What say you

[bgwilkinson]

Should John Wilkerson address the doctrinal erros of the last two pastors.

If you think he should, why? And when should he address this? 

If you think he shouldn't, why?

The short answer is this.

Yes he should address those heresies that were taught in our congregation.

The longer answer.

It must be done slowly and carefully. The content of his sermons is markedly different from the past two pastors. Sermons based on Scripture are common now, while in the past cherry-picked twisted Scripture personal opinion rants were the common fare from both pastors.

Sure there will be disagreements, as people want change now.

More care and due diligence on who can be a member is a sea change.

With the easy believism and industrial soul winning that has been characteristic of our assembly we have a large number of people who, IMHO, are baptised but are not saved.

While large numbers of individuals were saved a large percentage were not.

Bro. Wilkerson has instituted a discipleship program that seems to hold promise at reducing  the number of unsaved people as a percentage of our total membership.

You can't just vote people out that may not be saved even though membership should be limited to only saved and baptised members.

As far as addressing heresy such as double inspiration of a Bible translation I don't think he will touch that any time soon. We rewrote our by-laws to address this issue and have something that both sides can except.

Don't look for us to have events where someone stands up and says all modern versions are devils bibles.

Change? Yes but slowly.

I don't think there has been a sermon preached yet on women wearing men's clothing.

Just walked through my SS dept. Over half of the ladies were not wearing dresses.

 

[rsc2a]

Should John Wilkerson address the doctrinal erros of the last two pastors.

If you think he should, why? And when should he address this? 

If you think he shouldn't, why?

Unless you are a member of FBCH, who cares???  Doing so or not has no bearing on my life whatsoever.

Maybe not, but when one still has friends and/or family there, it is tough to get away from the conversation completely. I find it to be relevant question myself. That stated, I'd agree that it has little bearing on me directly as I've abandoned everything to do with the manmade idolatrous religion that is cultural fundamentalism. 

With the possible exception of extreme KJVOnlyism, which, as far as I know, is only present in fundamentalism.

Not true...I have a tract which espouses and defends KJVO which was written by a devout Southern Baptist.
Also, my wife's uncle who pastors in Tennessee is devote KJVO and he pastors a Southern Baptist Church.
If you like, I'll send you the tract and my wife's uncle's name via personal message.

SBCs can't be fundamentalist?

 

[Bruh]

Should John Wilkerson address the doctrinal erros of the last two pastors.

If you think he should, why? And when should he address this? 

If you think he shouldn't, why?

Why don't you call him and ask him for yourself?  I'll send you his cell number if you wish!

No thanks, just a discussion I wanted to have on the good ole FFF.

Thanks for being willing to send his contact info.

 

[16KJV11]

Should John Wilkerson address the doctrinal erros of the last two pastors.

If you think he should, why? And when should he address this? 

If you think he shouldn't, why?

Unless you are a member of FBCH, who cares???  Doing so or not has no bearing on my life whatsoever.

Maybe not, but when one still has friends and/or family there, it is tough to get away from the conversation completely. I find it to be relevant question myself. That stated, I'd agree that it has little bearing on me directly as I've abandoned everything to do with the manmade idolatrous religion that is cultural fundamentalism. 

With the possible exception of extreme KJVOnlyism, which, as far as I know, is only present in fundamentalism.

Not true...I have a tract which espouses and defends KJVO which was written by a devout Southern Baptist.
Also, my wife's uncle who pastors in Tennessee is devote KJVO and he pastors a Southern Baptist Church.
If you like, I'll send you the tract and my wife's uncle's name via personal message.

SBCs can't be fundamentalist?

You got it mouseman.. ...

 

[brainisengaged]

I don't know who bgwilkinson is, but we ostensibly go to the same church: FBC Hammond.

I say "ostensibly" because when I read his posts, I sometimes scratch my head. What Sunday School department at FBC finds over half the ladies in pants?

I believe Pastor Wilkerson is using the discipleship training to address the previous doctrinal issues of the church and to ensure that in the future, FBC Hammond will be full of properly saved, baptized, and indoctrinated Christians.

It is strongly and repeatedly recommended that each and every current member take the discipleship training. I have not yet done so, so I cannot attest personally as to what is being taught. However, the entire series can be purchased through the Growing in Grace link to the FBC bookstore on the FBC website. FWIW, if anyone is interested. It is written by a committee consisting of Pastor Wilkerson, Dave Douglass, and others.

