information from only side of the matter is not safe.
     
    You may not even know all of the details, let alone be sharing all that you know.
     
    We recently had a situation where a non member questioned a decision made by a majority of members. We had enough members present according to our constitution to legally make such a decision, but I guarantee that he thinks it was done wrong. Other members who could not be at that meeting were also contacted prior, so almost every member of our church was involved in the decision.
    He simply does not understand biblical church membership and therefore while he thinks that it was not brought before the church, according to biblical membership it absolutely was.
  • Member Statistics

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