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.

Church of Christ


DennisD
 Share

Recommended Posts




Tim, first allow me to say that there is no passage, not one, in the NT nor in the OT that explicitly states, "thou shalt not use mechanical instruments." But then again you can not provide even 1 passage in the NT (which is what we are under now) that gives you a command to use it, nor an example of their use in NT worship, nor can you provide even 1 passage that implies (inferrence) that we are to use them. Where is your authority? You go back to the OT to try to find it. We are not under the OT any longer.

No, I don't place anything above scripture, but I do recognize the fact that the example (both in the NT and in secular writtings) of the apostles and others of that time is a valid example to look at. I do believe that inspired men carry more weight that does those who have nothing more that men's traditions to offer. The inspired apostles and others of that time did not use them. You use them, not because you have authority for it but because of men's traditions which began with the catholic church around 1000 AD.


If you could provide one scripture reference which forbids the use of a piano or other "mechanical" music device in New Testament Christian churches someone might listen to you. Otherwise, the CoC is no different than the Catholic Church in that regard, dogma/history of the church carry more weight than scripture.

Your argument holds no water. If it held water then, you could not use a mechanical device to attend worship services. That's right NO CARS allowed for travel to worship services. If I were an English teacher and you were writing a paper I would have to tell you your argument for your supposition is invalid. You're basing your argument on pure preference and dogmatic tradition from your church.
"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." -Hebrews 10:25 No where in the O.T. or N.T. can you find a scripture telling you to get in a mechanical device to attend "assembling" i.e. worship services.

MODIFIED BELOW...QUOTING YOU...
first allow me to say that there is no passage, not one, in the NT nor in the OT that explicitly states, "thou shalt not use mechanical instruments transportation." But then again you can not provide even 1 passage in the NT (which is what we are under now) that gives you a command to use it, nor an example of their use in NT worship, nor can you provide even 1 passage that implies (inferrence) that we are to use them. Where is your authority? You go back to the OT to try to find it. We are not under the OT any longer.


I do recognize the fact that the example (both in the NT and in secular writtings) of the apostles and others of that time is a valid example to look at. I do believe that inspired men carry more weight that than does do those who have nothing more that men's traditions to offer. The inspired apostles and others of that time did not use them. You use them, not because you have authority for it but because of men's traditions which began with the catholic church around 1000 AD invention of the automobile around 1900 AD.


Based on your argument...START WALKING to Sunday Services.

Can't you see how absurd your argument is?
Now, on the other hand, if you want to say you don't use mechanical instruments in service because of preference, that's fine. Don't use them because of preference but, don't attempt to say it is because you are following the teaching of the Bible. Don't attempt to make a doctrine out of something that is not clearly spelled out in scripture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It's amazing how dispensationally wacky Church of Christ folks get. I showed one how musical instruments were used over and over again in the Old Testament during praise, but he threw that out because it was OT. Then some lady in their church who had been committing adultery repented and shaved all her hair off as a form of cleansing, something they got from the Old Testament. :smilie_loco:4

Edited by Rick Schworer
Link to comment
Share on other sites


The topic, church of Christ, is such a broad subject, and I answered the question if using music instruments was a sin with a no, yet as I said, this other is of much greater importance, in fact, its the most important.

You asked, "How many times is the question "What must I do to be saved?" Of which I have already answer, Paul says it this way, that is should a person want to be saved..

Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Ro 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

To be saved, confess the Lord Jesus with your mouth, believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, and thou shall be saved. Simple isn't it, not even no baptizing. In other words he is saying the same thing that Ephesians 2:8.9, says

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Grace, plus faith, to be saved, there is nothing possible for you do in order to gain salvation for its not of self, not of works, its a gif, yet you just can't resist adding to it, water baptism, its so hard to accept a free gift, it just seem there has to be something done to get that gift of salvation outside of faith and believing, so many add water baptism. When in fact, Jesus is enough. Jesus saves, water, a baptistery, has never saved anyone.