Someone mentioned on some thread that they doubt Pastor Wilkerson will address problems of the JH era since he is likely sees no problems to address from that era...and the comment was also made that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist himself.

If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

My own observation is that he is, almost certainly unintentionally, patronizing to women. He prefers to call women of all ages, "Girls." As in, "Girls, we are having a conference for you in April and I want you all to be there." When I hear someone addressing girls, I assume he is speaking to a group of pre-pubescent females. It never fails to shock me to realize he is addressing grown women. (Men are never inadvertently addressed as "boys") We recently had some visiting dignitaries from the local school boards on our Education Sunday. He started their introduction by saying with a very cooing, sugary voice, "We have some really special girls here that I'd like for you all to meet...." I was shocked and embarrassed when it turned out he was addressing visiting, adult, educated professionals in that manner.

So to whomever whispered (again on another thread but they all kind of overlap, don't they?) that Mrs. Wilkerson wears pants outside of church and God will judge her for it...I say, I really highly don't believe it. If anything, standards have tightened since Pastor Wilkerson got here. Women's dresses are nearly to the floor in every case, and I don't know where bgwilkinson was (he said women's attire has never been addressed), but women's attire was the subject of a Wednesday night Bible lesson not long ago and most certainly does get addressed.

 

[bgwilkinson]

I don't know who bgwilkinson is, but we ostensibly go to the same church: FBC Hammond.

I say "ostensibly" because when I read his posts, I sometimes scratch my head. What Sunday School department at FBC finds over half the ladies in pants?

I believe Pastor Wilkerson is using the discipleship training to address the previous doctrinal issues of the church and to ensure that in the future, FBC Hammond will be full of properly saved, baptized, and indoctrinated Christians.

It is strongly and repeatedly recommended that each and every current member take the discipleship training. I have not yet done so, so I cannot attest personally as to what is being taught. However, the entire series can be purchased through the Growing in Grace link to the FBC bookstore on the FBC website. FWIW, if anyone is interested. It is written by a committee consisting of Pastor Wilkerson, Dave Douglass, and others.

Someone mentioned on some thread that they doubt Pastor Wilkerson will address problems of the JH era since he is likely sees no problems to address from that era...and the comment was also made that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist himself.

If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

My own observation is that he is, almost certainly unintentionally, patronizing to women. He prefers to call women of all ages, "Girls." As in, "Girls, we are having a conference for you in April and I want you all to be there." When I hear someone addressing girls, I assume he is speaking to a group of pre-pubescent females. It never fails to shock me to realize he is addressing grown women. (Men are never inadvertently addressed as "boys") We recently had some visiting dignitaries from the local school boards on our Education Sunday. He started their introduction by saying with a very cooing, sugary voice, "We have some really special girls here that I'd like for you all to meet...." I was shocked and embarrassed when it turned out he was addressing visiting, adult, educated professionals in that manner.

So to whomever whispered (again on another thread but they all kind of overlap, don't they?) that Mrs. Wilkerson wears pants outside of church and God will judge her for it...I say, I really highly don't believe it. If anything, standards have tightened since Pastor Wilkerson got here. Women's dresses are nearly to the floor in every case, and I don't know where bgwilkinson was (he said women's attire has never been addressed), but women's attire was the subject of a Wednesday night Bible lesson not long ago and most certainly does get addressed.

Pardon me brainisengaged, but I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

Quote
"I don't think there has been a sermon preached yet on women wearing men's clothing."

Yes we have preaching on modest apparel but that is not what I'm addressing at all.

What we have not had is the cherry picking of OT verses and twisting them to fit NT times. And the brow beating, bullying and denigrating of ladies that used to occur with personal opinions masquerading as Scriptural teaching. Preaching that is OT Judaism and not NT Christianity has been pleasantly missing.

We have had NT teaching on modesty.

Sorry for not being clear.




"Just walked through my SS dept. Over half of the ladies were not wearing dresses."

I always use the word ladies when referring to females. My hope is that by addressing them with respect and deference they would behave as ladies. As I was walking through the outer hall of building P over half the ladies I saw were not wearing dresses, they were however wearing clothing.

