Matthew24

Faithful Word accidentally gives the gospel to more homos than the people that say hes wrong for hating them. Romans 1 clearly says that God made them that way. I could say that the preachers that the preachers who love homos hate hindu's and muslims, because they are destroying their testimony to them. It is still illegal in many places. Do you think its a coincidence that we just now started siding with the world on this issue? Like, christians of the past didnt understand, but now we finally understand that we should love them.

Great post bro matt!

20 minutes ago, DaveW said:

53 minutes ago, DaveW said:

You are obviously a fan.

Fact is that he presents his ministry as a big one when it is not as big as he presents it.

This is deceitful. 

Fact is, he attacks good men, and encourages his people to attack good men, and he/they do so without evidence and proof. I personally know of one man who has been called a false teacher publicly  (youtube) but the accusations against him are false.

Fact is, he often presents unbinlical arguments and attitudes to the wider public, thereby opening all independent baptists up to criticism.

Fact is, his attitude in general is not God honouring.

Fact is, of 20,000 claimed saved (over how long, I don't know) there shoild be more than 30 or so in evidence. Something is clearly going wrong in this "mighty work".

We are not talking a small discrepancy, but a VASTLY DISJOINTED representation. 20,000 to 30 or so in evidence?

This is aside from his clearly unbiblical doctrines in many areas, for which he should be censured.

So, deceitful, false doctrines, ungodly attitudes...... which of these should we overlook?

Now then, for my part, I rarely comment publicaly on this man, although I do warn my church people to avoid him, but that is part of my job.

Youre correct I am a fan. I, like 1000's of others, was saved by his youtube videos. 

I am sure not everyone that goes out is thorough with presenting the gospel, but that isnt because Anderson isnt teaching a thorough presentation. None of this is the reason that he is hated. I mean more than half of IFB preachers dont even go soul winning and I dont see anyone hating on them. It's really ridiculous. 

So I guess Anderson is supposed to force people to come to church, get baptized, and teach them. The numbers of people that truly get saved is irrelevant, the point is they are putting in the work that most are failing to do. Only criticism comes from the brethren and accusing them of not presenting the gospel correctly...like they just walk up quote john 3:16 and ask them to pray.

Idk...I think he has 300-350 that come on sunday. Obviously,.most people that get saved dont automatically start coming to church and living a christian life.

Anderson isn't only hated by the world, but he is hated by the brethren. Why? IMO even if one disagrees with his stance on Israel or the rapture, you would have to see his love for the lost. What is the true measure of love? FWBC is winning like 100 per week, why would any christian want him to go away? 

12 hours ago, HappyChristian said:

Well, here'e the thing...just because someone works somewhere does not mean they are tied in with them. As for Goldman Sachs, Heidi is a regional head in the investment management division in Houston (but is on leave of absence). So that is a bad thing exactly why? I realize that Trump and others have yammered quite a bit about Goldman Sachs, but how is working for them different from the job you choose to do? She's an employee, not an owner of the organization. Nor is she a shareholder, like Trump is. If Goldman Sachs is so very wicked that her working for the company means Ted won't make a good POTUS, then you can't vote for Trump. As a shareholder, he profits from their business. Same/same (actually worse cuz shareholders often make decisions re: the company's actions).

As for calling to audit the fed - Trump is late to that party. He joined both Cruz and Paul in the chorus (much later than them, though), with Ron Paul being the lead singer long ago.

9/11 an inside job? Trump can't actually decide what he believes - kinda like in everything. Because, as he said, "everything's negotiable."

Wanting something different is what landed us BO. 

John, J.B.Williams is just wrong. I was a member of a couple of different groups on Facebook that he was in...sorry, but with the experiences I've had there, I'll never again read or accept anything that man says. Plus - more than one true constitutional scholar has proven him wrong.

Swath, you are spot on. US law is what those in the US go by. And US law tells us Cruz is natural born.

