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 Cross And How Jews Perceive It: Sharing Messiah With The Jewish People


LindaR

Recommended Posts

Well my little diatribe lol on a Holy Nation. Seems like from the original question. The answers have gone every which a way lol.

Romans 9
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

The Gospel saves of course. It's not how one reasons with anyone or how they percieve anything. The Gospel saves:

Romans 1:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

In Isaiah 56 -

 

6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

 
And Revelation 7 -
 

 

Gentiles within Israel?

 

Yes. God said they could become part of Israel.

Unless I misunderstand the Old Testament.

 

Absolutely "strangers" could become part of Israel. However, again, we are talking about the nation and actual people of Israel. 

 

From the verses you quoted...including the previous verses...

 

Isaiah 56:1-8
1   Thus saith the LORD, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2   Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath1 from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3   Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4   For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths2, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5   Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6   Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath3 from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7   Even them will I bring to my holy mountain4, and make them joyful in my house of prayer5: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer6 for all people.
8   The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

 

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

God's holy mountain is in Jerusalem...in Israel.

God's house of prayer is the temple...in Jerusalem...in Israel.

6 The Lord Jesus Christ quoted this when he cleansed...the temple...in Jerusalem...in Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Absolutely "strangers" could become part of Israel. However, again, we are talking about the nation and actual people of Israel. 

 

From the verses you quoted...including the previous verses...

 

Isaiah 56:1-8
1   Thus saith the LORD, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2   Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath1 from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3   Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4   For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths2, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5   Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6   Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath3 from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7   Even them will I bring to my holy mountain4, and make them joyful in my house of prayer5: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer6 for all people.
8   The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

 

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

Christians don't keep the sabbath; that was for Israel...under the law.

God's holy mountain is in Jerusalem...in Israel.

God's house of prayer is the temple...in Jerusalem...in Israel.

6 The Lord Jesus Christ quoted this when he cleansed...the temple...in Jerusalem...in Israel.

 

Sorry.  I don't understand your point here.

 

Stranger(s) in the KJB means foreigners.  This is carried over from the French (Norman) conquest.  The French for foreigner is étranger.  This would originally have been estranger but the French dropped the 's' and we dropped the 'e'.  as in a number of other cases.  such as école = school.  One where we have dropped the'S' but the French have kept it is Spain.  In English of 1611  stranger=foreigner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sorry.  I don't understand your point here.

 

Stranger(s) in the KJB means foreigners.  This is carried over from the French (Norman) conquest.  The French for foreigner is étranger.  This would originally have been estranger but the French dropped the 's' and we dropped the 'e'.  as in a number of other cases.  such as école = school.  One where we have dropped the'S' but the French have kept it is Spain.  In English of 1611  stranger=foreigner.

 

Invicta,

 

I was responding to GenevanPreacher; in that, he pointed out that the Bible shows that Gentiles can become part of Israel...I guess he did so to give credence to his belief that the church and Israel are the same. He referenced a portion of scripture which spoke of "strangers" joining Israel. I agree with you; in that, strangers are foreigners...therefore, the strangers were Gentiles who joined in with Israel.

 

I was only showing that the scripture he used was speaking of the literal land of Israel and the literal Jews. That portion of scripture not only shows that, but also shows that those "strangers" who joined Israel were subject to the law...not grace. Other portions of scripture also show the same.

 

Hope that helps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Invicta,

 

I was responding to GenevanPreacher; in that, he pointed out that the Bible shows that Gentiles can become part of Israel...I guess he did so to give credence to his belief that the church and Israel are the same. He referenced a portion of scripture which spoke of "strangers" joining Israel. I agree with you; in that, strangers are foreigners...therefore, the strangers were Gentiles who joined in with Israel.

 

I was only showing that the scripture he used was speaking of the literal land of Israel and the literal Jews. That portion of scripture not only shows that, but also shows that those "strangers" who joined Israel were subject to the law...not grace. Other portions of scripture also show the same.

 

Hope that helps?

 

Actually I was showing that Israel was made up some who were not Israelites. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The Israel/church argument will run and run. Can we not resolve the argument by seeing all the redeemed as the Covenant people of God? That relationship runs through all the "dispensations." It counts in Israel, Jew and Gentiles for all eternity.
Lev. 26:9-12 Eze. 37:26-27 2 Cor. 6:16 Rev. 21:3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The conclusion of the matter:

 

Israel is Israel - a nation and people chosen by God which is distinct and separate from the Church, which is the Body of Christ, composed of all the saved/redeemed, both Jew and Gentile.

 

The Church is the Church  The church is built upon Christ.  The church did not exist in the Old Testament. It is an entity distinct from Israel (1 Corinthians 10:32)The Church is not Israel, and Israel is not the Church.

 

The end!

**************************************************************************************

Aug 6 2014

 

The Latest Threat to Evangelical Support for Israel [Excerpts]

 

Targeting young Evangelicals at top Christian universities has also been an extremely effective tool in the hands of those seeking to erode Evangelical support for Israel.

 

This is particularly the case in the field of theology. One of the defining characteristics of an Evangelical is their commitment to Biblical authority. They believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God and therefore a trustworthy guide for how Christians should approach both personal and political issues.

 

Wheaton College’s Dr. Gary Burge has dedicated much of his work to formulating a biblical argument against supporting Israel. In addition to his endeavors inspiring young Evangelicals to abandon support for Israel, he also has worked to inspire his own denomination to take a hardline approach to Israel as well. As an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA), Burge’s writings have played heavily in the recent decision of his church to divest in three companies that do business in Israel. The outrageously biased and anti-Israel study guide Zionism Unsettled included a chapter on Evangelicals and Christian Zionism taken from Burge’s work on the subject. His basic message is that the land of Israel is no longer important to God’s redemptive plan for humanity. The Kingdom of God, which was established by Jesus, fulfills all the promises God made to Abraham and the people of Israel. Thus, there is no need for an earthly “kingdom” for the Jews.