If, that is if I believe one had to be baptized in order to be saved, myself being a Baptist pastor, I would have to take a baptistery every where I went just in case there was not a body of water handy just in case I come across someone wanting to be saved. There is no way that I could witness to anyone, talking to them about being saved, telling them that they will have to attend the next church services in order to be baptized and fit for heaven, and that it they died before they could be baptized that they could not enter heaven. But I don't have to fear that, because God's Word tells us, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

Now I know why that beautiful old song says, "Amazing grace, and not, "Amazing Baptistery," for its all about that amazing grace that our Lord shown and offered to such worms as us.


I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the Lord’s church and specific topics related to the church of Christ. I must admit that it is a lot of work trying to have multiple discussions with so many people on multiple topics; I will do my best and hope that you will forgive me if I miss anyone’s specific issue. In order to try to better handle this, I will write on the specific issues rather than trying to answer each and every post separately. I will identify the specific person and post # which is found in the top right corner. I hope that this will be helpful and easier to keep up with. It will certainly cut down on the number of post that I am putting on here.

Now, to the specific issue of salvation: Jerry, you are at this moment the only one focusing on this issue so it should be rather easy to keep up with the conversation. I will first deal with the specific passages/issues that you put forth and then will turn to my previous question.

You present some wonderful passages which discuss salvation. Romans 10:9-10 and Eph 2:8-10 (you only list 8-9 but 10 must be included) are two passages which I frequently use in discussion of the topic of salvation. These passages discuss the importance of Grace, faith, confession and the role that each plays in man’s salvation.

First, we see that Eph 2:8-10 clearly teaches us that we are saved by grace. This is of course God’s part. God has graciously given us that which we certainly do not deserve and that is a means by which we can be saved. We know that He has given that means to you and to me and to every person who has or will ever live. Titus 2:11 tells us that that saving grace has appeared to all men. We know that not all men will be saved so there must be something more. I believe that is a simple thing to understand and that you and I would agree on that point.

Obviously, we can see the importance of faith. Eph 2:8-10 not only tells us that we are saved by grace but that it is by grace through faith. No problem there. We both agree on that point. We can further see that faith is a part of salvation in Rom 10:9-10. We must believe that God has raised him (Jesus) from the dead. There are many other passages that teach that faith is required. We can think of John 3:16, Acts 8:31, etc.

We can also see that confession is important. I don’t think that you and I would have any disagreement on that fact. Rom 10:9-10 tells us that we must confess. Jesus tells us in Matt 10:32-33 that we must confess Him before men. We read in Acts 8:37 of the Ethiopian Eunuch and his confession.

You did not mention repentance but I doubt we would have much problem with agreeing on the need to repent. The Bible certainly teaches us that we must repent. Jesus stated as much in Luke 13:3-5. We are told to do so in Acts 2:38, 3:19 etc. We are given the example of Saul/Paul would was certainly penitent (Acts 9, 22, 26). I believe you would agree with this fact. Please correct me if I am wrong? I might add that neither of the two passages you mentioned discusses repentance. This demonstrates that we can not take these two passages alone and say that that is all that is involved.

Now, where we clearly have an issue is the subject of baptism. Your disagreement is not with me but with the Word of God since it is what tells us that we must be baptized. We are given the express statement “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…” That isn’t all that difficult to understand unless we don’t wish to understand it. Now, I am certain that you will point out that Jesus did not mention baptism in the second part of Mark 16:16. But this is simply ignoring the fact that He did say it in the first part. Let us also remember that if I don’t believe then I won’t be baptized. After all, what would I accomplish other than to get wet? We can read in many other passages that we must be baptized. Rom 6:3ff, Gal 3:27, Col 2:12, Acts 2:38, 22:16, etc. I realize that some might say that this is not speaking of water baptism but it is in fact speaking exactly of that. There is but 1 baptism (Eph 4:5) That baptism is clearly identified in Acts 19:1ff, John 3:23, Acts 8:36ff.

Now, as to my question: I asked how many times the question “what must I do to be saved?” (in one form or another) in the NT. The answer is 4. I will hold off about putting any further info and give you the chance to look these four up. I hope that you will and see what the answer is in each of the 4.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, let us turn to the topic of mechanical instruments (MI). There are multiple people involved in this discussion so I will attempt to answer any and all points in this one post rather than posting individual replies. Forgive me if I miss one of your points; I will try my best to get to each one. Again, I will try to post the specific post number which is found in the top right hand of each post.

