Stop looking for revival and start living it. God is pouring out his spirit upon the preachers of the New Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Churches. >The Men of GodPastor Steven Anderson - Uncompromising founder and firebrand soul-winner who fearlessly preaches the pure KJV, exposes modern Bible perversions, stands hard against sodomy and Zionism, and leads the charge back to the old paths of door-to-door evangelism and post-trib truth.Pastor Jonathan Shelley - Ordained by Pastor Anderson. Bold hard preacher and documentary warrior who delivers scorching sermons against the sodomite agenda, upholds eternal security and the King James Bible without apology, and has stepped up to shepherd churches through storms while keeping the NIFB standard high.Pastor Bruce Mejia - Ordained by Pastor Anderson. Fearless California pioneer who plants and pastors with aggressive soul-winning zeal, refuses to soft-pedal the hard truths of Scripture, and keeps First Works Baptist Church a beacon of KJV-only, no-compromise fundamentalism on the West Coast.Pastor Dillon Awes - Ordained by Jonathan Shelley. Straight-shooting hard preacher who doesn’t mince words about sin, hell, or the need for real Bible preaching, delivering clear gospel truth and maintaining a strong local church stand for the pure Word of God and New Testament church order.Pastor Aaron Thompson - Steady, no-nonsense pastor who builds solid churches in the Northwest with consistent soul-winning, faithful KJV preaching, and a clear rejection of worldliness, Calvinism, and every modern compromise that waters down the faith.Pastor Corbin Ressl - Ordained by Pastor Anderson. Loyal Arizona soldier of the cross who plants and pastors with the same old-fashioned fire as the movement’s founder, emphasizing pure doctrine, aggressive evangelism, and an unwavering stand for the King James Bible and the old paths.
>>18613443Steven Anderson has been called out for being a cultist. Don't join his congregation, he's a dogshit human being
>The Doctrines>King James Onlyism The King James Version is the perfect, inerrant, and only authoritative Word of God in English; all modern translations are rejected as corrupt.>Salvation by Grace through Faith AloneSalvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone; works or Lordship conditions are rejected.>Eternal Security (Once Saved, Always Saved)True believers cannot lose their salvation.>Trinity There is one God eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit>Deity, Humanity, Death, Resurrection, and Return of Christ Jesus is fully God and fully man, born of a virgin, died for sins, rose bodily, ascended, and will return.>Post-Tribulation, Pre-Wrath RaptureThe church will go through the Tribulation; the pre-tribulation rapture is rejected.>No Calvinism Calvinist doctrines (especially limited atonement, unconditional election in the Calvinist sense, etc.) are rejected.>No Dispensationalism, No Zionism Classical dispensationalism and support for modern Israel as God’s chosen people/prophetic fulfillment are rejected; the church (true believers) is seen as the true people of God.>Believer’s Baptism by ImmersionOnly professing believers are baptized by full immersion; infant baptism is rejected.>Local Church ExclusivismEmphasis on independent local Baptist churches as the only true New Testament churches; rejection of a universal invisible church of all believers, historic creeds (e.g., Apostles’/Nicene), and fellowship with non-aligned groups; communion often practiced privately at home rather than in corporate services.>Atonement Involving Harrowing of HellJesus experienced punitive suffering in hell as part of the atonement (a distinctive and controversial teaching).>Strong Stance on Homosexuality Homosexuality is an abomination and sin; some leaders teach that unrepentant homosexuals cannot be saved and advocate capital punishment consistent with Old Testament law.
>The WorksSoul-Winning / Door-to-Door Evangelism >Aggressive, personal, face-to-face gospel preaching (especially door-to-door) is essential; tract-only methods are often dismissed.>Millions reached, tens of thousands saved.Hard / Hellfire Preaching>Uncompromising, confrontational preaching of sin, judgment, hell, and biblical standards without softening for feelings.Online Presence >You can view tons of NIFB preaching published on each church's website or at https://www.allthepreaching.comStrong separation and exclusivism >Minimal or no fellowship with other churches. Historic creeds are rejected.Family Integrated services>No separating children during church service so that predators can molest them. Strong emphasis on homeschooling.
Not sure if you're going to Heaven? Get saved now before it is eternally too late!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foRtBHXM16A
>>18613446Stay mad, fag.
