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.

Sabbath Worship?


DaveW
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, rstrats said:

...I maintain my position, though. As I stated previously, there are only 2 times where scripture mentions anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week. And neither time is anything said about the purpose being for rest and worship....Gathering on Sunday is not about "rest and worship" but rater primarily to fellowship and conduct the business of the church and the Great Commission teaching. Biblicly the only church service Jesus attended after his resurrection was the Sunday evening services...

...Look, I'm not saying that the moving of rest and worship from the 7th day of the week to the 1st day of the week isn't a divinely approved change.  I'm only saying that there is nothing in scripture directing such a change....

...Actually, the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week.  And I'm not judging or requiring anything from anyone.  I'm merely pointing out what scripture does and doesn't say....

...I said that based on scripture it seems that there is no scriptural reason for thinking that the status quo has changed....

No one changed anything. Granted many have bad theology on this but biblically "Sabbath" is still the seventh day and "The Lord's Day" is still the first day of the week. Sabbath also is for those in the Israelite Covenant and was never mandated for the Gentiles.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On ‎1‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 6:43 AM, rstrats said:

As I stated previously, there are only 2 times where scripture mentions anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week.

1.  John 20:19 -- "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you."

2.  Acts 2:1 -- "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place."  (Note: According to a Biblical understanding of schedule, the day of Pentecost was ALWAYS on the first day of the week, Sunday.)  (2nd Note: This was the very day hand-picked by God the Father and God the Son Themselves to send forth the baptism and empowerment of the Holy Spirit upon the New Testament church, the body of Christ.  In my own estimation, this FACT is the most significant New Testament reason for the assembling of a church body on Sunday.)

3.  Acts 20:7 -- "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight."

4.  1 Corinthians 16:2 -- "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come."
 

On ‎1‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 6:43 AM, rstrats said:

 And neither time is anything said about the purpose being for rest and worship.  

I am not aware of any New Testament passage which indicates that the primary purpose for the assembling together of a New Testament church is for the purposes of "rest and worship."  Rather, the New Testament seems to emphasize that the primary purpose for the assembling together of a New Testament church is for edification and worship.  Now, the Hebrew word "sabbath" means "rest" (not "seventh"); and the Hebrew Sabbath days were indeed for "REST and worship."   However, this is NOT the case for the New Testament church.  Indeed, those things were "a SHADOW of things to come; but the body is of Christ." (See Colossians 2:16-17)  The shadow is now past; the body is now present.  I myself have no desire to return unto the SHADOW of the Old Testament.  Rather, I myself desire to walk in the present reality of the New Testament BODY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Purpose of the Old Testament Sabbath:

1.  A day of rest through spiritual worship with and for the Lord.

Exodus 20:9-10 -- "Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates."

2.  One day in every seven to be hallowed unto the Lord.

Exodus 20:11 -- "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."

3.  A sign between the Lord and the children of Israel concerning the Lord's sanctifying work upon them.

Exodus 31:13 -- "Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you."

4.  A sign and seal of the perpetual covenant between the Lord and the children of Israel.

Exodus 31:16-17 -- Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.  It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."

_________________________________________________

However, as a New Testament believer I am not a member of the Old Testament/Covenant.  When our Lord Jesus Christ brought in the beginnings of the New Testament/Covenant, He did not intend simply to put a new patch upon the old. (See Matthew 9:16-17)  Rather, He intended to establish a new body. (See Ephesians 2:11-22)  This is the Biblical mystery concerning the New Testament church. (See Ephesians 3:1-12)  Even so, the SHADOW of things to come are now past; and the New Testament body of Christ is now present. (See Colossians 2:16-17)  For the children of Israel, the Sabbath day looks back to the creation, their deliverance from Egypt, and the sanctifying covenant of Sinai.  For the New Testament believer, gathering on Sunday looks back to the resurrection of Christ, the gift of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and the establishment of the New Testament body of Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Pastor Scott Markle,
re:  "John 20:19..."
First time.

 

 

re:  "Acts 20:7..."
Second time. 

 

 

re:  "Acts 2:1..."
When I said that there were only 2 times mentioned with anyone getting together on the 1 st day of the week I was speaking with regard to weekly gatherings.

 

 

re:  "1 Corinthians 16:2..."
Nothing is said about anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pastor Scott Markle,
re:  "For the New Testament believer, gathering on Sunday looks back to the resurrection of Christ..."

 

Just so it's understood that scripture is silent with regard to anyone getting together in observance or celebration of the resurrection.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, rstrats said:

re:  "Acts 2:1..."

When I said that there were only 2 times mentioned with anyone getting together on the 1 st day of the week I was speaking with regard to weekly gatherings.

????????????????

