Jump to content


Member Since 31 Dec 2012
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 10:52 PM

#370242 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 18 April 2014 - 11:20 AM

Thank you for clarifying - no offense is meant by this, but I do not agree with your assessment.  The things I read only help me with my understanding of Scripture, and have improved by ability to teach it to others. 

I don't claim to be the world's smartest man.  I do not believe the Lord expects us to "reinvent the wheel" when it comes to Bible doctrine and sound teaching. 


The filthy lucre you mention is in regards to a man who wants to use the office of a pastor as a means to a nice comfortable career.  They do not understand the necessary work involved.  All they see is an opportunity to get paid a nice salary with little APPARENT physical labor involved.  However, they have forgotten Matthew 20:28 and Paul's exhortation to the elders in Acts 20.  These people are only looking at things from the physical perspective, and neglect the most significant aspects of the ministry, which is the spiritual aspect.


So far as the sale of books go, most of the sincere Bible Believing authors out there who write and sell books only do so as a "ministry of helps" to other Christians.  There is a great deal of time, effort and money that goes into the production of books.  And most of these authors I am thinking of are not getting rich off their books - the cost is so high to produce them that they would have to charge 2 to 3 times what they do to "get rich."  If they want people to get their books at a reasonable price, they are only going to be able to earn enough "profit" off of the books to recoup their expenses, and have enough to print more.  Further, these same authors I am thinking of routinely GIVE AWAY a large quantity of books to pastors and missionaries alike to help them in their ministry.  It is not about the money - it is about trying to help God's people.


So, I am not going to argue the point with you, but I don't agree with you on that either.  I largely agree with you on most other issues.  And I do understand your perspective - all we need is the Bible, and if most preachers would just stick with the Bible, they would greatly improve their understanding of it, and become more effective preachers and teachers. 

My point is that these other books can be wonderful HELPS to understanding the Bible, but they are not the FIRST thing we go to....we go to the Bible first, then add to our knowledge from the labors of other good, Bible believing me. 


"You can borrow brains, but you can't borrow character."


In Christ,


I understand completely Steve.


I mean no offense and make no accusations either..my word on it. And this is farther away from the OP than should be but I will leave it alone after this.


Let me add another point to my points briefly please.


Please take post #64 and 66 and add this to it.


It makes Bible and common sense to me to look at the writing and publication of extra Biblical material (regardless of subject) in only two ways:


1. Ministry - giving away of materials to the poor to disciple or offering at costs to those who will.


2. Sales with any amount of profit. That is undeniably filthy lucre no matter the justifcation or rationalization. 


I also include websites that sell for profit men;s materials and websites that "ask" for donations.


None of this can be found anywhere in the NT except arguably where filthy lucre is mentioned.


IOW: Any profit sales, any requests for donations is not ministry. Even though all these sellers and websites call themselves ministries.


Ministry by definition is giving emotionally, spiritually, intellectually or physically to those in need. If someone writes a book on anything Scriptural in nature with his own money, prints it with his own money and then gives it away to those in need - that, my friends, is ministry and might be ordained by the Lord (might be but that is still suspect to me)


Anything else is just plain old sin (yeah, I said it). You know, filthy lucre, coveteousness, the lust of concupiscence, making merchandise of.... God ordained noone to write a book about His Word and then sell it. God ordained noone to live off the Gospel in this way at any time. Sorry but true and I think you all know it is true.


The local NT church is where everything should be done even these days. I don't care what the world is doing. If you want to make a living on the Gospel, then desire to be a pastor or elders in a local NT church.


I marvel at these authors who think nothing of this. The outrageousness of any man who trys to cheaply knock off God's Word, repackage it and try to sell it for any level of profit.


Yeah, I used to waste money on some of this bunk but realized that I have have zero interest in anything these covetous men would have to say anyway.

#370205 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 17 April 2014 - 09:46 PM


I am not sure I am following you here.

