Jump to content

CPR

Members
  • Posts

    507
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by CPR


  1. While I understand the whole thinking of "Between God and the person", I'm a little worried about those Churches that might allow anyone to partake. Well, not worried exactly, more scared for those that might be new believers and just happen to stumble across the Lord's supper at a church they are visiting. I never heard (until the one time in my current Church I was finally told) of eating and drinking of damnation if you've not examined yourself.

    I guess the Pastor might ask the individual and explain it but I feel we take that out of the equation by just performing the closed communion.

    Anyway, that was an enlightening topic. Thanks.


    I get what you're saying. In the "Communion service" part of our service we have a built in time for prayer and examination that is always the same that leads people through that process. Now of course you have to do it sincerely but I feel like it's very guided if someone wasn't familiar with Communion at our church or at all (like a new Christian). It's a solemn time of repentance, examination and thanksgiving.

    Of course, there are reasons to do it each way, so every church has to decide how they think God would have them do it. I agree, I think it's interesting to discuss how different churches OBserve Communion since we prOBably experience it just with our own church.



  2. Sounds very close to the Catholics. I think the only differences are:

    1. Only those that have gone through the "sacrament" of holy communion (Eucharist) are allowed to partake in communion.
    2. When the priest gives the bread/wine they say something like "Body of Christ/Blood of Christ" and you say Amen, move to the side and give the sign of the cross.

    Of course, maybe even some Catholic Churches are different...I've been a part of 2 Catholic Churches so that was my experience at both.

    Don't remember ever being taught this growing up though:

    1 Corinthians 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

    1 Corinthians 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

    1 Corinthians 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.


    Many liturgical churches take Communion in a way that I can see looks similar to the way it is practiced in the Catholic church. There are differences in the way the Sacrament is administered and, as you mentioned, who can receive it. All baptized Christians can receive Communion at my church, regardless of denomination, etc because we believe that it is the Lord's table for his people. That's why we say "the gifts of the Lord for the people of the Lord." Also, the thirty-nine articles are clear that we do not believe in transubstantiation, which is a very distinctive doctrine of the Catholic church.
  3. Thanks for all the responses! I think the small differences are interesting. I realized that in starting the topic I never answered my own questions so here goes:

    We take Communion every Sunday. All baptized Christians are welcome to participate. We follow the order of service in the Book of Common Prayer which includes, prayers for forgiveness of sins, reflection, and prayer and praise as we remember the sacrifice and thank God for his saving grace. We go forward by rows and kneel to receive the bread and the wine. The priest/reverend places the bread in your hand and says either "the body of Christ broken for you" or "the body of Christ; take this in remembrance that Christ died for you." You eat that, the they come around with the cup (one cup) and say either, "the blood of Christ, shed for you" or "the blood of Christ, the cup of salvation." You can also keep the bread/wafer and dip it in the cup (intinction) if you prefer. After that you go back to your seat and many people chose to kneel and pray. The choir is singing and the congregation joins in singing the hymn as they are ready.

    For me, it is a very meaningful part of worship.

  4. I've noticed that in various topics the subject of Communion often comes up and it seems that the practices vary slightly among different churches (even among those of the same denomination). I thought it would be interesting to discuss how everyone's church OBserves Communion. I'm always curious to know and I think others might be too since we tend to OBserve with our own churches and may take for granted that everyone does it the same way (or maybe that's just me :unsure:). So maybe people could discuss the following:

    - How often?

    - Who is invited to participate?

    - If participation is limited, how is that monitored (if at all)?

    - How do you receive the elements - (go down front and kneel, don't kneel, stay at your seat, other options?)

    - Is there a specific service (prayers, something specific the pastor says every time, certain order of things, etc)

    - One cup or individual cups?

    - What mode? (eat then drink, intinction, etc)

    Anything else? I just think it's interesting and it frequently comes up. I hope this doesn't turn into a debate of what is the "right" way, just an interesting discussion of how things are done in various churches.

  5. Hope it works out for you.

    Does anyone have things like this in church? These look a lot like the kneelers that flip down from the back of the pews that we use during services.




  6. Read your KJB and you'll learn there is not a difference in matters of church and matters of state when it comes to being a Christian and living according to the Word of God.

    Also, if you read the writings and speeches of the Founders you will learn their main purpose for the First Amendment was for the free excercise of Christianity without any denomination having dominion or government support over the others. In their writings they often used the term religion interchangably with Christianity.


    I do read my Bible - a few versions actually.

    And I've read and studied the writings of the founders. The thing is they were pretty smart and had a way with words. They knew how things were across the pond and if they had wanted to say Christianity they would have. If they had wanted to make this country a haven for Christians of different denominations they would have said that. But they didn't. They chose to advocate for religious freedom because they realized how terrible it is to be persecuted for a religious belief no matter what that belief is. This isn't a theocracy. Original intent won't hold water here.