1.  Was the day of Pentecost on a Sunday, the first day of the week?
2.  Were the believers and disciples of Christ gathered "with one accord in one place" on that day?
3.  Did God the Father and God the Son Themselves hand-pick that day to send forth the baptism and empowerment of the Holy Spirit upon the body of Christ, the church?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 1/26/2019 at 9:03 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Pastor Scott Markle,
re:  "1.  Was the day of Pentecost on a Sunday, the first day of the week?"

Maybe, maybe not.  Depends on when the count starts. 

 

re:  "2.  Were the believers and disciples of Christ gathered 'with one accord in one place' on that day?"

Acts 2:1 says they were. 

 

re:  3.  Did God the Father and God the Son Themselves hand-pick that day to send forth the baptism and empowerment of the Holy Spirit upon the body of Christ, the church?" 

Scripture doesn't say.   Acts 2:1-4 only says that on the day of Pentecost they were filled with the Holy Spirit. 

 

But I don't see what that has to do with my comment in post #24.
 

 

Edited by rstrats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Pentecost was always on a Sunday. It was the 50th day after a particular sabbath (after the sabbath of Passover week) - 1 day (which makes it Sunday - the first day of the week) plus seven weeks (49 days).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

  Paul wrote, on authority from the Holy Spirit, that, especially for gentiles, the observation of Sabbaths, special feast days, etc. as well as the eating or non-eating of certain foods was a matter of individual conscience, and to not criticize one whose own conscience was different.  While I don't believe any man-made, non-Scriptural doctrines of faith/worship, I don't criticize others solely for worshipping on Saturdays. However, in the US, Saturday worship meetings are almost part of a cult, such as SDA. Several of those cults try to follow those parts of the "Mosaic" law that are fairly easy for them to obey, ignoring the rest, and God's statement that if one lives by "the law", one must live by every jot & tittle of it, which, of course, no one can do, & was done only by Jesus. In all that, those cults have made their own little storefront jesus, which is neither actual Lord or Savior, but is a man-made character like Santa Claus or Spider-Man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
23 minutes ago, rstrats said:

What is your question about with regard to weekly gatherings?

My question marks were not about "weekly gatherings."  Rather, they were about your own handling of Acts 2:1-ff.  Based upon your comments in the following posting:

On 7/14/2019 at 8:11 AM, rstrats said:

Pastor Scott Markle,
re:  "1.  Was the day of Pentecost on a Sunday, the first day of the week?"

Maybe, maybe not.  Depends on when the count starts. 

 

re:  "2.  Were the believers and disciples of Christ gathered 'with one accord in one place' on that day?"

Acts 2:1 says they were. 

 

re:  3.  Did God the Father and God the Son Themselves hand-pick that day to send forth the baptism and empowerment of the Holy Spirit upon the body of Christ, the church?" 

Scripture doesn't say.   Acts 2:1-4 only says that on the day of Pentecost they were filled with the Holy Spirit. 

 

But I don't see what that has to do with my comment in post #24.

. . . It appears to me that you have not studied God's Word enough to know that the Day of Pentecost was ALWAYS on a Sunday, or enough to know that the out-pouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost was in direct fulfillment of Christ's promise as per Luke 24:49; John 14:16-17; John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

My question marks were not about "weekly gatherings." 


So why did you quote my comment, i.e.,  "When I said that there were only 2 times mentioned with anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week I was speaking with regard to weekly gatherings." if your question marks were not asking about that comment?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 1/26/2019 at 8:50 AM, rstrats said:

Pastor Scott Markle,

re:  "John 20:19..."
First time.

 

re:  "Acts 20:7..."
Second time. 

 

re:  "Acts 2:1..."
When I said that there were only 2 times mentioned with anyone getting together on the 1 st day of the week I was speaking with regard to weekly gatherings.

 

re:  "1 Corinthians 16:2..."
Nothing is said about anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week.  
 

8 minutes ago, rstrats said:

So why did you quote my comment, i.e.,  "When I said that there were only 2 times mentioned with anyone getting together on the 1st day of the week I was speaking with regard to weekly gatherings." if your question marks were not asking about that comment?

In your earlier posting you had specified those two times as John 20:19 & Acts 20:7.  As such, you excluded Acts 2:1-ff from your recognition as a New Testament account concerning the first day of the week.  At the time of my "????" response, I was not yet aware of your Biblical ignorance concerning the fact that the Day of Pentecost was ALWAYS on a Sunday.  Thus my "???" were intended as a challenge against your exclusion of Acts 2:1-ff from your list.  You acknowledged John 20:19 & Acts 20:7 as two times.  Based upon the Biblical facts concerning the Day of Pentecost, you should have at least acknowledged three times.  I was not questioning your reference to "weekly gatherings."  I was questioning and challenging your statement concerning "only 2 times."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How does this theory work?