 "Wanting something different is what landed us BO."  Yes, I thought about that when i was writing that....but did we get anything different with BO. Yes, we got more extreme in destroying our nation, but we were already well on the way. GW isn't a liberty loving conservative...he's a killer, just like BO. We are an empire with bases in well over 100 countries. Russia has like 3. Putin is the one that sounds more like a born again christian than any of these fools, but most of us can't see that because we are so blinded with hatred to the Russians. George Washington isn't walking through the door and if he was he'd be labeled a racist extremist even by moderates. The facts are we can't fix the country until we do our job as christians and win more to christ. It is our fault. We teach our kids that the earth is billions of years old, and life came from nothing, and then expect them to come home and be great christians. We bring them to the non denom church and put them in play centers and expect them to know anything about God's word. Kids aren't expected to sit still and listen in church...and if they are parents hand them a cell phone....or they go to kid's church to dumb down the message even more. Most churches i've been to are on about a 3rd grade preaching level. Christians can't grow listening to this dumbed down crud. Church is for saved people...not for winning the lost. Rant over. whew that felt good. lol

1 hour ago, John81 said:

With the creation of the unconstitutional Department of Homeland Security Bush the Second did more to prepare America to become a police state than any of his Democrat predecessors.

Even the Bush people now admit there were no WMDs in Iraq. Iraq was never a threat to America. In fact, Iraq under Saddam served as a check to both Iran and Syria. He was a strongman dictator but no worse than the many others America has worked with, even sided with. Under Saddam, unless a person posed a threat to his power, there was more freedom and commerce than other Arab nations, including our phony "ally" Saudi Arabia. The income of the average Iraqi was far greater than for those of other Arab nations. Christians were safe in Iraq. Look at the mess the place is in now.

I don't recall who it was, it's been posted here in the past, but a man who worked in the Bush White House when Bush the Second first took office pointed out that at the top of Bush's list was to figure out a way to attack Saddam...this was months before 9-11.

Also, some conservative group put out a list of Cruz's close advisers and most are from the Bush camp. Why would any true conservative or constitutionalist want warmed over liberal neo-cons as his advisers?

We are lied to constantly but most people don't care. As I've said before, there were very good reasons the Founders created a Republic with limits upon who could vote and an electoral college. Too bad we gave that up.

AMEN!  

It really isn't that hard to find out information on this topic. The hardest part is that we've been conditioned our entire lives to always believe that USA is fighting for freedom world wide. If you study these wars in depth and can put together coincedences/facts...you may find out that we were lied to. But most people will continue to waive the red, white, and blue, yell "Merica", say that people like me hate the troops, when the real Patriots are those who seek truth. Our founding fathers would have most of these politicians swinging from trees for treason. I love the troops, i hate the people that control the troops. I believe it was Feinstein that was asked "is 1 million dead Iraqi children worth it?" She replied, "yes". 

Youtube: incubator baby conspiracy               It is the truth about media propaganda convincing the American people we needed to go to Iraq in Desert Storm.

There are Islamic nut jobs, we have one as president. That doesn't mean the New World Order, who daddy bush pushed so hard on us and openly talked about, can't use and fund these Islamic extremist to take away freedoms. Then call us racist because we don't want them living next door to us. Wake up. Iraq isn't better now?/? We destroyed families and childrens lives. They weren't all extremist....and I would be extremist vs someone else if they were driving down my street killing people i know. Saddam wasn't a threat....nor Gaddahfi...there is real reasons  we went over there. It wasn't to stabalize it.....just like we shouldn't be destabalizing syria. look up syrian girl on youtube if you want an intelligent syrians perscpective.

YES! I'd take George Washington over any of them. lol. idk about Bush...he's still a traitor. The Reagan's hated them. Obama is the worst, and possibly the AC in my opinion. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't an election. Civil emergency to keep him in power. If you don't think Bush knew about 9/11 you are willingly ignorant. Dumb on purpose. Jeb escorted the Bin Laden's out of Florida. There is really so much evidence if you don't know by now....you don't want to know, because it's easier to go through life waiving your American flag and calling us conspiracy theorists....while the real patriots want to know the truth. Read your bible. The antichrist can't run the New World Order with the 1 world super power against him. 

I don't have many problems with those who voted for Cruz. For me, there are too many coincidences and relationships that cause me to question his intent. Yes, his stance on issues is great. But I feel he could be a "Trojan Horse". He worked under Bush, his wife works for Goldman Sachs, and i don't feel he's genuine. Trump isn't even close to perfect. I hate that he believes in torture, but he has shown that he can be informed about something and change. He's calling 9/11 an inside job, and calling to audit the Federal Reserve. The only 2 to talk about doing that, Lincoln and JFK. Huckabee said this is a revolution, we should be happy that it isn't violent. Newt Gingrich said the establishment doesn't like Trump because he isn't part of the secret society. I am not naive enough to believe Trump is really the answer, but I believe he is a chance. 