Seth, (post 38), you failed to list even one passage that says that it is ok to use MI in NT worship services. The passages which you did list (Matt 5:17, 1 Cor 10:11, 2 Tim 3:16-17) does not in any way justify MI. Yes, the OT is inspired. Yes, it is there for our benefit, for our learning (Rom 15:4) and yes, Christ came to fulfill rather than to destroy. He did fulfill and it was nailed to His cross (Col 2:14).

Here is a thought for you. What does 2 Peter 1:3 tell us? It tells us that God has provided to us everything pertaining to life and Godliness (of course we are under the NT which is what Peter is discussing). We are not told that we are to use MI in NT worship. Therefore, it must not pertain to life and Godliness. Rom 10:17 tells us that faith comes from the Word of God (NT in our case). We are not told to use MI in the NT worship. Therefore it must not be of faith that MI is used.

It amazes me how everyone keeps bringing up things which do not have anything to do with worshipping God. Toilets (post 9), English translations (38), Buildings (38), Automobiles (41), shoes (40) are all brought up to try to justify the use of MI in NT worship. Again, not one of these has anything to do with proper worship. Not one of these in anyway changes the worship of God. If this is the best anyone has then there isn’t much that you have to “hang your hat on” in relation to MI.

Seth, you say that “Biblically Christians have liberty to do anything they like as long as it is not sin in and of itself, and is not a bad testimony and stumbling block to others that leads them astray.” I suppose that you can use hamburgers and coke on the Lord’s Supper if you so desire. We both know better than that. Yet we have no command not to. The Bible is clear as to how man is to worship God.

It says that we are to do so in spirit and in truth (John 4:23-24). Remember that truth is in fact the Word of God (John 17:17). We will focus our discussion on the singing aspect of worship rather than each aspect of worship. We are told to sing (Eph 5:19, Col 3:16). I am told to do so with understanding (1 Cor 14:15). I am told what to sing and what singing is for (Eph 5:19, Col 3:16). Yet, I am not told in even 1 passage in the NT that I am to play a MI. Surely God is smart enough to know what He wants, isn’t He? Surely if He want MI, he would have given command or even an example of their use in the NT and yet He did not do so. Why?

I so often hear someone make the argument that God has not told us NOT to use them. He did not give us any command NOT to use them. IF only He would have said thou shalt NOT use MI, I would not use them. How many of those same people would agree with that same argument if it was turned against them. What if “Bob” was to go to the repair shop and tell the mechanic that he wanted his car’s oil changed? He leaves the car there and goes shopping with his wife. Upon returning a few hours later he finds a bill which is not only for an oil change but also includes 4 new tires and a paint job. Bob tells his mechanic that he did not authorize him to do such. To which the mechanic replies…you did not tell me not to either. Would Bob pay the bill? Would the law expect him to? Why is it we would have no problem understanding this in our own lives but when God tells us what he wants, we think he also has to tell us what he did not want?

Noah is a prime example of what could have been done. God said use Gopher wood. What if Noah had have chosen to include pine and cedar and maybe some oak, after all, God did not say not to, did He?

Jerry, you are talking about a pitch pipe. (39) We do not use a pitch pipe at the congregation that I am with though I have seen it used. It is blown to find the pitch and then put away prior to singing. It is not used as a part of the worship service and does not change worship to God in any way. If it was used while singing, I would be the first to say that the Bible does not permit it.

Covenant (40) once again you go to the OT. We are under the NT. Please provide even 1 verse in the NT which authorizes the use of MI in NT worship. Until then, you are simply offering your own desire over that of God’s Word.

Covenant, sin is sin. It is all the transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4) or failing to do that which we know is good (James 4:17). The wages of sin is death Rom 6:23 and it separates us from God (Isa 59:1-2).

But, we are not abiding in Him if we are not continuing to obey Him.

