|
Post by Doc H on Nov 21, 2006 20:39:03 GMT -5
I am not familiar with the Bible, but in which book did God say that evolution was from Hell?
The devil is the father of all lies.
There is more scientific evidence to support a young earth than evolution.
Was I correct in my observation that you do indeed believe that a frog could turn into a prince?
What changed between kindy and high school/university?
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 21, 2006 20:47:22 GMT -5
Your argument now is that independently of scripture you believe that evolution is not true, and that since you believe it to be a lie, and since the Devil is the father of all lies, then evolution must be from Hell? Yowsa.
Your statement that there is more scientific evidence to support a young earth rather than evolution not only failed to address any of my points directly, but is factually inaccurate.
Finally, I believe that you are the one who believes a frog can turn into a prince? In your world men change from wicked sinners to holy saints, and in your world God can in his omnipotence change anything he likes into anything else. You, and not I, are the one who believes in mystical transmogrifications.
|
|
|
Post by Doc H on Nov 21, 2006 21:08:15 GMT -5
mahatma,
Have you really made an honest study into young earth creation and evolution.
I can honestly say that I have.
I was taught at high school and at medical school that evolution was not just a theory but a fact.
I was an evolutionist. But now I am a creationist.
So maybe evolution is true after all.
EVIL-LUTION:
"I was once a polywog when I began to begin, then I was a frog when my tail tucked in, then I was a monkey in the tree and now I am a doctor with a PhD"
Prove it mahatma!
Why don't you check out Haeckel's embryonic recapitulation theory.
Still taught in schools today. I have my sons biology textbook from high school stating this proves evolution.
IT IS A LIE. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN BY ANATOMIC DISSECTION AND ULTRASOUND STUDIES THAT HAECKEL'S THEORY IS A FRAUD.
So why is it still taught in schools and universities as proof of evolution?
Satan is the father of ALL lies my friend.
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 21, 2006 23:22:35 GMT -5
It's certainly a fact strong recapitulation theory has been discredited, but I don't know that I ever learned it in any of my grade school, high school, or college courses. I am pretty sure I didn't. Last time I checked though, Haeckel was around in the 1800s, and modern evolutionary theory makes no recourse to embryonic recapitulation. It's certainly unfortunate that some old and outdated textbooks present his outdated theory as factual, but I hardly think that proves a grand conspiracy to support a "lie." If anything it points to a need for better funding for public schools, so that they might be able to afford more modern and accurate textbooks. The little poem is very cute Of course, you do realize that it is in itself a misrepresentation of evolution, as evolution does not claim humans descended from monkeys. I still haven't seen any evidence that the Bible says evolution is wrong, and I still haven't seen a single fact that would disprove evolution. So far as proving anything, the burden of proof is still on you my friend. You made the claim that evolution is a lie from the pits of Hell, and I am still waiting for you to present any proof, scientific or biblical, of that statement.
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Nov 22, 2006 15:17:31 GMT -5
1- Can you show me where I said I practice sin? 2- Can you openly state before all here that you do not at any time ever for any reason whatsoever sin? Thank you in advance for your reply I never said practice sin. I said sin. Period. You openly confessed that you still sin, but yet are saved from sin. This, again, seems contradictory. Maybe you can elaborate a little bit on exactly how one chooses to sin even after being saved from sin. I might add that most do not want to accept responsibility for choosing to sin willfully after coming to the knowledge of the truth, ie, being saved from sin. Thanks Dan! "...................................................................." (The sound of crickets chirping....and tumbleweeds turning) What's up, Dan? You bailed on me. I will try and start a new thread soon concerning sin, as this conversation was not following the original subject of tax evasion, etc....