How does the rejection of Dispensationalism and the veneration of the KJV even work? Covenant theology maintains that the doctrine of grace has existed throughout every covenant and that the conditions have never changed. Dispensationalism is the idea that every covenant God has had with man establishes new conditions and requirements. Scripture, including the KJV, tells us that among the Israelites were many that had sufficient faith and were therefore saved. So either they had everything at their disposal they needed to satisfy their covenant with God or over time God established new covenants with different requirements. Obviously the KJV didn't exist before the 1600s, so a KJV-only-ist would either say that the Bible is wrong when it says people were saved before they had access to the KJV or that we are under a new dispensation where the KJV is the only adequate version of God's word for one's salvation.
>>18613449KJV Bible verse that backs every claim here thoroughly?
>>18613446>for being a cultist.add abuser to the list too. As stated by his own children.
>>18613597>How does the rejection of Dispensationalism and the veneration of the KJV even work? Covenant theology maintains that the doctrine of grace has existed throughout every covenant and that the conditions have never changed. Yes, all two of them.>Dispensationalism is the idea that every covenant God has had with man establishes new conditions and requirements. No, it's not. It wrongly divides the word of truth into seven so called "dispensations" which is not a biblical concept. >Scripture, including the KJV,The KJV is the totality of scripture.>tells us that among the Israelites were many that had sufficient faith and were therefore saved. Yes.>So either they had everything at their disposal they needed to satisfy their covenant with God or over time God established new covenants with different requirements. No. You're conflating convenants, testaments, and requirements for salvation. Try again.>Obviously the KJV didn't exist before the 1600s, so a KJV-only-ist would either say that the Bible is wrong when it says people were saved before they had access to the KJV or that we are under a new dispensation where the KJV is the only adequate version of God's word for one's salvation.This is a strawman of the KJV only position. Try again.
>>18613603>add abuser to the list too. As stated by his own children.The word of his rebellious children is trash. Keep railing, loser.
>>18613609>The word of his rebellious children is trash.why? Why should we believe that a bunch of his children collectively decided to lie about everything (beating them with cords, cold showers)? Why did the daughter run away from Andersons home? What is their motivation for lying and tarnishing Andersons name?
Every time I see one of these idiotic christcuck threads I become more convinced the Romans should have tried harder to wipe out this idiotic cult.
>>18613608hi, im this anon >>18613598just wondering why you havent posted the KJV verses that anyone can read and come to same conclusions you spout itt so far.
>>18613610>why?Because their very rebellion and dishonoring of their father shows that they have very poor, or non-existent, moral fiber. It's like asking why witches might lie about a man of God.>Why did the daughter run away from Andersons home? Because her mind was poisoned by her disgusting uncle Clint and her trash brothers.>What is their motivation for lying and tarnishing Andersons name?Envy and love of sin. Possible reprobation in the case of Isaac and Clint.
>>18613614Because that's not the point of this thread. Do you have a specific doctrine you'd like to be educated on?
>>18613608>Yes, all two of them.There are more than two distinct covenants labeled as such in scripture. Abraham alone establishes two distinct covenants with God. I'll give that when we use the word in it's colloquial sense, as even scriptural authors tended to do, we can arrive at different and arbitrary counts. But the insistence that there are only two requires such a drastically novel understanding of what a covenant is that at that point you're, for all intents and purposes, making up a definition that nobody but a small handful of people have ever employed. >It wrongly divides the word of truth into seven so called "dispensations"I agree that dispensationalism is errant, but there's not just one model. It's a general approach to interpreting covenants that sees them retroactively based on their outcomes and not the initial terms layed out. This leads to some dispensationalists seeing 7 distinct dispensations, some seeing 5, and now I'm learning that some see 2. >You're conflating convenants, testaments, and requirements for salvation.A covenant is a contract. A transactional agreement. "You do this for me and I'll do this in return." So yes, it necessarily includes requirements. And what God offers us in the covenants He makes with us is salvation in exchange for faith. Anything else you tack on that is necessarily contingent for salvation, such as needing to receive His word through a highly specific translation, becomes a requirement for said salvation. In otherwords, you're saying "faith + certain beliefs and interpretations">This is a strawman of the KJV only position.Sure. This is me working everything out logically. But I came to you with the question "how does that even work?" The rest of the post is explaining why those two positions don't seem to be compatible to me.
