Is this really church?

[heartstrings]

Eph. 1: 22-23, And hath put all [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over all [things] to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Col. 1:18, "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."

I already put these verses back in post #50, with a link to an article with several more verses that demonstrate that those who are saved in in "the church".

Matt. 16:18, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

If Jesus was talking about the local church, there's so many prOBlems....

First of all, everytime a Bible believing church shuts down, for whatever reason, then the gates of Hell have prevailed against it.

Everytime a Bible believing local church that was right at one point and becomes liberal, then the gates of Hell have prevailed against it.

Everytime a Bible believing local church get shut down by persecution, then the gates of Hell have prevailed against it.

God promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His church, singular, not plural.

There's no way He was talking about the local church.

Good post.

And Jerry, what local church was the Ethiopian eunuch baptised into?

[trc123]

Good post.

And Jerry, what local church was the Ethiopian eunuch baptised into?

He most likely got his baptismal certificate from the Church at Jerusalem, but possibly Caesarea or Azotus.

My questions would be:

Since Philip was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord and the eunuch never saw Philip again and there is no further mention of follow up, how did the eunuch get discipled?

Did he come out of doing the OBservations of the law immediately in order to show everyone that he was no longer a part of that Old Testament system?

Or did he come out later when he was discipled?

Things that make you go, hmmmmmmmmmmm......

[John81]

I agree with this. I would add that many fundamental Baptist churches make fun of or denounce the RCC (and others) for all of their extra-biblical traditions and rituals, while in fact they (IFBs) have many many of their own and don't even realize it......

Could you elaborate so I don't have to guess as to what you mean, please?

[Brother Rick]

Could you elaborate so I don't have to guess as to what you mean, please?

I appreciate that you do this John.

I typically just think, "Huh?" and then click on "View New Content" in the upper right hand corner.

[MaxKennedy]

I've been thinking this over in the mind, considering scripture, and looking at history, and I don't think its biblical that Christians witnessed, saw God led them by the Holy Spirit to witness, and saw that person saved by the Holy Spirit - and then were required to have someone else use water baptism on them.

The same disciples that witnessed to them when that got saved baptised them - in general. They were fulfilling the commandment to go out and witness to the nations
and baptise them.

God doesn't bless every church with having offspring. In revelation, he plainly says of one church that he will kill her children for their fornication and idoltry. Its often used as a guilt trip that you must be water baptised after you are saved. Yes, you should if you can - its scripture, but the thief on the cross didn't get water baptised because he couldn't. But scripture also says you are suppose to baptise them. I don't see local church there. Where two or more are gathered in my name, there I am, Jesus Christ says. If God blesses me by using me to witness to someone in the Holy Spirit when they are saved, I am going to glorify him by baptising like he commanded, recognizing that a miracle just took place.

Not doing so is not giving God the glory for the miracle, not doing what he commanded us to do in the great commision, and dragging someone back to a babylonian captivity - baptist style, with two sacrements, and a priesthood instead of believing in the priesthood of believers. I'm pretty convinced at looking at a lot of preachers - baptist preachers (all types), that they can't save becauase they aren't saved (which goes with all denominations). The scripture is witnessing to all nations AND baptising. It doesn't split the two - and you can see if there is a harlot church, that you are just dragging someone newly born into it, whom wouldn't be there for the harlot's efforts.

That doesn't mean some people won't end up having a lot of people they have baptised after witnessing, because they are God gifted
preachers. It does mean that God's preacher won't be using his God given talent to a man made credintialed and certified one, who God never has
used to save anyone, but he has the special (and magical) gift of water baptism. That is exactly what babylonian captivity is, to have your God given talents locked up in man made churches. We have an enemy, and that has been his OBvious intent for a long time, tried again and again.

You can take this where you want. I'm preparing to leave the apostasy (not true baptist doctrine, but if its not in the bible, out it goes). It does say the bridegroom and bride will no more be seen in you. Why witness to someone right before Jesus Christ baptises with the Holy Spirit, and not give the glory to Jesus at the same time by water baptising right afterwords? Next time I see The Lord save someone, I'm looking for water. And should other members of your fellowship be around? Well, in the bible, they had big meetings and baptised a lot of people. And if there isn't anyone around, Philip comes to mind. I have other verses I could bring forth - but go out and witness to all nations.. and baptise. He has made us priests and kings to his God and Father. Amen.

Edited September 1, 2010 by MaxKennedy

[Brother Rick]

On the whole baptism thing... I haven't really looked into who's supposed to baptize and who's not. I don't think it's that big of a deal, Paul even said "Christ sent me NOT to baptize..."

I don't think a person should be rushed into getting baptized after they're saved. Baptism in of itself is a sign of dedication and the first sign of discipleship; it's not a flippant automatic thing. People need to know what they're doing when they get dunked.

Some crazy Baptist folks (they kinda act like Catholics though) out there insist that they were baptized from a true historical Baptist (according to their narrow definition) who was baptized by a true historical Baptist (not to be confused with what they call an "alien immersion"), all the way back to Polycarp and then the original Apostles.

