Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         33
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. 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. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 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.

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

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

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Scriptural distinctions between the nation of Israel & the "Church"


Seth Doty
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

None of that happened. What happened in 70 AD was that the city and the temple were both pretty much totally destroyed Completly destoyed. One writer, who, I cannot remember, said: "Zion was ploughed like a field." Josephus wrote "Jerusalem ... was so thoroughly razed to the ground by those that demolished it to its foundations, that nothing was left that could ever persuade visitors that it had once been a place of habitation." and left in ruins with the surviving Jews that escaped dispersing into other cities. It was the believing Jews who escaped when they saw the Roman armies of Cestius. The only other Jews who escaped were those who went over to the Romans, accepting Titus offer of clemency, but most of those trying to defect were murdered by their own countrymen, as they often had swallowed their gold te be able to take it with them, but they were cut open and robbed and killed. Then around 130 AD emperor Hadrian attempted to get rid of Jerusalem all together and build a roman city in its place with no Jews allowed resulting in yet another Jewish revolt since they hoped to re-build Jerusalem and the temple. (I did read that the wailing wall dates from that time as previously not one stone was left upon another.) Hadrian aka Adrian then sent troops to put down the revolt. When they succeeded, he announced in the senate that "Jerusalem is fallen." or in latin, "Hierosylma Est Perdita" and the senators cried "Hurrah, Hurrah, Hurrah." We still celebrate that when we give three cheers, "Hep Hep Hurrah" or more commonly Hip, Hip, Hurray." Looking at how much stuff has happened since the destruction of the temple and how relatively insignificant that was in the scope of history and how little was solved by it, it always amazes me when people try to act as if it is somehow nearly the grande finale in bible prophecy. I sometimes wonder if some have ever read the scriptures, Did not Christ even weep over jerusalem and these things that were to overtake her. Did he not say to the Scibes and Pharicees "Your house is left unto you desolate", and all these things would come upon that generation? The tribulation of those days was truly "Such as never was." because it was the vengence of God on the unbelieving Jews who "Filled up the measure of their fathers" when they murdered their Messiah," Matt. 23:30-32, 36. Luke 21: 22, Isaiah 61:2. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD is more akin to what Churchill said after some victories in North Africa during WW2 " This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

This thread is for the defining of Israel and the current position of NT believers and discussion of the scriptural passages dealing with each. In this opening post I hope to express some of the similarities, and yet point out that there are clear differences. I do not feel the scriptures support the idea that the church has "replaced" Israel.

First I will start with a couple of their similarities.

Israel is God's chosen people. NT believers are God's chosen people.
Specific promises were made to Israel. Specific promises have been made to NT believers.
Abraham was the physical father of the nation of Israel. Abraham is a spiritual father of NT Christianity.

Now for a couple differences.

The nation of Israel rejected Christ in unbelief. NT believers accept Christ in faith.
The fullness of God's blessing departed from Israel. The blessing came upon NT Christianity and Gentiles were "grafted in".
Blindness came upon Israel.(till the fullness of the gentiles come in) Any NT Christian has the opportunity for spiritual sight.

Now where the confusion starts for some is the many scriptural parallels drawn between the physical and the spiritual. For example lets take this passage:

Romans 9:1-8 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all ° Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.


Passages like this, when it is not compared to other scriptures, is where replacement theology comes from.

Here is another one that I will discuss a bit:

"Galatians 4:22- 31 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free."

Now before you decide this is proof that God is done with the nation of Israel lets look at what God said about the son of the bondwoman.


"Genesis 21:12-20 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept. And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation. And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink. And God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer."

