Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Critical Mass

Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Critical Mass

  1. Cruz is a dishonest man. Even Carson has recognized this. Cruz has also asked the party delegates to put aside the vote of the people and nominate him. Who cares what the voters say.
  2. Horseradish! I love how some of you are so in tuned to the motives of Christians. I'll tell you why I'm voting for Trump. Its because he's the only one who isn't another phony politician, except for maybe Carson, out of the bunch. And now that Carson has dropped out Trump has my vote.
  3. You are correct. Under the New Covenant during the Millennium the temple and sacrifices will be reinstituted. When did this become hard to believe? These people just toss out any verses that go against IFB teachings or just spiritualize them away. Forget literal fulfillment. Just observe above poster. He's straight out saying Ezekiel 40-48 is wrong because Paul said this over here. No attempt to reconcile the two perceived contradictions is attempted. No need to because his IFB school or church taught differently and no way can they be wrong. I honestly believe most in here don't actually read the bible. They just read portions of the bible that back IFB teachings. Or spend most of their time doing word studies of the "original languages" which are dead for a reason.
  4. The gospel was hid in the OT. It was there (mostly in type) and the prophets earnestly sought it out but it was hidden (I Peter 1:10-12). In fact, not even the twelve Disciples understood what Jesus was talking about when he told them of his death, burial and resurrection (Luke 18:31-34). And this was AFTER he commanded them to go forth and preach the gospel of the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom gospel they preached was NOT the death, burial and resurrection gospel that we preach today. That gospel was revealed to Paul who made it known to all the saints including Peter himself (Romans 16:25,26). Also, along with this revelation went the truth that Jew and Gentile would be united in one body called the church (i.e. the body of Christ). Anything that John may have written about was AFTER Paul's revelation and was brought back to his remembrance in due time by the Holy Ghost (John 14:26). This would explain why John's gospel is so much different than Matthew, Mark and Luke. Read the verses. It's clear as midday sky. Only those set in the teachings of their denomination or the "original languages" over the bible will not see it.
  5. Doesn't the verse he quoted say that the nation of Israel would be a light to the Gentiles? Didn't Jesus say Christians are a light in this world? I don't see what the problem is. The Gentiles will be drawn to Christ through how he deals with his people. Just think of it as the moon reflecting the light of the sun.
  6. All you say is true but remember the gospel of John was written way after Matthew and even Paul's revelation. The gospel went first to the Jew then to the Gentile. Matthew 10:5-7 [5] These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: [6] But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. [7] And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. The Gentiles are the other sheep he was to bring into the fold.
  7. Yes, but they still don't teach that only parts of the bible are for Christians ("all scriptures are profitable") while others are not. At least none that I ever read. They may say that certain parts (like Paul's epistles) only apply doctrinally to Christians but never that you toss out everything else. I can go into Exodus and find verses about the boards and silver knobs of the tabernacle and find some kind of spiritual application for Christians but I'm not teaching it as church age doctrine. This is what people are not getting here; there is a threefold interpretation of the bible: historical, doctrinal and spiritual. Paul's epistles apply exclusively to the church. It is church age doctrine from the apostle to the Gentiles. The gospels, Acts and the Jewish epistles have plenty of church age doctrine because of their placement after the cross but they are not exclusive for the church. There is some doctrine in those books that applies only to Israel. Also, it's clear from Acts 2:38 that Peter was preaching something different initially. Do you preach that as the gospel? Do you know anyone other than maybe a Church of Christ preacher that preaches it that way? And I mean the way it says in the KJV not the way it may say after tearing it apart with the "original language" like John R. Rice did. I don't know anyone who preaches, "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins" and, oh yeah, you will "receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" afterwords. You mean like the teachings that Invicta and Covenantor have been spewing out for years in this forum?
  8. I don't know anyone who says only Paul's epistles are for the church and nothing else. Not even your most hardcore hypers says that.
  9. And therefore I said the passage was still for today. The backslapping Amen's are nice and dandy but the passages still have to be dealt with without tearing them apart with the Greek. The Holy Ghost was not given until after baptism (in some cases after the laying on of hands) and Mark includes baptism in salvation..
