Monday, May 11, 2009

Others Like Me?

When Elijah felt sorry for himself, He felt as if he was the only one standing true for the Lord. I do not feel that way, but I rejoice at God's answer concerning thousands of others who were standing like Elisha. I wonder if there are others like our church? If you have these same convictions, please let me know.

1. KJV
2. Associate in ABA for missions support, literature and for benevolence offerings
3. Separation from false worship (don't sing or preach for them in worship or revival, don't invite them to do those things at our church)
4. Tithes and offerings
5. Women wear dresses (skirts) to worship
6. Use only ABA literature (including youth)
7. No fund raisers

15 comments:

  1. Bro. Archbishop,

    You are not alone. I agree to all principles you posted (except we have already discussed tithing, to which I agree to as an example).

    Sometimes in our blogs, all of us might tend to dwell on where we differ slightly on custom or practice, simply because we are in agreement in so many areas.

    I'm thankful for churches in the ABA and the many friends I have made over the years. I may appear somewhat moderate in my comments, but often it's because I'm pushing a little to see whether what we believe is scriptural or simply a matter of custom.

    I appreciate your stand for sound doctrine. Customs, dress code, worship styles, and generational differences, however, will continue to exist until the Lord returns. All we can do is preach and teach modesty, reverence, and that all things be done decently and in order.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. Agree, and so do all in our church (though we are not all that many).
    2. Disagree. Give no support in or through the ABA or any other association. Only direct.
    3. Agree with the separation, but might accept the opportunity to preach to them (not for them) under the right circumstances since we are to preach the gospel to every creature.
    4. Offerings (which can be 10%) but we don't teach tithing as a NT command.
    5. Agree, though we don't turn any away who show up otherwise. I don't like to see women in pants in church; but I have wondered over the last several years if we are not inconsistent. Should we be teaching not wearing pants elsewhere as well?
    6. No literature, Bible only (including youth).
    7. Agree; no fund raisers, no faith promises, no dire appeals. Only "appeal" is teaching the duty of the church members to support their own work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brother I love ya and respect your stand! I think it is great that you are pastoring one of the Lord's Churches and they are of like mind and stand with and support their pastor.

    While I may not agree 100% with these things...I'll stand by your side and defend the truth 100% of the time with you!

    I have NEVER forgotten the time when you allowed me to preach a youth revival at Trinity. The time spent with you and your dear family was priceless.

    God bless you!

    ReplyDelete
  4. We are close. We differ on 2 and 6,& 5 should be at all times. Head coverings for worship though.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree wholeheartedly on most of these... and slightly less than wholeheartedly on 5&6. I believe women can dress modestly in pants today, and with the lengths of the skirts that are being manufactured today, pants might actually be more modest.

    On ABA literature, that should be our primary source for literature, but I've been known to deviate. Still, ALL literature should be scripturally sound.

    I'm a KJV man, but am tolerant of other "literal" translations. I agree that there should be no fundraisers. Christ is not a beggar. Neither should His churches be.

    ReplyDelete
  6. #1- KJV is God's preserved word in the English language. Other modern versions come from a different, corrupt text. I'd still like to know what other KJV guys would consider as the true text in other languages.

    2. I agree that the ABA is the closest fellowship to the Bible. However, I highly respect and would not condemn those with convictions that any association is unscriptural and choose to support missions directly. I don't think you can ever be too conservative and scriptural in your doctrine and practice. I think we should look at each church by what they believe and practice. I believe we should look at each church individually as to whether we would fellowship them--even ABA. Those in other works such as BMAA,SBC,and independent Baptist we should also take church by church and not write them off completely. I talked to someone in an independent fundamental Baptist church that left the SBC in the '70s because they were too liberal. They use our S.S. literature, believe in closed communion and reject alien immersion, and teach modesty for men and women. Also, although I disagree with the Faithway Baptists on footwashing, I could most likely fellowship them. They were a split from the ABA in 1951 right after the ABA-NABA split. I don't know about individual churches in the CBAA (Conservative Baptists) or GARB (Regular Baptists). They were conservative splits off the ABC U.S.A. early in the 1900's. If I understand correctly, Bro. Chester Tulga came out of the CBAA. I know, however, that they as associations hold to the universal church heresy. ABC U.S.A. is too liberal and modernisitic and I wouldn't touch them with a 10-ft pole. The one where Bill Moyers is a member is dually aligned with United Churches of Christ.