The son of the bondwoman is still of the seed of Abraham in one sense, and God isn't finished with that son just because he has been cast out as can be seen here. The very name which God commanded he be given is a testament to that fact. The name "Ishmael" means essentially "God will hear". Notice that even while God is directing Ishmael to be cast out he is not sending him out to be destroyed or forgotten, and promises Abraham that he will make a nation out of Ishmael too even though Ishmael is the child of the flesh and Isaac is the child of the promise. Now we see from scripture that Abraham is a picture of faith, Hagar is a picture of the law, Ishmael is a picture of Israel after the flesh, and we know that bread is a picture of God's provision, and that water is a picture of the Word of God. Israel was cast out when they rejected Christ as the messiah, and metaphorically speaking they were sent forth with the Law, God's provision, and a limited amount of God's word. God's provision for Israel did not run out, but his word to Israel did, rather like the plumbline Amos saw the Lord set in the midst of the house of Israel in the seventh chapter of that book. As the water ran out Israel after the flesh withdrew from the law a certain distance, they are forced to ignore certain requirements like certain sacrifices because they have no temple. Nevertheless even though Israel after the flesh is nearly dead spiritually without the water of the Word of God one day the Lord God will hear their voice, the valley of dry bones will live, the angel of the Lord will bring back the Law to Israel after the flesh, for a season at least(the water was once again placed in a bottle), and once again they will have the water of the Word of God. God will be with them but they will be in the wilderness, which is a picture of solitude(post rapture), and they will be spiritually strong warriors for the Lord.


Of course that is just one passage of an OT "ensample" given unto us and scripture is full of teaching on the subject.



Isn't the Book of Hebrews written to the Hebrew believers? Edited by lettheredeemedsayso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
lettheredeemedsayso
Isn't the Book of Hebrews written to the Hebrew believers?

Believers & waverers - there are plenty of warnings against unbelief, & encouragements to persevere.

The letter was written while the temple (tabernacle) still stood, so while Israel was still a nation rather than a scattered people.

The letter is relevant to all believers, Jew & Gentile, as it provides a key to understanding the OT.

Were you making a specific point relating to the thread?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member


Isn't the Book of Hebrews written to the Hebrew believers?


Hebrews is written to Jews in the last days.

Hebrews 1:1-2

[1] God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
[2] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

James is written to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.

James 1:1

[1]James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

There is a reason why these are called the Jewish Epistles.

We keep looking backwards in how these epistles may have been applied when they still have much prophetic relevance. You see this same thing in the OT.

The "last days" are the last days and not the last 2,000 years. So the writer of Hebrews may have been writing to a group of Jews in his day but the book still has prophetic significance for a Jewish renmant during the Tribulation who are waiting on the Second Coming of Christ. Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites




Hebrews is written to Jews in the last days.

Hebrews 1:1-2

[1] God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
[2] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

James is written to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.

James 1:1

[1]James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

There is a reason why these are called the Jewish Epistles.

We keep looking backwards in how these epistles may have been applied when they still have much prophetic relevance. You see this same thing in the OT.

The "last days" are the last days and not the last 2,000 years. So the writer of Hebrews may have been writing to a group of Jews in his day but the book still has prophetic significance for a Jewish renmant during the Tribulation who are waiting on the Second Coming of Christ.



that being said wouldn't the book of Hebrews and Revelation be evidence that God is not finished with the nation of Israel?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


that being said wouldn't the book of Hebrews and Revelation be evidence that God is not finished with the nation of Israel?

God is not finished with anyone. All that God has spoken will come to pass.

Isaiah 40:8

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.



2 Timothy 3:16-17

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

My comments




Hebrews is written to Jews in the last days.

Hebrews 1:1-2

[1] God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
[2] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;



James is written to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.

James 1:1

[1]James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

There is a reason why these are called the Jewish Epistles.

We keep looking backwards in how these epistles may have been applied when they still have much prophetic relevance. You see this same thing in the OT.

The "last days" are the last days and not the last 2,000 years. So the writer of Hebrews may have been writing to a group of Jews in his day but the book still has prophetic significance for a Jewish renmant during the Tribulation who are waiting on the Second Coming of Christ.

Why did you not embolden THESE last days ?

I am used to people arguing that the time indicators of Revelation do not have their obvious meaning, but never have I heard the suggestion that the last days were not these last days, i.e. the days the writer & his readers were living in.

Please note the urgency, the immediacy of his appeals. He is writing to "we" & "us" not some future dispensation.

