Jump to content
Online Baptist

Brother Stafford

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content Count

    532
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by Brother Stafford

  1. With the release of the film, "Spotlight," earlier this year, many people who were victimized, in their youth, by priests, are coming forward about their abuse.  For the priests that are still alive to be punished, I believe that this is a good thing; however, what about those who were abused by priests that have since died?  Can anything be done for them?  Can they still file charges against the RCC itself?

  2. 1 hour ago, heartstrings said:

    The majority vote, in any given state, determines which candidate ALL of that state's electoral votes go to. My state, for instance, had a majority vote for Trump; so all 29 of our state's electoral votes went to Trump. I don't see how you can say votes don't matter. 

    The E.C. usually votes the same way that the public majority votes, but there is no rule, regulation or law that requires them to do so.  The E.C. has voted contrary to the public majority 4 times in the past and has now done so for the fifth time in our history.  The E.C. can vote however they please and they just have.  

    At last count, 59,794,934 individual voters voted for Hillary Clinton. 59,588,437 individual voters voted for Donald Trump.  That is a difference of 206,497 votes in favor of Clinton.

    However, out of 538 electoral voters, 228 of them voted for Clinton and 279 of them voted for Trump.  That is a difference of 51 votes in favor of Trump.

    For example, Maine has 4 electoral votes, but only three of them voted with the majority.  One of them voted against the majority.

    Unless I am missing something, the majority of individual voters chose Clinton, but the majority of E.C. voters chose Trump and Trump is now the President of the United States.  One can conclude that the E.C. voted contrary to the people.  How can you still think that the votes of the majority still matter if the E.C. can ignore the votes of the majority and elect someone for whom the majority did not vote?

  3. 5 hours ago, RSS Robot said:

    I’m amazed that we actually get to choose our government—the vast majority of human beings that ever lived on planet earth simply had to accept whatever government was thrust upon them. Millennia of people would marvel at the idea that we actually get to vote—what a privilege! America is a historical anomaly, and I’m grateful for it!

    Thankful to live in a nation where the voice of the people is still in play—I believe we witnessed history last night as an outsider overcame astounding odds and an enormous political/financial/media machine to become president-elect—against all odds and expectations. The whole process actually restores a bit of my faith that the American political system is still a reality.

    For the first time in my life, I did not vote at all in this election.  I am thrilled that Mrs. Clinton was not elected, but I am horrified at who was.

    However, the above quoted statements are demonstrably false.  The people elected Hillary Clinton.  The Electoral College, for only the fifth time in our history, voted contrary to the people. 51 electoral votes were favored over 224,985 votes of the majority of the people.  In all other elections (except 4), it just so happened that the E.C. voted the same way as the people, but the results of last night's voting should illustrate how the votes of the people do not, and have never, elected a president.   

    So it is clear, 538 people (currently) can vote however they please and can nullify the votes of how the majority of almost 325,000,000 people vote.

    And 51 of them just did.  Ignoring the 31 who voted for other parties, 228 of them voted for Clinton and 228 voted for Trump; which cancel each other out.  However, 51 more of them also voted for Trump.  51 people vs. 224,985.  

    So, stop kidding yourself by thinking that your vote matters.  It doesn't now and it never has.

  4. A post like this casts a dark pall over all mission work. It is a poor choice of subjects when a new member makes a post like this as his first, introductory post. This person seems to have an ax to grind and exhibits no Christian qualities that I can see. His anger is freely expressed and we only get to hear one side of the story.

    With respect, it is my opinion that, instead of silencing this voice, we should give him our ear, learn from his experiences and do what we can to change the attitude of many of our missionaries.

    I have witnessed some of what the OP is complaining about.  He may have violated forum rules, but I empathize with him.  I know IFB missionaries who fit his description and I have  personally been on mission trips to South Africa in the past, with a non IFB church, and know that LexUS is justified in many of his claims.  I have been searching for a sound IFB church in my area for quite some time now without success because of some of the same complaints that LexUS has with missionaries.  It's obvious that he is upset about the issue and he admitted that he was writing out of anger. 

    Personally, I think that post should stay.  I think the points that he raises are important enough to overlook any violations of forum rules.  Should a 911 operator hang up on a panicked caller if they use foul language?  I think it is an illustration of Romans 2:24:

    "For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written."

  5. On 11/5/2016 at 7:16 PM, RSS Robot said:

    1. Remember your dual citizenship.

    Our first loyalty is not to America but to our King. Patriotic as we may be, we have an eternal homeland:

    “For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”—Philippians 3:20–21

    ...Is your testimony to your family, neighbors, and coworkers one that shows both truth and grace? Would they find it hard to believe that you have a dual citizenship?

    ...These are issues where we must learn to think biblically—as American citizens with dual citizenship.

    ...The fact that we are dual citizens reminds us that the future is bright.