Here is the analogy. We've been hiring these plumbers from 2 different companies for a long time. Neither one of them is fixing our leak, yet we keep hiring them. Not only do they not fix the leak, but it gets worse. We don't care what the plumber looks like, but we aren't hiring from those 2 companies. We don't care if he has an animal on his head, or he likes women, or he has a foul mouth, we just want something different. This is why so many people are going for Sanders. Right or wrong, he's different.

People realize that the establishment politicians are corrupt, bought and paid for. Our country has been taken over by elitist, using "terrorism" as a means to take away our freedoms. Their goal is a New World Order. I believe most don't particular like Trump that much, but it's a better option than the New World Order. Cruz at least speaks of liberty and the constitution, but most conclude he is one of them. We don't want to fight meaningless wars in places where the USA was the root cause of what caused the chaos in the first place. Eisenhower spoke about the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex. We have been at war since the 40's...yet we haven't constitutionally declared it since WW2. We are no longer a constitutional republic. The people of America no longer stand with the government. "When people fear government there is tyranny"

⁷ The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.

i agree.  here is another verse we should be thinking about. This person has no root, but is saved.  ¹⁴ That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

22 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

 

THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER

 

 

 

            TEXT:MAT.13:1-10 * 18-23.

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION: There are very few things in the Bible that have generated as much speculation as the Parables that Jesus spoke. Many teachers disagree as to the meaning of some parables, as well as the symbols Jesus used to illustrate what he was teaching. 

When studying the parables it is very important to keep to the main point being taught, it is a mistake to try to make everything fit. If we forget this point it soon becomes very obvious that the parable makes no sense. A parable is not some mystic kind of teaching, it is designed to be understood---but not by everyone. 

 I do not claim to be the authority on the interpretation of the parables, and I do recognize that others hold different views. But after many years as a preacher and teacher, I have come to my own conclusions regarding this special form of teaching and the truth that was being taught. Having settled this in my own mind, this is what I teach. 

As we join the lesson, Jesus is by the seaside and as was so common at this time in his ministry, as he sat, the multitudes flocked to him. So great were the crowds, that he had to resort to teaching from a nearby ship. Ver.1-2. 

Ver.3. says that he spoke many things to them in parables. His disciples asked him a question in Ver.10. that would be good for us to deal with as we begin. It is very probable that there were many in the multitude that were unreceptive to his message. As we see later on, even some who professed to be his disciples went back and walked no more with him. This is further indicated by his answer to their question in Ver.11  A parable is a system of teaching that places one thing beside another for comparison or illustration. This was a very common form of teaching among the Jews. The parables of the Jews set forth the Jewish Nationalistic idea of the Kingdom, while the parables of Jesus were just the opposite. All of the parables implied a background of opposition and unreceptiveness concerning the Kingdom, even among his followers. The reason for this form of teaching at this time, was to conceal the truth from some and reveal it to others, as he outlined in Ver.11. 

The fact that some did not understand was not owing to the form of teaching, but rather to the hardness of their hearts. There were two factions following him at this time of his ministry, those who were against him would not believe no matter how plain he made the teaching. So his parables were designed to mystify his enemies, who would not believe anyway, while at the same time increasing the understanding of his believing disciples. This is the meaning of Mat.13:12. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

 

 

In short, the time had come to separate these two classes of people, and before it was all over everyone would take his position, either for or against. I might add that this is the same principle that is at work in the world today, the word of God separates people. 

This first parable is called the parable of the sower. As we listen to Jesus teach we can almost see the sower walking his fields, his bag of seed on his shoulder, and as he walks he broadcasts his seed over the fields. Where does it fall? Two things need to be understood at the beginning; one is that the seed that he sowed was good seed. In every instance something happened to it that made it unproductive. The second thing is that before one could understand this parable he must believe that Jesus was the Divine Sower, and that his words were the Seeds of the Kingdom. To anyone else his words would be meaningless. 

This parable then is an illustration of Jesus as the Divine Sower and the seed that he sowed is the Gospel of free Grace.     Some seed fell on the roadside or wayside and died without ever springing up. Ver.4. what’s more, the fowls came and ate them, removing any trace of their being there. We can readily see what these fowls represent in Ver.19. This represents the greatest degree of unreceptiveness such as the Jewish authorities, his most outspoken enemies. 

Some fall on rocky soil and spring up, only to perish without bearing fruit. Ver.5-6.  This represents those in a state of indecision, who are easily persuaded to reject him. They may even have been almost inclined to believe him for a while. 

Some fell among thorns and even grew for a time, but were finally choked out by the thorns before they came to fruit. Ver.7.  This represents those who believe with the head but not with the heart; or those who profess to be the children of the Kingdom but are not saved.

