Jump to content

HappyChristian

Member Since 10 Feb 2007
Offline Last Active Private
*****

#397221 Tracts.

Posted by AlanTaiwan on 17 December 2014 - 09:01 AM

Fellow Soul Winners,

 

We are missionaires to the Chinese on Taiwan. If there is any body that would like some free Chinese tracts please let me know.

 

Unless the cost gets to high, I will send up to a 100 tracts, free of charge,and I will pay the postage, to any one who will use them. If you do not know any Chinese all you have to do is visit any (real) Chinese restaurant.

 

These tracts are written in, "Traditional Chinese," for Chinese people in the States, Taiwan, Canada and most other locations. For those in Hong Kong and mainland, or communist, China I cannot at this time supply them for two reasons. One. I cannot mail them to China. Two. In those locations, and with some Chinese in other locations, they read, "Simplified Chinese."

 

I will also send an English translation of the tract.

 

Send me a message via Online Baptist or at sy.maurice@msa.hinet.net

 

May God bless every soul winner in these last days with fruit, wisdom, and courage.

 

AlanTaiwan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




#397130 New Name for IFBs

Posted by OLD fashioned preacher on 16 December 2014 - 10:03 AM

"Fundamentalist", "Missionary", "Sunday School" are good terms but not "Biblical" (not saying they are improper for a Christian) and therefore dispensable. "Christian", "Disciple", "Aged", "Holy Ghost", "Saint" are terms used in Scripture and should not be shied from.

 

"Fundamental" describes what kind of Christian you are, "Christian" defines who you belong to.

 

You can refuse to be called a "Fundamentalist" as a label without changing what you believe and without denying the Lord. You cannot refuse to be called Christian as a label without denying the Christ even though you don't change what you believe because you are denying the ownership.




#397092 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by Ukulelemike on 15 December 2014 - 09:48 AM

BAck to the topic at hand, its interesting to see that Mr. Ruckman doesn't consider abortion murder, using the creation of Adam as his proof text. The creation of Adam was significantly different from the birth of a child. First, Adam was build up from nothing, from dust, formed to a fully aduly man, the dust made flesh, but without ANY life, then, his nostrils were breathed into, and he received the spirit of life from God, a different spirit from the animals.

 

A baby conceived in the womb has life well before there is specifically breath. As well, it takes in oxygen from the mother, just not through its lungs.

A website on this issue puts it like this:

 

The unborn baby exchanges oxygen and carbon dioxide with the mother through the placenta and umbilical cord. The mother’s blood circulates through the placenta and also carries nutrients to the baby. The placenta is attached to the uterine wall and to the umbilical cord, which is attached to the baby. The mother, in effect, breathes for the baby. The mother inhales and breathes in oxygenated air, which passes through her circulatory system to the baby through the placenta and umbilical cord. Carbon dioxide returns from the baby through the umbilical cord and placenta to the mother, who exhales and removes the waste from her body.

So, while the lungs do not yet operate, it still receives oxygen, and clearly, has a living soul. It has a heartbeat very early on, as well as brain functions. Ruckman's argument that until it breathes for itself, means it isn't alive, is a fallacy, primarily of ignorance of how babies develop in the womb. And according to David, speaking apparently at the behest of the holy Ghost, the Lord knew him, even before he was knit together in his mother's womb. Jeremiah was called to preach before he was born. Sounds like God considered them people before they breathed on their own.

 

I wouldn't want to be him when he has to answer for who-knows-how many abortions are performed due to his assurance that its alright.




#396880 Whats for Supper...

Posted by 2bLikeJesus on 12 December 2014 - 04:00 PM

Stuffed bell peppers!  Yippee!




#396879 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by ThePilgrim on 12 December 2014 - 03:52 PM

You're evidently not from a rural area. :)

Here, try this....

 

 

1

Many, many years ago when I was twenty three
I was married to a Wider[widow] who was purty[pretty] as could be
This Wider had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red
My father fell in love with her and soon they two were wed

This made my dad my son-in-law and changed my very life
My daughter was my mother cause she was my father's wife
To complicate the matter even though it brought me joy
I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy

My little baby then became a brother-in-law to dad

And so became my uncle though it made me very sad
For if he was my uncle then that also made him brother
Of the Wider's grown up daughter who of course was my step-mother

 

(chorus)
I'm my own grampa,
I'm my own grampa
It sounds funny I know
But it really is so
I'm my own grampa

 

2

My father's wife then had a son who kept them on the run
And he became my granchild for he was my daughters son
My wife is now my mother's mother and it makes me blue
Because although she is my wife she's my grandmother too

 

(chorus)
I'm my own grampa,
I'm my own grampa
It sounds funny I know
But it really is so
I'm my own grampa

3

Now if my wife is my grandmother then I'm her grandchild
And every time I think of it, it nearly drives me wild
For now I have become strangest case you ever saw
As husband of my grandmother I'm my own grampa

 

(chorus)
I'm my own grampa,
I'm my own grampa
It sounds funny I know
But it really is so
I'm my own grampa

There is no need to bring my family into this thread at all.  :verymad:




#396873 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by OLD fashioned preacher on 12 December 2014 - 01:20 PM

I have kin in the Appalachians --- 'nuff said




#396758 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by LindaR on 11 December 2014 - 07:12 PM

Not the false Messiah, but the Antichrist, the false Christ.