In the very beginning of the churches, Christians included a lot of Jewish converts who were zealous in the law.  Perhaps the Christians met on Sunday because their Jewish members were still attending services in the synagogue or temple on Saturday.   This then settled into standard practice and became tradition, even though it was not necessary after the churches broke away from the synagogues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Most of the meetings of Christians in NT Scripture were on the first day of the week, thich has always been SUNDAY, on our calendars. (Some calendars are made to show Sunday as the last day of the week, for various reasons, usually pertaining to work schedules.)

   But, are we disobeying GOD by having our special worship days on Sundays? Not according to what He had Paul write in Col. 2:16- Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

(Remember- He gave the Sabbath ONLY TO ISRAEL.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/8/2019 at 8:08 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

In your earlier posting you had specified those two times as John 20:19 & Acts 20:7.  As such, you excluded Acts 2:1-ff from your recognition as a New Testament account concerning the first day of the week."


DaveW started this topic with what I thought was with regard to weekly meetings on the first day of the week.  He wrote:  "...the Bible is quite plain that organised meetings were absolutely definitely held on Sundays."  Although not specifically stated, my reply was predicated on the idea that he was at least implying that there were multiple accounts of folks meeting weekly on the first day of the week.  So when I wrote there were only two times mentioned in scripture I was referring to weekly gatherings on the first day of the week. I didn't include the Acts reference since it is referring to an annual event.   In the furture I will try to be more specific with regard to my intent. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Does Romans 14 not answer this whole question clearly, completely and simply?

I am so confused right now as to why this discussion even took place.

If you're going to have an argument regarding which day of the week we "must" meet on for church, we will, if we are both intelligent and honest, have to include a separate argument regarding which calendar God was looking at whenever He set everything up.

The SDA's argue against Sunday worship because "it was invented by Rome" while observing the Hebrew "Sabbath" on a Gregorian calendar, given to them by ... Pope Gregory! 😂😁😅

Humans...they boggle the mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, weary warrior said:

Does Romans 14 not answer this whole question clearly, completely and simply?

I am so confused right now as to why this discussion even took place.

If you're going to have an argument regarding which day of the week we "must" meet on for church, we will, if we are both intelligent and honest, have to include a separate argument regarding which calendar God was looking at whenever He set everything up.

The SDA's argue against Sunday worship because "it was invented by Rome" while observing the Hebrew "Sabbath" on a Gregorian calendar, given to them by ... Pope Gregory! 😂😁😅

Humans...they boggle the mind.

I don't actually remember, but I think the first post (which was mine) was separated from an existing thread. The Original post was posted to lay out the plain and biblical facts of the matter in such a way that the issue was made plain. As can be clearly seen, the plain biblical facts are still denied by some, and excuses are made to allow those to continue to argue, whilst pretending they are not.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

weary warrior,
re:  "Does Romans 14 not answer this whole question clearly, completely and simply?"

Not in any of the various translations/versions that I've seen. The subject of the chapter from start to finish has to do with dietary practices.  This chapter says nothing with regard to the Sabbath. 

 

 

re:  "The SDA's argue against Sunday worship because 'it was invented by Rome' while observing the Hebrew 'Sabbath' on a Gregorian calendar, given to them by ... Pope Gregory!"

I'm afraid I don't understand your point.  I wonder if you might elaborate?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

"Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

 5  One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. note

 6  He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it."

If a man regards Sunday as a special holy day, thats between him and God, he is worshiping God and God accepts it. If a man feels God is the God of all, and all days are equally belonging to God, and worships on Thuresday with the assembly because thats when they are free, theyre worshiping God and God accepts it. That's ok too. The Lord who is Lord of the Sabbath is Lord of Tuesday or Friday as well.

We are not actually commanded to worship on any particular day. The early church DID worship on the first day of the week, yes. They also greeted each other with holy kisses and washed each other's feet. Which we don't do.

Our own worship and service must follow and adhere to one of two sources. Scriptural command or historical precedent. If we glean through the book of Acts of the Apostles ("acts", actions...the "history" of the Apostles) for our methodology and turn it into mandated doctrine, we are teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. We make traditions into doctrine. And we will be doing silly things like  choosing church leadership by rolling the dice (Acts 1:26). Instead, we pick and choose what traditions we make into mandated doctrine. Into dogma.

As for my other observation about the calendars, God gave the Hebrew people, who had their own Hebrew calendar, a command to keep a uniquely Hebrew holy day. We don't use that calendar. So an SDA in Cincinnati uses a calendar invented and given them by a Catholic Pope in Europe to observe a Jewish day from a Hebrew calendar, because to observe Sunday worship on that same catholic calender from Europe would be following the leadership and influence of the pope. I just find it humorously ironic the knots we tie ourself up in when we start trying to observe holy days and habits from another time, culture, continent, language and calendar that are not specifically commanded us in scripture, just to be more holy. None of that is what makes us holy. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. 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

  • 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...