 

 

For a time they make a good show but in the end they are fruitless.

 

 

The things of the world always mean more to them than spiritual things. 

The fourth and last class is represented by the good ground or ground cultivated by the Spirit, in this ground the seed grows and produces fruit. This represents the person who believes with the heart as well as the head, is saved and a true child of the Kingdom. 

In conclusion, in our interpretation of this parable we have seen that; the sower is Jesus---the seed is the word of the Kingdom or the Word of God. Ver.19. ---the soil is the hearer---the fowls represent Satan described as "that wicked one.” We also see here that the purpose of Satan in the world is to keep men from hearing the gospel and being saved. Lk.8:12.

This story has 4 person types. There are 2 general views.

They both agree that person 1 is unsaved. 13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

They both agree that person 4 is saved.  ¹⁵ But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.

Person 2 seems to be the biggest question mark. ¹³ They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. This person recieved the gospel, believed it, but didn't finish his christian life strong. He didn't lose his salvation. Just because christians fall doesn't mean they were never saved.  ¹³ If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

Person 3 ¹⁴ And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and (bring no fruit to perfection).  In doing some research, I saw where this is translated into Greek as "does not mature". Can anyone verify this?

³ Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

So the debate continues between person 2 and 3...must we abide in faith until the end of our lives just like the catholics teach? lol or are we saved when we believe on Jesus?  Enter....someone talking about "meaning business" and how when we believe it has to be enough to change our entire lives (repent of sin) or that is evidence we are a tare. The church of christ cambellites isn't so far from some of us. Someone at my work just told me that the new testement begins in Acts and Revelation has already happened.

Please share your opinion.  I know there are 1000 different opinions to these parables. A guy I like to listen to said that 3 of these people are saved and only 1 is unsaved. What is your view and why?

I think there is probably 2 different ways we can judge if a person is saved?  

1. Their works, but we have to realize that there are many people that do good things that aren't saved and if someone doesn't do work it may only prove how much faith they have. "oh ye of little faith". If you don't go to church, don't read your bible, you may just be a bad christian.

2. We can ask them. Their words will tell you what they are trusting in.

On 2/22/2016 at 2:42 PM, wretched said:

Here is the point friend. If you are going to talk to them, talk to them correctly. If the drunkard professes salvation but upon further questioning never had a change of heart toward God and growth and wanting more than he is not born again and needs the seeds watered and prayed over.

The same goes for your Ned example.

Point me to the verses you use to say that you will automatically change your entire life once you become saved. Honestly, if a drunkard told me that he believe in Christ alone for his salvation I would think he is saved. I wouldn't question his salvation. On the other hand, Ned Flanders that goes to church every Sunday told me he is a "pretty good person", I would think he is damned because he doesn't get it. Matt 12: ³⁷ For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

The drunk is justified by his words, knowing he is a sinner but saved by Jesus. Ned is condemned for not putting all of his trust on Jesus.

Honestly, I think this topic probably isn't as cut and dry as anyone would like it to be...but I can't get over the thinking that we aren't justified by our works, nor do i believe, we do works, therefor we are saved.

3 hours ago, wretched said:

 

Make no mistake here fellas:

It is mere head belief in the facts of the Gospel that defines easy believism.

The absence of heart felt conviction by the Spirit is the issue. Unregenerate mental acknowledgement of the Gospel saves noone.

Put it this way, there are no instances in the Bible of anyone being pressured into belief or a prayer. This is no example of anyone being talked into a prayer.

The conversion examples are all born of preaching, hearing, conviction and belief with verbal inquiry beginning everytime by the recipient of salvation; IE, what must I do to be saved, or how can I be saved or who then can be saved, etc...This includes the thief on the Cross, who initiated his salvation also. Jesus didn't talk him into a prayer or ask him to be saved.

The scary part is that God's own people who got saved and their salvation was evidenced by their heart's desire to learn and grow and want to spread the Gospel, become confused by the false teachings of preachers probably like this Yankee fella (based on your posts) who have forgotten their own salvation testimony. Teaching a hellless, convictionless, heartless repentance or lack thereof.

There is no other way to be saved, there is no other way to know you are saved and there certainly is no such Bible idea that one can be saved and not know it. This is all purely born of satan and has 27-29% or the supposedly 30% of americans who claim Christ as Savior going to hell on a shutter.

