IFB Preacher Clips

voicecrying

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Messages
262
Reaction score
48
Points
28
Age
52
https://twitter.com/FakeSermon

Anyone follow this account on Twitter? Real clips of real IFB sermons. Some (many?) of the clips are horrendous.
 

Edwards

Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
120
Reaction score
1
Points
18
I have known many IFB preachers and none of them were like these men.  Tony Hutson committing blasphemy was horrible as he mocked the singing of the doxology and there were many of the clips that would be humorous if people  hadn't had to listen to them on a Sunday morning.
 

Ransom

Individual without a cervix
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,087
Reaction score
176
Points
63
Someone just drew my attention to a clip from this account by Andrew Slooooooder complaining that there's no doctrine being attacked more than Dispensationalism.

That may be true, if you can't see two feet past your Ruckmanist face. Most of the church is dealing with worldly philosophies making inroads (Marxist critical theory, transgender pseudoscience, etc.), while SlooooooOoOder is whining that not being Dispensationalist brings you closer to Reformed theology.
 

illinoisguy

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
327
Reaction score
61
Points
28
I don't understand how Ruckmanites can emphasize and demand belief in dispensationalism.  (As a former active member of a Ruckmanite church, I am well aware that they simultaneously insist on Ruckmanism and Scofield dispensationalism).  Scofield, in his "Introduction - To Be Read" in the 1917 Scofield Reference Bible, stated, " The discovery of the Sinaitic MS and the labours in the field of textual criticism of such scholars as Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Winer, Alford, and Westcott and Hort, have cleared the Greek textus receptus of minor inaccuracies, while confirming in a remarkable degree the general accuracy of the Authorized Version of that text.  Such emendations of the text as scholarship demands have been placed in the margins of this edition."

Scofield dispensationalist theology is firmly based on the teachings of men such as those listed above, which Ruckmanites condemn as "Bible correctors" and "Alexandrian cultists," and yet Ruckmanites demand that we blindly accept the Scofield teaching or be branded as brainless compromisers and infidels.

For an example of Scofield's correction of the King James Version to bolster his dispensational theology, see page 1271 of the Old Scofield Reference Bible, which is regarded as sacrosanct by Ruckmanites, where Scofield says, "The theme of Second Thessalonians is, unfortunately, obscured by a mistranslation in the A.V. of 2:1, where 'the day of Christ is at hand' - should be, 'day of the LORD is now present.'  Scofield corrected the KJV in order to promote his mistaken notion that the day of Christ and the day of the LORD are two different events. 

I don't see how I can simultaneously and consistently accept and affirm both Scofield dispensationalism and Ruckmanism at the same time, and yet this is what Ruckmanism demands that we do.
 

Tarheel Baptist

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
7,828
Reaction score
49
Points
48
Ransom said:
Someone just drew my attention to a clip from this account by Andrew Slooooooder complaining that there's no doctrine being attacked more than Dispensationalism.

That may be true, if you can't see two feet past your Ruckmanist face. Most of the church is dealing with worldly philosophies making inroads (Marxist critical theory, transgender pseudoscience, etc.), while SlooooooOoOder is whining that not being Dispensationalist brings you closer to Reformed theology.

Old Magruder, Saluder, Protruder is simply carrying on a long tradition of majoring on the minors...
 

illinoisguy

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
327
Reaction score
61
Points
28
The Intruder says Acts 2:38 is not for today.  I must be really out of it - this is the first time I have heard anyone say that, although I was told by some "ultradispensationalist" followers of Cornelius R. Stam that the New Testament does not begin until Acts 9 when Paul got saved.  Does anyone know what Sluder is getting at when he says Acts 2:38 is not for today?  I am aware that some IFBs say that repentance is not for today, even though Paul was preaching repentance near the end of his ministry (Acts 20:21, 26:20).
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
113
Points
63
illinoisguy said:
The Intruder says Acts 2:38 is not for today.  I must be really out of it -
You must have been asleep in your former "Ruckmanite" church as any Bible-believer knows that Peter had no knowledge of the blood atonement at this point and was preaching the baptism of John the Baptist.  The audience is Israel.  Many of the quotes in Acts 2 are from Joel.  You can "repent and be baptized" all you want (today) and go straight to hell, as we NOW know the gospel (I Cor. 15) and that is what we preach NOW.  You're confused as you are reading the gospel of the grace of God that you know NOW back into Acts 2:38 and trying to make it apply there.  It doesn't!

This is what happens when someone shuts off "rightly dividing the word".  They become Bible blockheads.  But you're in good company.  Most have no clue as to understanding the passage.