Hbr 2:1 ¶ Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let [them] slip.
2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard [him];

Hbr 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

The prophetic 40 years, of the wilderness & Psalm 95, & in effect prophesied by the Lord (this generation) were fast running out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Wilchbla:
The "last days" are the last days and not the last 2,000 years. So the writer of Hebrews may have been writing to a group of Jews in his day but the book still has prophetic significance for a Jewish renmant during the Tribulation who are waiting on the Second Coming of Christ.


That is a distortion of Scripture - Paul writes these last days & the straightforward meaning is the last days of the nation, before the destruction prophesied by the Lord. (Olivet prophecy.) Paul is writing to his readers - Jewish Christians & non-Christians.

I am not discussing disp'ism versus covenant theology, nor premil versus amil, but the simple meaning of Scripture.

John writes: 1Jo 2:18 ¶ Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Peter quoted Joel when he preached: Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh:....
....
21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
....
40 ¶ And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member


That is a distortion of Scripture - Paul writes these last days & the straightforward meaning is the last days of the nation, before the destruction prophesied by the Lord. (Olivet prophecy.) Paul is writing to his readers - Jewish Christians & non-Christians.

I am not discussing disp'ism versus covenant theology, nor premil versus amil, but the simple meaning of Scripture.

John writes: 1Jo 2:18 ¶ Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Peter quoted Joel when he preached: Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh:....
....
21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
....
40 ¶ And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.



Where did Paul write "these last days"? You don't know who the writer of Hebrews is so don't go there. There's a good reason we don't know who the writer of Hebrews is. And the prophecy of Joel was never totally fulfilled. The sun didn't turn dark and the moon didn't change into blood. There was no fire, smoke, etc. before THE NOTABLE DAY OF THE LORD (i.e. the Second Coming of Christ). So either Peter was lying, being poetic or the whole deal was put on hold for a reason.

When will Hebrews 1:2 take place? In the "last days". The last days in scripture is ALWAYS the period of time just prior the Second Coming of Christ. Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member




that being said wouldn't the book of Hebrews and Revelation be evidence that God is not finished with the nation of Israel?


If you read the book of Hebrews with the mind set that it's speaking to the future remnant in Israel that will be waiting patiently for the Lord's return during the tribulation you'll find out that the book makes much more sense. I'm not saying that their isn't doctrine for the believer in the church age but it is primarily speaking to a future remnant. This is nothing new. The OT was written this way on many occasion. Many passages in the OT prophets were directed towards a future group of people that didnt even exist at the time of the writing. For example: Isaiah 53. Well, the NT does this also. The mistake everyone makes is thinking that the whole NT is written for believers now with nothing to say for those during the tribulation AFTER the church has been raptured out. The church will be gone therefore the people during the tribulaion are not part of the bride of Christ though they are still saved by the blood. This explains Hebrews and why passages clearly state that if one backslides or takes the mark they can lose their salvation. That's because Hebrews is directed towards a totally different group of people then the NT church in this age prior to the rapture. I just can't understand why Christians can't grasp this. It makes so much sense when you realize this and the scriptures open up and all the alleged contradictions are sweeped away and things begin to make sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Does anyone else on the forum agree with Wilchbla?

Wilchbla:
If you read the book of Hebrews with the mind set that it's speaking to the future remnant in Israel that will be waiting patiently for the Lord's return during the tribulation you'll find out that the book makes much more sense.

Sorry, but the "mind set" I use to read Scripture letters is to seek to understand them in the normal way, not to impose a hermeneutic.

Your views aren't suggested by the Scofield notes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Wilchbla:
Where did Paul write "these last days"? You don't know who the writer of Hebrews is so don't go there. There's a good reason we don't know who the writer of Hebrews is.

I wasn't arguing about the author, but specifically Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son. The days they were living in, having received the words of the Son of God in person.

And the prophecy of Joel was never totally fulfilled. The sun didn't turn dark Mat 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour. and the moon didn't change into blood. There was no fire, Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. smoke, etc. before THE NOTABLE DAY OF THE LORD (i.e. the Second Coming of Christ). So either Peter was lying, being poetic or the whole deal was put on hold for a reason. At Pentecost there was no possible reason why, as you put it, "the whole deal" should be "put on hold." Full & free forgiveness was preached. There may be a poetic element, but the appearance of the moon is not recorded, nor is smoke.