>>18613618So you are implying the KJV has a verse that states that if someone doesn't like their father, everything they say about the father is a lie?>Because her mind was poisoned by her disgusting uncle Clint and her trash brothers.What specifically did her uncle and brothers say that was so convincing and damning to rebel against her father?>>18613619So you are telling us to believe every > you give because the KJV says so. But you didnt actually give us the KJV to read and come to the conclusion. I mean, at least with the Jehovah Witnesses, every claim they make on their website they cite the verse from their Bible.
>>18613627>So you are implying the KJV has a verse that states that if someone doesn't like their father, everything they say about the father is a lie?No.>What specifically did her uncle and brothers say that was so convincing and damning to rebel against her father?Who cares?>So you are telling us to believe every > you give because the KJV says so. But you didnt actually give us the KJV to read and come to the conclusion.I'm telling you what the NIFB believes.
>>18613631>No.okay, so why should we not believe his children? Any and all negative statements from children about their parents is a lie because "honor they parents" ?>Who cares?I don't want to join the sect where the founder is an abuser.What did the uncle and brothers say that was so outlandishly false that you can prove is false?>I'm telling you what the NIFB believes.Why should i believe you? What is your authority?>the KJVbut you wont get give us the verses to read them ourselves. You require people to request the KJV verse from you personally.
>>18613626>I agree that dispensationalism is errant, but there's not just one model. It's a general approach to interpreting covenants that sees them retroactively based on their outcomes and not the initial terms layed out. This leads to some dispensationalists seeing 7 distinct dispensations, some seeing 5, and now I'm learning that some see 2.I don't believe in any "dispensations" in the way dispensationalists use the term. God had a chosen people, the covenant with them being referred to as the old covenant or the Old Testament. God now has a new chosen people, the covenant with them being referred to as the new covenant or the New Testament. Also know as the BETTER testament. Salvation has always been available by grace through faith.
>>18613637>okay, so why should we not believe his children?Because they have demonstrated that they are exceedingly wicked and are trying to destroy their father. I don't believe anything they say toward that end.>Why should i believe you? What is your authority?Feel free to verify. I'm telling the truth, and you're an idiot.>but you wont get give us the verses to read them ourselves.Correct. Any other stupid comments?
>>18613638>I don't believe in any "dispensations" in the way dispensationalists use the termKJV verse to back this up please? I would love to know how the KJV defines dispensationalism and why the NIFB is correct.
>>18613641>Feel free to verify.im not trying to convince you to leave the NIFB. You are trying to convince me to love Anderson and ignore his "wicked" children that you can't explain why they are wicked other than they tarnished Andersons name. >stupid commentswhy is requesting you to cite the KJV stupid?
>>18613648>why is requesting you to cite the KJV stupid?It's stupid, because you're falling for this faggot's shtick. It's the Burn in Hell retard who treats this board as a full time job. He's not Christian.
>>18613644The King James uses the word "dispensation" 4 times:>"For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me." 1 Corinthians 9:17 KJV>"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:" Ephesians 3:2 KJV>"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;" Colossians 1:25 KJV>"That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:" Ephesians 1:10 KJVClearly the word dispensation is a noun of the verb dispense, which could be read as a "giving out" of something, for example a "giving out" of the gospel in 1 Corinthians. It's not special term for a contract.>I would love to know how the KJV defines dispensationalismIt doesn't.
>>18613648Good for you champ. Enjoy the burn pit.>>18613650>It's stupid, because you're falling for this faggot's shtick. It's the Burn in Hell retard who treats this board as a full time job. He's not Christian.I'm not a faggot. I'm not retarded. I don't treat this board as my full time job. I am a Christian. 0/4. Try again?
Love how simply mentioning the KJV or Steven Anderson immediately gets all the rodents to start sperging out and to writhe around in pain.
>>18613653You forgot to throw in "I'm not funny". And you aren't Christian 100 percent. For all your dedication to the bit, you would think you'd throw some verses to mix it up. Have sex, please. I'm begging you.
>>18613657>And you aren't Christian 100 percent.Okay, I'll take the bait. Go ahead, make your case. This should be rich.