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 22, 2006 17:11:38 GMT -5
I didn't bail; I just didn't see the post since I only sporadically come to this part of the Board You Said:I never said practice sin. I said sin. Period.You openly confessed that you still sin, but yet are saved from sin. This, again, seems contradictory. RESPONSE: When I was first saved, a day or two after my conversion I burned my thumb in welding class and the name of the Lord came out in a very vain manner; it was my custom to speak such wickedness before conversion; when I burned my thumb it just literally came out with no thought whatsoever in any way; it just did... no temptation "overtook me", as there was no temptation present...i didn't even know I said it until it was over.I immediately asked God to forgive me and began weeping in class that those words came out of my mouth (though no one else heard)....that's different than me saying I'm going to fornicate tonight.You see?...Fornicating is wilful; getting saved and the next day saying a cuss word because I was burned on my thumb was not conciously chosen at all....was it a sin? Of course! Was it wilful and did I CHOOSE to swear? Of course not. You Said: Maybe you can elaborate a little bit on exactly how one chooses to sin even after being saved from sin. I might add that most do not want to accept responsibility for choosing to sin willfully after coming to the knowledge of the truth, ie, being saved from sin. Response: Read above for definition of sin and wilful sin. Conclusion: I'm not privy to your type of questions, which engender only more questions which engender only endless debate on such menial issues; your doctrine on sin is not even correct; you apparently don't know the difference between wilful sin and sinning as I described it above; hence, it's foolish to speak further with you on this issue, because your views in this area are skewed by the ideologies of man's word and not God's Word; hence, I'm through. Dan
|
|
|
Post by Doc H on Nov 22, 2006 19:02:48 GMT -5
mahatma,
It's certainly unfortunate that some old and outdated textbooks present his outdated theory as factual, but I hardly think that proves a grand conspiracy to support a "lie." If anything it points to a need for better funding for public schools, so that they might be able to afford more modern and accurate textbooks.
The textbook was published in 2002-hardly an old and outdated book.
Same with the peppermoth lie-it is still present in modern day textbooks.
Same with the Archioptyrex (? spelling) lie-still present in modern day textbooks.
I actually confronted my sons Science department regarding this a couple of years ago- they are still teaching these lies to my daughter today.
I thank God that she has God, the Bible and her family to lead her unto the truth.
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 22, 2006 19:19:31 GMT -5
Doc H,
You are referring to a single textbook? Again, it's certainly unfortunate that old and outdated theories are in a textbook, but poor judgement or ethical failures on the part of textbook authors, editors, and book purchasing commitees has nothing to do with the validity of evolutionary theory.
Regarding the peppered moth, isn't it used as an example of natural selection (microevolution)? You stated specifically before that there was no evidence for macro-evolution, but I have never before heard it argued that adaptation and natural selection (microevolution) are invalid. In addition, I believe the only thing that has been "disproved" with regards to peppered moths is that tree lichen was the one and only factor which determined population density and predation.
Regarding the archaeopteryx (also sp? hehe) I am not certain what "lie" you are referring to? I'm not aware of a big debate surrounding them, but if you have some links I would be happy to investigate.
|
|
|
Post by jonathanhulewicz on Nov 24, 2006 1:08:40 GMT -5
I was recently told by a close friend of Kent Hovind's that 5 people got saved while he was in jail!
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Nov 24, 2006 2:12:10 GMT -5
I didn't bail; I just didn't see the post since I only sporadically come to this part of the Board You Said:I never said practice sin. I said sin. Period.You openly confessed that you still sin, but yet are saved from sin. This, again, seems contradictory. RESPONSE: When I was first saved, a day or two after my conversion I burned my thumb in welding class and the name of the Lord came out in a very vain manner; it was my custom to speak such wickedness before conversion; when I burned my thumb it just literally came out with no thought whatsoever in any way; it just did... no temptation "overtook me", as there was no temptation present...i didn't even know I said it until it was over.I immediately asked God to forgive me and began weeping in class that those words came out of my mouth (though no one else heard)....that's different than me saying I'm going to fornicate tonight.You see?...Fornicating is wilful; getting saved and the next day saying a cuss word because I was burned on my thumb was not conciously chosen at all....was it a sin? Of course! Was it wilful and did I CHOOSE to swear? Of course not. You Said: Maybe you can elaborate a little bit on exactly how one chooses to sin even after being saved from sin. I might add that most do not want to accept responsibility for choosing to sin willfully after coming to the knowledge of the truth, ie, being