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.

Why I Left The Pre-Trib Position


Ukulelemike

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

So we should tear the gospels out of our bibles?

you still don't get it do you?  There are more than one type of Gospel one for the kingdom and one for the body of Christ.

 

here is a link to an Independent Bible Believing Baptist there are three of these to listen to but they are not very long.

 

http://davereese.onwtw.net/ondemand/bible/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 389
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Advanced Member

If dispensationalism has no strict definition, to you, then why defend it at all?
If it has no boundaries, and it isn't definable, then it doesn't exist.

Just say you are a Bible believer.

I am.

I don't hold to any Theological system.

I hold to the Scriptures.

This is easy logic to get......
If there are beliefs that are held by disps, that happen to line up with the Scriptures....guess what?
They may be believed by others who aren't disps.
They aren't then become "closet disps", or "partial disps", or anything else.
I don't believe all dispensational teaching is wrong, or I'd have to chuck my Bible.
I amen where you're right.
I don't go along where you're wrong.

I don't go along with any known Bible correctors. You understand this.

I love God's Word, and reserve the right to have him reveal it to me, without the restrictions placed on it by any system of men.

Anishinaabe

 

They remind me of evolutionists.  I watched a programme on TV recently where there were all sorts of evolutionist, who all disagreed with each other.  Some believed in a big bang, with some ultra compact atom, some in an explosion of gas, some in an original nothingness or vacuum with was full of energy and exploded, creating as it were, everything out of noting, some in a gradual expansion of nothing into something, and a number of other daft ideas, yet they could all have a conversation about it.  But mention God creating the universe and they will all turn on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

HHmmmmm....

Wondering how we can have a rational discussion about dispensationalism when the people who are so decidedly against it don't even really know what it is????

 

I did not say that it does not have any "strict" definition or boundaries.  What I did say is that YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, yet you keep ranting against it.  All you know about dispensationalism is what someone has poisoned you against it with, and they themselves don't know what it REALLY is. 

And like I said, you are not really willing to go find out for yourself either.

 

Yes, Scofield was wrong in some places...but he was right more often than he was wrong.  So why throw the baby out with the bathwater?  You already believe many of the things that Scofield taught!  Why not identify how close you are to what he taught, and then do what so many others of us have done, which is praise the Lord for where Scofield (or anyone else for that matter!) was right, and warn where he was wrong? 

 

This is nothing more than a childish, knee-jerk reaction to something that you have no idea as to what it really is.  You perceive it to be a threat.  It is not. 

HYPER- dispensationalism?  Yes.  That is a prOBlem.  I am against that.  It is taking a good thing too far. 

 

Oh I know what dispensationalism is, I was taught it for many years in the Brethren.  I now believe the teaching to be false.   I have had friends who taught it in my current church and I disagreed with them and said why I disagreed with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

you still don't get it do you?  There are more than one type of Gospel one for the kingdom and one for the body of Christ.

 

here is a link to an Independent Bible Believing Baptist there are three of these to listen to but they are not very long.

 

http://davereese.onwtw.net/ondemand/bible/index.html

 

I will listen tomorrow if poss.  I am in a hotel room in France and my wife is in bed asleep and I don't want to wake her.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

So we should tear the gospels out of our bibles?

No, in this case it's OK to read someone else's "mail".  Feel free to read Jonah (for example).

 

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee
that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Mt 5:30
I haven't seen very many "one-handed" Christians lately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Was that the same McGee who said he was looking forward to the Revelation when there will be no more sea, as he was looking forward to parking his car where the pacific ocean now is?  (McGee on the Prophecies.)

I have no idea.  Why don't you listen to him yourself?  He has been on the radio since the mid-'60s.

His teachings are still being rebroadcast to this very day on "Through the Bible", even though he

passed away in 1988. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

When things moved from perfect to fallen what do you call it or when everything moved from "the Law" to "Grace"? I've heard it called a dispensation is there another name?

Yea, you would at least  think that the word "dispensation" would be in the New Testament, if it was an important "concept".

Oh wait.... it is in the New Testament :bigshock:

 

For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
 
That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ,
both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
 
If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
 
Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Oh I know what dispensationalism is, I was taught it for many years in the Brethren.  I now believe the teaching to be false.   I have had friends who taught it in my current church and I disagreed with them and said why I disagreed with them.

those brethren were a bit over board and extreme find the middel Biblical ground not their extreme interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

No, in this case it's OK to read someone else's "mail".  Feel free to read Jonah (for example).

 

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee
that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Mt 5:30
I haven't seen very many "one-handed" Christians lately.

 

I know a few men who made themselves eunuchs following Matt 5:30

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

When things moved from perfect to fallen what do you call it or when everything moved from "the Law" to "Grace"? I've heard it called a dispensation is there another name?

There are many terms one could use for example: Economies, Ages, Periods. Quantums etc etc etc but dispensations fits best.

 

The use of dispensation in Ephesians 1:10 fits a time period and Ephesians 3:2 fits a charge or duty of information dispensed to others.

 

I understand and it is considered that the Garden of Eden was a perfect state for man but really it was not.

