1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Ephesians 1:4-5

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Helen, Mar 17, 2006.

  1. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

    1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

    18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.


    1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

    1Co 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

    Attempting to "prove scripture" through/by the "wisdom of this world" only proves ignorance of the scriptures. :eek: :D [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians was written to a church whose people were fluent in Greek and they did not need the “wisdom of this world” to understand it. And it was soon translated into the Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Ethiopian languages and continued to be understood. But then the church entered into the dark ages and much of what had been common knowledge regarding the Bible was lost, and during the Reformation attempts were made to get the church back on track.

    However, in the 16th century there were no Greek grammars or lexicons of much value, nor any of the tens of thousands of Greek resources that we have today to study the New Testament. And everyday our knowledge and understanding of the Greek language is growing. Indeed, it is growing so rapidly that the standard Greek-English lexicon used around the world has to be updated every several years to keep it current and between these updates many new papers on the grammar and vocabulary of the New Testament are being published, and for those who want access to even more up-to-date information on the language of the New Testament, there is the B-Greek mailing list that is available free of charge to everyone around the world who has access to the internet (and the days of David Livingston are in the distant past) and a desire to be kept current on New Testament scholarship so that they can better understand the language of the New Testament.

    The “wisdom of this world” that Paul wrote disparagingly about was not up-to-date knowledge of the language and structure of the New Testament; it was the vain and empty philosophies of foolish men who denied the truth found in the New Testament. There is no greater safeguard against the “wisdom of this world” than a good understanding of the Bible based upon factual information. The translators of the KJV were all very well educated men who had much of what you call the “wisdom of this world,” but if they didn’t have it, we would not have the KJV or any other accurate translation of the Bible. And Bible scholars today have access to thousands of resources for Biblical study that were not even dreamed of by the translators of the KJV, but had these resources been available to them, I believe that many of them would have made good use of them for many of these men loved the word of God and delighted in learning more about it.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    Mommy's law is God's law, because the child is to obey his parents, as commanded by God. Therefore, disobeying "Mommy's law" will condemn one to hell, since he has broken God's law. This is Sunday School 101

    I STRONGLY disagree here. While parental law may be seen as a 'type' of God's law, in that its purpose is to keep the child safe and teach obedience, it is not God's law. Only God's law is God's law -- think the Ten Commandments and Jesus' two foundational Great Commandments.

    But the fact is that many parents make horrid 'laws' for their children. They are not allowed to play in certain clothes, they are not allowed to eat dessert unless they finish all their dinner, they must do this or that; they are not allowed to do other things. These are not God's laws and should not be seen as that.

    Any Sunday School which teaches that if a child disobeys his parents he is going to hell ought to be disbanded. First of all, no child is going to hell. Secondly, no one goes to hell because of sin. Thirdly, parental laws are not God's laws.

    You also asked for Scriptural support regarding an age of accountability. First go to Romans 7:7-11, where Paul says he was alive apart from the law, but when the law came, sin sprang to life and he died. This indicates that the person must know the law -- God's law.

    Now go to Numbers 32:11 and you will see that God puts an age limit on those who will be able to go into the Promised Land: "Because they have not followed me wholeheartedly, not one of the men twenty years old or more who came up out of Egypt will see the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- not one except Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite and Joshua son of Nun, for they followed the Lord wholeheartedly."

    This gives us an interesting indication that the Lord consideres the age of accountability to be in the late teens. Interestingly, this corresponds, biologically, to the time the brain has finally finished developing and finished the 're-wiring' it goes through during the teenage years.
     
  3. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Helen,

    You reference the Ten Commandments - what is the 5th commandment? And this commandment is repeated all through Scripture - children are to obey their parents. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

    No one goes to hell because of sin??? O.k., whatever you say.

    Romans 7:7-11 - convenient that you don't mention v. 13 - awareness of the law does not bring death, sin does. What was that you said about no one going to hell because of sin? Oh nevermind.

