Do we truly love the brethren?

maybe they understood had SAME Lord and salvation, agreed in Essentials, and showed just How to disagree on non essentials than?

 

John Calvin is not what some people claim him to be.

I don't want to throw this thread off track so here is a link, have you read this?

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=71775&highlight=calvin

 

I can't speak for them. As for me, I am an independent Baptist Fundamentalist, one who not only believes the fundamentals of the faith but defends them.

"Confided"? Is that what you call it? You never asked me what I thought of the situation, never gave me a chance to respond. You just got mad and said something I can't repeat here (a word not allowed by BB rules). Then you told me we couldn't continue the conversation when I rebuked the word you used. I hope you've grown past that now.

For the record, I would never act as that pastor did. Simply hearing your account (without knowing his side of it), he is dead wrong.

 

Sheltered life? I worked in a factory for four years to put myself through college, and have lived since 1981 in a totally heathen land, 99% non Christian. Plus I'm a pastor who has counselled drug addicts, ex-cons, adulterers, schizophrenics, and many others. I think I've seen and heard more wickedness than most lost Americans.

Basically, I was not offended, since I knew you not at all at the time, but thank you for the apology anyway. What happened was that (1) a picture was formed in my mind of your character that still lingers. Do you really want to leave that kind of impression in people's minds? (2) I rebuked your use of that word and you rejected the rebuke completely. No skin off my nose. It hurt you, not me.

I believe strongly in Biblical rebuke--and that is not just when I've been offended. If you rebuke a wise man he will love you, the Bible says. But by that standard half the people on the BB are not wise.

Once again, I don't presume to speak for others. I do see that Dr. Bob posts that he calls himself a Fundamentalist, as I thought. I know that Brother Jim has an excellent history in the past and knew personally some big time fundamentalists back in the day. I respect him much for his long service for Christ, but as for whether or not he currently calls himself a Fundamentalist you'll have to ask him.

I know a website that has over 10,000 independent Baptist churches listed. I've been in every kind of IFB churches, and there are many kinds. It's ignorant to look at one IFB church and label all the other 9,999+ churches as being similar. Did you know, for example, that there is an IFB seminary in Detroit that is Calvinist, though most aren't?

 

That's only if the rebuke is warranted. Ignorant rebuke or rebuke founded in error does not produce the effect that the text to which you are referring enunciates.

I do not know what word EWF used but if you were nit picking or riding a high horse or jostling for a position on the moral high ground to make yourself appear and feel more mature or more spiritual- then of course it should not make him love you.

I will say that you, like me, have your own particular set of faults and, it is my opinion based upon my experience with you that it is indeed your tendency to try to make yourself appear very mature or very spiritual or very humble. Some try for a "holier-than thou" and some try for a "humbler-than thou". I think sometimes you might try for both. That is just your particular weakness just like I have mine that you are quick and regular to point out.

Do you think that there are ANY Southern Baptists who are fundamentalists?

Do you think that Calvinists can be fundamentalists?

Do you think that MOST of fundamentalism is found among the Independent Baptists?

 

EW&F,you quoted all of JoJ's post and then proceeded to say the above? Why? His post clarified things for you in a nice manner. Why have you responded the way you have?

 

Luke,what kind of a Christian pastor are you? Why do you have the attitude you project on the pages of the BB? Please reconsider your words and then do what is right. You're heading down the wrong road if you don't.

 

You didn't read his post carefully. He made mention of the IFB's Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.

 

Rippon, with due respect, it is not inappropriate to point out to John his faults no more than it is for you to point out mine.

It is no more a crime to point out one's position on his high horse than it is to ride one.

John has oft corrected my faults- and I do not throttle his right to do so- nor do I spurn his qualifications as a pastor for so doing as you do here against me.

If you are going to rebuke people for rebuking people then rebuke John for there is no lack in his exchanges with those who debate him to do so- and then, to be consistent, you must rebuke yourself.

 

Thank you Rippon for your comments.

I see no further place for me on this thread, seeing the direction it ended up. Partly my fault--sorry folks, sorry. EWF. :jesus:

 

What are you thanking him for John? For rebuking us?

He had very little to say about you.

The gist of his posts were rebukes to me and EWF.

Are you thanking him for rebuking us for rebuking you???

 

Come on EWF, no need to get twisted, especially on a thread about love! :laugh:

John is simply mentioning the reputation you have left in his mind. To be honest, you seem a bit bitter about it, relax and get it right with you two, afterall, look at your thread title and maybe "Someone" is trying to let you know something??

For the record I also am a fundamentalist in belief, defending the truth against the onslaught of residual higher criticism, and liberal theology.

Basically these 5 tenets are defended, which were attacked:

1) The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.
2) The virgin birth of Christ.
3) The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.
4) The bodily resurrection of Christ.
5) The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

There were a series of books written c. 1900 entitled "The Fundamentals" published by R. A. Torrey and A. C. Dixon around 1910 or so as a reaction and refutation, and apology for the above truths.

I just don't adhere to the KJV part, the women in pants part, no movies, no swimming publicly, no men in shorts, and other things they call separation which is really a form of "legalism" (not technically legalism, but people have named it this) that many fundamentalists believe are fundamental to their faith.

- Peace

 

JoJ,

You have my prayers and respect, I see your true love for brethren and even to apologize to those who attacked you unprovoked.