I did not count all the ladies in our department nor did I see all the ladies in our department, I was referring only to the ones I saw in the outer hall between 20 and 30 ladies.

Sorry I did not express myself very well.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.[/quote]

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.

 

[Ex-Fundy]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.
[/quote]

Word up!

 

[Ex-Fundy]

I don't know who bgwilkinson is, but we ostensibly go to the same church: FBC Hammond.

I say "ostensibly" because when I read his posts, I sometimes scratch my head. What Sunday School department at FBC finds over half the ladies in pants?

I believe Pastor Wilkerson is using the discipleship training to address the previous doctrinal issues of the church and to ensure that in the future, FBC Hammond will be full of properly saved, baptized, and indoctrinated Christians.

It is strongly and repeatedly recommended that each and every current member take the discipleship training. I have not yet done so, so I cannot attest personally as to what is being taught. However, the entire series can be purchased through the Growing in Grace link to the FBC bookstore on the FBC website. FWIW, if anyone is interested. It is written by a committee consisting of Pastor Wilkerson, Dave Douglass, and others.

Someone mentioned on some thread that they doubt Pastor Wilkerson will address problems of the JH era since he is likely sees no problems to address from that era...and the comment was also made that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist himself.

If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

My own observation is that he is, almost certainly unintentionally, patronizing to women. He prefers to call women of all ages, "Girls." As in, "Girls, we are having a conference for you in April and I want you all to be there." When I hear someone addressing girls, I assume he is speaking to a group of pre-pubescent females. It never fails to shock me to realize he is addressing grown women. (Men are never inadvertently addressed as "boys") We recently had some visiting dignitaries from the local school boards on our Education Sunday. He started their introduction by saying with a very cooing, sugary voice, "We have some really special girls here that I'd like for you all to meet...." I was shocked and embarrassed when it turned out he was addressing visiting, adult, educated professionals in that manner.

So to whomever whispered (again on another thread but they all kind of overlap, don't they?) that Mrs. Wilkerson wears pants outside of church and God will judge her for it...I say, I really highly don't believe it. If anything, standards have tightened since Pastor Wilkerson got here. Women's dresses are nearly to the floor in every case, and I don't know where bgwilkinson was (he said women's attire has never been addressed), but women's attire was the subject of a Wednesday night Bible lesson not long ago and most certainly does get addressed.

Pardon me brainisengaged, but I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

Quote
"I don't think there has been a sermon preached yet on women wearing men's clothing."

Yes we have preaching on modest apparel but that is not what I'm addressing at all.

What we have not had is the cherry picking of OT verses and twisting them to fit NT times. And the brow beating, bullying and denigrating of ladies that used to occur with personal opinions masquerading as Scriptural teaching. Preaching that is OT Judaism and not NT Christianity has been pleasantly missing.

We have had NT teaching on modesty.

Sorry for not being clear.




"Just walked through my SS dept. Over half of the ladies were not wearing dresses."

I always use the word ladies when referring to females. My hope is that by addressing them with respect and deference they would behave as ladies. As I was walking through the outer hall of building P over half the ladies I saw were not wearing dresses, they were however wearing clothing.

I did not count all the ladies in our department nor did I see all the ladies in our department, I was referring only to the ones I saw in the outer hall between 20 and 30 ladies.

Sorry I did not express myself very well.

Problem is, when does NT teaching on modesty lead to 100% of a church's "inner circle" ladies wearing only skirts/dresses?

 

[Norefund]

I couldn't agree more.

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.
[/quote]

 

[bgwilkinson]

I don't know who bgwilkinson is, but we ostensibly go to the same church: FBC Hammond.

I say "ostensibly" because when I read his posts, I sometimes scratch my head. What Sunday School department at FBC finds over half the ladies in pants?

I believe Pastor Wilkerson is using the discipleship training to address the previous doctrinal issues of the church and to ensure that in the future, FBC Hammond will be full of properly saved, baptized, and indoctrinated Christians.

It is strongly and repeatedly recommended that each and every current member take the discipleship training. I have not yet done so, so I cannot attest personally as to what is being taught. However, the entire series can be purchased through the Growing in Grace link to the FBC bookstore on the FBC website. FWIW, if anyone is interested. It is written by a committee consisting of Pastor Wilkerson, Dave Douglass, and others.