    #3. I'm against churches having singings and inviting just anyone to come and sing. I also don't believe a false preacher should stand in God's pulpit at any time--even a funeral.

    #4. Practiced by Abraham and Jacob before the Law, commanded by God under the Law (Malachi 3), received by Jesus Christ in heaven now (Hebrews 7) and how could we give any less? (2 Corinthians 8:9)

    #5. I am like Bro. Acker here. While I disagree with women wearing pants to church (and like Bro. Faulkner see it as inconsistent to teach it is inappropriate for church and then wear them the rest of the week), slacks (if they are different from what a man would wear) are more modest than some things that are worn to church these days.

    6. I want to add to this one. It is dangerous when we, even as preachers, read from others who are unsound in doctrine. Peter said that we can fall from our steadfastness if we are not careful. (2 Peter 3) And I don't understand why other versions and other unsound material are sold in our bookstores.

    7. Again, God's means of carrying out His work is through tithes and offerings. (Malachi 3)

    ReplyDelete
  7. #3- I didn't mention rock music, raising hands, swaying, clapping, throwing people up in the air, riding a motorcycle down the aisle of the tabernacle, magic shows (something that was condemned in the Bible), etc. My comment under this one was in addition to what Bro. Merritt said.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As to #1. As I have posted before, I am KJV preferred. I really don't trust the text used in translating the newer English versions. I like what Bro. Younglandmarker said about this one for the most part.

    As to #2. We practice sending our missions support direct. However, we still believe in fellowshipping in the ABA. The Adult SS Commentary, which is a recent source of help, is a good help for teachers and pastors also. Our national messenger meeting could consist of more preaching and less award giving and the like. Years ago the late Bro. I. K. Cross made the remark that we didn't need the hand clapping (not an exact quote, but my perception ); and to this I agree. Also we have tended to be more like the SBC, as to committees, as the years roll by. Our committees in some cases are to controlling.

    Also about #2: I believe Bro. Younglandmarker gave a good post on this.

    As to #3: I don't believe in being ecumenical in any shape, form, or fashion. I stand with you, Bro. ArchBishop, on this one and also again Bro. Younglandmarker made some good remarks and I stand with him on his additional remark made on May 12, also.

    As to #4: This is what I practice and teach not as a law but as doing what God would have us to do out of love to and for Him and because He first loved us. Again I like and agree with Bro. Younglandmarker who said, "how could we give any less? (2 Corinthians 8:9)" We are under grace and grace in us is to abound.

    As to #5: I prefer that the ladies wear dresses. But we are in the West. It seems that Bro. R. L. Vaughn has hit the nail on the head for me, he said, "5. Agree, though we don't turn any away who show up otherwise. I don't like to see women in pants in church; but I have wondered over the last several years if we are not inconsistent. Should we be teaching not wearing pants elsewhere as well?" However, I believe Bro. Acker and Bro. Landmarker have some good comments on this #5.

    As to # 6: I believe we need to be very careful in the literature we use. As Bro. Acker said, "Still, ALL literature should be scripturally sound." We should be careful that we are not using literature that teaches universal invisible church, Open Communion, Alien Baptism etc. Literature for all ages should be sound and according to our doctrinal stand on the Bible.

    As to 7. "No fund raisers." I agree. The Bible teaches that the work of God through N. T. churches is to be supported by the free will offerings of his people. Again should we give less then 10% being under grace.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Brother younglandmarker... seriously, swaying? Are you kidding? I do this on accident, and half the times don't even realize I am doing it. Seriously?

    Brother Bishop,
    Please email me at CalvaryYouth@live.com and let me know something. Do you feel if a church doesn't meet up to these, they aren't a true church? I would really like to know your opinion.

