Brian Cain: Missionary to Cebu, PH; Pastor of Oceanview Baptist Church; Husband; Father; Former Navy nuke; Texan
Oslob, Central Visayas
Joined March 2012
- Tweets1.7K
- Following55
- Followers89
- Likes1.3K
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
.@megbasham needs to clarify her DHS tweet. What questions did she ask the spokesperson? Was this an official press release or an email response? If it was an email, the full correspondence should be made publicly available.
@TomBuck testified that Samuel sought his counsel during the visa process. The Sey family says they have worked with legal counsel since 2022 to obtain permanent legal status. Yet DHS supposedly claims Sam had no pending applications and overstayed his authorized admission by “over four years.”
Consider the timeline.
On February 20, 2022, Samuel wrote that he had been in Ohio for three weeks, placing his arrival around late January. He received his marriage license on April 14 and planned to marry on April 16, approximately 76 days after that estimated arrival. Canadian visitors are commonly admitted for up to 6 months.
Then, on December 24, 2022, Samuel wrote: “I can’t visit my family in Canada until I get my Green Card.”
That statement deserves attention. Adjustment of Status is a legal pathway through which an eligible foreign national who entered the US lawfully may apply for permanent residency after marrying a US citizen. Once an I-485 application is filed, leaving the country without approved Advance Parole will generally abandon the application, subject to limited exceptions. His December statement is consistent with someone waiting for a green card and unable to travel without jeopardizing the process.
It does not, by itself, prove an application was filed. But alongside Buck’s testimony and the family’s account of working with counsel since 2022, it raises a serious question of Basham’s tweet about DHS’s claim that Samuel had no pending applications and was thus in the states illegally for over 4 years.
We should remember that the government is not infallible, and neither are the journalists who repeat its claims. Did we learn nothing from COVID, when the CDC and journalists pushed narratives that later had to be reconsidered? “The government said so” is not a substitute for scrutiny, evidence, and due process.
Respecting lawful authority does not require blind trust in it. Magistrates are accountable to God, and their claims are not beyond examination. Establish the facts before passing judgment on @SlowToWrite.
Samuel Sey’s family confirms that the DHS statement that claimed he agreed to deportation is FALSE.
They have been working with a lawyer ever since 2022 when they submitted for a Green Card to obtain status for Samuel, and are currently working with their legal team to uncover what might have gone wrong to cause ICE to jail Samuel.
Please continue to pray for and donate to brother Samuel, and rebuke the antichristians on this app.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Progressive Christianity and Christian Nationalism are two sides of the same coin.
What is that coin? A religion of the here-and-now with a useful god comprised of cherry-picked verses and vain imaginings.
Find the narrow path. Choose the real Jesus that will not be used or useful for your agendas. Set your affection on things above and not on things on the earth. Bow the knee of your heart to the One “in whom we live and breathe and have our being.”
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
WARNING: Very personal story post below about leaving King James Onlyism and Finding Freedom in Christ
On this day in 1536, William Tyndale was strangled and burned for translating the Bible into English so ordinary people could read the Word of God for themselves.
It is also a personal day for me and marks the day I was kicked out of my church for no longer holding a KJVO position. I lost everything that day. My church, my community, my friends, and my identity.
I was raised KJVO.
I grew up reading every Chick Tract ever printed, calling every other version a “per-version,” and even tearing up NIV and NKJV Bibles in hotel rooms as a kid, thinking I was serving God.
At my IFB Bible college, I was taught that the King James Bible was not only the best translation, but the perfect, inspired, and FINAL Word of God.
But while preparing my ordination paper on bibliology, I ran into questions my KJVO education could not honestly answer. So I studied the history of the English Bible for myself.
I read the KJV preface, “The Translators to the Reader,” and realized the translators themselves would have rejected modern KJVOism. They saw their work as one step in a long chain of faithful translation, not the final word. They also admitted that their work would contain mistakes and imperfections.
I also studied the common KJVO “proof texts” like Psalm 12:6–7, Matthew 5:18, and Revelation 22:19. I discovered they had nothing to do with the KJV.
• Psalm 12 speaks of God preserving His people, not a translation.