     

    The author claims that, as Christians, we have dual citizenship, but provides no Scripture which supports such a claim.  

     

    If you are a Christian, then you are a pilgrim; passing through a foreign country on your way home to your one and only country.

     

    (1 Peter 2:11) "Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;”

     

    We are soldiers chosen for battle, not to get comfortable and involved in the minutiae of this life.

     

    (2 Timothy 2:4) "No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.”

     

    As visitors in a foreign land, we are to obey the laws of the land during our visit, as long as they don’t conflict with God’s laws.

     

    (Acts 5:29) "¶ Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”

     

    As Christians, our citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven comes first and everything else is secondary.  As pilgrims in a strange land, we must work to provide ourselves and our families food and shelter, but the true patriot loves his true Kingdom and is loyal only to his true home.

     

    (James 4:4) "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God."

     

    (1 John 2:15) "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

     

    The Kingdom of Heaven is all that there is.  The Earth, and everything in it (including the United States) will be destroyed and a new one will be created.  I love my God; not any man made flag.

     

    I have heard it said, “Many brave men fought and died for worldly nations, but only one died for your eternal salvation."

  6. I have made three requests directly to Bro. Matt and have inquired in the thread, "Am I doing Something Wrong?" but have not received any response from Bro. Matt.  I have been surmising that he is either extremely busy or that I might need to be a member here for a certain period of time before being allowed access.  

    I am not complaining; I am just eager to participate in IFB section conversations.  I have never kept something like this forum up and running, so I have no Idea how taxing it must be on one's time.

  7. 11 hours ago, Rosie said:

    how much do you have to pay for startmail

    It's $59 a year.  There is a seven day free trial, so you can look around and see if you like it.  Then, if you do like it, you can purchase a year subscription.  I've had it for three years and I am very pleased with it.  

    Google monitors and scans the contents of emails.  They claim that it is for the purpose of being able to customize advertising that you see, but it is much more than that.  Before you get any email, facebook or other social media mumbo-jumbo, you need to watch a documentary called, "Terms and Conditions May Apply." The internet is much more dangerous than people think.

  8. I use startmail.  They don't search your emails and they are online privacy advocates.

    I also use Blur (formerly Don't Track Me) in conjunction with Startmail.  You can create unlimited aliases and they will forward to whichever email address you attach to them. 

  9. 6 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

    Have you heard this statement?

    "I don't believe in lifestyle evangelism."

    I never hear any form of that statement or sentiment.  Like DaveW, I hear people stating the opposite; that they only believe in lifestyle evangelism, or, more commonly, "I just believe in setting a good example and, if they like what they see and ask me questions, I'll talk to them a little about Jesus."  I have never witnessed this happening once in my entire life.

    I stated, in a separate thread, that the IFB church I was attending refused to go soul-winning and believed it to be a bad idea that didn't work.  I talk to people who talk a good talk about the importance of sharing the Gospel, but when I ask them to go soul-winning with me, they never accept.

  10. Steamed beet greens, baked potatoes, sautéed asparagus, roasted Brussels sprouts and a spinach salad with tomato, radish, scallions and Braggs vinaigrette dressing.  Followed by a small bowl of blackberries, blueberries and a kiwi.

  11. 1 hour ago, Mark16 said:

    I feel like a Baptist but am becoming disappointed with the huge number of Baptist who I feel are going through the motions and are condescending to people living with the Holy Spirit strong in them.  Just like I searched for what was missing in my life, I think the same is true for the huge Church I am attending.  Interested to learn what this site is about, because from my short time here it seems others may have been frustrated like me with their Church. 

    I can empathize with what you are feeling.  All of us here have been witness to churches getting farther and farther away from sound biblical teaching.  It is, indeed, difficult to find a good church.  Although it seems that the majority of them are teaching heresies and are not places that are edifying, there are good churches out there.  If we are diligent, we can find them, but we must remember that we will not succeed in finding a perfect church.  Remember: the trouble with churches is that they're all full of sinners.  

  12. On 10/17/2016 at 2:19 AM, Jim_Alaska said:

    Bro. Stafford. This is your thread, I attempted to answer your question in the best way I could. I cannot show you a scripture that specifically says that God called (my name) to the ministry because there is none, that's why I said we cannot manufacture scripture.

    I did not base any conviction on a personal experience brother, I simply recounted my personal experience in the hope that it might be of some benefit to you.

    I gave you my experience, the rest is up to you. You can cast it aside, but it is still my experience. I am sorry if my response to your question is not sufficiently adequate for you, but I feel no burning need to justify myself to men on an Internet message forum.

    With all due respect, it seems that you simply wanted to chime in on the subject, although you could not offer what I asked for in the original post.  In the OP, I said that I have heard people give accounts of personal experiences of being called by God, and that I needed help finding Scripture that supports or refutes such a claim.  You merely gave your account of a personal experience, offered no Scriptural support and claimed that none exists.  Your input consisted of merely illustrating my original point.