Don't get hung up on semantics.  False Messiah and False Christ/Antichrist are one and the same thing.

 

MESSIAH: (anointed one). A prophetic name for Jesus; the same as Christ. Messiah (Mashiach) is the Hebrew word for Anointed One; Christ is the Greek word.




#396865 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by OLD fashioned preacher on 12 December 2014 - 11:00 AM

Not all of them have catchers. One of my cousins (grandson of two pentecostal preachers - my gpa and his mom's dad as well) married the daughter of another pentecostal preacher (I'm telling you....).  I had the, erm, privilege of going to one of the services (sadly, my sister "spoke in tongues" that night - sometimes phony, but my sister was definitely in a trance...scary stuff) at his church and saw some so slain, falling to the ground. Of course, there were no cameras...

 

 

John, I'd bet if you dig deep enough, the pentecostals you know would admit that they believe in eternal security as long as they didn't do some certain sin. In my aunt's case, it was smoking. In my mother-in-law's case (she was raised pentecostal, became Baptist but didn't completely give up some of her training), it would be murder. Yes, I know that is egregious, but she was adamant that anyone who killed someone would lose their salvation. Now, there is some argument that mayhap they wouldn't have been really saved, but that aside, murder wouldn't cause loss.  In one of my hubby's uncle's case, it was divorce.  Etc.

Along with Pentecostals, I've known some Baptists who believed that if you committed suicide you went to Hell. (Catholic doctrine)




#396864 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by OLD fashioned preacher on 12 December 2014 - 10:58 AM

When you confront those Pentecostals, ask them why they have catchers to catch those slain in the Spirit? I say, move out of the way and let them fall. If it truly is the Spirit, why hinder His work? Let them fall with the force He knocked them down.

Of course, there is a chance they will stand up immediately and manifest what spirit really prompted them to fall. LOL

"Slain in the Spirit"? I find it in the Bible, Ananias and Sapphira. Of course, they didn't get back up afterwards!!




#396826 Whats for Supper...

Posted by Rosie on 12 December 2014 - 05:56 AM

Preaching is always better. Amen?


#396805 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by DaveW on 11 December 2014 - 08:05 PM

What branch of Pentecostals believes one can lose their salvation? I've never personally met a Pentecostal who had that view.


I've never personally met a pentecostal that DIDN'T have that view......


#396769 Whats for Supper...

Posted by Invicta on 11 December 2014 - 07:30 PM

This evening we went to our former foster son and his wife for dinner.  He did the catering and did Chicken breasts wrapped in bacon and roasted, roast potatoes, Steamed red cabbage, carrots and green beans, and a lentil savoury for my wife who is vegetarian.  We all had some of that.  Not bad for someone who is dyslexic and when he came to us aged 14 could not read mare than three letter words.  We took a raspberry gateau for desssert. 




#396721 How Old Is The Earth

Posted by MountainChristian on 11 December 2014 - 01:44 PM

I do not believe in a 'Lucifer', as pertaining to some 'high angelic being' over one third of the angels.

I know I will get opposition on this, but to 'create' an existence of a creature that man has added

the attributes and 'honor' that only our Lord should have, but from the opposite view of course, in my opinion

is just wrong.

Historically the name Lucifer, in whatever language spoken, was meant to name the planet we call Venus. I do not get this from modern sources.

The notes alone in my bible explain this name as meaning "the morning star, that goeth before the sun, is called lucifer to whom Nebuchadnezzar is compared"

I go to work at 5:30 am everyday, and most days I get to see that morning star: Venus. By the way, sometimes it is the 'evening star' too. 

Yes, some 'non-Baptists' in centuries of old, did refer Lucifer's one verse in Isaiah as an example of the devil we call Satan.

But their thoughtline was based on and in their other 'doctrines'. Which we know as unbiblical. Why Baptists have taken this up I do not know

But I do know that, as a bible believing Baptist, and I am one, that no matter what any other 'baptist' teacher or preacher says,

you go on scripture, and the scripture does not teach Lucifer as the Head Devil of biblical teaching. It is a made up doctrine using other verses

that appear to support it yet don't clearly.

Jesus Christ never once named the devil Lucifer. He referred him to other names, of which we all know.

I have received plenty of 'flack' concerning this thought, yet is it destructive to our beliefs at all?

