Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         14
      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.

The "wines" Of The Bible - The Blessed & The Cursed


Recommended Posts

The Egyptian bibles contain the Word of God but they are not the Word of God.  God preserved His Word in the King James Bible.  All others based on the Egyptian/Westcott and Hort are of the devil.

 

Christians do not grow much at all in Christ using a perversion.  That is my own testimony and born out by many others I've known and talked to.  It's also apparent in those that come here who use them, they are sorely lacking in knowledge and discernment because they have been duped into using a perversion too.  It's never too late to switch, I did, you (if the shoe fits) and others can too.

Matter of opinion and obviously different experiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Matter of opinion...

 

No sir, this position is born out by the facts.  There are no errors in the King James Bible.  The Received Text comes out of the church at Antioch (where Christians were first called Christians) and the Alexandrian texts come out of Egypt.  ALL new bibles are based on the Egyptian texts which were penned by non Christians.  ALL of them contain contradictions and omit God's Word, the NIV omits some 60,000 words for example.  What did God say about what happens to those who add to or take away from his Word?

 

The rock-n-roll, beer drinking "christian" loves the modern versions because then there is no final authority, they can act in any carnal way they please and point to another "translation" to justify their wicked behavior and confound the truth.  This includes the "pastors" of those concert halls which they call churches.  Most are just as lost as Catholics and Muhammadens.

 

I see you made a funny face at the mention of Sam Gipp, seems you would do well to watch the videos too, regardless of what you think of the man.

 

Just heard that Banner is gone and that's good news!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

No sir, this position is born out by the facts.  There are no errors in the King James Bible.  The Received Text comes out of the church at Antioch (where Christians were first called Christians) and the Alexandrian texts come out of Egypt.  ALL new bibles are based on the Egyptian texts which were penned by non Christians.  ALL of them contain contradictions and omit God's Word, the NIV omits some 60,000 words for example.  What did God say about what happens to those who add to or take away from his Word?
 
The rock-n-roll, beer drinking "christian" loves the modern versions because then there is no final authority, they can act in any carnal way they please and point to another "translation" to justify their wicked behavior and confound the truth.  This includes the "pastors" of those concert halls which they call churches.  Most are just as lost as Catholics and Muhammadens.
 
I see you made a funny face at the mention of Sam Gipp, seems you would do well to watch the videos too, regardless of what you think of the man.
 
Just heard that Banner is gone and that's good news!


Also, how can any of the other versions be right if they all come from the same line/translation and don't even agree with each other?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No sir, this position is born out by the facts.  There are no errors in the King James Bible.  The Received Text comes out of the church at Antioch (where Christians were first called Christians) and the Alexandrian texts come out of Egypt.  ALL new bibles are based on the Egyptian texts which were penned by non Christians.  ALL of them contain contradictions and omit God's Word, the NIV omits some 60,000 words for example.  What did God say about what happens to those who add to or take away from his Word?

 

The rock-n-roll, beer drinking "christian" loves the modern versions because then there is no final authority, they can act in any carnal way they please and point to another "translation" to justify their wicked behavior and confound the truth.  This includes the "pastors" of those concert halls which they call churches.  Most are just as lost as Catholics and Muhammadens.

 

I see you made a funny face at the mention of Sam Gipp, seems you would do well to watch the videos too, regardless of what you think of the man.

 

Just heard that Banner is gone and that's good news!

So everyone that reads a different version, in your opinion, is a carnal, wicked, rock and roller who loves to drink.  That's quite an opinion.

 

I'v seen enough of Gipp's videos to  :runforhills:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

If the Word of God is true but you have two versions which say different things, then one of them is wrong.

It really is as simple as that.

If God's Word is inerrant but each version is different, then which one of the many is inerrant?

They can't all be inerrant if they are different.

Secondly, the statistics of numbers of changes and omissions are at least roughly correct. Deciding which is correct (has KJV added or have the others removed) is really the issue.

I will try to find the link again but there is a list of changes and omissions in the NIV. You will think some are petty but some are amazingly huge. But the changes are definitely there.

Now, few if any here would say that some can't get saved from another bible version. Few if any here would say you can't grow using another bible (although I think many here would suggest that growth would be limited).
Most would say that the KJV has the perfect preserved Word of God (for the english speaking world) and is therefore the best version to read. After all, if you had a choice of cars to drive but you while they both looked the same, one had a few bits missing, which would you choose to drive?