 

 The first day after the six days of the work of God and the Seventh day of rest, though God says everything is good, he does not say it is perfect.  The flood of Gen1:2 was because of judgement on Satan and his angels, though God made the earth habitable for his next greatest creation Man, it was not perfect because the effects of Satan's sin were still upon the earth and the heavens (the atmosphere and the Universe ((not God's abode)).  That is why Satan disguised as a serpent was able to deceive Eve and cause her to fall into transgression.  Perfection (holiness) would have kept sin out but because it was not perfect sin was able to come. 

 

Only after the Revelation 21 new heavens and new earth will it be perfect again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

wathdiver, on 04 May 2014 - 3:43 PM, said:snapback.png

Is there a correlation between the Kingdom of Heaven, Kingdom of God and the Gospel of the Circumcision, Gospel of the Uncircumcision? 

Heaven is a Created thing and God is not. 

 

Kingdom of Heaven is the created heaven which is to be a kingdom for Christ. 

 

Kingdom of God is an uncreated place that is the abode of God where all is to exist and will one sin is dealt with.

 

Gospel of the circumcision is the Gospel of the kingdom first preached by John the Baptist, Jesus and the twelve

 

Gospel of the uncircumcision is the Gospel of Grace preached by Paul, Silas and later explained to by Paul to Peter and the others in Jerusalem on one of Paul's returned trips.  See if you can locate that trip?  Paul had five trips (if I am not mistaken) to Jerusalem you will only be able to identify it by the term "up", I think Paul described it as being a private time with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

Ceremonial washing has always been an integral part of Judiasm.  John the Baptist call his kinsmen to repent and be baptized.

Believers in Jesus also were ceremonially washed as a sign of repentence.  This was done to prepare the way for the Lord.

The ideal would have been for the whole nation to be baptized and receive their Messiah to sit on David's Throne.

Jesus will rule the world from Jerusalem and his kinsmen (genetic Jews) will serve him in Israel in the future.

 

We, as Gentile believers are not bound by Judiasm, we are "baptized" in the Holy Spirit.  When we see ourselves as sinful

in the presence of God the Holy Spirit, then the "self-ego" must die and we will be filled with God's Spirit be born-again and sealed.

Our King is in heaven, and we will be "changed" and taken up into heaven at the rapture (harpazo).

 

We will return from heaven with Jesus when his kinsmen (genetic Jews) repent of their National sin of rejecting their Messiah.

Meantime, we remain in the heavenly kingdom waiting for the fulfillment of Enoch's prophecy from Jude 1:14:

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

 

 

So you believe, like the church of christ cult, that baptism washes away sin? That, my friend is heresy in a nutshell. And Jesus died to shed his 'baptism' for our sins? NO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Tribulation saints are not mentioned in scripture, either.

Yes they are.

Rev 7:14
14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their rOBes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.


Anishinaabe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

They are called elect, as well...

Mat 24:21-22
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved:but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.


Anishinaabe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

So you believe, like the church of christ cult, that baptism washes away sin? That, my friend is heresy in a nutshell. And Jesus died to shed his 'baptism' for our sins? NO.

You are full of balony, mischaricterizing my post.

You should be rebuked on this forum by the moderators for using the term "heresy"  in this context.

You OBviously no nothing whatsoever about John's baptism in the context of Judiasm.

 

==================================================================================

Acts 2:38  Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the

name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Gospel of the Circumcision
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

There are many terms one could use for example: Economies, Ages, Periods. Quantums etc etc etc but dispensations fits best.

 

The use of dispensation in Ephesians 1:10 fits a time period and Ephesians 3:2 fits a charge or duty of information dispensed to others.

 

I understand and it is considered that the Garden of Eden was a perfect state for man but really it was not.

 

 The first day after the six days of the work of God and the Seventh day of rest, though God says everything is good, he does not say it is perfect.  The flood of Gen1:2 was because of judgement on Satan and his angels, though God made the earth habitable for his next greatest creation Man, it was not perfect because the effects of Satan's sin were still upon the earth and the heavens (the atmosphere and the Universe ((not God's abode)).  That is why Satan disguised as a serpent was able to deceive Eve and cause her to fall into transgression.  Perfection (holiness) would have kept sin out but because it was not perfect sin was able to come. 

 

Only after the Revelation 21 new heavens and new earth will it be perfect again.

 

So you don't see heaven as perfect? Isaiah 14:12 You see the devil and his third not cast out of God's heaven? And what about when the devil went up to heaven and talked to God in JOB?

 

I must say, I've always assumed  the "good" in Genesis was the same as perfect. This is a new one to me. I need to think about that for awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

 

You OBviously no nothing whatsoever about John's baptism in the context of Judiasm.

 

 

John's Baptism has nothing to do with the Judaism, it's Christian.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

John's Baptism has nothing to do with the Judaism, it's Christian.  

Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him,
We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people,
that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them;
and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve.
Acts 19:1b-7
 
==============================================================================================
 
Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:17-18
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him,
We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people,
that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them;
and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve.
Acts 19:1b-7
 

 

I'm sorry, this simply shows men who had been taught wrong and were not saved the bible's way.

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   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 8 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...