• Matthew 5 affirms the permanence of God’s Law, not an English version.
• Revelation 22 warns against altering the book of Revelation’s prophecy and message, not modern translations.
When I shared my findings with my pastor, I was met with anger and hostility. I was told that if I left the King James Only position, I would be turning my back on the men who had trained me, and that I would be heading toward apostasy, and that my children would
not be saved ultimately with the “road I was headed down.”
But I had realized that even though the KJV is beautiful and faithful, it was keeping me ( and those I was trying to disciple) from clearly understanding God’s Word. Much of its language was hard to grasp, and it was hindering more than helping.
I chose honesty. I told my pastor I no longer held a KJVO position but would gladly keep teaching from the KJV. I just could not pretend to believe something I no longer did.
Instead, I was asked to leave.
Leaving that church was not just leaving a church. It was leaving a culture, a family, and a way of life. In the IFB world, we were told that churches outside our circle were compromised or false. When my wife and I left, we stepped into uncharted territory, trusting God to lead us.
We were shunned by many we loved. Then, just a few months later, our home burned down in a total-loss fire. Some said it was God’s judgment on us.
That season broke us, but it also built us. God taught us to stand for truth, no matter what it costs… just as Tyndale did.
And in one of those quiet moments of providence, the very day we left our church, we came home heartbroken and saw that this very day in church history was when Tyndale was martyred - October 6th.
It felt like God saying: “Truth is worth standing for, whatever it costs.”
God used our loss to teach us that our identity is not in a Bible version or denomination, but in Christ alone. Through that truth, He turned our pain into purpose. Through my book “The Forgotten Preface” and my story God has allowed me to tell, I’ve seen Him open eyes and free hearts. Every testimony reminds me that nothing we endured was wasted.
Tyndale’s dying prayer was, “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes.”
God answered it.
And by His grace, He is still opening eyes today of those trapped in KJVOism.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
I’ve tried to raise my kids to be, if necessary, the one juror who can’t get over the defendant viciously killing their own kids.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Just saw this. And once again...we just...listen to Scripture. Well, some do.
“For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur.”
(Acts 4:27-28)
The early church understood what Dinesh D'Souza denies: that in the single greatest crime in history, the ONLY time when a truly innocent man was murdered, not only were those who murdered him responsible, but...they acted in perfect concert with God's predestined purpose. We had already seen how God's sovereign decree and man's responsibility are compatible in Genesis 50 with Joseph and his brothers, and in Isaiah 10 with the punishment of Israel by Assyria. But here, in the greatest redemptive event of all, God's sovereign predestining decree, and the guilty men, together. In harmony.
Lindsay Clancy is guilty of murder and should be executed. And what she did was part of the sovereign decree of God. It is possible Dinesh does not believe in a God big enough for both of those things to be true, but everyone who prayers with the early church in Acts 4 does.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Lying is a sin. No one has ever told you that you have to be a Calvinist to critique Calvinism. What we have told you repeatedly is that you do not get to invent a position we don't hold, slap the label "Calvinism" on it, and then pretend you have refuted Calvinism.
Calvinism is not whatever you decide it is. It is most specifically defined by the Reformed confessions, especially the Canons of Dort. If you want to critique Calvinism, then quote the confessions and tell us exactly where you disagree with them.
I have yet to see any of you do that. Instead, you repeatedly misrepresent the position, attack your own caricature of it, and then congratulate yourselves for refuting a position we don't even hold.
So, if you want us to stop calling out your blatant and careless misrepresentations, the solution is incredibly simple: quote our confessions. Show us the specific article, section, or proposition you reject, and then make your case.
But apparently that requires more work than constructing strawmen. It is much easier to attack a caricature of Calvinism than to honestly engage what Calvinists actually confess.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Help me out here - I just wanna make sure I understand the Catholic operating system.
YES — when Rome says something you agree with: “Christ gave authority to His Church. You Protestants can’t just interpret everything for yourselves.”
NAH — when a bishop, Vatican publication, theologian, or church leader says something completely ridiculous: “Wellllll technically you don’t have to believe THAT.”