I have a question for "other than KJV"ers:

Do we have a complete and perfect Bible available to us today, and if we do which of the various versions is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have "translations."  Words or sentence structure may be different, but the meanings are the same.  Wasn't there already a KJV thread?  If Christians aren't growing there could be numerous reasons, and not necessarily what version they're reading.  Lack of studying, poor hermeneutics, ignorance, lack of willingness to mature, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

So everyone that reads a different version, in your opinion, is a carnal, wicked, rock and roller who loves to drink.  That's quite an opinion.

 

I never said nor insinuated such.  Please read it again.

 

We have "translations."  Words or sentence structure may be different, but the meanings are the same.  Wasn't there already a KJV thread?  If Christians aren't growing there could be numerous reasons, and not necessarily what version they're reading.  Lack of studying, poor hermeneutics, ignorance, lack of willingness to mature, etc.

 

God recorded His Word in the way he wanted us to learn them.  When you accept these other translations you put the translators, not God, as your final authority for all matters of faith and practice.  All of these Egyptian bibles, which all the modern versions are based on, are perverse and change God's Word to suit their copyrights, puff them up, and their wallets too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said nor insinuated such.  Please read it again.

 

 

God recorded His Word in the way he wanted us to learn them.  When you accept these other translations you put the translators, not God, as your final authority for all matters of faith and practice.  All of these Egyptian bibles, which all the modern versions are based on, are perverse and change God's Word to suit their copyrights, puff them up, and their wallets too.

I use the Holy Spirit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Here is the website - this page has a download of "Serious omissions in the NIV".

It is a free download.

http://www.libertybaptistchurch.org.au/books.html

He actually has a number of free downloads - I certainly don't think he has everything 100% right, but his stuff is pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Holy Ghost would NEVER have you use the devil's handiwork as a replacement for the Bible that the Holy Ghost wrote!  That's a silly belief when you think about it!

 

Gipp like you and me doesn't have everything right but on this topic, he's spot on.  I wouldn't listen to James White for example when it comes to the King James or modern perversions but he is spot on when talking about cults like the Russellites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Holy Ghost would NEVER have you use the devil's handiwork as a replacement for the Bible that the Holy Ghost wrote!  That's a silly belief when you think about it!

 

Gipp like you and me doesn't have everything right but on this topic, he's spot on.  I wouldn't listen to James White for example when it comes to the King James or modern perversions but he is spot on when talking about cults like the Russellites.

Since He takes up residence in my heart, He is my Helper, Comforter, Guide and Revealer of Truth, and He will never leave or forsake me.  That's all I need and no one else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Do you really mean you think the Holy Ghost wrote the KJB or did your sentence just come out looking that way?

 

No, 2 Peter 1:21 "but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."  I do believe that the Lord had a hand in preserving his Word in the King James in the English language; we have no originals to buy in the bookstores or download; they are long gone.

 

Since He takes up residence in my heart, He is my Helper, Comforter, Guide and Revealer of Truth, and He will never leave or forsake me.  That's all I need and no one else.

 

You didn't answer any of the other fellas questions.  Just gave us a liberal's answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, 2 Peter 1:21 "but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."  I do believe that the Lord had a hand in preserving his Word in the King James in the English language; we have no originals to buy in the bookstores or download; they are long gone.

 

 

You didn't answer any of the other fellas questions.  Just gave us a liberal's answer.

Which question?  I don't see one directed at me.  You label me "liberal" because I believe the HS is my Comforter, Helper, leads me into truth, is in me and won't leave me or forsake me?  That's Biblical.  John 14:16-17, Romans 8:26, Hebrews 13:5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Can someone start a thread on the validity of the KJV as opposed to Modern Versions of the Bible?  It is difficult to follow this thread as it is about "The 'wines' of the Bible."  Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Which question?  I don't see one directed at me.  You label me "liberal" because I believe the HS is my Comforter, Helper, leads me into truth, is in me and won't leave me or forsake me?  That's Biblical.  John 14:16-17, Romans 8:26, Hebrews 13:5

 

Dave or Mike was in the companion thread.

 

I said that you used the tactic or phrase of a liberal.  They do this when they don't want to come to the knowledge of the truth.  The phrase itself is true, wonderful and indeed comforting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Dave or Mike was in the companion thread.

 

I said that you used the tactic or phrase of a liberal.  They do this when they don't want to come to the knowledge of the truth.  The phrase itself is true, wonderful and indeed comforting.

God's word uses the word Liberal.

 

 Isa 32:5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said [to be] bountiful.
 Isa 32:8 But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 8 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...