    Numbers 32:11 - nice try. To use this passage as a defense for AoA in salvation is way off the mark. God is not dealing with salvation from hell in this passage. He is meting out rewards to His covenant community. Salvation does not equal "wholeheartedly following the Lord" as it states. It's an issue of obedience. Joshua and Caleb weren't the only saved people of their generation. They were rewarded for their faithfulness. And apparently those under 20 were not guilty of the sins of their fathers. It is a far stretch to use this for AoA.

    Are those the only verses you have for AoA? I would think a doctrine that is apparently so clear and foundational could be defended much better than this.
     
  4. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    Romans 7:13 says that sin brings spiritual death, which is exactly what Paul was saying earlier, too. As for not going to hell because of sin, please read John 3:16-18. A man is condemned for unbelief, not because of sin. Jesus paid the price for sin. He did that for us.

    As far as the Exodus passage goes, the rescue from Egypt is often seen as a TYPE of rescue from sin and the entry into the Promised Land as a TYPE of salvation. And there are forty years in between. You can reject the type, and that is fine. I simply think it is interesting and you asked what verses might support an age of accountability and I gave them to you. It is quite simple to say you don't accept them rather than trying to mock me when I tried to answer your question.
     
  5. mima

    mima New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    395
    Likes Received:
    0
    I strongly agree with Helen.
     
  6. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is unbelief a sin? You know the answer.

    John 3:18 - ...he who does not believe is condemned already... - "condemned already" indicates that the person is in a previous state of condemnation. Belief in Christ is the only way to escape that already existing condemnation.

    John 3:36 - Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him. - Notice the phrase, "remains on him" - the wrath is already there; faith in Christ removes that already existing wrath.

    Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death...

    Our sin is what condemns us. Faith in Christ removes that condemnation. Rom. 8:1

    Yes, I see the Exodus as a type of our salvation. But types can only go so far. If you accept your analogy for AoA, then you need to say that Moses wasn't saved, since he was kept out of the Promised Land (for disobedience). A better analogy is that the escape from Egypt is our salvation, while the entrance into the Promised Land is our rewards.

    You've yet to show clear Scriptural support for AoA.
     
  7. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    It's stuff like this that tells me I need a break from BB. Anyone know of a Christian discussion board where people actually care about what the Bible says and don't pull doctrines out of their butter?
     
  8. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    Is unbelief a sin? You know the answer.

    Yes. However all sins were atoned for -- paid for -- on the cross. Not all sin, however, is forgiven. Those are two different things.

    John 3:18 - ...he who does not believe is condemned already... - "condemned already" indicates that the person is in a previous state of condemnation. Belief in Christ is the only way to escape that already existing condemnation.

    You are trying to support your view by taking the words out of context. Here is the full three verses -- I bolded the part you 'forgot.'

    "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

    Makes a difference when it is put in context!

    John 3:36 - Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him. - Notice the phrase, "remains on him" - the wrath is already there; faith in Christ removes that already existing wrath.

    Yes, now cross reference this with Romans 1 to see WHY God's wrath is on them:

    "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them."

    The anger is being poured out because they are rejecting the truth God has made plain to them.

    Christ took care of atonement on the cross.

    Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death...

    That is why Jesus died. He took care of those wages. That is the Gospel message!

    Our sin is what condemns us. Faith in Christ removes that condemnation. Rom. 8:1

    No, our sin condemnED us -- past tense. Christ took care of the sin part of the condemnation. Now we are saved or condemned because of belief in Him, not because of our sins. Or do you think Christ died for nothing?

    Yes, I see the Exodus as a type of our salvation. But types can only go so far. If you accept your analogy for AoA, then you need to say that Moses wasn't saved, since he was kept out of the Promised Land (for disobedience). A better analogy is that the escape from Egypt is our salvation, while the entrance into the Promised Land is our rewards.

    You've yet to show clear Scriptural support for AoA.


    You are free to reject what I posted regarding that. It's an area of great argument and you are right, a type can only go so far. So let it stop before your Moses argument and it still holds... it's up to the reader. I'm willing to present evidence that I see for it. I am willing to say that I think it is true, but I am not willing to say someone isn't saved who doesn't agree with me! So you are free to reject it....it's your free choice....
     