saved from sin. Response: Read above for definition of sin and wilful sin. Conclusion: I'm not privy to your type of questions, which engender only more questions which engender only endless debate on such menial issues; your doctrine on sin is not even correct; you apparently don't know the difference between wilful sin and sinning as I described it above; hence, it's foolish to speak further with you on this issue, because your views in this area are skewed by the ideologies of man's word and not God's Word; hence, I'm through. Dan Wow, I guess you must be right, Dan. I must be wrong, because you say so. The sad part is that I was being very sincere, and actually wanted to have a meaningful discussion on this issue. I even mentioned that I would start a new thread (which I will do soon). I suspect you have an underlying issue with me, and with most of the other open-air preachers on this forum. There is no way you can come to this type of conclusion on my doctrinal view of sin with the minimal amount of discussion we had. You have actually exposed yourself with this response. You are unteachable, disrespectful, and very much deceved, sir. Take a little advice: Stop trying to be right about everything, and learn to be a man of your word. Did you not say you were purged from the spirit of debate? Yet, I see you sticking your nose into every subject you possibly can, out to prove to the world that Dan is right again, and that all other doctrines are foolish. Be careful who you write off as false brethren, sir. Many whom you claim to be in error and false are actually solid, mature, and obedient servants of Christ. Christians are slandered enough by the devil, so why do you continue to slander men of God? Reader beware: Dan is out to prove you wrong! PS: Does the Bible actually make a differentiation between types of sin, like willful, or unwillful, etc? I don't think so. Sin is sin. Period. Jesus said "men loved darkness rather that light.....", so it sounds like either sin, or no sin. Either you love sin and hate God, or you love God and hate sin.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 24, 2006 12:05:46 GMT -5
EDIT!
On second thought, I'm not going to entertain your posts further, bullhornbob.
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Nov 24, 2006 13:40:05 GMT -5
Dan: BullhornBob! I know why you don;t like me now!
BB: Who said I did not like you. I have no malice towards you, or anyone else. Are you making things up again?
Dan: I just went through some of your posts and you're pals with Micah and Ruben!
BB: And who are YOU pals with? It would seem you are defending sin, according to the thread. You make yourself an enemy of God by loving sin. Hypocrite!
Dan: No wonder you blasted me as you did! You're a friend to false prophets! That explains it.
BB: You cannot, and quite frankly, will not be willing to prove this very strong accusation. These men are saved, sanctified, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Can you prove they are not? All I hear are accusations without biblical evidence (note that I said evidence, not OPINION).
Dan: No more needs to be said by me and as a matter of fact, I'm deleting my post in reply to you above....
BB: You can run, but you cannot hide. You have been exposed as accusational and unreasonable. I think you may fair much better doing just that....saying nothing else and listening for a change.
Dan: I once came against, openly, Ruben Isn't-Real for telling people God hates them and marching with those who do... I also came against, openly, Micah, as he's on Youtube with beer being thrown in his face for calling a man's girlfriend a w/h/o/r/e; rather than saying, Jesus says you're forgiven... go, and sin no more(Jesus never once did this type of Evangelism)
BB: Yes, you come against all who oppose your views, and quite viciously, I might add. Maybe you just cannot see it, but from my perspective, you basically are the OAO Boards Police Chief. Your job is to go around correcting everyone's posts, and pointing out everyone who disagrees with you as "false brethren" or "false converts." All the while amen-ing those who agree with you.
You have obviously overlooked the fruit of Jesus ministry....they murdered Him. They wanted to kill Him from the very beginning. They murdered the prophets before Him, and all the apostles after Him. So it is no wonder that men come against God's servants today. (And by the way, Jesus was Messiah, not an evangelist. He fulfilled all of the offices of Priest, Prophet and King)
Dan: I haven;t done so in some time, but your referrence to me as calling solid brothers false brethren says alot about why you wrote what you wrote above. No matter; I read your posts extolling the abominable men you call Brethren.
BB: And you have an opinion as does everyone else. You can try to read into it all you want, but the fact remains that I have proof, you have accusations. I have video and eye-witnesses of how God is being glorified through the men you call false, you have.........posts?
Dan: I have received more emails from Baptists and Holiness Charismatics saying, "Praise God!" than I have mean ones; the mean ones come only from their FRIENDS; never from those who se e these wicked men in action once a year at the homosexual parades or from the ones who are victimized by them.
BB: Please clarify; I'm not sure I follow you. Are you saying your ministry is better than their ministry? You have to be kidding! How juvenile of you.