>>18613652im having trouble understanding these verses. Can you explain them for me, please? After all you are trying to get me to join the NIFB. Jehovah Witnesses seem to want to sit down and talk. But you NIFB people called me dumb, stupid, faggot, whenever i ask you to explain KJV verses to me. >>18613653Why should i love pastor Anderson if there are several accusations by his own children that he beat them and his wife?>they lied. all of it is a lieWhy should i believe you?
>>18613661Okay, feel free to dance with the schizo. Tried to warn ya.
>>18613661Goodbye, dork.
>>18613656So NIFB people thinks anyone who doesnt like Anderson, when hes been accused of abusing his family, is a rodent?
>>18613662>And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?John 10:20 KJV
>>18613638A dispensation is just an era categorized by what is demanded and what is received. It can also have geographical considerations, but not always. If you believe that the law presented to Moses for the Israelites atop Sinai was relegated to that time period, that region, and/or that group of people and you extrascripturely interprete in a clear boundary to that then you have created a dispensation. The alternative is known as covenant theology. A covenant theologian believes that the law was delivered as a unique form of faith that God is demanding from His saints. Or, as Paul puts it, that the law functions as a way to expose you to your sin. Not one iota of the law is abolished. It still applies. But it in itself never functioned to save anyone.>God now has a new chosen peopleGod has always been the God of all nations. Psalm 113, Jeremiah 10.7. What has changed is how we interpret the inheritance of the Kingdom. Paul not only explicitly groups all believers under the moniker "Israel", but insists that God has always saved people from outside of the ethnical group.
>>18613665Huh?
>>18613666>666
>>18613668>A dispensation is just an era categorized by what is demanded and what is received.No, it does not. The King James never uses the word that way as evidenced by all four uses of the word dispensation catalogued here: >>18613652
>>18613668>If you believe that the law presented to Moses for the Israelites atop Sinai was relegated to that time period, that region, and/or that group of people and you extrascripturely interprete in a clear boundary to that then you have created a dispensation.Not so, since that's not what the word dispensation means.>God has always been the God of all nations.True, and irrelevant.
>>18613675>that's not what the word dispensation means.You just said that the KJV never defines dispensation. Yet you are contesting its meaning.
>>18613680>You just said that the KJV never defines dispensation. Wrong. I said it never defines dispensationalism.
>>18613683then why in your posts you use dispensationalism when its not found in the KJV Bible? What happen to King James English only?
>>18613671>The King James never uses the word that wayYou're right. The sense of the word "dispensation" as we, and dispensationalists, use it for this type of discussion has nothing to do with any word or concept present in any translation in the Bible. It is extrascriptural. Same with words like "trinity" and "denomination". But just because words aren't present in or utilized in a certain way in scripture doesn't mean their concepts or applications don't exist. The Bible is not a standin for a dictionary, a systematic theology, nor lived experience.
Pastor Shelley has a cool podcast he does with Ben the Baptist called THE BAPTIST BIAS. Check it out! https://www.baptistbias.com
>>18613686There are plenty of other threads you can troll. This is about the NIFB. Bye!>>18613690>You're right. The sense of the word "dispensation" as we, and dispensationalists, use it for this type of discussion has nothing to do with any word or concept present in any translation in the Bible. It is extrascriptural. Same with words like "trinity" and "denomination". But just because words aren't present in or utilized in a certain way in scripture doesn't mean their concepts or applications don't exist.All true. What's your point?
>>18613666If Satan can use scripture creatively repeatedly, why can't you? It'd expose the limits of the bit, I suppose. You overestimate your "talents" way too much, and this is the last time we chit chat, cretin>“He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made. His mischief returns upon his own head.”
>>18613694>this is the last time we chit chat,Works for me!
>>18613693>What's your point?That "nuh-uh, I can't be a dispensationalist because the word you're choosing and the concept you're espousing doesn't exist in the version of the Bible I like" holds no water as a refutation of anything I've said up to this point. I'm telling you that the situation you describe your beliefs under -the one that makes you believe there are covenants from God that are distinct in their requirements- makes you a dispensationalist. You apply the same logic as a dispensationalist. That's all dispensationalism is.
