Fundamental Baptist Christian

It's frustrating that no matter how many times anyone can show the Scripture to the unbeliever, no matter how good the exposition is done but they still refuse to believe it. So what's the reason behind such frustration? 1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. This is the reality that we have to realize. Unsaved people can't understand the Bible because they receive not the things of God. Here's how it gets so irritating - Scripture is clearer than day but the error persists. It doesn't matter how bright the sun is but if the person is blind then he can't see the truth. This is the case of spiritual blindness and spiritual denial - the truth is clear but the hardened heart cannot savingly believe for salvation because it refuses to.I could talk about a couple of verses that are too obvious in themselves yet peo...

According to a self-proclaimed Roman Catholic apologist (who I'll probably dub as Mr. Whistle when I mention him) he claimed that salvation is in the hands of Peter because Jesus gave the former the keys of Heaven. The guy is clearly taking things out of context with what he says. I wonder does he even bother to check out the idioms of the Bible since some passages use a figure of speech instead of speaking everything literally? If he can't get Matthew 16:18 correctly where he said that Peter the Rock even when the Good News Translation for Roman Catholics says otherwise (and worse for them Peter is differentiated as a rock and the Rock is clearly not him) then he also misinterprets Matthew 16:19. Let's try to understand Matthew 16:19 with the keys and what they really mean. In his interpretation he's already telling everyone that born again Christians should just go back to the Roman Catholic institution because the Pope supposedly holds salvation in his hands. I don...

It's very easy to say, "But that's just Old Testament." to dismiss stuff that aren't convenient for anyone. Cults can say that this and that are irrelevant because they are found in the Old Testament. What they are ignoring is that you can't understand the New Testament without the Old Testament or that the Old Testament contains the moral laws and the ceremonial laws. Here are a few stuff that people tend to dismiss because it's found in the Old Testament: Death penalty for crimes against life. Spanking your children as a form of discipline. Forbidding the use of images for worship. However, they're guilty of double standard whenever they appeal to the Old Testament. Here are a few examples of doing so: Some self-proclaimed last messengers appeal to the Old Testament to justify their sexually licentious lifestyle. Some of the worst offenders are Joseph Smith and Felix Manalo to justify their adulteries. Joseph Smith is said to have 64 mi...

Do you know that a pseudo-Christian organizations are faultily built on out of context preaching? Whenever I study these organizations whether it'd be the Roman Catholic institution, the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Iglesia ni Cristo or any of them claiming to be the true church or the true church restored after its apostasy (that's not Bible teaching, either), we can be certain that out of context preaching out of context is indeed dangerous. Many people are in Hell today all because of quack preachers who keep taking verses out of context. Many of them either have a false security in their good works or in their belief that Christians can still remain the same as before. Either way, both the works salvationist and the Antinomian aren't regenerate Christians but they're still degenerate sinners. The portrait above shows the example of how stupid out of context preaching is. The person in green is putting God to the test by misquoting Philippians 4:13....

Got Questions defines eisegesis from the article " What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis " as: The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means "to lead into," which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants . Why is eisegesis or out of context preaching really more used? Most people today are just too lazy. The preacher is really that lazy to study the Bible for himself. It's always easier to take Scriptures out of their context than understanding them in context. But just like easy believism, it really gives disastrous results. If easy believism shelters false converts then it also advocates eisegesis preaching. 2 Peter 3:16 warns of people who twist around the Word of God. That's what eisegesis does to the presentation of God's Word. It's also appropriate ...

I could care less how anti-Catholic the Iglesia ni Manalo is, besides it doesn't even deserve to be called by its formal the as Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) because there is no way that a corrupt anti-Catholic but harlot daughter of the Great Whore of Revelation would EVER be the true Church of Christ. Like Joseph Smith who formed the anti-Catholic Mormon cult, Felix Manalo also has promoted himself above Christ which in turn he is an antichrist.  Here are some strange, heretical teachings concerning Felix Manalo which is utterly blasphemous which I will take verses from the New International Version which they use as one of their versions, instead of the Authorized Version of 1611 which makes Felix Manalo another antichrist like the Pope in Rome: They teach Felix Manalo will fulfill Isaiah 41:13-15 which says, "For I am the LORD your God who takes hold of your right hand and says to you, Do not fear for I will help you.  Do not be afraid you worm, JACOB litt...

As said, it's very important to do exegetic pretty NOT eisegetic preaching.  The method that Charles Spurgeon used was verse by verse preaching.  Hearing Pastor John F. Macarthur's "Bad Hermeneutics" message, I had my thought on how stupid eisegesis is.  Now for the record, here's the definitions we have to clarify: Exegesis- Exposition of the text based on CAREFUL analysis with grammar, CONTEXT and setting. Eisegesis- This is where the user takes things OUT OF CONTEXT where one is only concerned about making a point, even at the expense of the meaning of words and use of one's imagination. If I did my analysis in a very exegetic way, I would really go and find if NOTHING contradicts my interpretation.  I go verse by verse, cover to cover with the Bible.  What makes preachers like John MacArthur credible is with the fact how they go verse by verse.  Atty. Zigfred Diaz's liking of MacArthur's methodology of preaching is simple- it goes V...