    John, I've said it before, I'll say it again, many there be that feel the Christians behavior is different within the church than it is in the world, that is they walk by one set of rules in church, leaving them at the door as they exit church, them abide by a different set of rules.

    That is much like a member of the churches of Christ stated, "The Bible is for church and home, we are to leave it in our church and home, and not carry its way into the world as we leave our church & or home. I have come to notice on thing about those who feel this way, they are real friendly with the world, that is seem more concerned about matters of the world than matter of God.

    2Ti 2:4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

    Lu 8:14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.

    2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

    Mt 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

    Jas 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

    Yes, many there be that entangled them self in the cares of this world.


    My behavior isn't different in church than it is elsewhere. Also, I don't abide by a set of "rules" I abide by God's grace.

    The reason I say that church and state are different is because they are. The government is not a church. I am not going to use the government to force my religion or my religious beliefs and preferences on people. That is neither biblical, reasonable, or acceptable. People who want to use the government to oppose the building of a mosque are doing just that.


  7. Women with hair obviously long were sadly few.



    I'm not trying to start a debate or anything, but what length would "obviously long" hair be considered? Not trying to get legalistic or anything, I'm not expecting something like "2 inches below the ears" or something ridiculous, but just in general what people's opinions are of what would constitute obviously long hair.



  8. Actually...BEFORE 9/11, our founding fathers may have considered it.

    AFTER 9/11....nah. Our founding fathers would have kicked them all back home to the middle east, just like they did the British who were against our country. No room here for anti-American sentiment.


    Well unless you want to turn this into China or the Soviet Union there is. People are free to criticize the government or the country here.

    Kick them back to the middle east? Well, you can deport people who are here on visas. As far as people who are citizens and people who have always been Americans (many of whom are Muslim) you really can't kick them out. If anyone does, you and I better start getting nervous. As far as the example of the British during the American Revolution? That was before we ever had a Constitution.

  9. Should a Christian support a man who is for building the mosque? People forget that we are Christians first and the final authority in our lives is not the Constitution but rather the Bible. Why do we find so many Christians defending the Muslims right to build the mosque? This is no better than wishing a false teacher or heretic godspeed. It seems that Christians have run to the defense of just about every crazy wickedness and "right" these days because the Constitution backs it. I betcha the Founding Father's wouldn't back the mosque being built at Ground Zero.

    Oh, and by the way, any group that is anti-Israel you will find Ron Paul supporting.


    There's a difference in matters of church and matters of state. If you can't tell the difference than there isn't much i can do to help you there.

    I betcha the Founding Fathers would support the building of a mosque seeing as how they wrote the Constitution and found freedom of religion important enough to make it the first amendment.

    P.S. The proposed mosque site isn't anymore at ground zero than my Manhattan apartment is.
  10. As far as background checks, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that. Unfortunately that's being realistic in the world we live in today. Most people in jOBs that work closely with people in one on one and/or sensitive situations have to undergo background checks. Nurses, doctors, teachers, counselors, just to name a few. Google "clergy abuse" or "church abuse" and you will find more results than you can count. It's not just the Catholic church either. Sadly it takes place in all denominations. Churches and Christians have a responsibility to protect their community, parishoners, and fellow Christians. If a simple background check prevents a tragedy, how could anyone OBject? Isn't it worth it? The answer is a resounding yes.




  11. Basically good points, but over the past decade or so the courts have ruled that eminent domain is no longer restricted to common good uses as was the case for over 200 years; such as for the purposes of building roads, bridges, canals and the like. Now the courts have ruled eminent domain may be used in order for city planners to delve into aspects of community development.

    I believe in the Constitution as set forth so I don't believe the federal government should have anything to do with what's done in downtown NY. This should actually be a matter for the city of NY to deal with. One of the prOBlems with this issue is not only are there folks voicing their opinions against the mosque being built there, but there are groups and politicians working to actively ensure the mosque is built there by trying to procure funds for the mosque and working deals to ensure the mosque can be built on that site.

    If the city of NY were to determine the mosque can't be built there, I believe as you say there needs to be something specific about just where such can and can't be built in NY and why.

    I'm personally against the mosque being built there because I know Islam and I know history. The building of a mosque in that location is a symbol of Islamic victory and the laying of claim to the land.

    That said, I'm not a citizen of NY (State or city), thankfully, so my view shouldn't carry any more weight than any other non-New Yorker.


    Well, regardless, everyone has a right to their opinion, New Yorker or not! However, I do think that it's important and something opponents of the issue haven't addressed; if the proposed site is too close, where isn't too close?


    Eminent Domain is being used for all types of things that it was never intended to in this country.