Am I getting warmer? 😂
So who exactly decides which parts of the supposedly authoritative Church are really authoritative?
Because if Catholics can hear a church authority say something and respond, “Nah, I reject that,” congratulations—you’ve discovered private judgment.
Welcome to Protestantism. We have coffee and donuts.
Also, if the devil is now merely just a metaphor, a social construct, misogyny, patriarchal conditioning, or whatever this week’s woke explanation is, I have another question:
Was Jesus confused when He talked about Satan?
Were the Apostles confused?
Was Peter confused when he described the devil as a roaring lion looking for somebody to devour?
Are the Jooos the devil? (Couldn’t help myself)
Tell me straight - are we supposed to wait for the latest Vatican-approved think piece to explain what Scripture really meant or what?
You see, here’s the freakin best part: if Catholics aren’t obligated to believe something just because a bishop, priest, theologian, or Vatican publication says it, then apparently Catholic authority comes with one gigantic asterisk:
“Authoritative, except when you personally determine that it isn’t authoritative.”
Amazing.
At that point, if the devil is just a suggestion, maybe the Church’s opinions are suggestions too?
Asking for a Mormon friend.
Ehh, I’ll just stick w/the Bible - the LITERAL word of God!
Sola Scriptura. ✌️😉
Leo XIV Official Newspaper: The Real Devil is Misogyny
The Vatican's official newspaper just published articles denying the devil's real existence—blaming "patriarchal education" and promoting feminism instead of Christ.
The Pope's own press is publishing heresy, and the faithful are expected to accept it.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Anybody celebrating someone who becomes a Roman Catholic clearly doesn't understand the gospel message, or what Roman Catholics teach.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Well, record shows…I tried. The man is utterly clueless about the history of the church, the Reformation, the Remonstrance, Dordt, and everything that has happened since then. Prediction: once someone “takes a stand” with feet planted firmly in self-imposed ignorance they very often go to their grave committed to that position. This was what I hoped to avoid. Still time to back off and do this right but, truly silly rhetoric like this is shameful. It would even make Arminius himself chuckle.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
John Owen on 1 John 2:2:
Christ died for:
🌎All the sins of all men.
✝️All the sins of some men, or
❌Some of the sins of all men.
In which case it may be said:
❌That if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so, none are saved.
✝️That if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world, and this is the truth.
🌎But if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?
⁉️You answer, ‘Because of unbelief.’
🎯I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!”
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Christians: Come to Christ, find peace with God by faith in Jesus. He did it all!
Catholics: Submit to Rome!
And people think it’s the same religion?
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Rather than being based on verses which explicitly teach the doctrine, Postmillennialism, like Arminianism, is a system based on *inferences* from passages which are not contextually about what is being claimed. Then, these verses are...
m.facebook.com/story.php?sto…
#dispywednesday
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Many think Catholicism is the ancient church. The apostles would never do or allow this sort of idolatrous behavior. Never.
The issue with claims to originality and an unchanged tradition within either Catholicism or Orhodoxy is that they are full of changed traditions and practices. They just try to pretend these things go back to the apostles when they don’t. It’s very much the same as the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. The Pharisees had a host of traditions and practices that at times conflicted with Scripture. So, to buffer against complaints they just said that an unwritten “oral tradition” connected all their teachings to Mount Sinai. It was just unwritten tradition and if you wanted real ancient Judaism you had to follow their lead. Jesus blew that out of the water! They were just inheriting slowly developed traditions of man and calling them ancient and authoritative. Jesus appealed to Scripture to trump them.
This Protestant will remain Protestant.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
Sooo….you’re praying to Mary-she can’t hear you herself, but she hears you through Christ-then she takes your prayers BACK to Christ….?
It’s like prayer pinball.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
A few further thoughts on the Durbin–MacArthur controversy and the distinction between losing here and overcoming in Christ:
Revelation 6:9–11 portrays faithful saints being slain because of the word of God, while Revelation 12:11 says that they overcame by the blood of the Lamb and did not love their lives even unto death. They may be killed on earth and yet overcome in Christ.