    As for us,
    1. Agreed.
    2. Agreed, except I don't send to the ABA nationally, b/c of the bad missions out there who don't agree to #1.
    3. Agreed in a sense, I suppose.
    4. Agreed.
    5. I agree we should ALL be dressed 100% modestly. This may not be a dress or skirt, but female (I repeat, SPECIFICALLY MADE AND DESIGNED FOR FEMALES, AND NOTICEABLY SO) business suits are much more modest than any dress or skirt that comes above the ankle.
    6. If taking an idea from something else and making your own literature is considered ABA since you are ABA and what you make is ABA, then I agree. If not, I'm out.
    7. I disagree. A job is a fund raiser. If two students want to go to church camp, and go out and mow yards together to earn the money they need, then use it for church camp, nothing is wrong with this. Likewise, if a whole youth group washes church members' cars to earn finances, and then donate 100% of their earnings to the church or youth group, this is as good as the widow's mite. We hold fundraisers outside of the church, but I've found our "fundraisers" inside the church including a valentines day banquet for the adults and a youth hosted supper help the youth and elderly interact and grow closer to one another in fellowship. The adults would probably give the funds anyway, and the jar is only for voluntary giving (not a set price).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ruh, I meant to say we DON'T hold fundraisers outside of the church, and by church, I meant the people AND the church house building.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 1. I accept the KJV as the word of God. I am not totally opposed to the concept of an "updated English" translation, but I've yet to see one which really did only update the English.
    2. I have associated with ABA churches all my life and I accept, without reservation, the stated doctrinal position of the ABA. I am, however, very troubled by the direction the ABA is taking. So far as mission work we send money directly to the works we support.
    3. I agree with separation. I do not consider ABA churches as the only legitimate churches and have no problem, in principle, having fellowship with sound churches outside the ABA.
    4. I believe the Lord's ministry should be supported by freewill offerings. The practice of tithing as it is preached today has no precedent in God's word - Old or New Testament - and is a mere tradition of men.
    5. No where does the Bible teach that women shouldn't wear pants, to church or otherwise. No where does the Bible teach that our church attire should be any different from what we wear at other times. The Bible teaches that our clothing should be modest and gender specific. I'd like for some of you guys to try on my wife's pants and see if you still think they are man's clothing. Incidentally, I haven't worn a tie to church for at least 5 years.
    6. We discarded the ABA literature about 6 years ago and use nothing but the Bible in any of our classes.
    7. No fundraisers - just freewill offerings.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bros. Melton & Merritt--

    Perhaps an interesting future topic for a thread would be women wearing pants to church. How much of this is tradition and how much is scripture? Is women wearing pants a "wearing what pertains to a man" issue, a modesty issue, or an issue of casual versus formal dress? Are pants designed for women really men's clothing? If it is a "cross-dressing" issue, shouldn't it be wrong all the time?

    Just an idea. This might be an enlightening conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Good idea. They are all emlightening to me. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  14. And is a clothing made specifically for women pertaining to a man? Anyway, I wanted to let all of you know (in response to Mark Osgatharp's agreement to #1) there MAY be an updating of English to the KJV. First, the KJ21 and the TMB are updates (revisions) to the KJV, NOT new translations. Secondly, the newer KJV-ER (easy reading) simply updates the spelling of words (to the best of my knowledge and according to its claims). It claims to be the KJV updated with words like "believeth" to "believes" and "thou" and "thee" and "ye" to the updated spelling "you". Before you get upset about the removal of the plural 2nd person pronoun, know this. It claims EVERY 2nd person personal pronoun which is plural in the Textus Receptus has a superscript P by it. This would enlighten us on some knowledge of plural pronouns that even the language the translations used for the KJV doesn't provide.

    If this is what it claims to be, it is something some have been waiting for, for a long time. Just as the current KJV we use now is an updating of the 1611, this is also. As a plus, on the web site I viewed that it was sold from (I guess the updating committee), they explain why the NKJV and other modern versions are not God's Word.

    Just thought you ought to know.

    ReplyDelete