Happy New Year!
 

illinoisguy

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
327
Reaction score
61
Points
28
I think I get it now - it's that rubbish about Scofield's multiple gospels.  I am still standing with Paul who said there is only one Gospel, and that anybody who comes along with a new, improved version of the Gospel is to be accursed - Galatians 1:6-9.  Count me in the Bible blockheads.

Reminds me of the old Groucho Marx show where he had a guest from Marblehead, Massachusetts.  Groucho asked him where he was from and he said, "Marblehead."  Groucho replied, "I didn't ask you to describe yourself - I asked you where are you from!"
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
113
Points
63
illinoisguy said:
Count me in the Bible blockheads.
Confession is good and the first step in recovery.

And you've nailed it.  Peter didn't know Paul's gospel in Acts 2:38.

In Acts 10:45 Peter is "astonished" that the Holy Ghost was obtained BEFORE baptism.

He didn't know that in Acts 2:38.

But hopefully, I'm not wasting my time as you appear to mock anyone trying to help you.
 

Ransom

Individual without a cervix
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,087
Reaction score
176
Points
63
illinoisguy said:
Does anyone know what Sluder is getting at when he says Acts 2:38 is not for today?
He's talking about Dr. Petey's hyper-Dispensationalism. Petey claimed there were no Christians present at Pentecost, as it was a Jewish feast, and everyone present was a Jew.

(Except for the hundred and twenty believers that existed at the time and were gathered together, you say? Blow it out your nose, kid, as Petey would say if he weren't rotting in a box.)
 

Ransom

Individual without a cervix
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,087
Reaction score
176
Points
63
Twisted said:
In Acts 10:45 Peter is "astonished" that the Holy Ghost was obtained BEFORE baptism.
"The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles" (Acts 10:45).

KJV-onlyism . . . promoting biblical illiteracy since the 1930s.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
113
Points
63
Ransom said:
Twisted said:
In Acts 10:45 Peter is "astonished" that the Holy Ghost was obtained BEFORE baptism.
"The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles" (Acts 10:45).

KJV-onlyism . . . promoting biblical illiteracy since the 1930s.
LOL!  Yes, the other Jews with him were also astonished.  The point, which you don't get, is that Peter's knowledge grew through the book of Acts.  He did not know everything in Acts 2:38.

I laugh seeing you look up the verse to find something to nitpick about.  LOL!
 

Ransom

Individual without a cervix
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,087
Reaction score
176
Points
63
Twisted said:
He did not know everything in Acts 2:38.
Yeah, and Dead Lyin' Petey was still wrong about there being no Christians present on Pentecost.

I laugh seeing you look up the verse to find something to nitpick about.  LOL!
Yeah, you being 180 degrees off from the truth is just a nitpick, we know.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
113
Points
63
Ransom said:
Yeah, you being 180 degrees off from the truth is just a nitpick, we know.
Better 180 degrees that this!


                  RANSOM'S EXEGESIS
 

Ransom

Individual without a cervix
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,087
Reaction score
176
Points
63
By "exegesis," you mean  "quoting a Bible verse," right?

I can't help notice that you haven't actually provided an exegesis of the same verse that shows your interpretation is a better one.

Nor will you, of course.
 

illinoisguy

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
327
Reaction score
61
Points
28
www.ruckmanism.org/multipleplans

Since some IFBs are making acceptance of Ruckman's teachings on multiple plans of salvation a test of fellowship, this is a good article to read, to find out what Peter the Great taught, which we are all expected to believe.  This article is "must reading" for anyone who does not want to be labeled a "Bible blockhead" for the sin of not knowing and believing all the nonsense that Ruckman taught.
 

Tarheel Baptist

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
7,828
Reaction score
49
Points
48
Twisted said:
Ransom said:
Yeah, you being 180 degrees off from the truth is just a nitpick, we know.
Better 180 degrees that this!


                  RANSOM'S EXEGESIS

Frankly, I?m impressed you even know how to spell exegesis.
 

TheRealJonStewart

Member
Registered
Joined
May 4, 2016
Messages
681
Reaction score
5
Points
18
Age
31
voicecrying said:
https://twitter.com/FakeSermon

Anyone follow this account on Twitter? Real clips of real IFB sermons. Some (many?) of the clips are horrendous.
It's kinda like Steve Furtick's terrible message on the gospel which was circulating in social media. Man that was cringe level.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
113
Points
63
Tarheel Baptist said:
Twisted said:
Ransom said:
Yeah, you being 180 degrees off from the truth is just a nitpick, we know.
Better 180 degrees that this!


                  RANSOM'S EXEGESIS

Frankly, I?m impressed you even know how to spell exegesis.
I had to look it up.
 
Top