Someone mentioned on some thread that they doubt Pastor Wilkerson will address problems of the JH era since he is likely sees no problems to address from that era...and the comment was also made that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist himself.

If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

My own observation is that he is, almost certainly unintentionally, patronizing to women. He prefers to call women of all ages, "Girls." As in, "Girls, we are having a conference for you in April and I want you all to be there." When I hear someone addressing girls, I assume he is speaking to a group of pre-pubescent females. It never fails to shock me to realize he is addressing grown women. (Men are never inadvertently addressed as "boys") We recently had some visiting dignitaries from the local school boards on our Education Sunday. He started their introduction by saying with a very cooing, sugary voice, "We have some really special girls here that I'd like for you all to meet...." I was shocked and embarrassed when it turned out he was addressing visiting, adult, educated professionals in that manner.

So to whomever whispered (again on another thread but they all kind of overlap, don't they?) that Mrs. Wilkerson wears pants outside of church and God will judge her for it...I say, I really highly don't believe it. If anything, standards have tightened since Pastor Wilkerson got here. Women's dresses are nearly to the floor in every case, and I don't know where bgwilkinson was (he said women's attire has never been addressed), but women's attire was the subject of a Wednesday night Bible lesson not long ago and most certainly does get addressed.

Pardon me brainisengaged, but I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

Quote
"I don't think there has been a sermon preached yet on women wearing men's clothing."

Yes we have preaching on modest apparel but that is not what I'm addressing at all.

What we have not had is the cherry picking of OT verses and twisting them to fit NT times. And the brow beating, bullying and denigrating of ladies that used to occur with personal opinions masquerading as Scriptural teaching. Preaching that is OT Judaism and not NT Christianity has been pleasantly missing.

We have had NT teaching on modesty.

Sorry for not being clear.




"Just walked through my SS dept. Over half of the ladies were not wearing dresses."

I always use the word ladies when referring to females. My hope is that by addressing them with respect and deference they would behave as ladies. As I was walking through the outer hall of building P over half the ladies I saw were not wearing dresses, they were however wearing clothing.

I did not count all the ladies in our department nor did I see all the ladies in our department, I was referring only to the ones I saw in the outer hall between 20 and 30 ladies.

Sorry I did not express myself very well.

Problem is, when does NT teaching on modesty lead to 100% of a church's "inner circle" ladies wearing only skirts/dresses?

For sure there are upper level families where the wives do not always wear dresses.
I guess you might be surprised if you knew who they are.

I am not opposed to them, it  is up to each individual believer as to what they believe it and should not be determined by others. I have not seen this is our current pastor.
He is a humble man, not proud and arrogant as in the past.

 

[Ex-Fundy]

For sure there are upper level families where the wives do not always wear dresses.
I guess you might be surprised if you knew who they are.

I am not opposed to them, it  is up to each individual believer as to what they believe it and should not be determined by others.

Sorry bro...but I highly doubt this. Unless you mean to say that these ladies wear pajama pants in the evening. LOL

 

[brainisengaged]

bgwilkinson, just to be clear, my husband also teaches "A" Sunday School, and is in building P every Sunday. Those girls standing around in the hallway are not HB girls, nor are they "A" Sunday School girls. They are most welcome no matter what they are wearing, but you and I both know that the moment an HB girl shows up to Sunday School wearing pants, well...I cannot even imagine what would happen. I am certain she would be ushered into a restroom, hidden from anyone's sight, a skirt would be found somewhere and she would be made to put it on. I am also positive that no lady adult Sunday School teacher would show up in pants. So the fact that you saw a lot of visiting girls / bus kids milling around wearing pants before their opening SS assembly is not proof that things are changing at FBC.

Yes I was at a grocery store and saw a very upper level deacon's wife wearing pants and grocery shopping with her husband. I know it happens. She looked very elegant and ladylike, by the way. But you know she would never dare show up to church like that.

Myself, I submit to the Baptist Burka but not because I believe the Bible teaches a woman is supposed to be garbed in an ankle length skirt at all times. I submit because my husband admits the Bible might not teach it but he can't get over his own feeling that ladies must wear skirts at all times. So I do.

 

[brainisengaged]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.