What if..... they were baptized all the way back to Judas!


*Insert Dramatic Music*

***bomb-BOMB-BOMB!!!!!***

Edited September 1, 2010 by Rick Schworer

[John81]

On the whole baptism thing... I haven't really looked into who's supposed to baptize and who's not. I don't think it's that big of a deal, Paul even said "Christ sent me NOT to baptize..."

I don't think a person should be rushed into getting baptized after they're saved. Baptism in of itself is a sign of dedication and the first sign of discipleship; it's not a flippant automatic thing. People need to know what they're doing when they get dunked.

Some crazy Baptist folks (they kinda act like Catholics though) out there insist that they were baptized from a true historical Baptist (according to their narrow definition) who was baptized by a true historical Baptist (not to be confused with what they call an "alien immersion"), all the way back to Polycarp and then the original Apostles.

What if..... they were baptized all the way back to Judas!


*Insert Dramatic Music*

***bomb-BOMB-BOMB!!!!!***

If a person is properly presented the Gospel and is born again in Christ, the Scriptural example is typically immediate baptism. If they are truly born again one should be able to tell them about baptism and they should quickly understand its meaning and desire swift baptism.

One of the prOBlems today comes from "easy believism", pressure tactics, trying to get someone to "make a decision for Christ", and various other non-biblical methods.

If a person is saved, they are just as saved at the moment of salvation as they are at any other time and if immediate baptism is possible, such is Scriptural. Otherwise, baptism as soon as possible should be in order.

The real risk out there isn't somone unsaved being baptised (if such occurs it's simply a meaningless baptism) but rather the risk of so many being brought to a false profession through unbiblical means.

Baptism is the first step in discipleship and discipling should begin immediately.

[Brother Rick]

If a person is properly presented the Gospel and is born again in Christ, the Scriptural example is typically immediate baptism. If they are truly born again one should be able to tell them about baptism and they should quickly understand its meaning and desire swift baptism.

One of the prOBlems today comes from "easy believism", pressure tactics, trying to get someone to "make a decision for Christ", and various other non-biblical methods.

I agree to a certain degree. I just don't think people should be pressured into it. But yes, the sooner the better.

As far as the tactics listed, I guess it would all depend on how you define them. If someone knows they're a sinner and they want to trust Christ, should I tell them "No, you have to wait until you're really ready..." before showing them the way? Is preaching on Hell a pressure tactic?

Salvation is of faith, discipleship is of works. Perhaps some Christians want to make sure the sinner will make a good disciple before they're even saved? I don't agree with that.

[JerryNumbers]

Christ's Church


Christ's Church

His One And Only Church

"Christ built only one kind of church: "I will build MY church." It is His church because He created the members. (Col. 1:16.) It is His church because He purchased it with His own blood. (Acts 20:28.) It is His church because He is its Head and it is His body. (Eph. 1:22-23.) It is His church because He is its Bridegroom and it is His bride. (Eph. 5:22-32.)

"There is one body." (Eph. 4:4.) "God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." (1 Cor. 14:33.) Christ built only one kind of church; He has only one body, and that is the "local" church, the church that has a definite membership, a definite time and place of meeting, a definite organization with elected officers (bishops, elders, or pastors, and sometimes deacons), and a definite program of carrying on the Lord's work—"the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Tim. 3:15.


No "Invisible" Church

"The devil has persuaded many people that the church is some kind of an 'invisible" thing that all Christians belong to, and if he could make enough people believe this he would soon destroy Christ's church. But Christians who get their doctrines from the Bible instead of from the devil will not be misled. The Bible does not say one word about an "invisible" or "universal" church. There isn't any such thing.

In Matt. 16:18, in Paul's letter to the Ephesians, in Col. 1:18,24, 1 Tim. 3:5, 15; 5:16, Heb. 12:23, Jas. 5:14, and possibly a few other passages, the word "church" is usedabstractly, as I have frequently used it above, not referring to any particular organization at any definite place, but to the church as an institution. When we make a concrete application of the word we must have in mind a particular organization of baptized disciples that meets somewhere and is engaged in the Lord's work, because this is the only kind of church that the Bible tells us anything about."

[John81]

I agree to a certain degree. I just don't think people should be pressured into it. But yes, the sooner the better.

As far as the tactics listed, I guess it would all depend on how you define them. If someone knows they're a sinner and they want to trust Christ, should I tell them "No, you have to wait until you're really ready..." before showing them the way? Is preaching on Hell a pressure tactic?

Salvation is of faith, discipleship is of works. Perhaps some Christians want to make sure the sinner will make a good disciple before they're even saved? I don't agree with that.

I think we are in agreement, just not using the terms in the same manner.

Any biblical preaching or witnessing is correct and not what I mean by pressure. What I meant by those who apply pressure are those who typically present a "1, 2 3, pray after me" witness and then push and prod, pester and bug a person until they agree just to get them to leave them alone.