  10. First off, all the bible is still for today as per II Tim. 3:16. It just might not all be DOCTRINALLY applied to the church today. Secondly, the "all nations" part was fulfilled at Acts 2:5. Many of the apostles never left Jerusalem so in essence they would have disobeyed the last commission (which was given directly to them) so I see Acts 2:5 as a fulfilment of the Lord's command to them. Last of all, like you said, Acts 2:37 says the Holy Ghost isn't given until after baptism. So apparently, something different was going on early in Acts to at least Acts 15 maybe even later where Paul rebaptizes John's disciples in Acts 19:1-6. In this case they didn't received the Holy Ghost until Paul laid his hands on them. Just like there are no more tongues and prophecies now but there were in the early church so baptism seems to play an important role in salvation or at least in receiving the Holy Ghost in the early church. All of this took place before Paul received his revelation of the body of Christ and the gospel of John was written. The problem we have is if the bible doesn't read like we want it to read so as to fit into our theology (in most cases here it would be independent Baptist) we either go to the "originals" and change what it says to fit our theology or we just outright reject what it says. This is a fatal mistake, IMO, that will shut off any more understanding of the scripture. If you believe what it says and start questioning your previous theology or beliefs (question with an honest heart to know the truth) then more understanding and light will be cast on these difficult passages. You should be a bible believer first and a baptist second.
  11. Windows is garbage. Each time they put out a new operating system the more of a convoluted mess it is. Linux or Ubuntu is the way to go.
  12. Do you mean, "What happens to unelect babies who die?" I have heard one (and only one) Calvinist say that they are tossed into the fires of hell and Christians should give God glory for it. I make this not up.
  13. Still nothing that says people are saved or damned before the foundation of the world. The election is based on foreknowledge leaving the door open for freewill. We Americans are just to be blamed for everything, huh? Reminds me of YouTube where Americans are blamed for everything and given credit for nothing unless it's bad.
  14. The passage does seem to suggest that only the predestined are called. To me this is the most difficult thing in the passage. Yet Paul says somewhere else that Christ "is the Savior of all men" indicating everyone has a chance. So, even though there's only an elect who are predestined there's seem to be a chance for everyone to be part of that elect. It's not a locked out predestination that most would never have a chance to be part of. A man can make himself part of that predestination if he simply believes on Christ.
  15. IMO, many people enjoy Christmas because it's a time to be with family and remember family memories. You can talk about the pagan roots all you want but a Christmas tree reminds them of their childhood and a special time they may have spent with grandma and grandpa or whatever. I can hardly remember any of the junk I got for Christmas but I can still remember times with my family. Paul said something about , "use it rather". In other words, take advantage of the situation to talk about Jesus. If you launch into the pagan roots of Christmas and start blasting the holiday as being evil you will find most people will shut you off. But if you use it to tell others about Jesus and the gospel without condemning the day than they will more likely to listen. I remember a good up coming church that was split because of a Christmas tree in the lobby. Testimony lost.
  16. Sounds to me like a person is predestined to look like Jesus one day, nothing about being saved.
  17. No surprise since the theory of evolution is basically a religion.
  18. Calm down, bud. I didn't say they were proof of evolution I just asked if they could be argument for the theory. I really don't have a great understanding about viruses. I didn't realize they weren't considered living organisms. I would think that even though they can't reproduce on their own the fact that they seek to survive by injecting its RNA in to another host would qualify it as a form of life. Parasites like tapeworms don't reproduce without a host either but are considered life. So viruses are an evidence of God's judgement?
  19. What about viruses? Are they a proof of evolution? Seems new ones are popping up all the time.
  20. O'Sullivan's Law: Any group or organization that isn't actually right-wing will become left wing over time".
  21. The verse doesn't say when the ordaining was carried out but it's probably similar to John 3:20,21; Romans 2:7-10; and in the case of Cornelius in Acts 10 not as Calvin taught it since there was freewill involved. The ordaining to believe unto eternal life took place sometime when they were carrying out good works. I dare to say you had some pre-gospel Gentiles (all Jewish proselytes-vs 43) who were followers of the law so God sealed their salvation by making sure they heard the gospel. So their good works is what got them ordained but it was the gospel that sealed the deal. They still had to come to the light of their own freewill, though.
  22. I keep having to reset my password. Anyone know the reason why?
  • Create New...