FAQ |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.av-1611.com ? ?
I'm concerned about 'some' of the doctrine I've found on this site, and I wondered if anyone of you were familiar with them. Since there is more than a few hourse of reading here, I'll point you to this page, specifically....
http://www.av-1611.com/Key_Understanding_Bible.htm Quote:
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
av1611.com != av-1611.com
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
I don't see anything wrong with the snippet you quoted, but of course I am not reading the totality of their statement. I suppose it could morph into hyperdispensationalist teaching from there, but I have not read the full article so I do not know.
But, regardless: av-1611.com is not affiliated in any way with this site, which is av1611.com. If you have questions for them (or whomever runs that site), you'll need to take it there. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hello pneuby,
The ground has been scorched here lately on some of this, so I will merely repeat what I have stated on other threads, this may help you better understand when you come across something like that... The replies you get will differ because there are different views on it among KJV believers. There are good people on different sides of this. I think you will find that there are several levels of dispensational doctrine being taught here. For example, some reject all dispensational teaching. On the other hand I think most of us are going to subscribe to a "moderate" dispensational teaching. Then there are also a few on here that in my opinion go beyond that into the realm of Hyperdispensationalism or Ultra-dispensationalism. The errors of Bullingerism should also be something believers should be aware of. For more on that here are a few articles for your review: http://cnonline.net/~rkmiller/ultrad...m-ironside.htm http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hy...tionalism.html On the other hand, according to a recent poll, I think most believers on this board, including the owner, are in support of the ordinances like water baptism for believers (a few are not but they are not bad people by any means). I think for the most part we have all tried to avoid the division this can create, while still allowing for some discussion. It is safe to say we ALL have disagreed with each other on SOME issues, at SOME time. But to me that is not a bad thing as long as it doesn't get out of control. I think God's people should be able to disagree on things without attacking each other personally. Sometimes dispensationalism can be a divisive issue for Christians. But all of this in no way impacts our full support for the authority of the King James Bible, and even though we all may squabble from time to time on some issues, the heart of the forum is the inerrancy of the King James Bible and I can tell you that we all rally together as brothers (and sisters) to defend it when needed. My personal suggestion is that you search past threads here for a while on this issue until you get the lay of the land. In the end, each believer will have to search the scriptures and make up their own mind. Last edited by Bro. Parrish; 07-10-2009 at 09:28 AM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Brother If you aren't practising animal sacrifices for sin covering and relying on the shed blood of a risen and glorified Saviour then your a dispensationalist.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
While their statement does Justice to defining the NT dispensations by book division. it looks similar to Doug Stoufer's outline of NT book divisions.
But those dispensations cannot be so cut and dry either. and because of that as was mentioned earlier could morph into over division or hyper-dispensationalism. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thanks for the link, BTW. Grace and peace Tony |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
the site in question is definitely hyper-dispensational and dry-cleaning! be careful!
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Every single one of us on here are "dry cleaners" unless you think Baptism does some kind of spiritual cleaning ala Campbellites, aka Water dogs. When you were saved, you were made clean without water, by the Holy Spirit.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
But if you know your church history, you know that the Baptists were persecuted heavily by the protestants for insisting on baptism AFTER salvation, and not in connection with salvation. Our position implicated their doctrine as false, since by default, baby-sprinklers are forced to admit that baptism is connected to salvation, and that it is not necessary after salvation. WE have lost our sense of history because of our political freedoms. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|