Rick ( 42), Rick, Rick Rick…..where do I even begin? Are you suggesting that because one person who claims to be a member of the church of Christ did something which has no bases on scripture (the lady you mentioned) that we all are somehow confused? Surely you can see the lack of any understanding in that? I see so many different views among the IFB on this very site. Am I to take the views of one and then label you as believing that even though you don’t? Are there those who profess to be faithful members of the Lord’s church who teach and/or practice error? Certainly…I can name more than one; but whatever any one person teaches, the word still says what it says and it does not authorize the use of MI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Is it really profitable to go down this road again? :icon_rolleyes:

I, for one, would be interested in learning the doctrine of the CoC, but can we please avoid repeating this whole 'baptism & salvation' discussion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Is it really profitable to go down this road again? :icon_rolleyes:

I, for one, would be interested in learning the doctrine of the CoC, but can we please avoid repeating this whole 'baptism & salvation' discussion?


We could talk about church membership and salvation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

coc333 again, yawn.gif, it seems to me you can use the OT when convenient (your reference to Isaiah), and when Paul wrote the book of Romans there were only 5 other NT (he had writen)+/- books written, the Word of God in existence at that time was the OT. Just my twocents.gif

Edited by Bro Jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites


It amazes me how everyone keeps bringing up things which do not have anything to do with worshipping God. Toilets (post 9), English translations (38), Buildings (38), Automobiles (41), shoes (40) are all brought up to try to justify the use of MI in NT worship. Again, not one of these has anything to do with proper worship. Not one of these in anyway changes the worship of God. If this is the best anyone has then there isn’t much that you have to “hang your hat on” in relation to MI.


There is no doudt in my mind that you are amazed and easily at that. I'm beginning to understand...if you have no Biblical basis for your Church dogma then you resort to Catholic style avoidance. CoC and RCC both have two Cs in them...I see the similarity now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Is it really profitable to go down this road again? :icon_rolleyes:

I, for one, would be interested in learning the doctrine of the CoC, but can we please avoid repeating this whole 'baptism & salvation' discussion?



I cannot understand you making this comment, salvation is the most important thing, without it a soul will go to hell to be punished forever. There is never a season that it is not proper to speak about salvation. And without salvation a person cannot under stand God, its a life heart changing experience.

And I can't imagine anyone being opposed to the path to salvation to be proclaim, unless its a lost person that knows not God. And we know quite well that the lost cannot discern God's Word.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yes, until they are 1st saved, they cannot understand spiritual implications of God's Word.

Seems only a lost person and or one that holds to the Calvinist doctrine would oppose to seeing a plan of salvation laid out in a place were a lost person might be. But that is off topic under this topic. But salvation is never off topic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

[

Seth, you say that “Biblically Christians have liberty to do anything they like as long as it is not sin in and of itself, and is not a bad testimony and stumbling block to others that leads them astray.” I suppose that you can use hamburgers and coke on the Lord’s Supper if you so desire. We both know better than that. Yet we have no command not to. The Bible is clear as to how man is to worship God.


Yes. If a church wanted to have hamburgers and softdrinks at the Lords supper in addition to the unleavened bread and grape juice that specifically represents the body and blood of the Lord they would have the liberty to do so as long as it wasn't a situation like the one in the Corinthian church where they were sinning because some were bring large amounts of food and partying and even getting drunk(sin in and of itself) while others were poor and didn't even have enough to eat and were being shamed by the more wealthy. It might seem odd, since most of us are probably used to a tiny cup and a little piece of a "cracker" instead of a real meal but there wouldn't be anything "wrong" with eating a full meal or any acceptable food or drink items along with the unleavened bread and grape juice provided it was done in a careful manner that did not invite sin. That would mean making sure no one was tempted toward gluttony, food was fairly distributed so that some were not ending up with a lot of the "good stuff" while others were getting stuff not nearly so good and not much of it at that, etc. The hassles of regulating that properly as well as the difficulty of providing enough food for everyone is probably why the majority of churches started using the tiny cup and little piece of cracker instead of a real meal. That preserves the symbolism which is the most important aspect, makes sure everything is fair and equal, and certainly doesn't tempt anyone to gluttony. Edited by Seth-Doty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, perhaps I have not been as clear as I need to be. I am not saying that the OT is not useful. I am not saying that we can not use it to learn principles. What I am saying and what the Bible does teach is that we do not look to the OT to know what “acts of worship” that we are taught to offer to the Lord. We are not to follow the OT commands. I hope that I am a bit clearer in what I am saying now. Certainly the Word is clear even when we are not.