As I read, study, and prepare sermons and lessons for our congregation here, I glean as much as I can on my own.  After I have done my own personal study, I will then read what I consider to be helpful commentaries to gain more insight.  If I am struggling to gain the correct understanding of a passage, I will read many commentaries to help me understand what the passage is saying.


Am I missing something here?  Are you saying that reading what other people have learned through their own study is wrong? 


Not trying to be argumentative here. I simply don't understand your point.


I do sir, however, like all my posts, they are my opinion and I never claim they are authoritative. Though I can get riled up once and again :)


I honestly don't think the Apostles or even the early Church Elders studied anything other than the Scriptures. I wonder often if the filthy lucre warned against is actually all these other books and publications and internet "ministries" and blogs and etc. etc.

They didn't need all that extra bunk and they turned the world upside down. World ain't been turned upside down lately, has it?

#370201 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 17 April 2014 - 09:19 PM

I disagree with this point here. I've undergone immense learning in the last few years and my faith has grown by leaps and bounds because of it. Truly, I'd say that study and learning is the only reason (temporally speaking that is) it grew for the year I was in a church with awful preaching and poor fellowship while I was on the road 2-3 weeks a month. Learning only weakens faith when it's done without discernment and unchecked by the Bible and causes the learner to become puffed up by his/her knowledge.


Btw, I am 100% confident in the KJB and it's all I carry everywhere I go. That doesn't mean I shouldn't lean on godly men who can help me understand it better. If that were the case there would be no need for preachers because everyone would be just fine with their personal Scripture reading. Faith and knowledge/learning aren't mutually exclusive. Faith was an important point that Paul consistently made, but he also told Timothy to study.


Agreed, but where we differ is that God through Paul told Timothy to study His Word, the Scriptures. Not the writings of men, whether the clouds, ruckmans, ripleys or hyles of the day.


Local NT preaching by Pastors is for leading, feeding and motivating the local flock. Study should be between each believer, the Word and the Spirit. NOT by the filthy lucre of men's books.

God describes our hearts as wicked, why would you think God wants us to study our own writings?


Think about it

#370124 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 17 April 2014 - 09:49 AM

Consider this gents as a better way to sum up why I believe: ruckman, riply, cloud, whoever aside (who cares)


If you are not 100% confident in the 100% authority of the KJB on the street while preaching to handle every objection from every direction by every type of person, then I feel you are actually weaker in the faith than you could be. Mans learning weakens faith, not strengthens it. This is all about faith friends. Remember God measures our worth by our faith, not by our learning and education. The Spirit teaches us God's way by our faith in His Word, not by man's writings.


God gave us no other Word, He inspired no commentaries, no lexicons, no history books, etc. 


Study His Word to give every man a reason for the hope which lieth within you.


If you ever catch yourself saying "well it says this but really means that" or "in the greek it really is defined as this and not what it says in english". Stop, drop and slap yourself silly because that is what you just looked like to the person who had the objection. You are asking this person to have faith in a Book you just opinioned is in error.


IMO, this is the most important way to look at it.


It baffles me that anyone cares to know more about the spectulations of men over the who,what,when,where of the Word and not the Word itself. And I am not saying anyone in this thread is doing that either, I am just making the statement.

#369994 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 16 April 2014 - 11:06 AM

I will interject on this post. Also, as one who has no idea what ruckman or ripley say about this subject.


1. yes

2. no


However, the KJB is directly inspired and the complete Word of God. At the same time, I certainly believe most of the versions mentioned on this site (even id'ed as corrupt) contain the Words of God, I just dont have faith in them that they are complete and without error as I do the KJB. My reasons are farther up this thread.