    However, in this case, there is every reason to use it to keep the peace. The site is part of the 911 disaster, and buying historical sites has alwasy been used with that. It is being used to incite muslim's to futher acts of terror, so it a matter of keeping the peace. And the muslim's can't possibly claim that they can't be bought out and have their worship center some place else - any place should do, unless there is a special significance to the 911 site, and if there is a special significance to the 911 site to them, then what is being said about them is true - they are trying to incite a riot while we are at war.

    When things like this are argued about, and we are at war, and at the same time land is seized for >>shopping malls<< for >>prive profit<< using eminent domain, it makes me worried how decadent the country is. Constitutionally, the State of New York can do what it likes with the eminent domain issue - its their state.


    Many court cases have further defined eminent domain, we could prOBably argue what was originally intended forever. What it was most certainly never intended to do was "keep the peace." Public benefit is the overarching principle. Let me assure you, if eminent domain is used in an attempt to put an end to this issue people will will not be happy for all kinds of reasons. Muslims, Constitutional scholars, Americans who know their country is better than that, New Yorkers, you name it they will be outraged. And rightfully so.



  12. In this case, eminent domain should be used to buy the property. Its exactly true that it is being used for the Holy War, and is just sedition at the moment. Buying the property is entirely reasonable.


    Umm, eminent domain can't be exercised willy-nilly like that in this country for any reason. By that logic the government could seize your house or your church any day now because they decided they didn't like you. Regardless of how a few nutcases want us to start treating Muslims, we don't do things like that in this country.

    Holy War? Oookay.


    I never liked Ron Paul.

    Freedom of religion does NOT MEAN freedom to build stuff wherever you want. I can't build a house for my family near Ground Zero, but I have a right to build a house, right? Just not THERE. Same with any church, even a Muslim one. And in this particular case, ESPECIALLY a Muslim one.

    Um...not letting them build a mosque in that ONE place is NOT messing up their constitutional rights.



    Actually, you can live near ground zero with your family, many families do. Granted, your structure would have to follow zoning laws, but say you bought the old Burlington Coat Factory building and wanted to modify it for living space for your family, you could.

    And there is a church even closer to ground zero than the proposed mosque/community center.

    So if you say not there, where? How far is far enough? I'm seriously asking here because at some point that will have to be determined. So how far? Lower Manhattan? NYC? The United States? Because right now people don't want a mosque to be built in Tennessee and that's pretty far from ground zero.




  13. that is probably why you are poor, because you will not trust God to provide!


    Wow, I've stayed out of this discussion, but that comment was unkind and uncalled for. Really not what I would expect from a Christian. There are lots of reasons for financial hardships, especially in this economy. God does promise to provide for our needs, but he does not promise that we won't be poor or that we will not have financial hardships. I have not read where Standing Firm has indicated that he hasn't had his needs provided for or that he hasn't prayed for and trusted in God to provide. That is what we are promised, our needs provided for, not earthly material riches.

    Before we start condemning others let's remember that God asks different things of each of us. We are not all called to give the same amount or serve in the same way. However, God uses each of us for a unique purpose and his grace is truly a wonderful thing!


  14. When someone is attending a church that I do not approve of, sometimes if I have the right opportunity I may say something to them about it. The one thing that holds me back is so many times they will see it as an attack against them and or the church they attend. So many times I do not get into such a discussion, yet sometimes I will.

    All I will say is, that having read nearly every post that John has made and its numbers are above 39,000, I've never known John to attack anyone.

    The only thing I read into his post is concern for you.

    Plus, when one comes to a Independent Baptist forum and places in their signature that they attend an Episcopalian Church they ought to figure on comments being made about it, and possibly some one trying to show them the right way.

    As for me I choose not to go to forums other than Baptist forums, just as I do not attend churches that are not of the Baptist faith. I respect their right to meet together in church and or on the internet in a forum and to discuss what so ever they chose.

    Yes I know, some people believe all churches teaches the same thing, unfortunately that is untrue, and all church do not teach only Bible truths. And of course I believe we Independent Baptist teach God's truths. And I know for sure that the Episcopalian Church leads many down a false path to Christ thus giving them a false hope of being saved.

    I'm going to mention a book, its name is, "The Little Baptist," and it can be downloaded in PDF format by clicking on the title of the book. Its about a young girl whose family attends a Presbyterian Church, and the battle this girl goes through trying to understand how to be saved.


    First off, I'm going to go ahead and apologize for my part in derailing this thread.

    Secondly, my signature is perhaps ill thought out. It is a joke more than anything that most people I know think is funny and I think that we should all be able to laugh at ourselves from time to time. I'll gladly remove it if it offends for the sake of harmony. Now I've been posting on this forum for awhile because I enjoy the discussion here with fellow Christians. OBviously I do not post in the IFB-only areas because I am not IFB. I was not aware that it offended anyone or anyone thought that I should not be on here. Not everyone on this forum is IFB, and it is a public forum so I wasn't aware that I was doing anything wrong.