Tim, you are funny.

Seth, you are not. All I can say is WOW!!!!!!......WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites





I cannot understand you making this comment, salvation is the most important thing, without it a soul will go to hell to be punished forever. There is never a season that it is not proper to speak about salvation. And without salvation a person cannot under stand God, its a life heart changing experience.

And I can't imagine anyone being opposed to the path to salvation to be proclaim, unless its a lost person that knows not God. And we know quite well that the lost cannot discern God's Word.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yes, until they are 1st saved, they cannot understand spiritual implications of God's Word.

Seems only a lost person and or one that holds to the Calvinist doctrine would oppose to seeing a plan of salvation laid out in a place were a lost person might be. But that is off topic under this topic. But salvation is never off topic.



Jerry, I must say that I agree with you in as much as it is always the right time to discuss salvation.

Obviously, we do not agree on what in fact in involved in salvation nor on some of the other comments you made in this post but it is always the right time to discuss salvation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Tim, you are funny.

Seth, you are not. All I can say is WOW!!!!!!......WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Even in the OT David had the liberty to eat the shewbread that was technically only lawful for the priests to eat since he understood the meaning of it, how much more would we have liberty in the NT age to eat a full meal in at the "Lords supper" considering that there is nothing that would say otherwise and fully understanding the meaning of his body and shed blood and victory over sin and death? Anything I could eat or drink in good conscience at any time I could eat or drink in equally good conscience at a supper in remembrance of Christ where the unleavened bread, the symbol of his body and his holiness, and the grape juice, the symbol of his blood and sacrifice was eaten. Why not? Can't think of any reason why not but habit, tradition, and the potential problems with doing it on a congregational level that I mentioned in a previous post.

Jesus is Lord of the Lord's supper as well as the sabbath. :wink

"1 Corinthians 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Jerry, I must say that I agree with you in as much as it is always the right time to discuss salvation.

Obviously, we do not agree on what in fact in involved in salvation nor on some of the other comments you made in this post but it is always the right time to discuss salvation.


I didn't take it as so much an "objection" to talking about salvation issues as being tired of the exact same stony ground being gone over again in a short period of time. How long or how much seed to throw on stony ground? I personally don't mind it being discussed but I don't think any of us are under any illusions as to the result. Coc333 will insist baptism is part of salvation and that we are ignoring the scriptures, and pretty much everyone else will say in various ways that he is a unbiblical heretic and that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God and is the first step of obedience to Christ rather than having anything to do with salvation. End of story. Edited by Seth-Doty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist



I didn't take it as so much an "objection" to talking about salvation issues as being tired of the exact same stony ground being gone over again in a short period of time. How long or how much seed to throw on stony ground? I personally don't mind it being discussed but I don't think any of us are under any illusions as to the result. Coc333 will insist baptism is part of salvation and that we are ignoring the scriptures, and pretty much everyone else will say in various ways that he is a unbiblical heretic and that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God and is the first step of obedience to Christ rather than having anything to do with salvation. End of story.


You never know, but if you completely surrender and not bring it up, it surely will never happen, and it is of utmost importance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites




I didn't take it as so much an "objection" to talking about salvation issues as being tired of the exact same stony ground being gone over again in a short period of time. How long or how much seed to throw on stony ground? I personally don't mind it being discussed but I don't think any of us are under any illusions as to the result. Coc333 will insist baptism is part of salvation and that we are ignoring the scriptures, and pretty much everyone else will say in various ways that he is a unbiblical heretic and that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God and is the first step of obedience to Christ rather than having anything to do with salvation. End of story.