I don't think so.

 

.....cut......

 

Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! (The remaining paragraph.) 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners? All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house. 19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet. 20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned. 21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.



#396711 Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?

Posted by MountainChristian on 11 December 2014 - 12:57 PM

Freewill Baptists teach after getting saved they keep their salvation by works. In my area they are strong KJV only men and women. After sinning they teach they must get saved again. So each day they are saved and lost many many times. They live under a heavy yoke of works. 




#396542 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by Pastor Scott Markle on 09 December 2014 - 10:06 AM

(Note:  This posting is somewhat lengthy; however, those who generally follow my posts will not find this to be much of a surprise.)

 

Concerning Daniel 9:24-27 –

 

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

 

As the context of Daniel 9 reveals, this prophetic utterance was delivered unto Daniel, who had been confessing the sins of his people Israel and praying for the Lord’s mercy upon his people Israel.  Indeed, when the angel Gabriel delivered this prophetic utterance unto Daniel, he specifically indicated that the focus of its revelation concerned Daniel’s people Israel and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, as per the opening line of verse 24 – “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] people and upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] holy city [Jerusalem].”  Furthermore, the angel revealed that these “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God upon Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and upon Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, for a six-fold purpose as signaled by the six infinitive phrases that complete verse 24. 

 

This six-fold purpose of the Lord our God concerning Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, are as follows:

 

1.  “To finish the transgression” – Herein the word “transgression” is singular, indicating that it refers unto the entire rebellion of the Israelites against the Lord their God as a single unit of sinful fault.  Indeed, the Hebrew word that is translated by the English word “transgression” indicates a breaking away (or, departure) from a relationship or covenant with another.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful departure of the Israelites away from Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks” are concluded, the Israelites will never again depart from the Lord.

 

2.  “To make an end of sins” – Herein the word “sins” is plural, indicating that it refers unto the individual activities of sin that the Israelites might commit against the Lord their God.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful activities of the Israelites against Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks “ are concluded, the Israelites will never again commit sins against the Lord.

 

3.  “To make reconciliation for iniquity” – Herein the word “reconciliation” indicates the ideas of atonement and forgiveness and of reconciliation thereby.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about His forgiveness upon the Israelites for their sinful departure from Him and for their sinful activities against Him, and to bring about thereby the reconciliation of the Israelites unto Himself and unto His blessed fellowship.

 

4.  “To bring in everlasting righteousness” – Herein the phrase “everlasting righteousness” reveals the spiritual condition into which the Lord God intends to bring the Israelites through His work of reconciliation.  He intends to bring them into a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness,” not into a condition of righteousness from which they might again fall, but into a condition of righteousness from which they will never fall again.  Indeed, this is the spiritual condition into which the Lord God will bring the Israelites at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

 

5.  “To seal up the vision and prophecy” – This phrase appears to indicate that all of the Lord’s prophetic utterances concerning the Israelites (especially concerning His judgments upon the Israelites) will be brought to their conclusion through the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

 

6.  “To anoint the most Holy” – Herein the phrase “the most Holy” refers to the Most Holy One, the promised Messiah of Israel.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, we learn that this Most Holy One, that the Messiah, is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about the literal anointing of the Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over all the earth.  As such, we could expect that the literal return of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords (See Revelation 19) will occur at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

 

Now, in this context the phrase “seventy weeks” may be literally understood as “seventy sevens,” wherein the English word “weeks” is employed for the idea of “sevens.”  The reason that the English word “weeks” is so employed is because a week is the most natural grouping of seven when we encounter the element of time sequences.  However, the Hebrew idea of “sevens” is not limited only to a group of seven days, but can refer to any grouping of sevens within the sequence of time.  With this understanding in mind, we move to verse 25, wherein greater detail is revealed concerning the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” (or, seventy sevens).

 

The opening portion of verse 25 reveals that the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” will encompass the time period “from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince.”  Thus these first sixty-nine sevens will begin with “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” after their seventy years of captivity by the hand of the Babylonians (See Ezra & Nehemiah).  Thus also these first sixty-nine sevens will conclude with the coming of “the Messiah the Prince.”  Now, the distance of time between these events are known by historical record to be greater than a period of sixty-nine literal weeks.  Rather, we understand by the historical record that the distance of time between these events encompassed a multitude of years (indeed, 483 years).  Therefore, we are brought to understand that the “seventy sevens” of this context are a reference unto seventy groupings of seven years each.

