What happened to these people?

[sag38]

If you want ugliness then go to the political and news threads. Rev Mitch gets attacked all the time by a select few and yet they never seemed to be challenged for it. It's one thing to disagree but these guys can be vicious especially if you say something "bad" about their precious Barack Obama. SFIC and Linda may have been way out there but they were never vicious or ugly.

 

[just-want-peace]

I am sorry to see SFIC go. I didn't interact with him much, I didn't know him, and I didn't always agree with what he said, however unlike many here I never was bother by him. The man was just standing firm for his Godly convictions, and I can respect that and separate it from not agreeing with what is said. In fact there are many things posted here that I find more offensive and with a more unChrist attitude than what read from him.

Bolded mine

Now that is the truth if I ever saw it.
:BangHead::BangHead::BangHead:

 

[Pastor_Bob]

[Modalism] was SFIC's view that got him banned

What makes you so sure that this was the reason for his banning?

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Personally I found less wrong with S[F]IC's posts than those who consistently seemed to bait him.

I agree 100%. Many posters here knew that they could get an immediate reaction from him so they used that to their advantage.

 

[Palatka51]

SHAME, has visited Baptist Board this day.

 

[Revmitchell]

SFIC did not in any way promote modalism.

 

[Dale-c]

Wow, a day or so after I post about people banned a long time ago, two of the most active members are banned (one of which was hte first person to respond to this thread) and the threa gets hijacked.
But, the thread is hijacked so I will not try to get back to the OP because it was answered anyway.

I have had many disagreements with people on this board and I am rarely ever in favor of banning anyone.
But Linda and Ron (SFIC) were not edifying.
They made it hard for me to remain civil and made discussion almost impossible because it was like trying to catch a slippery snake when you had a discussion.

They could not be pinned down on much. It was always a moving target.

The salvation of other posters was regularly questioned but often in such a way that you had to be a part of the entire thread to catch it.

I could put up with most of it but when he said that the first commandment does not apply to Jesus Christ, that was the last straw.

I fully support the decision to permanently ban then.

Most people who disagree with me here are like iron that sharpens iron.
They did not.

They made me angry and took me down. Rather than edification I just got mad often times.

I pray that God will soften their hearts and show them their error.
I do not hold any malice against them and wish them the best.
But the best is the truth.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Maybe it was the Spirit that was making you mad instead of sfiC and Linda. I cannot find where they preached anything contrary to Scripture. You have it out for them because of their conviction on alcohol and calvinism. And your hatred for them shows blatantly here on the BB. It shows in many other's posts as well.

 

[Revmitchell]

Maybe it was the Spirit that was making you mad instead of sfiC and Linda. I cannot find where they preached anything contrary to Scripture. You have it out for them because of their conviction on alcohol and calvinism. And your hatred for them shows blatantly here on the BB. It shows in many other's posts as well.

I agree.:thumbs:

 

[The Scribe]

Maybe it was the Spirit that was making you mad instead of sfiC and Linda. I cannot find where they preached anything contrary to Scripture. You have it out for them because of their conviction on alcohol and calvinism. And your hatred for them shows blatantly here on the BB. It shows in many other's posts as well.

Also, attacking Billy Sunday because he preached against alcohol.

 

[Revmitchell]

Also, attacking Billy Sunday because he preached against alcohol.

Wow! forgot about that. Kind of the pot and the kettle isnt it. Tearing down his family only because Billy preached against his pet sin. How edifying is that?

 

[Dale-c]

You have it out for them because of their conviction on alcohol and calvinism.

I disagree with probably half of the people on this board about one or both of the issues.
I have not really had a problem with them.

I disagree strongly with Webdog on calvinism but I consider him a brother and a friend.
When he said that his job was ending I was genuinely concerned for him and his family and will keep them in prayer.

I disagree with Brother Bob on calvinism and alcohol but when I drove by a church in his denomination (ORB) in Kentucky a while back I contacted him about it.
Why? Because he is a friend and a brother in Christ.

I could mention others but both of these men have been involved in many threads with me.

But are there doctrinal issues that SFIC holds that Web and bro Bob do not?
Yes! The first commandment certainly applies to Jesus Christ!

Also, neither have ever made adherence to their interpretation of scripture the measure of salvation.

IN short, they cause me to study and learn even though I disagree with them on some areas.

SFIC and Linda were not edifying at all.
They were self righteous, arrogant and sometimes even heretical.

I do not wish them harm. I wish for them that God would show them their error and I would love for resoration to happen.

But as long as they are convinced of theirr own righteousness in all doctrine, I beleive there was no alternative to banning them.

 

[Dale-c]

Also, attacking Billy Sunday because he preached against alcohol.

No, I critiqued Billy Sunday for adding works to the gospel by saying that one would go to hell for voting against prohibition, for not using any scripture in a message, for never mentioning Christ in a sermon.

 

[Dale-c]

Tearing down his family only because Billy preached against his pet sin. How edifying is that?

It is hardly my "pet sin"
First, it is not a sin to drink moderately and second, I have had about 3 drinks this year.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is hardly my "pet sin"
First, it is not a sin to drink moderately and second, I have had about 3 drinks this year.

I don't need to know that and I don't care. My concern doesn't lie in what you do at home. When the discussion comes up on this board I will do what everyone else does and present my view.

Even though I disagree with someone like RW I do not attack him or his family personally. I stick to his public statements and theology. What you did with the Billy Sunday thread far exceeded anything that SFIC did.

 

[The Scribe]

No, I critiqued Billy Sunday for adding works to the gospel by saying that one would go to hell for voting against prohibition, for not using any scripture in a message, for never mentioning Christ in a sermon.

Even though I disagree with someone like RW I do not attack him or his family personally. I stick to his public statements and theology. What you did with the Billy Sunday thread far exceeded anything that SFIC did.

:saint:

.....

 

[Pastor_Bob]

They made me angry and took me down. Rather than edification I just got mad often times.

Proverbs16:32 He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city. (KJV)

I just realized that I answered with Scripture! Maybe I'm SFIC???

 

[webdog]

What makes you so sure that this was the reason for his banning?

That's what DIDW stated SFIC told him.

 

[webdog]

Modalism in no way separates Jesus form the Father. In fact it takes that idea to far and insists that there are not three distinct personalities in one God. But the same single personality works in different modes rather than personalities.

Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God. It is a denial of the Trinity which states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes, or forms.

Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son. After Jesus' ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. These modes are consecutive and never simultaneous. In other words, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time, only one after another. Modalism denies the distinctiveness of the three persons in the Trinity even though it retains the divinity of Christ.

Claiming the command to not have other gods is not intended for Christ is just this, as it would only be intended for the Father

 

[Dale-c]

Even though I disagree with someone like RW I do not attack him or his family personally.

When did I tear down Sunday or his family? As I recall I dealt with his teachings.
It may have included some about his family but I do not remember attacking him personally, only his teachings.
If I did attack him personally, I apologize. Also if I did, please show me.