I'm taking the spiritual lead in my family

[Salty]

have started a new thread - we are at the hijacking point.

 

[Salty]

I'm taking the lead. This means setting the example and going to a church that I feel the Bible is best taught and in my situation this does means not continuing to attend a IFB church in my area. ...

What kind of church are you seeking out - as I state before - every IFB is different.
Are you looking at a SBC, other Bap denomination, a "Bible church" (aka we dont want to admit we are baptists) - non-baptist or ect???

Also, have you discuss this with your wife?

 

[Salty]

I think you confused my post with his. My statements are only hypothetical. If I had to leave my current church, I'd have 10+ SBC options within short driving distance. I'd have at least two non-denominational churches also.

And my wife and I are fully on board with going to our SBC church .

Not trying to confuse your post -
My point was directed for Evan and his wife.

 

[TCassidy]

Now, I prefer to see a lady in a dress, at church, but I can not find any scripture requiring a dress

1 Timothy 2:9 ωσαυτως και τας γυναικας εν καταστολη κοσμιω μετα αιδους και σωφροσυνης κοσμειν εαυτας μη εν πλεγμασιν η χρυσω η μαργαριταις η ιματισμω πολυτελει.

καταστολη - κατα - down from, as to hang down from, hanging. στολη - robe.

Women are to wear "hanging robes" or "robes that hang down."

But bear in mind 1 Timothy is one of the Pastoral Epistles. It does not set a general standard but a standard for normative dress in the worship service.

My wife wears slacks when she rides with me on my motorcycle, and on other occasions. She always wears a dress or a skirt/blouse combination while at church.

Now, I prefer to see a gentleman wear a coat and tie to church, but I can't find any scripture requiring that.

I can't either. But wear a tie anyway.

I say it's biblically ok for women to wear pants. My church says biblically it's not.

I agree with both. It is okay for a woman to wear slacks, but the normative dress for the assembled worship service is the dress or skirt/blouse combination.

You were doing it right all along.

Now, on one hand, I would not go into a church and demand they allow ushers without ties to serve.

Do you know where the wearing of ties by men originated?

When syphilis was endemic in Europe men would wear a "cravat" or "neck tie" to cover the open syphilitic cankers associated with second and tertiary stage syphilis.

So our ties, now thought of as proper attire for a Christian gentleman, actually started as a way to cover up the results of sinful immorality.

 

[StefanM]

Not trying to confuse your post -
My point was directed for Evan and his wife.

I understand. My post was right after I woke up. I shouldn't be allowed near a tablet at that time . . .

 

[StefanM]

I can't either. But wear a tie anyway.

I sometimes wear a tie, especially in colder weather, but I don't have an abundance of shirts to wear. The ones I have are wearing out, and I can't afford to replace them.

For work, I can wear polos, and I've been able to find these for a relatively inexpensive price. Plus, my car has no A/C, so I'm not going to wear anything to work in the summer that involves a tie!

I imagine in the coming months I'll be wearing a tie to church from time to time, though. I do like wearing ties; I just have to be able to afford to do it.

 

[Sapper Woody]

I must ask---why do you attend this church? You seem to have quite divergent views on Christian practice.

Honestly? Because the preaching is solid, I am happy here, and I can get involved and be a part of the church, as much as my mental condition allows.

This is an IFB, but we have visitors who wear clothing deemed inappropriate, and they are never chided. It is a KJVO church (not Ruckman-type, but closer to KJVP) but people are not derided if they use something else. They believe in separation, but to them it means insulating yourself from the world, not isolating yourself. The have bus ministries for bringing in kids, and they have nursing home ministries and preach to over 100 inmates in a prison ministry every Sunday and Monday.

Personally, I feel you have the wrong view of IFB, at least as a whole. That's the great thing about the "I". Each church is different. I've attended IFB churches that sang contemporary music in their services, and IFB where contemporary music was deemed "too worldly" to he listened to. One where I felt unwelcome for not wearing a tie, and one where the pastor wasn't wearing one.

IFB are too diverse to even begin judging all by any. You really don't know what you're getting until you get there.

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

 

[StefanM]

Honestly? Because the preaching is solid, I am happy here, and I can get involved and be a part of the church, as much as my mental condition allows.

