*Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About DaveW

  • Rank
    Resident Aussie and general dumb bloke
  • Birthday 09/30/1968

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    I'm a West Aussie
  • Are you IFB?

Recent Profile Visitors

10,684 profile views
  1. This proves you are not concerned with accuracy but with agreement. I have nothing more to say.
  2. Obviously not concerned enough about accuracy to point out the faulty references here............ Or rather it shows the level of concern for accuracy - if you agree with GP you can post anything you like and he doesn't care.
  3. A few years ago I had a discussion with my then boss. At one point of the discussion, as he was trying to show his wisdom of things biblical (in his mind anyway) he said "Well of course the Bible says money is the root of all evil ", at which point I stopped him and corrected him "Actually it says 'the love of money is the root of all evil', to which he replied "Oh...... that changes things a bit......" Might be worth looking at such partial quotes?
  4. As to special music, you can very quickly tell if someone is singing for their own glory or for the Lord's. I would rather hear an imperfect voice singing for the Lord than a perfect voice singing for themselves. And whilst I understand your position, the Bible disagrees: 2 Chronicles 29 27 And Hezekiah commanded to offer the burnt offering upon the altar. And when the burnt offering began, the song of the LORD began also with the trumpets, and with the instruments ordained by David king of Israel. 28 And all the congregation worshipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded: and all this continued until the burnt offering was finished. And note that I am not "looking back to the Law" but seeing a principle clearly displayed, nor am I trying to get you to go against your own conscience - with your background as described, you need to walk more carefully in this matter. As to congregational singing, I think it may have been around a little earlier than 1694: Psa 149:1 Praise ye the LORD. Singunto the LORD a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints. (And verses following).
  5. It is funny - I have this discussion with people on occasion. I would MUCH prefer it cold than hot. .......BUT that is because "cold" here is not the same as cold there. By that I mean, when we in Perth think of "cold" we mean days of as low as 12C and nights that creep below zero C - but it is rare to get more than three or four of those in a row. Not snow and ice on the roads and temps constantly well below freezing. You wouldn't be liking our Summer when we have three weeks in a row where the temp is right up around 38C (100F) and a cool change means it drops to the mid 30's. But you would rather it be hot. Live with it and our minds change........ I would love to be somewhere where it snows...... (But I don't live in it all the time.) ;)
  6. Is that white stuff sand? Did the wind blow it up of the beaches? We sometimes get that here on the roads near the coastline, but it doesn't make driving dangerous...... I will have to see if I can find some pics of us driving in the sand dunes then you will see a covering of white stuff. Temp here hit 42 the other day...... celsius. :lol:
  7. Welcome back again. Good couple of return posts by the way.
  8. I wonder how much sense it would make for me to go onto a Chevy forum and constantly extol the virtues of Fords?

    I might try it and see what happens....

    But then again, that is what is commonly called "trolling" I think, so I wouldn't do that.........

    Especially since I own a Chrysler and a Toyota....... :lol:

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. DaveW


      I will thank you to not comment on my status again. It is not wanted nor welcome.

    3. DaveW


      I should, after all, be able to post in my own status without getting trolled by you. It is bad enough that you falsely accuse me in the general forum, let alone trolling me in my own status.


    4. Genevanpreacher


      It is posted on the main page. I didn't know this was personal area. I shall not comment again. Sorry.

  9. Part of the problem is how can you tell? There can be many reasons for such things. I know it is not illness as such but: Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? The Lord says plainly that these did not suffer thus because of their own sin. You could preach on the possibility of it being so, but none of us knows fully the mind of the Lord. The illness could be simply the result of sin in the creation, and not this specific sin.
  10. Roses are red, Violets are blue, Rhyming is hard, Bacon. Haiku is special, Written by men who can count, But not by me.
  11. Well, with GP now resorting to false accusations and once again ignoring previous posts, I think it is possibly time to lock this thread. Certainly no point in my further participation.
  12. MC, I would encourage you to do a study on the word church, the word body, and to find the way God Himself has chosen to refer to His Saints as a group. Many people use your quoted verse to try to support a universal understanding of church, but the verse does not actually say that at all. The verse makes perfect sense if you view the word as generic, or even if you view the word as literal, ie the "church of the disciples" which was actually the only church that Jesus Himself directly built. That singular, individual church has not been prevailed against by Satan as they spread across the world, forming new churches everywhere they went.
  13. "I have said nothing unscriptural..." Except that there is a universal church. The name of the thread is "Concerned over accuracy?" - a name which YOU, GP, designated but which you then ignore. For the sake of accuracy, the Bible DOES indeed speak of all believers, but it NEVER clearly refers to all believers as "the church". The Bible refers to all believers as "all saints", "family of God", "fellowcitizens" and the like but NEVER as a church. This is another clear instance of you simply making things up, another clear instance of you following doctrines which are plainly not IFB. I think at this point I might leave this thread alone......
  14. Of the 112 (I can't remember exactly at this moment) translations of the word "ecclesia" about half of them are plural - you cannot by definition have a multiplicity of universal somethings (in this sense), so about half of the instances are not universal by this point alone. A whole of others are referring to "the church at.... (Corinth for instance), which is clearly not universal. Or the church in or of etc. Then there are some which people simply misunderstand and make universal when they actually are not. In fact there are only a very few uses of the word church which are NOT CLEARLY local only, and in those cases they make good sense in a local understanding and so can easily be applied that way. Some of these mention church not as the subject but incidentally and so make no comment as to its nature. And some, like Eph 5 only appear to be universal if you ignore their context. And of course in every case we must understand who the letter was written to. If it is written to the Church at Corinth, then the obvious understanding (unless clearly indicated otherwise) is that "the church" is that church written to. When the overwhelming use of the word is local ONLY and there are a few vague passages, how does it make sense to build a doctrine of universal church on those few vague passages?
  15. As I am ahead of most of you at least in this way (if no other ), let me wish everyone a happy new year. And no I did not stay up to do so - where I am it is currently 6:52 am.