Note that Peter declares: Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God......

When will Hebrews 1:2 take place? In the "last days". The last days in scripture is ALWAYS the period of time just prior the Second Coming of Christ.
No. Have you looked at the 8 verses in Scripture where "last days" are mentioned? e.g. James accuses his readers:
Jam 5:3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.

The 60s were the last days of the nation before the AD 70 destruction.
Edited by Covenanter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Does it really matter who wrote it? I think Paul did. Yet what counts is its from God.

Heb 1:1 ¶ God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

And all Scriptures are given to us, they are is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

And the one that says different, disagrees with the Word of God

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Covenator, I really don't care if anyone in here agrees with me or not though I know of at least two posters in this forum who do. The book of Hebrews clearly is clearly written to Hebrews in the last days. I don't know how much clearer it can be.
I also find it laughable you think the AD60s were the last days.

Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Are your saying that nothing in the book of Hebrews applies to us today, including the verses below?



Heb 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
Heb 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Covenator, I really don't care if anyone in here agrees with me or not though I know of at least two posters in this forum who do. The book of Hebrews clearly is clearly written to Hebrews in the last days. I don't know how much clearer it can be.
I also find it laughable you think the AD60s were the last days.


So you think that bthe book of Hebrews has nothing to say to us today?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recent Achievements

    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      Prayer Warrior
    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      Thumb's Up
    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      First Post
    • StandInTheGap earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 0 replies
    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 1 reply
    • Razor

      Psalms 139 Psalm 139:9-10
      9. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; 10. even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy righthand shall hold me. 
       
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West  »  Pastor Scott Markle

      Advanced revelation, then...prophecy IS advanced revelation in the context of the apostles.
      I really do not know where you are going with this. The Bible itself has revelations and prophecies and not all revelations are prophecies.
      Paul had things revealed to him that were hid and unknown that the Gentiles would be fellow heirs.
      How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Eph 3:3-9
      And I do not mean this as a Hyper-dispensationalist would, for there were people in Christ before Paul (Rom. 16:7). This is not prophecy for there are none concerning the Church age in the O.T..
      Israel rejected the New Wine (Jesus Christ) and said the Old Wine (law) was better, had they tasted the New Wine there would be no church age or mystery as spoken above. to be revealed.
      It was a revealed mystery. Sure there are things concerning the Gentiles after the this age. And we can now see types in the Old Testament (Boaz and Ruth) concerning a Gentile bride, but this is hindsight.
      Peter could have had a ham sandwich in Acts 2, but he did not know it till later, by revelation. But this has nothing to do with 1John 2;23 and those 10 added words in italics. Where did they get them? Did the violate Pro. 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Where did they get this advance revelation? Was it from man, God or the devil?
        I just read your comment and you bypassed what I wrote concerning book arrangement, chapters being added and verse numberings and such. There is no scripture support for these either, should we reject these?
      Happy New Year
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West

      Seeing it is Christ----mas time and I was answering question on Luke 2:33 concerning Jesus, Mary and Joseph . I thought it would be fitting to display a poem i wrote concerning the matter.
      SCRIPTURAL MARY