Dan: That said, I'm not going to respond to you further; I know EXACTLY what you're doing... and it's not going to work. It takes two to debate; you're on your own Bullhornbob.
BB: Of course you will not respond, because you do not want to admit your fault. You accuse without proof, then write people off as false, and expect that to be final. But I suspect you will respond, as you have to be right, you have to have the last word, and you will not relent.
Pitiful. Quite pitiful. When you grow up, let me know. Then we can have a meaningful discussion. I pray you see the error of your ways and become humble, teachable, and willing to discuss the Bible with respect and decency. You know, the things you accuse others of not doing?
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 24, 2006 14:01:32 GMT -5
Jesus loves me, this I know, fvor the Bible tells me so, little one to Him belong, they are weak, but Jesus is strong....
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Nov 24, 2006 15:29:58 GMT -5
I would honestly err more towards RevK's position on the "perfection" (or whatever you want to call it) issue... so I would disagree with some of the things bullhornbob and Micah have said on it, but this situation really grieves me. I don't see why a real discussion isn't possible.
I don't agree with Ruben's methodology, i.e. the "God hates you" banners, but I still believe he is saved and a man of God. An unregenerate would not be out there preaching the word like he does. Micah as well. I don't think bullhornbob's ideas should be written off simply because he associates with Ruben and Micah. That is an ad hominem argument. A more reasoned and humble discussion is needed on this...
Dan, with all due respect and in humility, I honestly think you are in the wrong here... maybe you should clarify on what you mean and why you say Micah and Ruben are false prophets as that is a VERY serious charge (Gal 1:8-9) and as such, should not be thrown around lightly and deserves to be justified if it is made... your new avatar message also disturbs me as it seems to be mockery...
Please reconcile this guys! This is an awful thing to be happening.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 24, 2006 15:59:14 GMT -5
I would honestly err more towards RevK's position on the "perfection" (or whatever you want to call it) issue... so I would disagree with some of the things bullhornbob and Micah have said on it, but this situation really grieves me. I don't see why a real discussion isn't possible. I don't agree with Ruben's methodology, i.e. the "God hates you" banners, but I still believe he is saved and a man of God. An unregenerate would not be out there preaching the word like he does. Micah as well. I don't think bullhornbob's ideas should be written off simply because he associates with Ruben and Micah. That is an ad hominem argument. A more reasoned and humble discussion is needed on this... Dan, with all due respect and in humility, I honestly think you are in the wrong here... maybe you should clarify on what you mean and why you say Micah and Ruben are false prophets as that is a VERY serious charge (Gal 1:8-9) and as such, should not be thrown around lightly and deserves to be justified if it is made... your new avatar message also disturbs me as it seems to be mockery... Please reconcile this guys! This is an awful thing to be happening. What is a Prophet? Jesus said John the Baptist was the greatest of prophets. He did no miracle. So why was he the greatest? He preached the Prophet's Message and prepared the Way of the Lord under the Anointing of Elijah. I will clarify by saying that Ruben's message is false (God hates You) thus making him a false prophet. Prophets are known by their MESSAGE, not their MIRACLES (Deut 13:1-3). If the message is false, the messenger is false. Let God be true in all things and let us not shrink back from walking in the Truth and in marking and avoiding those who do not.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 24, 2006 18:07:31 GMT -5
See what you guys make me do to my wife?!_____________________ She's recovered now though and she's smiling! See! She knows it's you guys who make me pop her into the wheelchair every now and then! AHAHAHAH
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 25, 2006 13:36:01 GMT -5
I will clarify by saying that Ruben's message is false (God hates You) thus making him a false prophet. I don't know what message Ruben is preaching other than what I read in the previous posts, but if it is anything like what I wrote for a campus newspaper... www.geocities.com/groceryguy19/Noneutrality.htmTo get back to the thread, however if anyone has not seen America: Freedom to Fascism... openairoutreach.proboards52.com/index.cgi?board=news&action=display&thread=1163252120Then they ought to. Yes, of course we need to 'render unto Caesar (Federal Government guided by the Constitution with consent of the governed),' but we are not required to render unto Caesar's tax collector (IRS) what does not belong to Caesar (again Government under the Law/Constitution of which they are breaking, by the people of whom they are robbing).