    Now you mention "show me the right way." Again, no one has ever asked me what I believe, what my church teaches, etc. Not once. So I fail to see how anyone can assume that I am going the wrong way. Just because Baptists teach the truth doesn't mean that others don't. I fail to see why an Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc cannot know God's saving grace from attending their church. I know first hand that we can and we do.



  15. If you read my post carefully you will notice my questions were not about the church you attend but about concern for you. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion I thought you were a new Christian but I assure you that was not on my mind. One can be a Christian one year and mature more in Christ than some who have professed Christ for 50 years. How long one has been in Christ isn't always an indicator or maturity or immaturity in Christ.

    Since you have brought it up, again, it's by biblical duty to ask why after 20 years of being a Christian you would be sitting in a liberal, unbiblical church. Scripture is clear that we should be open to and thankful for biblical admonition. I've not attacked you nor am I addressing you in a condescending manner. If you take note, what I put forth I proclaimed applied to myself and all professing Christians, not just you.

    If you are looking badly toward me because I'm concerned for you then I accept that. Two of the things which greatly hurt my heart is the idea of those who profess to be Christians yet will one day hear from Christ that He never knew them before He casts them into Hell, and the idea of those who profess to be Christian yet they fail to mature in Christ and not only will they suffer loss before entering heaven, there are all those such could have rigthly influenced for Christ yet they didn't because of their failure to OBey Christ.

    If I were ever a member of church that went astray and I failed to separate myself from such and find a biblical church home, I would hope the Lord would send someone along to admonish me. Brothers and sisters in Christ are to help one another be sure we are in Christ and to be sure we are growing in Christ and abiding in Christ, living according to His Word, for His glory and honour. It's not very Christian of us if we sit back and watch professing Christians go the wrong way, accept false teaching, be a part of unbiblical churches, walk in adultery, homosexuality, drunkenness, etc.

    You call yourself my sister in Christ and thus I care about you and love you in Christ. What love would it be if I failed to act upon it?

    If you profess to be a Christian and to be a follower of Christ then it's the duty of every other Christian, including myself, to help you along through reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness according to the Word of God. Loving you as my sister in Christ compels me, and should others, to desire the best for you in Christ.

    There is the possibility you don't want to fully follow Christ and if you tell me that's the case then I will be saddened, I will pray for you, but I will step back and allow the Lord to reach out to you through another and/or other means.


    I'm not even sure how to respond to this. I considered ignoring it, but it seems that everywhere I post lately you seem to find me and want to turn the conversation to what church I attend. I'm not sure why you think that my church is unbiblical or somehow wrong or why you think that I am not OBeying Christ or do not want to OBey Christ. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are sincere in your concern. However, if you are sincere, then it seems to me that you would try to find out if you have cause for concern rather than attacking me or whatever you want to call it by trying to discuss my church affiliation when responding to any post I make. I will challenge you again to do this on a topic for this purpose. If you don't want to, fine. But I can't help but thinking you are somewhat misinformed about my church and me and that you wouldn't think any church I was a part of was "biblical" unless it was an IFB church.



  16. Exactly..........to all the stuff on politics. CPR, I'm glad that you considered the source a "reliable one". That was my point......that newspaper is not exactly "conservative", hence my conclusion that we OUGHT to be sounding warning bells. If you google the subject, many Christians prOBably HAVE known about this for a while, but they did not jump on the bandwagon back in Feb. when this article was written. This is 6months later, and my sil just heard a radio broadcast on the subject. They have watched, they have waited. They are seeing changes coming about. As far as the other stuff on the thread.....way off topic, and I'm not going to comment. Freedom of worship is at the core of Freedom of Religion, but it is not all inclusive of the Christian walk and the liberties that we find in the Constitution of the U.S. Therefore, we should stand up and fight for those liberties while we can (if an individual believes that it is God's will for him/her to do so) and we should make the most of our opportunities to witness to those around us, and do our best to support those in missionwork because the time is getting shorter each day and our freedom to do so on a widescale basis may be taken away in the near future.


    I'll agree with that. I think this is something that every American, regardless of religious affiliation, should pay close attention to. I was merely trying to point out that this could be harmless since it appears that it is sometimes used interchangeably with "freedom of religion." I think it's important that we give fair consideration to all the facts instead of jumping all over someone who we may not agree with. If we have all the facts that makes us more credible, does that make sense?

    That being said, rights require us being vigilant to protect them. We have not maintained these rights for over 200 years by being passive. Our first amendment rights are so very important and any perceived attempt to chip away at them, however subtle, deserves attention.
  • Member Statistics

    6,088
    Total Members
    2,124
    Most Online
    shlomo
    Newest Member
    shlomo
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...