Very sad commentary on the church today

[grainofwheat]

As believers we should all be light and salt in this world. I meant that we should be skeptical of your claims -- that we should take your remarks with a dash of salt. We are the ones who need to add a pinch of salt to your comments.

These "so called claims" are not claims but facts included in the book of Acts.
The people of the Way are Christians in the early Church.

 

[Jedi Knight]

The Word of God should be preached instead of peoples convictions!!!!! [peoples convictions, however well intended, may be wrong.]

If you have the word in your heart you should be preaching with conviction.

 

[grainofwheat]

We've both assumed things based upon each other's posts that maybe we shouldn't have. Let's let bygones be bygones... :smilewinkgrin:

Matt, you are an honorable man and I respect that greatly.
It is time for me to move on because studying the Bible is a better use of my time than spending it on this forum debating issues. I wish the very best blessings on you and your household from our Lord Jesus

 

[Revmitchell]

Originally Posted by grainofwheat
I never attacked anyone

This is a blatant lie you attacked my calling and then you make a backhanded attack suggesting everyone should have known what you were talking about even though you gave no scripture.

but challenged positions and statements on this thread with Bible references.

Your original statement included no scripture. Lie number 2

It should have been clear from my references to the book of Acts that my statements were talking about being linked to the early Church through Jesus. I even used [Acts 9:1-5] in my postings.

It was only after you were questioned that you made any mention of any scripture

 

[grainofwheat]

May my Lord Jesus bless all who Love Him and are called according to His purpose.

 

[grainofwheat]

This is a blatant lie you attacked my calling and then you make a backhanded attack suggesting everyone should have known what you were talking about even though you gave no scripture.



Your original statement included no scripture. Lie number 2



It was only after you were questioned that you made any mention of any scripture

Sir ,# 43 did include paraphrased statements from the Scriptures just not the references. [Romans 14:4 and James 4:12]

 

[kyredneck]

OK Thanks, Primitive Baptist churches do tend to be small. They usually don't have Sunday School and don't support the modern missionary movement.

HankD

Is there something inherently wrong with being small, or not having Sunday School, or not supporting the modern missionary movement?

 

[Revmitchell]

Sir ,# 43 did include paraphrased statements from the Scriptures just not the references. [Romans 14:4 and James 4:12]

If you believe that is sufficient to justify your previous statements then I will leave you to it. Let your conscience be your guide.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Back to original post.

I am preaching on Luke 16 this Sunday and found this from R. C. Sproul in studying:

If these things are indeed symbols, then we must conclude that the reality is worse than the symbol suggests. The function of symbols is to point beyond themselves to a higher or more intense state of actuality than the symbol itself can contain. That Jesus used the most awful symbols imaginable to describe hell is no comfort to those who see them simply as symbols. [R. C. Sproul. Essentials Truths of the Christian Faith. p. 286.]

 

[HankD]

Is there something inherently wrong with being small, or not having Sunday School, or not supporting the modern missionary movement?

I only named these things as a clue as to whether this man came from a Primitive Baptist background. If you had heard from him any of these qualities of the "small" church he had attended.

This being related to the question as to the doctrine of hell and that there are some Primitive Baptists "no-hellers".
As far as I know these are the only Trinitarian Universalists that I know of except for a church in Boston in the 18th century.

Apart from all that, these are subjective questions, the answers depend upon how you view the Scriptures concerning each.

I'll give my answers apart from the Baptist Distinctives.

I believe the question concerning "small" would be answered with a "no" by almost everyone including myself. I would say no there is nothing wrong with "small" from the Scriptures. Personally after having been involved with both small and big, I prefer "small". In addition what is "small" to one may be "big" to another and vice versa. Small for me would be less than 100.

The modern missionary movement? For one thing, that depends upon the mission board. There have been many compromises along the way with the history of modern missions as well as the church at large, so I can't answer concerning a particular mission board unless I knew their view on several areas of doctrine along with their biography.