  9. Me4Him

    Me4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Me4Him,

    Mommy's law is God's law, because the child is to obey his parents, as commanded by God. Therefore, disobeying "Mommy's law" will condemn one to hell, since he has broken God's law. This is Sunday School 101.
    </font>[/QUOTE]You missed the whole point, did the child know it was breaking God's law or Mommy's law??

    Who did the child think it was disobeying, God or Mommy???
     
  10. Me4Him

    Me4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Helen

    Calvinist have things so "backwards" I don't think you'll "ever" get them to "SEE" that we aren't judged for being sinners, but "Remaining sinners", in spite of Jesus dying to save us.

    The "only way" we can go to heaven is to "believe" in Jesus,

    The "Only way" we can go to hell is "NOT" to believe in Jesus,

    Their "spiritual understanding" is as "narrow" as their doctrine. :eek: [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  11. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Helen & Me4Him,

    I will be back in a few days for your specific objections, but one quick question - it appears that you think that if someone never heard about Jesus, then they automatically go to heaven, since they only thing that sends one to hell is to reject Jesus, and you can't reject Him if you haven't heard of Him. So why send missionairies to people who've never heard about Jesus? Why not keep them in their innocent state so they can go to heaven?

    Also, I wanted to mention this: Even though I do believe our sin is what condemns us, and we are all born sinners, that does not mean that I necessarily think all babies (or even some) who die also go to hell. If they are saved, their sin still needs to be taken care of like any other sinner - through Christ's substitutionary atonement on the cross. I think there is some indication in Scripture that this is the case (that they are saved), but we do not know for sure. However, I reject the notion of AoA. Anyone who goes to heaven has had their sinned atoned for on the cross.
     
  12. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    First of all, Andy, the Bible says that Jesus died for ALL sin and tasted death for ALL men. If anyone thinks that they go to hell for their sins, they they are saying first that Jesus did not do a complete job and, second, that the Bible is wrong. Here are some passages to consider:
    -----------
    "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men -- the testimony given in its proper time."
    1 Timothy 2:5

    "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by the power of his word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty n heaven."
    Heb. 1:3

    "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone."
    Heb. 2:9

    "Such a high priest meets our need -- one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself."
    Heb. 7:26-27

    "Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself."
    Heb. 9:25-26

    Jesus paid the price for ALL sin. It is not sin which sends anyone to hell, as a result. It is, rather, the refusal to believe, as Jesus Himself states as plainly as possible in John 3:16-18:

    For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

    -----------

    Now, I cannot speak for Me4Him and I disagree with much of what this person says. So I am responding on my own behalf here. Do people who have never heard of Jesus automatically go to heaven? NO! But they don't automatically go to hell, either.

    All the ancient cultures remember in legend and story the creation and the flood. All have some memory involved in these two of a Promise made by God to rescue men. The faithful of the Old Testament did not know the name of Jesus. But they knew the Promise and believed on the Promise and that Promise was Jesus. We are incredibly blessed that we have an historical fact to look back on. But those before had a Promise to look forward to, and that faith is the channel, if you will, through which God's grace saved them.

    At the end of Hebrews 11 we read of these people:
    "These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect [complete]."

    The reason for missionaries is to tell the people of the world "God did it! He fulfilled the Promise -- and here is how it happened...." Why should those who have trusted almost blindly not be given the same blessing we have -- to know Who the Promise was fulfilled in and what He said and everything that happened?

    Age of accountability does not mean someone has not sinned before that. It means that he has sinned unknowingly and as Paul stated in Romans 7:11+, until the law is known, sin is dead. It may be there, but it is separated from the person in the sense that it cannot cause his spiritual death. Paul says similar in Romans 5:13 -- "Sin is not taken into account when there is no law."

    So we make laws for our children that they can learn to obey. Learning to obey without fear is paramount for learning about God and a relationship with Him. Learning that laws are for the benefit of the receiver and not the giver is also extremely important.