 

As Burge told the participants at the [2010] “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference, “It is not that the covenant of Abraham has been rejected; nor that it has been replaced or superseded; it has been fulfilled.” Using the term “fulfilled” is, essentially, an attempt to get around the nasty history of supercessionism and replacement theology, which hold that the coming of Jesus abrogated God’s covenant with the Jews and they are no longer a chosen people. To non-Evangelicals, it may seem to be simply a matter of semantics, but its implications are extreme: The Jewish people and especially the modern State of Israel have no special significance to God. Rather than using the imagery St. Paul offers—of the gentiles being grafted on to the vine of a faithful Israel—this view sees Israel as the egg from which Jesus hatches and then discards the shell.

 

This message of “fulfillment theology” is often coupled with stories of Palestinian Christians who have lost their land to Jews. In the film With God on Our Side —which is routinely shown at Evangelical colleges—Salim Munayer, founder of the reconciliation ministry Musalaha, stands beneath an olive tree and describes how his family lost their land in 1948 and their subsequent mistreatment by American Christians. “Quite often I meet Christian Zionist groups that don’t understand the implications of Christian Zionism,” he says. “The implication of Christian Zionism, the way we hear it here, is [that] to accept this theology is to commit suicide as a people group.” This is an explosive challenge to the average American Evangelical: How can you support a theology that causes people to suffer?

 

While this challenge may be emotionally effective in persuading some younger Evangelicals to reject the idea of God’s faithfulness to Israel, it ignores the rOBust Christian theology of suffering, as well as political realities that are hidden by fear. The Christian theology of suffering recognizes, for example, that God allows suffering for a season in order to further his redemptive plan for humanity. At the same time, the political reality is that Palestinian Christians are suffering less at the hands of Israel than those of Palestinian nationalists and Islamic radicals.

 

Christy Anastas, for example, a Palestinian Christian from Bethlehem, has courageously broken the silence on how land is routinely stolen from Palestinian Christians by other Palestinians: Palestinians are stealing other Palestinians lands—especially Christian lands. I have four uncles who lost half their land by people from Hebron. Just like that. They went to court to ask for their rights. The judge, sadly was from Hebron. He said to them, I can’t wait to see the four of you dead in the fridges.

 

The price Christy paid for speaking out was significant. She was disowned by her family and forced to flee to the UK, where she received asylum. Unfortunately, films like With God on Our Side refuse to acknowledge that the price of speaking out against Palestinian corruption, or even of not hating Israel enough, is too much for many Palestinians. It’s easier to go along with the crowd and blame Israel.

 

http://www.thetower.org/article/the-latest-threat-to-evangelical-support...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It is not important to ThePilgrim who his parents were.  He doesn't care whether they were Jew or Gentile.  He only cares that he is saved by grace by a wonderful Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ.  He also prays that all men would find the same joy in Saviour's salvation he has found.  ThePilgrim will let the theologians worry about who will inherit a piece of land on this earth . . . . He knows he has a heavenly home awaiting for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Rahab, the Harlot was the mother of Boaz.  She was a Gentile.  I have no doubt she was saved, and possibly her family.

 

Ruth the Moabitess was a Gentile and the wife of Boaz.  I have no doubt she was saved.  Were they saved by keeping the law or by looking forward to Christ, their Saviour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

LindaR,

 

Thank you for your fine post, enlightenment, and exposing the erroneous teaching of men like Dr. Gary Burge, Wheaton College towards God's chosen people; the Jews.

 

God's Covenant with Abraham, the Partiarch's, King David and the prophetic words of the prophets, have not been fulfilled as Dr. Burge, and others, teach through, 'replacement theology,' or 'fulfillment theology,' or some other method to replace the Covenent and promises to God to Israel. 

 

'Next year in Jerusalem.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Rahab, the Harlot was the mother of Boaz.  She was a Gentile.  I have no doubt she was saved, and possibly her family.

 

Ruth the Moabitess was a Gentile and the wife of Boaz.  I have no doubt she was saved.  Were they saved by keeping the law or by looking forward to Christ, their Saviour.

 

Invicta, I've made my position clear many times on this forum; in that, salvation has always, is, and will always be by grace through faith. If your post was in response to mine above, I wasn't speaking of salvation. I can see how one could have misunderstood due to this statement I made...

 

That portion of scripture not only shows that, but also shows that those "strangers" who joined Israel were subject to the law...not grace. 

 

Perhaps I could have worded it better, but I was merely pointing out that the scriptures made it clear that the strangers who joined Israel were... 

  1. joining the actual people in Israel,
  2. in the actual land of Israel,
  3. and they were also subject to the actual law that God gave to Israel. 

The church (grace) was given no such directive by God, and in using the term "grace", I was referring to the church; not salvation. 

 

That still doesn't adequately describe what I was trying to say, so I'll just stop trying to explain it.   :nuts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well still looks like answers many of them are off question lol. The strangers part I don't know. In Judges I believe some people were left alive and remained.

There is Christian Zionism lol. Which is a curious thing to me. I don't know. On the one hand. I wonder if Paul would be a Christian Zionist. The Diaspora certainly didn't seem to upset many.

There seems to be a verse that says: I will seek to destroy the nations that come against Israel. In Zech.

Me I have not much of an opinion. Where that verse is in place and time. I don't know. