Fundamental Baptist Christian

Yet another hard to understand passage of the Scripture that skeptics love to hit is Exodus 22:16-17 and Deuteronomy 22:28-29. They say that this is a hard and cruel law that they despise (while hypocritically saying that there are no absolutes) because it supposedly commands rape victims to marry their rapists. However, we do have to take things into context first. First, let's consider what Exodus 22:17 says. You have to remember that Deuteronomy and Exodus are in complete harmony. The same passage that if a man impregnates (and the King James Version or KJV uses "entice a maid" and not "rape" which are two different words) a single virgin woman out-of-wedlock then he is obliged to marry her. However, this can only happen if the father approves. If the father doesn't approve then he can't have the woman. There is also the law that says that he may not divorce her. That means he's now bound to every rule to protect her and provide for her all he...

There's the criticism that the Bible commands rebellious children to death. Here's the verse that disturbs a lot of people because it sounds like it condones parental abuse: Deuteronomy 21:18-21  If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; and they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard . And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. It seems the Bible says that parents should directly kill their rebellious children for the slightest sin. But they don't realize that there's a much bigger cont...

First, take note of the word "some" since in due fairness, some Roman Catholics I know haven't misused these verses for their sensationalist activities and are more or less professional in defending their false doctrine. Now let's take a look at these verses that were cherry picked from Jeremiah which Roman Catholic fanatics tend to use to justify their attack against born again Christianity. I don't deny that there are pastors who indeed deserve to be exposed as fakes but Roman Catholic fanatics tend to do their usual double standard ofexposing the pastors who sin with sensationalism but hide any the dirty history of the Vatican as much as they could. Now let's take a look at the verses and the meaning in context. Funny that some Roman Catholics are now quoting from the Authorized Version of 1611 to suit their needs when I find most of them hate it. The Roman Catholic Good News Translation says rulers not pastors. Pastor is a synonym for shepherd and ...

I remembered when I became a born again Christian that I simply hungered for more teaching but soon listened to several Bible programs that had something fishy going on. Either they were all love and no preaching against sin, some of them were prosperity gospel preachers and some say that if I have a question then ask him. It is time to deal with reality that there are people who know the Scriptures but they are not saved. While saving knowledge is really necessary to be saved but possessing that knowledge alone does not save. I thought of how persons who claim to be a "Bible Answer Man" are not saved. Sure it is possible to know a lot of what Scriptures have to say, quote Proverbs, talk about the different details of the Bible's stories, know where to find this and that in the Bible but they are not saved. Do you remember the Pharisees? The Pharisees knew a lot about the Old Testament Scripture. Today, we have Roman Catholic priests and pseudo-Christian cults who may...

It's very amazing to how Roman Catholic apologists can really chew themselves out whenever they misquote the Bible.  That is why it's important for every serious born again Christian apologist to use exegesis or learning more about Scripture in context lest they go ranting "to him that pisseth against the wall" out of context. Let's read Mark 7:8-13 from the Good News Translation which is commonly used by Roman Catholics saying: " You put aside God's command and obey human teachings .  And Jesus continued, You have a clever way of rejecting God's law in order to uphold your own teaching.  For Moses commanded, Respect your father and your mother, and, If you curse your father or your mother, you are to be put to death.  But you teach that if people have something they could use to help their father or mother, but say, This is Corban (which means, it belongs to God), they are excused from helping their father or mother.  In this way the teaching you...

When it comes to people who are warned about their sin and false religion, telling them they are on their way to Hell or that they are not as good as they think (and note, many wicked people think they are righteous), they always say, "Judge not or you will not be judged."  Let us take the whole statement into context and not out of context. The most common verse that gets taken out of context is Luke 6:37.  What did Jesus mean by judge not and you will not be judged?  It is about a judgmental attitude or being the final judge.  People are called to judge sinful actions and wrong doctrine but not as the final judge.  In John 7:24, Jesus said, "Judge not according to appearance but judge righteous judgment."  In short, you are not to judge unrighteous judgment but righteous judgment.  The kind of judgment that is forbidden is that when you judge wrongly.  You are only permitted to judge righteously. In further context, Matthew 7:1-2 is not th...

It has become a common picture that people just love to misapply verses for their convenience.  Matthew 7:1-2 and Luke 6:37 are frequently cherry-picked.  It reminds me of the video when somebody first said, "Didn't the Bible tell you not to judge." then later the same person says, "Yes I'm judging you for judging me."  This of course is hypocritical because there is a huge difference with being judgmental and judging.  Judgmental means that you are judging people quickly and critically or the tendency to judge harshly.  Judgment on the other hand means the act of making a decision after careful thought or the act of judging someone.  To judge a person means to regard something as good or bad. Matthew 7:1-5 talks about judgment which warns that before you take the speck out of somebody's eye, take out the log out of your eye first.  It also means before correcting others, you must correct yourself and that the very first person you must judge first...

One of the biggest life lessons that I learned while I grew up as a Christian was, "Just because a person quotes from Scripture to justify their doctrine, does not mean it's Scriptural."  After I got out of Roman Catholicism and looking for a church to go into, I had no idea that other "Protestant" churches were not Christian but they were just anti-Catholic groups that taught another gospel which is not another.   If Roman Catholics can misquote Scriptures to justify their heresies like Peter as the first Pope, the Iglesia ni Cristo (Manalo) also misquotes Scriptures to justify Felix Manalo as the last messenger, the Mormons have done the same to justify Joseph Smith as the last messenger.  A lot of false prophets even use Scriptures to promote themselves but when those verses are take in context, you can see that these men are not men of God but phonies who misquote the Scripture.  A lot of people ended up joining quasi-Christian denominations from Roma...

Romans 4:5 says, "But to him that worketh not but believeth upon Him which justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."  The verse itself can be misused and abused by Antinomians and easy believists as "proof" that a Christian can live like the rest of the world and still be saved.  What becomes stupid is when a person says something like, "Well, haven't you read Romans 4:5?  I can be a Christian and woohoo I don't have to do good works!  I can sin all I want!" type of reasoning but there's a warning to that.  Although good works do not precede salvation but the Bible is clear that good works are a result of salvation.  Remember Romans 4:5 is is NOT the only verse in the Book of Romans. While salvation is never earned or maintained by good works but there is one thing that must be remembered.  A true faith is not static but an active faith.  Just in case those people forget, Romans 3:31 says, "Do we then make void the...

Well it's the idolatrous feast of the Black Nazarene and again, I would stress out that the Black Nazarene is NOT the Jesus Christ of the Bible. Now I would like to share the verses that were misused namely Colossians 2:15 and Psalm 68:25.  Now it's time to finally time to analyze these verses and not cherry-pick on them which I will quote from the Good News Bible: Colossians 2:15- "And on that cross, Christ freed Himself from the power of the spiritual rulers or authorities that he made a public spectacle of them by leading them as captives in His victory procession." Psalm 68:25- "Your procession comes into view o God, your procession into the holy place my God and King." So one, the word procession is definitely not the wrong word to use for the translation. If we check the dictionary, a procession is a parade, an entrance. The origin came from the Middle English from the Anglo-French processiun from the Latin procesio or act of proceedi...

An excerpt from Pastor John F. Macarthur's message "The Security of Salvation Part 2" (which was taken from Pastor Brett's blog ) writes: Galatians 5:4…Galatians 5:4. And it says there, "Christ is become of no effect unto you whosoever of you are justified by the law, ye are fallen from grace." And people say – You see, right there it proves that you can fall from grace.  That’s right, it does say that. But would you notice to whom it says that?  It says it to people who try to get saved by…what?…by law. You go back to verse 2: "Behold, I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised," in other words, if you believe you can be saved by surgery, if you believe you can be right with God by some kind of physical operation, "then Christ means nothing to you." Christ is of no use to you. You don’t need Him. He’s profitless because you can be saved by your surgery.  And then in verse 4 he says: "Christ is also of no effect t...

I remembered an experience among people that they tend to misuse the parable of the unforgiving servant in order to avoid paying their debts.  In my experience after I ran after somebody who owed me a large sum of money, he used the parable of the unforgiving servant to justify himself that he will not pay it.  In fact, it was obvious estafa or running away with debt without the intention to pay which really is inexcusable compared to a person asking for an installment plan because they are having financial trouble.  What they do not realize is the real meaning of the parable of the unforgiving servant is more of a parable of divine forgiveness than financial problems.  As said, in Matthew 18:21-35 we are more faced with the illustration of man's sinfulness and his inability to pay the debt to God and how Christians should give more time but I don't see anything wrong with locking up a person for absconding debt while showing mercy for a person who cannot pay, then...

Roman Catholics try to justify their manmade tradition by appealing to 2 Thessalonians 2:15 which says in the King James version, "Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or our epistle." which can be translated as this from the Good News Bible for Roman Catholics, "So then our brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to those truths which WE TAUGHT YOU both in our preaching and in our letter."   The typical argument is that, "Hah, we got you.  The Bible supports tradition."  Yes, the Bible DOES support tradition BUT looking close at the verses, we realize that the Apostle Paul (who Roman Catholics adhere as a pillar of truth while they erroneously adhere to Peter as the first Pope, the Rock, the Head of the Church and the Pope as the successor of Peter) was talking about the traditions he gave should be either from the word of the Apostles or by their epistle which the Roman Catholic versi...

It's really getting bad for some of my Independent Fundamental Baptist brethren to actually even take the words "pisseth against the wall" which appears at least six times in 1 Samuel 23:22, 1 Samuel 25:34, 1 Kings 14:10, 1 Kings 16:11, 1 Kings 21:21 and 2 Kings 9:8 where the King James actually has the words "pisseth against the wall".  Now I am a King James only-ist but I do not support the stupid interpretation of "pisseth against the wall" by some IFB preachers who have become in some way similar to the Catholic Faith Defenders that they argue against when they should spend their time soulwinning .  Actually I even heard that rather outrageous "pisseth against the wall" sermon by Steven Anderson that was so taken out of context. So what does pisseth against the wall mean? Let us take a look at these six verses and take it on a exegetic view NOT an eisegetic (out of context) view: 1 Samuel 23:22- "And so more also do Go...

Matthew 7:13-14 - " Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:  Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Luke 13:24 - " Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." My deepest appreciation to Pastor John F. Macarthur's sermon "Which Way to Heaven?" which was preached on May 18, 1980. His sermon can be found on his website and you can hear him preach it as well. I would like to clarify these two verses. It's time to really interpret the Bible with the Bible. What is so sad that preachers like Ray Comfort, Paul Washer, John Macarthur or maybe I should mention the dead preachers like Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Billy Sunday, Arthur Pink, John Bunyan, John Calvin, Harry Allen Ironside and Estus Pirkl...

Exodus 21:24-25 says, "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." Jesus said in Matthew 5:38-39, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Did Jesus negate the value of justice? Not at all. Here one has to realize the reality of the fact that Jesus as said did not come to destroy the Law but to FULFILL it (Matthew 5:17) in that very same chapter. Overall, Jesus DID NOT negate justice but rather He went against the wrong use of the Law which the Pharisees according to history, used it to justify their vengeful behavior and UNJUST scales. So it's highly possible that these Pharisees were already giving people punishment not according to God's weights but their own weights. One has to realize that first and foremo...

Luke 11:27-28 says, "And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But He said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it." (King James version, note that even the Good News and the Douay translation keeps the same meaning ) One of the verses that Roman Catholic faith defenders have used to defend their Marian devotion are Luke 11:27-28 that the people were giving praises to Mary and that this verse is frequently misinterpreted by Baptists and their fellow born again Christian believers to discredit their Marian devotion even when the BIble NOWHERE teaches Mary should even be venerated in that way as to call her names that are only for God alone. If one should truly examine Mary in the Bible, clearly she had also refused to intercede between people and her son in John 2:5 to do whatever Jesus tells them...

I remembered the time I was newly reading the Bible, after I switched to the King James Bible that I read Jeremiah 10:3-5 which seemed to suggest about Christmas trees.  The passage says, "For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of a forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.  They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers that it move not.  They are upright as the palm tree but they speak not: they must needs be borne because they cannot go.  Be not afraid of them: for they cannot do evil, neither also it in them to do good." When one looks at Jeremiah 10:3-5 in context, one has to even see the rest of the context.  The more I read it, the more I really see that it in context, we can read in Jeremiah 10:14 talks about graven images when it says, "Every man is brutish in his knowledge, every founder is confounded by the grave iamge: for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no...

The command of do not judge lest you be also judged can be found in Matthew 7:1-2, Luke 6:37 and Romans 2:1.  However these people do not really bother to take the Bible into context whenever they use it as a means to avoid receiving correction and conviction of their wrongdoings.  However Matthew 7:3-5 goes against the problem of having a double standard in living in which one must get the beam out of one's eye before dealing with others. That is judge one's behavior before judging other's behavior.  Matthew 7:6 however has the discernment of who's a dog and who's a pig- that means people are to be judged by their actions and whether or not the person should still be bothered anymore with witnessing or not if the person will just tear God's message for them to shreds.  In order to read this further correctly and in context, it has to deal with the reality of NOT BECOMING THE FINAL JUDGE OF PEOPLE . As said, Ephesians 5:11 says that rightful judgment b...

Isaiah 24:15- "Wherefore glorify ye the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea." Isaiah 43:5- "Fear not: for I Am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west;" Well at first glance, it seems that it really fits in the model of the cult of Felix Manalo to justify the Philippines as the chosen nation. However taking both verses in context, one must realize these verses are taken out of context. First, Isaiah 24 talks about the devastation of the Earth, that declares that even the islands (this is ALL Gentile nations not just the Philippines) rejoice. One must notice that the whole Isaiah 24 refers to all the Gentile nations, though not listed. It talks about judgment, not church building. Second, Isaiah 43:1 says, "But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob , and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have calle...