This is an IFB, but we have visitors who wear clothing deemed inappropriate, and they are never chided. It is a KJVO church (not Ruckman-type, but closer to KJVP) but people are not derided if they use something else. They believe in separation, but to them it means insulating yourself from the world, not isolating yourself. The have bus ministries for bringing in kids, and they have nursing home ministries and preach to over 100 inmates in a prison ministry every Sunday and Monday.

Personally, I feel you have the wrong view of IFB, at least as a whole. That's the great thing about the "I". Each church is different. I've attended IFB churches that sang contemporary music in their services, and IFB where contemporary music was deemed "too worldly" to he listened to. One where I felt unwelcome for not wearing a tie, and one where the pastor wasn't wearing one.

IFB are too diverse to even begin judging all by any. You really don't know what you're getting until you get there.

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

Maybe it's my area of the state. Practically every IFB church around here is KJVO and has "KJV1611" or "AV1611" on the church sign. I literally have never seen a church around here without some sort of similar position. (I like to check church websites out of curiosity.)

All the other Baptists are SBC, except for a rare Free Will or General Baptist church, a very small smattering of Missionary Baptist churches, and African-American NBC churches (also a very small number).

The area really is SBC-dominated. We probably have 25 churches for every IFB church, and that church always seems to be strongly KJVO.

On a personal note, if a church is anything close to KJVO, it's a non-starter. Even KJVP would knock a church to the bottom of my list, unless you mean the pastor preaches from the KJV. That's fine. I don't care what version the pastor uses. My pastor uses the ESV, but I use the NKJV.

 

[StefanM]

I'll add one thing about my desire to avoid KJVO (which is absolute) and KJVP (which is contextual):

I want my children to be able to learn the Bible in a modern translation at church.

 

[Sapper Woody]

I'll add one thing about my desire to avoid KJVO (which is absolute) and KJVP (which is contextual):

I want my children to be able to learn the Bible in a modern translation at church.

Our church only allows preachers and teachers to use the KJV. But we have children and visitors who bring in others. I can't speak to the membership, because I've never noticed.

Personally, at church I don't use the KJV. I use a Spanish translation. It helps me with my Spanish, and with my mental state translating the Spanish helps me stay in the "here and now".

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

 

[StefanM]

Our church only allows preachers and teachers to use the KJV. But we have children and visitors who bring in others. I can't speak to the membership, because I've never noticed.

Personally, at church I don't use the KJV. I use a Spanish translation. It helps me with my Spanish, and with my mental state translating the Spanish helps me stay in the "here and now".

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

That would be a deal breaker for me. A church that couldn't allow a modern version in the pulpit--I have a conviction against this, and I couldn't join without violating my conscience. I could attend a service or two, but only with good reason.

 

[Sapper Woody]

That would be a deal breaker for me. A church that couldn't allow a modern version in the pulpit--I have a conviction against this, and I couldn't join without violating my conscience. I could attend a service or two, but only with good reason.

And that is a point that we can agree to disagree on amiably. In that area, I hold no ill-will to someone who thinks differently than I do. I don't look at it as weaker/stronger. Just different opinions.

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

 

[StefanM]

And that is a point that we can agree to disagree on amiably. In that area, I hold no ill-will to someone who thinks differently than I do. I don't look at it as weaker/stronger. Just different opinions.

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

I would elevate it higher than an opinion in my case, but I wouldn't force my conviction on others. It would be disingenuous for me personally to join such a church, so it would be a sin for me to do it.

I treat it like those who can't join another denomination without violating their consciences. Genuine, sincere Christians may be present, but I must fellowship with a church that corresponds with my convictions, as I believe everyone should do. That also goes for those who disagree with me. If it's not of faith, it's sin, right?

 

[TCassidy]

I have a conviction against this

No, you don't. You have an opinion. A conviction is something you can support from the bible. The bible translation issue is a matter of scholarship, not of theology. The bible is totally silent regarding bible translation.

Now I agree with you about KJVOism, but I would never raise my opinion to the level of conviction as I can not point to a scripture that says "Thou shalt not be KJVO." Just as the KJVOs cannot point to a verse that says "Thou shalt use only the KJV."