    But there does come a time, according to Romans 7, when the law does come into a life as a known and understood law from God. When that happens sin does spring to life, the person sins volitionally and is then separated from God, or spiritually dead.

    All sin is paid for, atoned for, on the cross. But not all sin is forgiven. That is an entirely different matter. That is why John tells us "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." Forgiveness takes two: the "I'm sorry" person and the "You're forgiven" person.

    ALL people are potentially saved because of Christ's work. It was for the whole world, and showed His desire that not one should be lost. But how few come to repentance? Not many, really. Most people prefer the defenses of their own pride and 'power.' I think that is why so many people have to be allowed by God to get to the very end of their proverbial ropes before they will scream to Him for help.

    But there are those who spend their lives wanting the truth and living by what they know of it. These people are truly blessed, for God uses them every day of their lives and they are led easily to Christ and recognize Him as the truth they have been searching for. These are the seekers God wants us all to be: "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart." Jer. 29:13. (I just noticed in the concordance that there are two different words for 'seek' used there. The first is simply to look for and the second, used in 'seek me with all your heart' means more a determined demanding sort of seeking. It is a person who will not rest until he HAS found the truth.)

    I doubt this will change anything you think, but I hope it clarifies my position a bit.

    Helen Setterfield
     
  13. Me4Him

    Me4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    0
    The people under the OT died without "EVER" hearing the name "JESUS, did all of them go to hell,

    why not,

    Where was their opportunity to "hear Jesus", since no man comes to the father but by him??

    And what about people who wasn't born Jew, when will they hear??

    And what about people who "do by nature" the things of the law yet don't have the law??

    Your question can't be answered in a simple paragraph, there's a little more to it.
     
  14. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    I shortened, Me4Him, be cause I have presented it so many times.

    Here is part of it:
    http://www.ldolphin.org/zodiac/index.html

    Part of it is in the stories of missionaries who come back saying "they already knew about the promise. How did they know?" Part of it is in the ancient Chinese language, testifying to the fact that they certainly did know. Part of it is in the most ancient Vedic material, showing they originally knew...

    God left no man without enough truth to follow. And God judges the heart -- for which I am profoundly grateful!
     
  15. Me4Him

    Me4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Noah and his sons brought the knowledge of God with them to the "new earth", so who has an excuse??
     
  16. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    That, too.
     
  17. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Helen wrote,

    Helen,

    Have you studied every ancient culture on this planet? Out of the several hundred of them that have been studied by cultural anthropologists, can you name just 10 of them that “remember in legend and story the creation and the flood”—or is this just an extravagant exaggeration and a gross distortion of reality?

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Calvibaptist

    Calvibaptist New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Boy, I am not on the board for a few days and we add 6 pages to this post??? I can't keep up. I have no idea what was said on pages 5-10, so I'll just chime in with what I read here.

    IF Jesus died for and tasted death for all men, then everyone goes to heaven. You are a universalist. You say, "Oh, no, but people go to hell for rejecting Jesus." I ask, is rejecting Jesus a sin? If Jesus died for all sin for all men, then He died for that one too. Your position is unbibilical.

    Exsqueeze Me?!? Baking powder?!? I'm sorry, but this is patently unbiblical. If those who have never heard don't automatically go to heaven or hell, where do they go? Are you a second-chancer, who believes that people get the option to repent and believe at the judgment? If this is true, why the great commission? Why share the gospel at all?

    I almost don't know where to start with this... Do most cultures have some legends or stories that have some amount of truth in them? Of course they do. Most cultures have a flood story. Does it matter that the truth is mixed with a lot of error? Let's ask the Mormons that one.

    Even more importantly, using your example, would it not have been better (especially for the Jews) for Christ to never have come? All would have had some faith in a promise that they didn't know all the facts about and no one would have been held accountable.

    Yet Paul describes the Jews that had rejected the Messiah as "having a zeal for God but not according to knowledge." A "zeal for God but not according to knowledge" is the exact equivalent to being lost.