I think the misconception arises because in the NT baptism was so closely associated with the conversion experience: it was the automatic and immediate response to having repented and called upon the Lord by faith....Hence "repent and be baptized" is said in the same breath. But the Scriptures clearly and repeatedly repudiate any doctrine which says we are saved by any human works which we perform. Baptism, then, being a "work," has absolutely no efficacy to save us. Coc has demonstrated for all of us the danger of taking just a few verses out of the context of the whole NT, and using them to contradict other just as clear verses. "Baptism saves" is a clear contradition of "not of works" (Eph.), "not by works of righteousness" (Titus), etc. (don't want to take the time to list out all the verses we already know).

Seems like we all know what each other believes about salvation. We cannot convince anyone of the truth; we all must be convinced by the Holy Spirit as we read His Word. So, it sorta seems that discussions like this one are pretty useless...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I can think of two men right off, they were both hardened, for you to have known them you would have thought they were the brothers of the devil himself. I'm glad no one gave up on them, for you see, they both made a profession of faith and wanted to be baptized, and even attended church. Wow, to met them before and after, you would have thought they were different people after their conversion. Yet the Word does speak about the new man, and the Word can do for a lost man.

I even remember preaching at a Baptist Church one night, a man and a woman walked the aisle to be save. They had visited this Baptist Church on an impulse that night, they were members in good standing of a local church of Christ. Maybe someone felt it was not useless to tell them, Tell Me The Old Story and that is why they were in that church that night. They professed faith in Jesus Christ and wanted to be baptized.

Ro 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

How shall they hear, if everyone thinks its useless? How can the holy Spirit work, if we think its useless?

You never know when the seed is planted, if its not planted, the Holy Spirit cannot do its part. I hope I never get to the point I think its useless and I give up.

I stand amazed at my Baptist brothers and sister being tired of hearing about salvation and thinking its useless.

Being near 65, I could give more examples, yet that ought to be enough.

Hey, its not useless, the Word is still powerful.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart

Its just as powerful as ever, unless you hide it under the bushel thinking its useless. Still, even at near 65, "I Love To Tell The Story," and I love for people to "Tell Me The Old Story." I never tire of it as some seem to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


I think the misconception arises because in the NT baptism was so closely associated with the conversion experience: it was the automatic and immediate response to having repented and called upon the Lord by faith....Hence "repent and be baptized" is said in the same breath. But the Scriptures clearly and repeatedly repudiate any doctrine which says we are saved by any human works which we perform. Baptism, then, being a "work," has absolutely no efficacy to save us. Coc has demonstrated for all of us the danger of taking just a few verses out of the context of the whole NT, and using them to contradict other just as clear verses. "Baptism saves" is a clear contradition of "not of works" (Eph.), "not by works of righteousness" (Titus), etc. (don't want to take the time to list out all the verses we already know).

Seems like we all know what each other believes about salvation. We cannot convince anyone of the truth; we all must be convinced by the Holy Spirit as we read His Word. So, it sorta seems that discussions like this one are pretty useless...


Good points Annie. I believe (and I'm sure that coc will correct me if I'm wrong) that the Church of Christ don't see baptism as a "work" of man. Rather, they see being baptized by a pastor the same as being led to the Lord by a pastor. The pastor plays his role, but it is acutally God that does the saving and the baptizing. I can agree with them in that regard, however I don't agree that baptism is necessary for salvation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jim, perhaps I have not been as clear as I need to be. I am not saying that the OT is not useful. I am not saying that we can not use it to learn principles. What I am saying and what the Bible does teach is that we do not look to the OT to know what “acts of worship” that we are taught to offer to the Lord. We are not to follow the OT commands. I hope that I am a bit clearer in what I am saying now. Certainly the Word is clear even when we are not.

Tim, you are funny.

Seth, you are not. All I can say is WOW!!!!!!......WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You are not funny attempting to lead people astray and teach them after the doctrines of men, doctrines according to Campbellism. You have no reasoning based on Biblical truth, you have no basis for your rant (Campbellism) on mechanical instruments yet, you attempt to sell it as perfect doctrine. It is sad...the hypocrisy of it. Edited by 1Tim115
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 1 Anonymous, 9 Guests (See full list)

  • Recent Achievements

    • Mark C earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Mark C earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Razor earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Mark C earned a badge
      First Post
    • Razor went up a rank
      Collaborator
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Popular Now

  • 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...