Word up!
[/quote]

rsc2a, I happen to very much agree with you. I was however stating what I believe our current Pastor believes, based on what he says and what he teaches us. I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt. If he believes in his heart that God is honored in this manner, then who am I to argue? That is his personal conviction. One thing we all really like about him is that he does NOT try to make his personal convictions the Law of the Land. He states what he believes in a humble manner and is always careful to add that others may not believe the same.

 

[Ex-Fundy]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.

Word up!

rsc2a, I happen to very much agree with you. I was however stating what I believe our current Pastor believes, based on what he says and what he teaches us. I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt. If he believes in his heart that God is honored in this manner, then who am I to argue? That is his personal conviction. One thing we all really like about him is that he does NOT try to make his personal convictions the Law of the Land. He states what he believes in a humble manner and is always careful to add that others may not believe the same.
[/quote]

Shouldn't we still be given pause when someone has some "personal standards" which find little to NO merit in Scripture?

 

[brainisengaged]

Yes, it does give me pause. How much, I am not certain. But definitely, pause.

 

[bgwilkinson]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.

Word up!

rsc2a, I happen to very much agree with you. I was however stating what I believe our current Pastor believes, based on what he says and what he teaches us. I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt. If he believes in his heart that God is honored in this manner, then who am I to argue? That is his personal conviction. One thing we all really like about him is that he does NOT try to make his personal convictions the Law of the Land. He states what he believes in a humble manner and is always careful to add that others may not believe the same.
[/quote]

I think you are correct, as a convinced Baptist it is anathema to me to impose my personal convictions and beliefs upon others. Each believer is responsible to God for his own beliefs and must come to them on his own using the Bible and letting the Holy Spirit work on ones heart and mind.

I don't know if you were here during Bro. Hyles time, but he preached thus saith the LORD with regard to many things that should rightly be left up to each believer.

 

[TidesofTruth]

[quote author=brainisengaged]If a legalist is someone who believes that God is made happier by people who adopt certain standards, then I would have to say that Pastor Wilkerson is a legalist. He firmly and wholeheartedly believes in honoring God by the adoption of standards that set the Christian apart from the rest of the world.

God is made happier by people who love others well and trust in Him. Frankly, I think He could care less if a man has long hair or a kid listens to Switchfoot.

And what sets Christians apart from the rest of the world isn't what movies they watch or whether they drink wine; it's their ethic of love, mercy and grace practiced in accordance with both the example of and a dependence on the cross with a vision for a future hope in which God restores all things.

Word up!

rsc2a, I happen to very much agree with you. I was however stating what I believe our current Pastor believes, based on what he says and what he teaches us. I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt. If he believes in his heart that God is honored in this manner, then who am I to argue? That is his personal conviction. One thing we all really like about him is that he does NOT try to make his personal convictions the Law of the Land. He states what he believes in a humble manner and is always careful to add that others may not believe the same.

Shouldn't we still be given pause when someone has some "personal standards" which find little to NO merit in Scripture?
[/quote]

Do you not believe in Soul Liberty?  That liberty belongs to personal beliefs?  Cannot one consider their weights in which the Holy Spirit has dealt with them on personally that they cast off, without your hypercriticism?  I know a missionary who personally gave up Ice Cream because it became a weight for him, however find where Ice Cream is a sin in the bible.  Would you ever consider listening to the Holy Spirit in which He dealt with you on a specific weight in your life?  Can I guess no, or would that be using the same parasitical attitude you have posted on here throughout all your posts.


Many of those who constantly scream chapter and verse want no such thing, they only want license.  - me

 

[Ex-Fundy]

Brain stated: "I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt."

That is odd, if he feels that way and has stated it to others I don't understand it since it has really no merit in Scripture. It's apples and oranges with your missionary ice cream story, textbook legalistic tendencies.

 

[TidesofTruth]

Brain stated: "I believe he truly feels it honors God for a man to wear slacks and not shorts, for a man to have short hair, for a man to be clean shaven, and for a man to always wear a collared shirt."

That is odd, if he feels that way and has stated it to others I don't understand it since it has really no merit in Scripture. It's apples and oranges with your missionary ice cream story, textbook legalistic tendencies.

Paul the Legalist said:
" But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.  For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.  I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.  But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."

And (gasp) he told others about it, and (gasp) it made it into scripture.  Paul, such the legalist.  We must judge him so and throw out all his teaching (as some here do).