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 25, 2006 14:48:13 GMT -5
As I argued before though Michael, even if it is the case that the government is not constiitutionally allowed to collect taxes, and even if christians are not forced by their religion to pay these taxes which they believe to be constitutionally illegal, it still seems to be a choice between a spiritual calling and a worldly stand. If a man who is running a ministry decides to take an ethical stand on a matter of worldly importance, and has the knowledge that this worldly ethical stand is likely to bring down the wrath of the law, isn't he deciding that this worldly issue is more important than his spiritual ministry?
To be clear, I don't think Mr. Hovbind is particularly moral or ethical, but even under this "best of circumstances" position, did he not choose to fight a worldly fight at the expense of his spiritual labor?
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Nov 26, 2006 0:54:36 GMT -5
Jesus loves me, this I know, fvor the Bible tells me so, little one to Him belong, they are weak, but Jesus is strong.... OK, here you go, Dan: Hebrews 6:1-3 says: Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit. Just for the record, most churches today, even so-called christians, cannot get past the repentance part of the above verse. This is why we are having this discussion, boys and girls. Immaturity running rampant. II Corinthians 7:1 says: Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.Big, scary words like perfection and holiness.....oooh nooooo, you mean I have to be HOLY? I have to stop sinning. AAAAAHHHHH! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dan, you are the only one on this board who calls christian men false just because you disagree with them. Are you also going to accuse Jesse and his teams as being false brethren? I have personally preached with all of the teams (except Jeffrey), and associated with them. I wholeheartedly support these dynamic young men, and I am sure they would do the same for my wife and myself (the wife and I have been open-air preaching at least once a week for about 2 years now). Does this automatically make them an abomination? And, on what grounds? You obviously have an issue with the confrontational style of preaching. I pray you search the New Testament examples of preaching, and study them without the influence of men, but with sincerity and simplicity of heart. Dan, if you get right down to it, you are really just disagreeing with the Bible. I can and will gladly enter into a civil and respectful discussion on any of the above topics, and concerning any of the accusations you have posed. Again, no malice here. Just a genuine concern for your attitude towards Ruben, Micah, and myself. Any other names you might want to add to your list?
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 26, 2006 3:47:40 GMT -5
As I argued before though Michael, even if it is the case that the government is not constiitutionally allowed to collect taxes, and even if christians are not forced by their religion to pay these taxes which they believe to be constitutionally illegal, it still seems to be a choice between a spiritual calling and a worldly stand. If a man who is running a ministry decides to take an ethical stand on a matter of worldly importance, and has the knowledge that this worldly ethical stand is likely to bring down the wrath of the law, isn't he deciding that this worldly issue is more important than his spiritual ministry? To be clear, I don't think Mr. Hovbind is particularly moral or ethical, but even under this "best of circumstances" position, did he not choose to fight a worldly fight at the expense of his spiritual labor? I think I see what you are saying...For the sake of the ministry and the work he is doing he should have capitulated, paid the taxes; and let others fight the political battle like the Constitution Party (fomerly the US Taxpayers Party). In that sense, yes. However I don't see the issue as worldly. I believe "All of Faith For All of Life." I believe that the Law-Word of God applies to every area of life including law/politics and economics/money (there you go: politics, money and religion in a handbasket) as well as education, sociology, mathematics, science, and more; even if writing a doctoral thesis on the ovarian maturation of Japanese quail it must be written from a theocentric perspective. I agree, his ministry may suffer. But I won't presume to know what he was 'deciding'. I have too little information to make an assessment of his motives...
|
|
|
Post by alan4jc on Nov 27, 2006 0:35:10 GMT -5
Bullhorn, I don't know you personaly nor do I know Ruben. However I have seen pictures and heard from some people where I live here in Utah, about Ruben in SLC during the Mormon conference. Holding up garments between 2 poles is certainly nothing that can be found in the New Testament. If he has repented for misrepresenting God, than fine. I have been a believer for 18+ years and I use the law of God because it is what converts the soul. It is perfect, and if used rightly can effect many. I read a post here by someone on one of the travelin teams that suggested that all open air preachers check their heart before they go out. Do they truly want lost and dying people to be saved or do they want to degrade and swing people to their own side? I know in all honesty that I have been in situations where I have lost focus of the reason for my preaching, and I.m sure you have too. The issue for open air preaching as far as I can see isn't weather to use the law or not.The issue is weather we use the sharp edge of the sword or the blunt one.