I wouldn't force my conviction on others.

You mean you would not force your opinion on others. Neither will I. But it is an opinion. In my case a carefully considered opinion. A studied opinion. Even a scholarly (and yes, I know how much most of the KJVO crowd hates that word) opinion. But is just an opinion.

It would be disingenuous for me personally to join such a church, so it would be a sin for me to do it.

If it would be a sin for you it would be a sin for everyone.

Foolish maybe. Sin? No.

 

[Internet Theologian]

No, you don't. You have an opinion. A conviction is something you can support from the bible. The bible translation issue is a matter of scholarship, not of theology. The bible is totally silent regarding bible translation.

Now I agree with you about KJVOism, but I would never raise my opinion to the level of conviction as I can not point to a scripture that says "Thou shalt not be KJVO." Just as the KJVOs cannot point to a verse that says "Thou shalt use only the KJV."

You mean you would not force your opinion on others. Neither will I. But it is an opinion. In my case a carefully considered opinion. A studied opinion. Even a scholarly (and yes, I know how much most of the KJVO crowd hates that word) opinion. But is just an opinion.

If it would be a sin for you it would be a sin for everyone.

Foolish maybe. Sin? No.

Now that right there is spot on!

 

[StefanM]

No, you don't. You have an opinion. A conviction is something you can support from the bible. The bible translation issue is a matter of scholarship, not of theology. The bible is totally silent regarding bible translation.

Now I agree with you about KJVOism, but I would never raise my opinion to the level of conviction as I can not point to a scripture that says "Thou shalt not be KJVO." Just as the KJVOs cannot point to a verse that says "Thou shalt use only the KJV."

You mean you would not force your opinion on others. Neither will I. But it is an opinion. In my case a carefully considered opinion. A studied opinion. Even a scholarly (and yes, I know how much most of the KJVO crowd hates that word) opinion. But is just an opinion.

If it would be a sin for you it would be a sin for everyone.

Foolish maybe. Sin? No.

I personally believe that KJVOism is a rejection of the Bible (in modern translations). Others may not have that view, but I believe that's strong enough to qualify as a conviction.

It would be a sin for me to join a church I believe holds such a position.

 

[TCassidy]

Now that right there is spot on!

I think so too, if I do say so myself. Which I do!

 

[StefanM]

And if someone doesn't want to call it a conviction, it is a very, very, very strongly held belief/opinion.

I said also it was a sin for me because I could not do it out of faith. That is very true.

 

[TCassidy]

Others may not have that view, but I believe that's strong enough to qualify as a conviction.

Can you show me a verse in the bible that says KJVOism is a rejection of the bible (if even only in modern translation)?

It would be a sin for me to join a church I believe holds such a position.

Can you show me a verse from the bible that says joining such a church is a sin?

If it's not of faith, it's sin, right?

This is a general rule which is not only applicable to the case in Romans 14, but to any other, whether of a natural, civil, moral, or evangelic kind: whatsoever does not spring from faith, cannot be excused of sin; whatever is not agreeable to the word and doctrine of faith, ought not to be done; whatever is done without faith, or not in the exercise of it, is culpable, for without faith nothing can be pleasing to God.

So, again, where can you find, in the bible, as a doctrine of the Christian faith, a verse that says "Don't join ABC Baptist church because to do so would be sin?"

 

[StefanM]

Can you show me a verse in the bible that says KJVOism is a rejection of the bible (if even only in modern translation)?

Can you show me a verse from the bible that says joining such a church is a sin?

This is a general rule which is not only applicable to the case in Romans 14, but to any other, whether of a natural, civil, moral, or evangelic kind: whatsoever does not spring from faith, cannot be excused of sin; whatever is not agreeable to the word and doctrine of faith, ought not to be done; whatever is done without faith, or not in the exercise of it, is culpable, for without faith nothing can be pleasing to God.

So, again, where can you find, in the bible, as a doctrine of the Christian faith, a verse that says "Don't join ABC Baptist church because to do so would be sin?"

We obviously disagree, but I can't defend against the questions you ask.

I'll call it a belief or opinion--take your pick.

But it's as strong of a belief as diamond.