 

Now, the report of verse 25 is not presented with a simple designation of threescore (sixty) and nine “weeks” (sevens), but with the dividing of two parts, the first being “seven weeks” (seven sevens) and the second being “threescore and two weeks” (sixty-two sevens).  This seems to indicate that something of significance will also occur at the completion of the first “seven weeks” (or, forty-nine years) of these sixty-nine weeks (sevens).  Even so, the closing line of verse 25 appears to reveal what this “thing” of significance is – “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”

 

Since verse 25 has recorded the beginning and the ending for the first sixty-nine “weeks” of the “seventy weeks,” we would now logically expect verse 26 to report the events of the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks.”  Indeed, human logic would move us to expect that the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” would follow immediately after the first sixty-nine “weeks” are completed (since the number seventy does follow immediately after the number sixty-nine).  However, this seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” is not actually and specifically mentioned until verse 27.  Rather, verse 26 gives a report concerning events that occur “after” the “threescore and two weeks” (after the first sixty-nine “weeks”) without making any specific reference to the seventieth and final week.

 

What then are these events that occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), without any specific indication that they fall in the seventieth and final “week” (7 years)?  Verse 26 appears to give report concerning three things, saying, “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  Herein the preposition “after” does not indicate that these things occur at the end of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), but indicates that these things occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) are already concluded.  Furthermore, it is worthy of notice that verse 25 did not specifically state that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would conclude with the cutting off of the Messiah the Prince.  Rather, verse 25 simply indicated that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would extend “unto the Messiah the Prince” (and thereby conclude), without specifying the activity of the Messiah the Prince to which it was referring.  (Personally, I believe that verse 25 is referring to the beginning of our Lord Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry as initiated by His baptism.)

 

So then, what are the three things which verse 26 indicates occur after the conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years)? 

 

1.  The Messiah will be cut off in death, not for His own sake, but for the sake of others.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, this would be a prophetically reference unto the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross. 

 

2.  “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city [that is – Daniel’s holy city, Jersusalem, as per the contextual statement with which verse 24 began] and the sanctuary [that is – the temple in Jerusalem].”  Now, in this statement there are two elements of information that are worthy of notice in relation to the context.  The first of these elements of information is that there is “a prince that shall come” unto the Israelites and unto the city of Jerusalem who is not referenced as their Messiah.  The second of these elements of information is that this “prince that shall come” is not the one himself who comes against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.  Rather, it is the people of which he will be a part that come against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.

 

3.  “The end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  This statement appears to indicate that the destroying of the city Jerusalem and of the temple in Jerusalem will end with utter desolation upon the Israelites, and that the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem will continue to suffer ongoing desolations thereafter.

 

Finally, with verse 27 we come to the concluding verse of this prophetic utterance and to the specific reference unto the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) of these “seventy weeks.”  The opening line of this verse indicates that some “he” will “confirm” some “covenant with many” (apparently among the Israelites, since that is the focus of this prophetic utterance as per the opening statement of verse 24).  In fact, this “he” will “confirm” this “covenant” with these Israelites for a period of “one week” (that is – a period of one seven, or of seven years).  Then this verse indicates that in the middle of this seven year period (after 3.5 years), this “he” will “cause the sacrifice and oblation” of the Israelites “to cease” (apparently ending his seven year “covenant” with the Israelites).  Finally, this verse indicates that this “he” will bring a form of desolation upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem, and that this “he” will do so for the purpose of “the overspreading of abominations” upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem.  Indeed, this verse indicates that this desolation will continue upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem “until the consummation” (until the completion) of the seventieth “week,” and thereby of the “seventy weeks.”

 

So then, who is this “he” of verse 27?  Grammatically, the closest antecedent to this pronoun in the context is “the prince that shall come” who was mentioned in verse 26.  Furthermore, in the context there is no other reference to “the prince that shall come” of verse 26 in order to explain who he is and why he matters and was mentioned at all in verse 26.  As such, I would contend according to these principles of grammar and context that the “he” of verse 27 is “the prince that shall come” of verse 26.  Now, it is again worthy of note that this “prince” is not referenced in verse 26 as being the Messiah, but that he is in some way related to the people who would destroy the city of Jerusalem and the sanctuary (temple) therein in the destroying event that is prophesied in verse 26.

 

In conclusion, let us consider the grammatical and contextual gap that is presented in this passage between the conclusion of the sixty-nine “weeks” and the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  Verse 25 clearly speaks concerning the beginning and conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks,” and verse 27 clearly speaks concerning the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  However, the events of verse 26 are presented between these other two records.  Indeed, as we have already noted, verse 26 does specifically indicate that the events which it records occur after the sixty-nine “weeks.”  Yet verse 26 makes no specific reference whatsoever to the seventieth “week.”  Furthermore, verse 27 specifically makes reference to the beginning of the seventieth week, and then reports concerning events that will proceed from that point.  Yet verse 27 does not specifically indicate that the events which are recorded in verse 26 are included in that seventieth “week.”  As such, we may understand from the flow of the grammar and the context that there is some form of gap in time between the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) as recorded in verse 25 and the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) as recorded in verse 27, and that the events of verse 26 will fall within that gap in time.






The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500