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Nov 27, 2006 21:56:24 GMT -5
Bullhorn, I don't know you personaly nor do I know Ruben. However I have seen pictures and heard from some people where I live here in Utah, about Ruben in SLC during the Mormon conference. Holding up garments between 2 poles is certainly nothing that can be found in the New Testament. If he has repented for misrepresenting God, than fine. I have been a believer for 18+ years and I use the law of God because it is what converts the soul. It is perfect, and if used rightly can effect many. I read a post here by someone on one of the travelin teams that suggested that all open air preachers check their heart before they go out. Do they truly want lost and dying people to be saved or do they want to degrade and swing people to their own side? I know in all honesty that I have been in situations where I have lost focus of the reason for my preaching, and I.m sure you have too. The issue for open air preaching as far as I can see isn't weather to use the law or not.The issue is weather we use the sharp edge of the sword or the blunt one. Alan, I know Ruben is a godly man. I have spent many hours with him doing many different activities, not just preaching. He wants the wicked of this world to know the truth, and trust me, his hands will be clean on judgement day. Open-air preaching for over 25 years will give one a bit of a head start, no? (We are novices at this) To work an event with this man is like being part of a well-oiled machine. Hours of preparatory prayer, planning, many $$ spent travelling and hours driving, I could go on and on. Here is the problem; most people will take a small piece of the puzzle and claim that they know what the whole picture is. The only way to see the whole picture is to have all the pieces put together. A short video clip or one or two pictures on the internet are just not enough. Walk a mile in his shoes one year at Mardi Gras, or one of the bigger sodomite parades. Maybe then you will understand, when you see the love of God being poured out through this obedient servant.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 27, 2006 23:03:15 GMT -5
Bullhorn is correct; internet clips and pics are NOT enough! With this I agree! So... go to Ruben's own site, look around, and then you'll see what this abominable man is all about. It's strange and somewhat disturning that Ruben's site is obessed with homosexuals and homosexuality; thsi appears and is a main theme with Ruben Israel. Take the time, people! There's LOTS to see! Here are some short glimpses, from his own site: He changes Scripture verses, LITERALLY: www.officialstreetpreachers.com/HOMO/PORTAL/gay%20pride.htmThis page is too graphic for teens: www.officialstreetpreachers.com/homonews%20updates.htmNow, go check this man's site for yourself and compare this with the Jesus of the Bible! www.officialstreetpreachers.com
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Nov 27, 2006 23:26:57 GMT -5
Those are very nice pictures of your family, Dan.
about those "changes"... I wonder what the intent behind them was. Surely the man doesn't intend to actually try and change the canonical content of those verses. He is probably intending to do something else with it. Maybe you should ask him.
as for the site concentrating on homosexuality... the reference to "sin f*gcisco" and similar language throughout the site, the stick figure buggery, etc. is not something I'm a big fan of... but that's really my only complaint. Not that it's even really a complaint. Just a little thing that kinda disturbs me. Overall I don't have a problem with Ruben, although I am not for "God Abhors You" signs.
|
|
|
Post by berean73 on Nov 27, 2006 23:59:15 GMT -5
Bullhorn is correct; internet clips and pics are NOT enough! With this I agree! So... go to Ruben's own site, look around, and then you'll see what this abominable man is all about. It's strange and somewhat disturning that Ruben's site is obessed with homosexuals and homosexuality; thsi appears and is a main theme with Ruben Israel. Take the time, people! There's LOTS to see! Here are some short glimpses, from his own site: He changes Scripture verses, LITERALLY: www.officialstreetpreachers.com/HOMO/PORTAL/gay%20pride.htmThis page is too graphic for teens: www.officialstreetpreachers.com/homonews%20updates.htmNow, go check this man's site for yourself and compare this with the Jesus of the Bible! www.officialstreetpreachers.comThat is absolutly horrible! I have never met or seen Mr. Israel, but will try to find some of his videos. If what he has on his website is coming from him..... prayer brothers, pray for this man. Disgusting.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 28, 2006 0:12:34 GMT -5
Berean, all of that stuff on his site was made by him for the site.