      I WALK NOT ON WATER NOR CHANGE IT TO WINE
      SO HEARKEN O’ SINNER TO THIS STORY OF MINE
      I, AM A DAUGHTER OF ABRAHAM SINNER BY BIRTH
      A HAND MAID OF LOW ESTATE USED HERE ON EARTH
      MY HAIR IS NOT GENTILE BLOND, I HAVE NOT EYES OF BLUE
      A MOTHER OF MANY CHILDREN A DAUGHTER OF A JEW
      FOR JOSEPH MY HUSBAND DID HONOUR OUR BED
      TO FATHER OUR CHILDREN WHO NOW ARE ALL DEAD
      BUT I SPEAK NOT OF THESE WHO I LOVED SO WELL
      BUT OF THE FIRST BORN WHICH SAVED ME FROM HELL
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               2
      WHEN I WAS A VIRGIN UNKNOWN BY MAN
      THE ANGEL OF GOD SPOKE OF GOD’S PLAN
      FOR I HAD BEEN CHOSEN A FAVOUR VESSEL OF CLAY
      TO BARE THE SON OF THE HIGHEST BY AN UNUSUAL WAY
      FOR THE SCRIPTURE FORETOLD OF WHAT WAS TO BE
      SO MY WOMB GOD FILLED WHEN HE OVER SHADOW ME
      BUT THE LAW OF MOSES DID DEMAND MY LIFE
      WOULD JOSEPH MY BETROTHED MAKE ME HIS WIFE
      I THOUGHT ON THESE THINGS WITH SO NEEDLESS FEARS
      BUT A DREAM HE RECEIVED ENDED ALL FEARS
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                              3
      THEN MY SOUL DID REJOICE IN GOD MY SAVIOR
      HE SCATTERED THE PROUD AND BLESS ME WITH FAVOR
      O’ THE RICH ARE EMPTY, THE HUNGRY HAVE GOOD THINGS
      FOR THE THRONE OF DAVID WOULD HAVE JESUS THE KING
      BUT BEFORE I DELIVERED THE MAN CHILD OF OLD
      CAESAR WITH TAXES DEMANDED OUR GOLD
      TO THE CITY OF DAVID JOSEPH AND I WENT
      ON A BEAST OF BURDEN OUR STRENGTH NEAR SPEND
      NO ROOM AT An INN, BUT A STABLE WAS FOUND
      WITH STRAW AND DUNG LAID ON THE GROUND
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
                                                  4
      MY MATRIX WAS OPEN IN A PLACE SO PROFANE
      FROM THE GLORY OF GLORIES TO A BEGGAR’S DOMAIN
      SO WE WRAPPED THE CHILD GIVEN TO THE HEATHEN A STRANGER
      NO REPUTATION IS SOUGHT TO BE BORN IN A MANGER
      HIS STAR WAS ABOVE US THE HOST OF HEAVEN DID SING
      FOR SHEPHERDS AND WISE MEN WORSHIP ONLY THE KING
      BUT HEROD THAT DEVIL SOUGHT FOR HIS SOUL
      AND MURDER RACHEL’S CHILDREN UNDER TWO YEARS OLD
      BUT JOSEPH MY HUSBAND WAS WARNED IN A DREAM
      SO WE FLED INTO EGYPT BECAUSE OF HIS SCHEME
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               5
      SO THE GIVER OF LIFE, THE ROCK OF ALL AGES
      GREW UP TO FULFILL THE HOLY PAGES
      HE PREACH WITH AUTHORITY LIKE NONE BEFORE
      PLEASE TRUST HIS WORDS AND NOT THE GREAT WHORE
      HER BLACK ROBE PRIEST FILL THEIR LIPS WITH MY NAME
      WITH BLASPHEMOUS PRAISE, DAMMATION AND SHAME
      THERE ARE NO NAIL PRINTS IN MY HANDS, MY BODY DID NOT ARISE
      NOR, AM A DEMON OF FATIMA FLOATING IN THE SKY
      THERE IS NO DEITY IN MY VEINS FOR ADAM CAME FROM SOD
      FOR I, AM, MOTHER OF THE SON OF MAN NOT THE MOTHER OF GOD
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
      6
      FOR MY SOUL WAS PURCHASED BY GOD UPON THE CROSS
      FOR MY SINS HE DID SUFFER AN UNMEASURABLE COST
      I WILL NOT STEAL HIS GLORY WHO ROSE FROM THE DEAD
      ENDURING SPIT AND THORNS PLACED ON HIS HEAD
      YET, IF YOU WISH TO HONOR ME THEN GIVE ME NONE AT ALL
      BUT TRUST THE LAMB WHO STOOL IN PILATE’S HALL
      CALL NOT ON THIS REDEEMED WOMAN IN YOUR TIME OF FEAR
      FOR I WILL NOT GIVE ANSWER NEITHER WILL I HEAR
      AND WHEN THE BOOKS ARE OPEN AT THE GREAT WHITE THRONE
      I AMEN YOUR DAMNATION THAT TRUST NOT HIM ALONE
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, O’ SINNER TRUST ME NOT

                       WRITTEN BY BRO. WEST
       
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...