The devil turned the Gospel into a cheap imitation just as he does everything of God. He neutered IFBs by turning witnessing into a quick sales contest and numbers reporting game to stop the flow of true conversions and keep would be useful servants who want to obey the great commission, useless for God.

Read all of I John as your personal proof to self whether you are truly in the faith or not. The book was written so that we will know that we are saved and the verse Old P quoted is at the end of the Epistle and explains that, "These things have I written so that you will know.... It seems you took it out of context as written and inserted it into your own context. Its true context is everything God gave John to write preceding it.

People continue to confuse lordship salvation with evidence of the new birth and they are not the same thing. The Bible clearly demonstrates that conversions create new creatures who will want to grow and learn and follow the Lord. Some faster than others but all will be interested in God. This idea that folks can be saved by mental acknowledgement of the Gospel, forget all about it and head back down to the whorehouse with no conviction is not of God and there is ZERO example of this in Scripture.

These people maybe be mentally "saved" according to this man made up definition of salvation but they are not regenerated and their names do not appear in the Book of Life.

We must witness but we must do it right, bathed in prayer for power of the Spirit and let the Spirit lead the person to the Lord (God gives the increase-not you)

Go in the flesh and you come back with big easy false numbers. Go in the Spirit after real importunity for the Spirit and souls, you will bring some 10, some 30 some 60 real conversions over your lifetime in the Lord.

 

But the facts are you can't know if anyone is saved or not without talking to them. There probably is some alcoholics that live at the bar and can tell you they are saved by Jesus alone. You can also find some "Ned Flanders" at church that can tell you they are saved because they are a "pretty good person".

14 hours ago, Old-Pilgrim said:

I believe we are saved by faith in Christ, but assurance is a different thing, assurance can be lost, Hebrews 10:35  Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. 1 John 5:13  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.

 

Hello Wretched, Have you ever listened to Ralph Arnold Yankee? do you think he is teaching "easy believism"?

Thanks Old-Pilgrim. I think i agree with you mostly....and love Ralph Yankee Arnold. I think it is possible for people to be saved and them not necessarily believe it. As for us, we shouldn't assume anyone is saved...but help christians grow. I think in many peoples case it comes down to confusing preaching. Telling people that we must make jesus the master of our lives. All of the lordship salvation and do you bear the fruit of a good tree talk confuses and preaches a works based salvation. One thing the fruity people always forget to mention is that a bad tree can't produce any good, and  a good tree produces zero bad.....comparing this to someones works...as if saved people never do anything bad....and unsaved can't do anything good is a false teaching. There are many unsaved people who feed the homeless and quit drinking.  I'm sorry but these self righteous fruit cakes are annoying and think they have no bad fruit....proud, arrogant, and haughty is not of God.

I have a question regarding salvation.  I believe we are saved when we believe in the gospel....the moment. BUT, when I got saved I didn't really feel saved until I grew more as a christian, my faith grew, strengthened, and confirmed that i was indeed a child of God.  Sometimes I doubt that I was saved at that moment, because I didn't feel like it. On the other hand, I don't believe we are saved on confidence, but all faith we have on Jesus and 0 on everything else. In other words, it doesn't matter how much faith we have, just that it all must be on him.  Thoughts?

19 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Oh, okay. That's strange though since you have your Google+ profile listed as Fisher of Men, and those were the only ones basically listed on Google+. Thanks for the response.

i have seen his videos tho. I like them for the most part. Not sure what his doctrine is or anything, but seems like for the most part he's good.

1 hour ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Just out of curiosity, are you the Google+ Fisher of Men and Fisher of Men Productions? The information for both is the same. If so, on your accompanying YouTube channel (Fisher of Men Productions), there is a video called "Danielle of Truth and Spirit Mime". If that is your channel, may I ask your reason for posting that video?

No that isn't me. I just liked the name

15 hours ago, Alan said:

Matthew24,

You, Invicta, and the other folks who do not believe that the Tribulation Period as depicted is 7 years in length ignore the plain teaching of Daniel 9:27. Pastor Markle proved without a shadow of a doubt the the Tribulation Period is 7 years. Both you and Invicta ignore this inspired scriptual knowledge and want everything said your way. The day you and Invicta can properly believe, correctly interpret scripture with scripture and learn how to rightly divide the scriptures, is the day you will see it.  

Your opinion is not humbled, unbiased, or correct. I respectfully disagree. 

Obviously I'm extremely unintelligent. Anyone that has the holy spirit living inside of them can see this clear teaching that tribulation is 7 years.

²⁷ And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.