Have fun kids

#369301 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 10 April 2014 - 08:44 PM

Thank you for your explanation. All I'm really looking for from anybody who chooses to chime in is a well thought out reason for holding the position. If someone has a faith-based position, of which secondary inspiration absolutely is, there is precious little I can do to change their mind because it involves a change in worldview to some degree and even the smallest change there is almost impossible unless someone is open-minded about it; so I'm not going to try to argue or persuade you one way or the other. I think your position is absolutely incorrect on several points and we clearly have different ideas about the veracity of historical data and scholarship and what it means to study it, but that's your prerogative. I merely want to understand your position and anyone else's who holds a similar one.


Now that is a great reply, thanks brother

#369235 Secondary Inspiration

Posted by wretched on 10 April 2014 - 11:32 AM

I think the far better question is how would any of you folks have any idea how the KJB came about apart from guesswork based on the writings of man's history.


Some of you quote your internet research as fact, what men taught you in Bible college as fact, Regurgitated opinions from so called historical documents which could very easily have been heresay and slanted when written to lead the readers in the directions of the writers- as fact; modern greek translation guessicons of ancient greek meanings- as fact.


Nothing you read or learn or know is factual apart from the Word fellas. Try to keep from forgetting that.


Why do I say this? Because I have faith that the KJB is the directly inspired, complete Word of God.


Complete and uninhibited FAITH is what this is all about. If not, why are any of you doing any of this anyway?  Think about it

#368970 The Bible Only?

Posted by wretched on 07 April 2014 - 08:29 PM

In my studies of Eph 6 and the armour of God, one source that piqued my curiosity was in fact a childhood comic book series.
They had descriptions of Roman soldiers and their armour - done of course in a humourous way.
Many years later, after I was saved, when I read in the Bible about the armour of God it occurred to me that it must have been Roman armour. I had always assumed the comic was just made up silliness, but in fact the comic book was very accurate in this respect - but with a funny twist.

When I investigated, I discovered some amazing things about the passage.
None of it changes the passage, but it strengthens the passage unbelievably.
Years later when I preached the book of Ephesians we had an ethnic Roman attending. Because of his heritage, he had made a study of Roman history. He came to me afterwards and confirmed that what I had said about the armour was historically correct.

It is a wonderful study to do.


You wouldn't happen to be referring to Asterix and Obliex? I read those comix as a child in Europe. My mother was from Luxembourg

#368925 So How Does A Person Get Saved?

Posted by wretched on 07 April 2014 - 03:29 PM

No, on that day I made repentance toward God and put my faith in Jesus Christ.


There is more, some time earlier my wife had given to me the book, The Case for Christ, I read it to disprove once and for all God and the bible.  I didn't win and thank heavens for that!


My only memory of someone witnessing to me (the exact conversation is lost, don't even know if it was biblical) was at the BEQ lounge at Glenview Naval Air Station in the summer of 1986.  That night a former sailor and wanderer told me he traveled the country going wherever the Lord needed him to go.  He talked to me about the Lord but I soon changed the topic.  I was the chief mocker of all things God in my family, though while in uniform I faked it.  Used to make sport out of running those anti-abortion people off the sidewalks with my muscle car; it's a miracle that God chose to forgive all that I had done against him and still keeps my name in the book despite all the wrongs I continue to do.  Were there others?  I cannot remember, there were certainly some I never gave a second's worth of my time to try though.  


Just as the savage in the jungle is responsible to God, my salvation was similar.


Ah, got it bro, thanks. KInd reply too.

#368721 So How Does A Person Get Saved?

Posted by wretched on 05 April 2014 - 10:28 PM

Consider this and I will leave it alone:


Jesus said we must have the faith of a child, Jesus said forbid not the children for of such is the Kingdom. I don't believe it is possible for a child to be born again so soon after water birth. I think they are safe not having their own opinions yet. It is when they turn from their parents and influence-rs opinions in their early teens and form their own that it is possible for them to repent.


I think we should absolutely sow the seeds and keep them in church of course. But I don't think we should push them to be "saved" when they have no true conviction of what they are doing. And as they grow continue to convince them they got saved when they were 5 or 8 or 10 or whatever when they reach their teens and are having doubts and then when they reach their 20s, etc.


