Where do go if I leave the IFB movement?

treasure_unseen said:
What sign?

That's just more modern man made silliness. Or did you even consider that?

I'm saying you can't tell from what they want to label themselves ... If you going to use one, use the right one.
Click to expand...
What are you calling man made silliness-the New Testament? These are what the churches of the NT were called in the New Testament. Of course you may prefer your man made tradition of putting "Christ" or "Christian" in the name.
 
tmjbog said:
What are you calling man made silliness-the New Testament? These are what the churches of the NT were called in the New Testament. Of course you may prefer your man made tradition of putting "Christ" or "Christian" in the name.
Click to expand...

I was specific and you purposely didn't deal with what I said in your quote. You never do. Which is what you once congratulated me on calling out in UGC. Now you're just like him.....

I asked what "sign" sat outside the church building in Corinth?
 
treasure_unseen said:
I was specific and you purposely didn't deal with what I said in your quote. You never do. Which is what you once congratulated me on calling out in UGC. Now you're just like him.....

I asked what "sign" sat outside the church building in Corinth?
Click to expand...
A church does not have to have a sign to have a name. What kind of crazy hair splitting mission are you on now.
 
tmjbog said:
A church does not have to have a sign to have a name. What kind of crazy hair splitting mission are you on now.
Click to expand...

YOU referenced a sign with the "Church of Corinth" on it. I didn't. You did. That was rather silly. I didn't do it.
 
treasure_unseen said:
YOU referenced a sign with the "Church of Corinth" on it. I didn't. You did. That was rather silly. I didn't do it.
Click to expand...
I don't think I did. But if so disregard "sign". Were the NT Christians wrong for now including Christian or Christ in the name of their church?
 
tmjbog said:
I don't think I did. But if so disregard "sign". Were the NT Christians wrong for now including Christian or Christ in the name of their church?
Click to expand...

They didn't call themselves Baptist. Its more than you're trying to confine the conversation to.

There were no division among them in "Church" name. There was just ONE church at Corinth. Now there are division in name among those who claim Christ. As such, modern members of the body of Christ should Glorify God in the Christian name.
 
treasure_unseen said:
They didn't call themselves Baptist. Its more than you're trying to confine the conversation to.

There were no division among them in "Church" name. There was just ONE church at Corinth. Now there are division in name among those who claim Christ. As such, modern members of the body of Christ should Glorify God in the Christian name.
Click to expand...

treasure_unseen said:
You can't tell it from what they call themselves. I don't see Christian on their church signs.
Click to expand...

So you are moving away from the complaint that Christ or Christian should be in a churches name to their should be more unity. But if these churches have people like you in them they will spend all their time bickering over small details.
 
tmjbog said:
So you are moving away from the complaint that Christ or Christian should be in a churches name to their should be more unity. But if these churches have people like you in them they will spend all their time bickering over small details.
Click to expand...

Okay. Tmj. I'm done. Enjoy.
 
treasure_unseen said:
I don't particularly like him either. Though he had a noble cause. He just wanted every English person to speak the same way. You know us English talkers. Arrogant. Full of ourselves. Especially "us" Southerners. We love our "million dollar words"....

How about "To have authority or control over someone or something "......
Click to expand...

As vague as that definition is, I can partially agree to it. Without getting verbose, submit has *some* significance here.
 
ALAYMAN said:
As vague as that definition is, I can partially agree to it. Without getting verbose, submit has *some* significance here.
Click to expand...

Then you don't believe in the individual priesthood of the believer.
 
treasure_unseen said:
Then you don't believe in the individual priesthood of the believer.
Click to expand...
Or, it could be you misunderstand the fact that priesthood of the believer doesn't preclude proper submission to legitimate godly servant leaders.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Or, it could be you misunderstand the fact that priesthood of the believer doesn't preclude proper submission to legitimate godly servant leaders.
Click to expand...

I believe in the individual priesthood of the believer. That means, I have direct access to know God and learn of God apart from any external influence. In other words..... I get to get the Truth directly from God.... myself. That means, I don't need you. Nor your less than adequate representatives.

Just so you know. I know you don't know because of your KJVOism.

There is not one single command in the entire NT that puts a "pastor" between God and anyone else.... and I mean ANYONE.

Your king of preference, James, had the Scriptures changed in Hebrews 13 and other places.

Your pastor doesn't rule anyone.
 
"Where do go if I leave the IFB movement?"
You go to the Underground Church.
 
FSSL said:
"Where do go if I leave the IFB movement?"
You go to the Underground Church.
Click to expand...

There isn't such a thing.

I probably would go to a local church with you. At least till you got tired of me and ran me off... :)
 
AV1611, Hebrews 13:7, says, "Remember them which haue the rule over you" but in the margin of the original AV1611 there is the alternate reading "Or, are the guides."

AV1611, Hebrews 13:17, says, "Obey them that haue the rule over you" but in the margin there is the alternate reading "Or, guide."

As I understand it, "guide" translates the meaning of the original Greek, with regard to the role of the pastors, better than "rule." And no one can accuse me of heresy for saying that - I got it straight from the AV1611.
 
illinoisguy said:
AV1611, Hebrews 13:7, says, "Remember them which haue the rule over you" but in the margin of the original AV1611 there is the alternate reading "Or, are the guides."

AV1611, Hebrews 13:17, says, "Obey them that haue the rule over you" but in the margin there is the alternate reading "Or, guide."

As I understand it, "guide" translates the meaning of the original Greek, with regard to the role of the pastors, better than "rule." And no one can accuse me of heresy for saying that - I got it straight from the AV1611.
Click to expand...

The margin notes are better but not entirely accurate.... much closer though. The Geneva Bible, which the "king" hated, read "Oversight".

The difference between a ruler and an "Overseer" are dramatic. A good Overseer, often deals with things that the sheep never know about. A good Overseer, is concerning about what the sheep are eating.

A ruler... on the other hand.... in the order of the "king" who inspired it...... He wants ABSOLUTE authority and control.

There is only one KING in our "pecking order" and that is KING Jesus. Which is the only a few verses in the NT that really denotes absolute authority as in "ruling" another. One example is....

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful.

Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
 
treasure_unseen said:
Ask Him what exactly? I'll be glad to do it.

I already know you're ruling down where you're at. How much they paying you now? Still enjoying all those "pastor appreciation" days?

Who would ever imaged that slaves would get a day named after them..... that comes every few months. Can't even wait a year to have them.....

When do you have member appreciation?
Click to expand...
I’m just staying home and having church at my house with family.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top