Lastly, don't count on people agreeing with you about Mr. Israel; more often than not, he's defended by some here (DEFINATELY NOT ALL!) due to friendship with...it's double standard, really... people condemn tons of things, but hey! raise concerns about their friends and you'r e toast!
Ruben Israel needs to repent and get right with God!
Bullhorn, you mentioned Ruben being in OA longer than any of us.... and you're correct; he's been preaching a message void of the Anointing and Love and Compassion of God longer than I've been alive, most likely.
Sad and unfortunate.
I don't expect his friends, who support such filth and are under the punishment as he is before God, to amen my statement here.
It makes no difference though; the corporate Body of Christ sees through this trash; it's the lone rangers and wanna-be-pulpit ministers who support this stuff.
True Evangelism preaches under the Anointing, uses the Word of God and it's message and methods and will never stoop so low as to cause a sinner to become twice the son of hell that he already is.
Causing sinners to further hate God is no acolade, Bullhornbob; you're as deluded as Ruben is, and just as abominable also.
You guys are no better than a pornographer; you're both guilty of destroying lives with your methods of "reaching" people.
You're in big trouble when you stand before God.
|
|
|
Post by berean73 on Nov 28, 2006 8:25:57 GMT -5
Berean, all of that stuff on his site was made by him for the site. Lastly, don't count on people agreeing with you about Mr. Israel; more often than not, he's defended by some here (DEFINATELY NOT ALL!) due to friendship with...it's double standard, really... people condemn tons of things, but hey! raise concerns about their friends and you'r e toast! Hey Dan, I hit the "preview" button last night as I was writing my post to see how it would look before I posted it. The first thought that came to mind was... " well this might not be well received...lol". But ya know what? I hit the "post" button anyway. I'm not to concerned with popularity, I am however concerned with people's heart conditions, especially if they claim to follow the same Lord as I do. Again, I have not preached with this man, I have had no interaction with him at all, but I don't know that I would nessesarily need to. If that website, with those thoughts came from his heart, then the only reason I would want to meet this guy is to ask him if he "considers himself to be a good person".......lol. Zeal without wisdom comes to mind. I stand by what I said, I spent quite some time reading his entire website last night. I looked at all those banners and almost wept for him. I am not some neo-evangelism, soft, squishy, telling half truths kinda guy. Homosexuality is a sin, and an unregenerate person dying in that lifestyle will spend an eternity in Hell. However, I will never go around with such hate. Instead let us show concern, compassion, and true Christlike love for the sinner... all sinners. Let them hear the tears in our voices if they don't see them in our eyes. Is there a time to get a little hard? I do believe so! However, do I need to say.. God Abhors You God Hates Homo Sex Homo Sex is the Shame of Our Country ?? Come now, that isn't preaching Christ. That IS preaching hate. Ok, let the rebukes come......... I stand firm upon the Rock, my Solid Foundation. Pray about this folks... please.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Nov 28, 2006 10:20:03 GMT -5
Amen Berean!
|
|
|
Post by joechristopherson on Nov 28, 2006 10:46:55 GMT -5
Amen and Amen
|
|
|
Post by alan4jc on Nov 28, 2006 11:28:59 GMT -5
This is For Bullhorn or anyone that supports Reuben....I'm sitting here at my desk after going to his website and I,m greatly grieved. Almost to the point of tears over his website. I have absolutely no issue with street preaching or the use of Gods word (especially the Law) to proclaim the truth of the gospel. However Bob if you think that because someone go out "preaching" for 25 years and spends time in "prayer" and spends lots of"$$" this gives them the right or authority to say and do whatever they "think" in the name of evangelism. I won't say he isn't a brother in Christ but in 18 years of following the King of Kings this is truly sad to my spirit. Perhaps he and others are not always angry or mean spirited, but some correction from some godly men looks to be in order. However if someone doesn't agree with all he does they will be labeled as neo-Christians. I'm certainly in agreement that many have soft peddled the Gospel, but degrading your brothers in Christ is wrong. Many more thought are in my mind, for now I will just pray for God to bring some Spiritual men alongside of Reuben.
|
|