Generally speaking, Yes, I personally believe it is wrong NOT to support missions. While I know that most Primitive Baptists believe the Great Commission was given only to the Apostles in Matthew 28 but so was the authority to baptize, yet PB's baptize for membership. Myself, I believe the Great Commission extends to the present day.

As far as I know there are some PB's who support missions but they don't call it a mission or missions as such. They are willing to send "helpers" or "workers" to another local church or area to "help" with the work.

Sunday School? I don't find anything for or against it in the Scriptures.

I do find that we should desire the word both milk and meat to grow in knowledge and discernment without restriction as to the confines of the local church or one's age (the only necessity is the ability to read and/or understand it if spoken).

I hope I answered your questions to your satisfaction brother.

BTW, I have nothing against the Primitive Baptists and in fact I admire them because for the most part they are the "salt of the earth". They do seem to have a quarrelsome past but I believe all Baptists have that in common.



HankD

 

[Magnetic Poles]

But ... if the salt has lost its savour . . . ? What then?

Actually, this refers to one verse with a factual error. The fact is that salt NEVER loses any of its saltiness. It is a property of salt.

 

[gb93433]

I believe the question concerning "small" would be answered with a "no" by almost everyone including myself. I would say no there is nothing wrong with "small" from the Scriptures. Personally after having been involved with both small and big, I prefer "small". In addition what is "small" to one may be "big" to another and vice versa. Small for me would be less than 100.

Being in a small church means you get more attention. Doing ministry in a large church means you cannot expect to get much attention.

Some churches have chosen to remain small and plant new churches.

The modern missionary movement? For one thing, that depends upon the mission board. There have been many compromises along the way with the history of modern missions as well as the church at large, so

Seems to me that the focus of modern missions was to go into the interior of a nation rather than stay along the coast as was previously done.

 

[Revmitchell]

Actually, this refers to one verse with a factual error. The fact is that salt NEVER loses any of its saltiness. It is a property of salt.

Man some folks just want to create errors. MP this shows your ignorance on this matter. You might want to take another look at that verse.

 

[gb93433]

The fact is that salt NEVER loses any of its saltiness. It is a property of salt.

Dump some gypsum in it and see what happens.

Mt. 5:13, "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men."

 

[Revmitchell]

Back to original post.

I am preaching on Luke 16 this Sunday and found this from R. C. Sproul in studying:

This has always been what I have preached. I never debate literal flames because it is irrelevant. Hell is far worse than we could ever imagine. To be somewhere, where none of God's glory exists if unfathomable. I shutter at the thought. Add to that to be left to ourselves, our sin, our depravity is to tremendous to comprehend.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Dump some gypsum in it and see what happens.

Mt. 5:13, "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men."

Gypsum can neutralize some effects of NaCl in certain applications, but as long as there is no chemical reactions changing salt to something else, it will always remain salty.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Man some folks just want to create errors. MP this shows your ignorance on this matter. You might want to take another look at that verse.

Again, quick with the ad hominems, eh bro? I know the verse very well. People are being likened to salt. Yet salt never loses it's saltiness, or savour. So the analog is flawed. I have though, wondered about the KJV translation of using a personal pronoun "his" in reference to a genderless chemical like salt.

 

[tinytim]

Salt does lose it's saltiness, just ask some farmers around here.

 

[Revmitchell]

Again, quick with the ad hominems, eh bro? I know the verse very well. People are being likened to salt. Yet salt never loses it's saltiness, or savour. So the analog is flawed. I have though, wondered about the KJV translation of using a personal pronoun "his" in reference to a genderless chemical like salt.

Whether or not salt loses its saltiness is irrelevant. The "analog" is clear and it is not necessary for salt to lose its flavor to make the point. By the way there was no ad hominem in that post.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Whether or not salt loses its saltiness is irrelevant. The "analog" is clear and it is not necessary for salt to lose its flavor to make the point. By the way there was no ad hominem in that post.

Well, we will disagree. The analog is flawed.
As for the ad hominem, I was told by a mod that when I said someone was ignorant on an issue, it was indeed. Just trying to get consistency around here.