Sow the seeds, when they are old they will not depart from it (not forget the seeds as they are watered). They will truly repent then. I don't have time to thoroughly explain my idea but there it is in a nutshell.


I know it is not what you hear in sunday school but it is a concern of mine.


Real quick, run an experiment in children's church when a child is confronted to be saved. Offer candy at the point of prayer instead and see what they decide.


You could have offered me a million dollars instead at the point where I got saved and I would have lit your money on fire. Think about it.

#368707 So How Does A Person Get Saved?

Posted by wretched on 05 April 2014 - 08:52 PM



You have piqued my curiosity. Is there a "common tare" in IFB churches, or was your statement more general in nature?


I think the common tare are the 2nd generation members. Those who were converted as children, growing up in the church and never actually repented since their only knowledge of the Lord was from their parents.

I fear for these kids and cringe when I see parents encouraging their children to pray a prayer to be saved.

They look, act, talk just like the born again but never actually were. Just a theory

#368683 So How Does A Person Get Saved?

Posted by wretched on 05 April 2014 - 04:07 PM

If he cannot recall a single point in time where he was hearing or reading the Gospel (death, burial and resurrection of Jesus) preached, felt an undeniable conviction of sin, God's righteousness and judgment to come and at this point changed his entire outlook on God calling out to God to save him, then No, he is not born again. He is just one of many tares within IFB churches.


His story however is less common than what I think is the most common tare in IFB churches though.

#367632 What To Do About Accuracy And The 'tyndale Tradition' Bible Called Th...

Posted by wretched on 29 March 2014 - 01:13 PM


I like the Geneva Bible personally but do not believe it is the complete Word. It no doubt contains most of it but is not the perfect and complete Revelation.

It has not stood the test of time nor the attacks of satan. In addition, satan pays no attention to it simply because no one knows it exists.

But if you like it that is your business.

#367504 New Wine

Posted by wretched on 28 March 2014 - 01:04 PM



This dead horse has somehow been resurrected AGAIN


I suppose since it is up again I will be the odd man out.


IMO drinking alcohol is never ok by the Spirit indwelling us because the Word is clearly against it and should never be justified as such.


IMO wine always means wine in Scripture. I refuse to change the Word to meet an idea-ever. New wine is referenced as sin and with drunkedness almost as much as old wine throughout the Bible. I think ASOD had the logical and seemingly well researched answer that new wine, because it was not fermented as much had less alcohol content. I admit that I have done no research but do think that is the most reasonable, logical and Scriptural explanation I have heard on it.


Anyway, I really am also opposed to referencing guessicons to explain anything from the NT. Not because I am anti-learning or ignorant but because I know they are guessing and I spent probably more years than most doing the same thing realizing it causes more confusion than it clears up.


I am not sure if it was the Spirit convicting me or perhaps my personality hates not having an answer for those that ask about the hope in me. Even perpherial issues like wine, etc. I got sick of saying "wellll, you know, the greek defines it as this or that" OR "wellll, we know that Jesus would have no part of this or that, therefore, it can't mean this or that".


Yaw do what you want but I got sick of giving extra Biblical sounding answers long ago and won't be going back to that. If the KJB says it then that is what it means. I decided a long time ago to study how to divide the Word, rather than attempt to correct it. (of course this last statement has nothing to do with wine but my fingers were on a roll)


On a side note, that NN fella is a strong christian and edifying to others. Even when he is slamming my ideas, he is kind about it :)

#367203 Family Salvation

Posted by wretched on 26 March 2014 - 11:32 AM

Although I would absolutely, positively love to believe hinton's theory on this passage. The contextual situation of Acts 16 seems apparent to me that Paul explains the Gospel first to the man with the caveat "the same goes for your house" if they also believe. In the subsequent verses Paul and Silas go and preach to the man's "house".


I wish there were a nepatistic program clause in the Gospel, but I am afraid we are all on our own.

The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500