    These cultures that mix truth with error in their faith in the promise (as you describe it) are guilty of a very serious sin - idolatry. God has revealed Himself and we must worship Him in spirit and in truth, not in spirit and partial truth.

    And yet those Jews who sinned unintentionally and unknowingly in the OT still had to offer sacrifices, showing their guilt and need for cleansing. Those Gentiles who do not have the law, still die and are under the judgment of God, even though they don't know the law and shouldn't be held accountable. Have you never read what God told Joshua to do to those poor Canaanites who should not have been accountable for their sins because they had never heard the Law? Something is flawed in your reasoning.

    Sometimes I want my children to fear consequences, and even me, just like God wants us to fear Him.

    When do you suggest that Paul was without the Law? He was born a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin. He was circumcized on the 8th day according to the Law, so he was under the Law by at least 8 days old. He would have been taught the Law by his parents from the moment his mom had her last contraction. He would have studied in the local synagogue from a very early age. He sat at the feet of Gamaliel. When was he without the law?

    Paul's main point in Romans 7:7-11 is that the Law does not conquer sin, it only reveals sin. He makes his point first and then further describes it.

    Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, "You shall not covet."

    This is his point - the Law revealed sin. He doesn't then go on in the next few verses to describe something completely different, like "babies are not accountable because they don't understand right from wrong." That's a ridiculous way of interpreting this text. The next few verses describe what happened when this self-righteous Pharisee really understood the law - it condemned him rather than saving him.

    Romans 7:8-11 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.

    The law says, "Don't covet." Rather than giving Paul the ability not to covet, it almost forces him to do it because, now, his sinful nature kicks in (it revived) and He dies. The fact that it says sin was dead doesn't mean it wasn't there and he wasn't accountable for it. It means it was inactive or powerless (relatively). The same is true of faith in James 2:17 - Faith without works is dead. It doesn't mean it's not there; it means it's innactive or powerless.

    The purpose of the law was to bring life. Instead, because we all disobey, the penalty is death. This is Paul's point here. It is not that all of a sudden, when I understand the law, I am held accountable for it. It is that I was accountable before, and when the law came in, it told me what I was accountable for and didn't provide a way to obey it. It just pronounced judgment for disobedience.

    Wrong. If sin is paid for, and atoned for (covered), it is forgiven. That is one of the main problems with free-willers. You don't understand the meaning of atonement. There is not going to be one person in hell who will be able to say that they are there despite the fact that their sins were atoned for. If God has been paid, why would He exact more payment after someone has died?

    This is a verse written to believers, not unbelievers. It talks about the continual cleansing power of the blood of Christ. It is conditional on confessions, no doubt. But there is also no doubt what John was saying - if you do not confess your sins, you are not one of His. Therefore, all believers continually confess their sins.

    You are sort of right, at least as it touches this verse. But don't make a hard and fast rule of this. I can forgive someone without them ever coming and saying I'm sorry. God can do the same.

    Here is my problem - THE BIBLE DOESN'T SAY THIS!!! The Bible never says that Christ's death potentially saved anyone. It says He came to save. It says He is the propitiation (not potential propitiation). It says He atoned (not potentially atoned). You add a word that is antithetical to all biblical teaching.

    "Whole world" can't possibly mean every individual who has ever lived. Jesus did not die for Judas Iscariot. He was the son of perdition before the foundation of the world. If Jesus died for Him and God really desired that he not be lost, then God is the most sadistic being in existence.


    I agree. Sometimes that is what God uses to bring the elect to Himself. And don't balk at the usage of the word elect, because that is what the Bible says.

    Romans 3:10-11 As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.
     
  19. Calvibaptist

    Calvibaptist New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's stuff like this that tells me I need a break from BB. Anyone know of a Christian discussion board where people actually care about what the Bible says and don't pull doctrines out of their butter? </font>[/QUOTE]I found the PuritanBoard to be very interesting. But there are always arguments between paedo and creedo baptists of which is right. Also, too many of them simply point to confessions rather than discussing Scripture.
     
  20. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    10
    Did I read something earlier that Helen describes herself as a pastor?
     
Loading...