>>18613699The concept of dispensationalism does not exist in the King James Bible. The King James Bible is my final authority for all matters of faith and practice. Therefore I reject dispensationalism as a valid doctrine. >>18613699>the one that makes you believe there are covenants from God that are distinct in their requirements>That's all dispensationalism is.That is not what dispensationalism is. You're parroting a common rhetorical tactic of dispensationalists, but it's something like a motte and bailey technique, not a serious presentation of the ideology. Try again?
>>18613693How am I trolling? What have i said thats not a valid question?You claim to have authority from the KJV and never cite it unless asked to. And even when you do ctrl+f for your verses, you never explain them.You want people to love Steven Anderson, but never acknowledge all the allegations his own children made about him. You say "the KJV says you shouldn't believe them" but never cite a verse.How are both of these questions trolling to you?
>>18613704>>>/his/catalogFind another thread. This one isn't for you.
>>18613703>The concept of dispensationalism does not exist in the King James BibleHere's where you and I would agree. And the point that dispensationalists are trying to argue about there being a change in the requirements between the physical, historical, ethnical nation of Israel and Christian gentiles is something that I shut down on the basis that it's an extrascriptural concept. All covenants are the same in essence. Saints have faith and God saves. There are no new conditions under various covenants, only universally applicable information given to us about what God desires and what we receive. >not a serious presentation of the ideology.It's as serious and as literal as it gets. Dispensation comes in different flavors with different models. But the one thing that ties them together is the methodology you espouse. I'm not the one using the word as a meaningless catch-all boogeyman to sling around at anyone I disagree with— you are. I'm telling you what both covenant and dispensational seminaries teach and what dispensationalism as a categorical grouping means.
>>18613653>WORSHIP STEVEN ANDERSON OR YOU'LL GO TO HELL
>>18613713>>18613713>And the point that dispensationalists are trying to argue about there being a change in the requirements between the physical, historical, ethnical nation of Israel and Christian gentiles is something that I shut down on the basis that it's an extrascriptural concept.1. I'm not a dispensationalist.2. That is not an extrabiblical concept. It is clearly taught throughout the New Testament. For example:>Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.Matthew 21:43.Or even more to the point:>In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.Hebrews 8:13>All covenants are the same in essence. Nope. The Old Testament is very distinct from the New.>Saints have faith and God saves.True and irrelevant.>It's as serious and as literal as it gets.Not at all.
>>18613718*yawn*
>>18613726>OP hates trolls>proceeds to posts screenshots of him hiding posts and writing erp phrases like *yawn*
>>18613726THOSE FLAMES JUST GOT HOTTER
>>18613729>YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!!!>MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!Nope! Bye!
>>18613732>YOU HAVE TO CONVERT TO NIFB FOR ME!!!!!>ANDERSOOOOON!!!!!Sorry, im a Christian.
>>18613732STOP THE DEVIL'S LIES AND WORSHIP THE ONE TRVE MESSIAH OF THE KJV STEVEN ANDERSON
>>18613734>>18613736Did Mom take your xbox away?
>>18613736AND IGNORE ALL THE ABUSE ALLEGATIONS FROM ANDERSONS ROTTEN CHILDREN AND HIS BROTHER CLIVE!!!! THE KING JAMES BIBLE SAYS ANY CHILD THAT TALKS BAD ABOUT THEIR PARENTS IS A LIAR
>>18613725Look, there are two modern schools of interpretation as it pertains to the covenants of the Bible. Dispensationalism is by far the more widespread one. The alternative is covenant theology. If you believe covenants separate history into distinct eras where the requirements have changed then you're a dispensationalist. If you believe that there is an unbroken through-line between each covenant and therefore no substantive difference between old and new, you are a covenantalist. Those are the two options. Go ahead and make up your own word for a third way, but if it lends its approach to the side that says "separate" and not to the side that says "not separate"; it's only a matter of time before the rest of the world recognizes that you do, in fact, belong to that faction. Please don't take my word on this, go talk to someone else who's been through seminary and isn't known for just saying "nope, you're wrong. Imma choose my own labels for my group and everyone else and that's just how it's gonna be now".
>>18613746Cool, another troll. Bye!
It's funny, you can tell by the length of the post whether someone has the goods or not. The more words, the higher chance they are trying to obfuscate and misdirect. Meanwhile I can answer clearly in one or two sentences. Because I'm not trying to hide anything. Because I'm right. :D