    More simply, it was as if I said, "I need to know some reasons why people enjoy eating apples." and you responded by saying, "I love apples, but I can't tell you why; and no one else can either."  

  13. 9 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

    ...no man will ever convince me that what I experienced was not real and that my God no longer directly influences the lives of his people.

    Basing a conviction upon a personal experience is, quite simply, a very dangerous way to practice discernment.  That leaves us open for untold deceptions.

    (2 Corinthians 11:14) "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."

    That is precisely the reason that God has given us His word.  

    (2 Timothy 3:16-17) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: {17} That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

    Again, making life decisions based upon personal experiences without Scriptural support is indescribably dangerous.

  14. 4 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

    Brother Stafford, we cannot manufacture scripture to suit our preconceived questions. If there is no scriptural support to answer a specific question, we can't make scripture say what we want.

    I do not believe that we could conceive of a question that cannot be answered by Scripture.  Some things may not be addressed specifically, but they can be addressed using Scriptures that discuss similar topics or themes.  

    Marijuana may not be addressed by name, but we can conclude that, because there are so many verses that condemn drinking alcohol, being drunk and of the verses that promote being sober minded and clear headed, that marijuana use is, more than likely, condemned.

    3 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

    I did not say, nor do I believe that they are subjective experiences.

    Nonetheless, what you have shared is the very definition of the word, "subjective."  I am looking for objective scriptures that will support or deny your claims.

    Recognizing that an apple is an apple is an objective observation.  If I say that the apple is delicious, that is a subjective opinion.  If I say that the apple has positive nutritional benefits, that can be verified objectively.  If I say that the apple whispers it's nutritional contents to me in my ear, then that is a subjective claim, as it cannot be objectively verified.  However, if there was Scripture that told us to listen to the whispers of apples for wisdom and guidance, then that would be scripturally objective support for a scientifically subjective claim.

    4 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

    I gave scripture showing that God calls men, like Paul, who was called be an Apostle.

    There are Scriptures that support the claim that God spoke verbally and through the Holy Spirit to specific people for specific tasks.  God called Samson to be a Nazarite from birth to death and to never cut his hair, but that is not evidence that God wants all men to have long hair; especially since there is Scripture that condemns it.  

    The Scripture that tells about Paul and Barnabas definitely means that God called Paul and Barnabas, but it does not mean that God calls anyone else that specific, guided way.  Where is the Scripture that tells us (directly or indirectly) that God still personally calls individual people for specific purposes?

    2 hours ago, wretched said:

    While I tend to subscribe to this statement, can you provide Scripture that supports this?  I am also having a difficult time finding verses that say (directly or indirectly) that God no longer personally calls individuals.  I tend to lean in the direction that God no longer speaks to people or personally calls people, but I admit that I have come to that conclusion from personal experiences and opinion; not Scripture. 

    Years ago, I worked at a mega church here in Michigan.  I heard "Christian-ese" on a daily basis.  I would ask someone from another department if they could help me with a certain project and they would often respond by saying, "I just don't feel like God is calling me to do that right now." During one of our meetings, our senior pastor once said, "Our bookstore is doing so well, that I believe that God is calling us to expand it and add a coffee shop as well.  He's really blessing us."

    I had a friend that used to love going to the hippy "Rainbow Gatherings."  She used to go to them and use a lot of drugs and engage in a lot of fornication.  Eventually, we ran into each other again and she told me that she had gotten saved.  She told me that one thing she missed was the Rainbow Gatherings.  Then, about a week after she told me that, she told me that she had a dream that God was calling her to attend the gatherings for His sake and that He "put it on her heart" that smoking weed wasn't bad.

    I have heard countless examples of people claiming to have heard God's voice of that they felt called to do or not to do something.  Of all the times that I have prayed about specific things, I have never once heard God's voice, nor have I ever felt called or lead to anything other than Scripture.  In my experience, when I pray, it seems like God is answering me by bringing specific Scripture verses to my mind.  However, I never tell people that God spoke to me or, even that God answered my prayers, because I am terrified of telling people that God has done something of which I am not 100 percent certain.

  15. On 4/12/2016 at 5:49 PM, heartstrings said:

    My thinking on this, is that if we had no pain, no thorns and thistles, sweaty faces, no trials and tribulations, suffering or death, we would be in a state of Godless utopia. We wouldn't need to pray or even need God at all.

    This implies that, before the fall, Adam and Eve were living in a godless utopia without the need of God at all.  This further implies that, since there will be no sin in Heaven, that it too, will be a godless utopia and that we will have no need for Him.  Since such statements are considered heresy in any biblically sound, Christian conversation, would you care to clarify your meaning or recant those things?

×
×
  • Create New...