That is the distinction I understood MacArthur to be making when he said, “We don’t win down here, we lose,” and then clarified, “We lose on this battlefield, but we win on the big one, the eternal one.” His examples were explicit: “It killed Jesus. It killed all the apostles,” and, “They killed Him, they killed the apostles, and in every generation they kill the people who proclaim the truth.” The world really does hate Christ and those who belong to Him, just as Christ taught.
MacArthur spoke about persecution, suffering, and death on this earthly battlefield. His statement did not deny every temporal victory, providential mercy, advance of the gospel, or season of rest granted throughout church history. The church may experience genuine fruitfulness and deliverance in this age while still suffering real losses until Christ returns. Yet even when the saints are persecuted, dispossessed, or killed, they overcome in Christ and will be openly vindicated when He comes. Revelation 6 and 12 display that pattern plainly.
Micah expresses the same hope in God’s vindication: “Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy. Though I fall I will rise; though I dwell in darkness, Yahweh is a light for me. I will bear the indignation of Yahweh because I have sinned against Him, until He pleads my case and executes justice for me. He will bring me out to the light, and I will look on His righteousness” (Micah 7:8–9).
Perhaps some expectations of continual growth and earthly victory have been shaped more by the unusual peace and prosperity experienced in the United States over the past half century than by the experience of much of the church throughout history. The United States has been an instrument of many real blessings, but it has also promoted and participated in much evil. Its prosperity and influence should not be confused with the victory of Christ’s kingdom.
Yet none of this is a reason for passivity or despair. On the contrary, we are to be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that our labor in the Lord is not in vain (1 Corinthians 15:58). We must always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks about the hope within us (1 Peter 3:15).
What is that hope? It is not confidence that every faithful labor will produce the earthly results we desire, that we will necessarily see revival, or that the church will finally triumph over the rebellious world before Christ returns. We may see visible fruit and revival according to God’s will, but our hope rests in Jesus Christ, crucified, risen, reigning, and coming again. In Him we have forgiveness of sins, reconciliation with God, and eternal life. Our final and public vindication will come when our Lord returns, raises us bodily, and brings us into the fullness of everlasting life with Him. Earthly treasures will perish, but our treasure is in heaven. Christ is our hope.
Eschatology substantially shapes this disagreement. If Christ returns before the millennium, then the church does not finally subdue the rebellious world through historical progress before He comes. Paul likewise teaches that the rebellion precedes the day of the Lord (2 Thessalonians 2:3). Final public vindication arrives with the returning King and the resurrection of His people. But if Christ returns only after a prolonged era of widespread Christian ascendancy, then the statement “we lose down here” will naturally sound contrary to that expectation. MacArthur could have stated the distinction more fully or qualified his wording more clearly, but he did not need to, because nothing he said was false.
Nuclear Pastor retweeted
They love this argument: If you can’t distinguish between various factions of far-leftism, then you’re automatically disqualified from having an opinion.
Up front, here are the definitions (plus bonus Leninism definition):
Communists = Strive for a classless society with common ownership of production.
Marxists = Communists who believe in a classless society as the end of history.
Leninists = Those who idolize the man who operationalized Marxism to its logical conclusion.
Socialists = Fake meaning (Berniebros): Kids who like free stuff. Real meaning (PSL, DSA): Communists who pretend to tolerate dissent.
And now here’s the reason why they’re all interchangeable and why it’s perfectly OK for everyone to use any one of those terms to refer to the others:
They all advocate to overthrow the American government via revolution. Every single faction I’ve researched has had links to foreign hostile governments in service of revolution. Rubio’s Cuba Report from last week did a good job of documenting far left ties to Cuba. But what’s not covered is their deep ties to Venezuela, Nicaragua, Iran, China, and more.
Far-leftists are fundamentally subversive to the core, with allegiances to foreign hostile governments. All of them. That’s what makes them interchangeable. Not whether they decide their party platform via Comintern vs. parliament.
They’re “populist” only insofar as their allegiance is to some arbitrary Communist utopia rather than NATO. Which, by the way, is why I’m going to call out any right-wing commentator who proposes forming alliances with so-called “left-wing populists.”
State governments must take the lead in banning far-leftists from voting in local elections or holding statewide office.