Of course if someone is moved by the Holy Ghost to accept Christ we shouldn't tell them to wait. (Not sure where you got that idea but it's likely just another miscommunication)

Salvation must come before discipleship and no one can make a good disciple until they have been saved. First comes salvation which should be followed immediately by discipleship. One of the prOBlems with modern witnessing techniques is not only many use unbiblical methods and receive many false professions, but there is very little discipleship done anymore. Even among those who witness biblically, often they have no plan to disciple those they help come to Christ and they do no follow up with them helping them to get with someone who can and will disciple them and get them involved in a biblical church.

[JerryNumbers]

I agree to a certain degree. I just don't think people should be pressured into it. But yes, the sooner the better.

As far as the tactics listed, I guess it would all depend on how you define them. If someone knows they're a sinner and they want to trust Christ, should I tell them "No, you have to wait until you're really ready..." before showing them the way? Is preaching on Hell a pressure tactic?

Salvation is of faith, discipleship is of works. Perhaps some Christians want to make sure the sinner will make a good disciple before they're even saved? I don't agree with that.

It seems that John the Baptist did something somewhat like what you seem to say you would disagree with. No its not exactly like it, just some what.

Mt 3:7 ¶ But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Mt 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
Mt 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
Mt 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mt 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

John refused to baptize these people until they brought forth fruits meet for repentance. I've never seen a pastor that did this, yet if they did, I would not argue
against it.

After services were over I would seek out the pastor and ask why. Why wait until after services. Sometimes some things are best left unsaid in front of everyone. What ever the prOBlem is, it may be nothing, and or it may have already been taken care of, and there is no sense in putting it forth in front of the church, for it could bring great embarrassment, and even


Our churches have always took a vote before receiving a member, the reason being someone may know that person is shack up with someone and or living in some type of open sin. I've only seen one case where the vote was taken and someone voted against receiving that person. The pastor tabled the matter, and asked the person who voted against accepting this person to meet with him and that person right after the services.

At the evening services after preaching services the pastor brought it back up, telling the church, the matter had already been taken care of, the person who voted against this man was present and he says he has no OBjection to accepting this man, a vote was taken with everyone in favor of receiving him.

That is the only incident like this I have heard of, but I freely that it was carried out in the proper way. And to have addressed it publicly in froth of the whole church could have caused some hard feeling. I spoke to our pastor, from what I understand whatever it was, was kept between those 3..

[Brother Rick]

It seems that John the Baptist did something somewhat like what you seem to say you would disagree with. No its not exactly like it, just some what.

Mt 3:7 ¶ But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Mt 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
Mt 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
Mt 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mt 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

John refused to baptize these people until they brought forth fruits meet for repentance. I've never seen a pastor that did this, yet if they did, I would not argue
against it.

I'm not sure I understand, what is it that you think I disagree with?

Regardless, John's baptism had nothing to do with ours. His baptism was to manifest Christ to Israel, once they had repented of their sins and were ready to accept their Messiah. Our baptism is for people who have already trusted Christ as Saviour. The important thing to remember is that a lot of the people that John baptized hadn't even seen Jesus yet, let alone trust Him, furthermore Christ hadn't died on the cross yet.

Acts 19:2-4, "He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." Edited September 1, 2010 by Rick Schworer

[Brother Rick]

I think we are in agreement, just not using the terms in the same manner.

Any biblical preaching or witnessing is correct and not what I mean by pressure. What I meant by those who apply pressure are those who typically present a "1, 2 3, pray after me" witness and then push and prod, pester and bug a person until they agree just to get them to leave them alone.

Ya, I hate that stuff. The sad thing is that some think that just because they uttered a prayer they're ok. Salvation takes place in the heart by faith, the prayer is just icing on the cake I think. What good is icing without cake? Well, I guess that's a bad analogy because I'd love to eat some chocolate icing right now....

[Brother Rick]

No "Invisible" Church

Maybe it's just terminology that I'm confused on. I don't believe in an invisible church that consists of only people of one cult or denomination. I believe in the body of Christ, which consists of all saved people living and dead, and they are all contained within "the church", as "the church" is also the body of Christ.

Would you agree or disagree?

Are all saved people in the body of Christ?

Are all saved people in the church of Christ?


Col. 1:18, “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Col. 1:24, “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:”

[John81]

Ya, I hate that stuff. The sad thing is that some think that just because they uttered a prayer they're ok. Salvation takes place in the heart by faith, the prayer is just icing on the cake I think. What good is icing without cake? Well, I guess that's a bad analogy because I'd love to eat some chocolate icing right now....

I get ya! It breaks my heart to think of the many who have said a "sinners prayer" and now think they are heavenbound even as they continue on, unsaved, living in sin. Unfortunately I have a few in my extended family that seem to think they are heavenbound because they were baptised. The thing is, they were not biblically saved before baptism but the church they were baptised in basically teaches that if you are baptized, you are good with God.

It's so very hard to reach any of these since they think they are already "good to go" and are not interested in the true Gospel which would actually require them to repent and follow Christ.

How sad to think of them hearing Christ tell them to depart because they never were biblically born again even though they thought they were okay with God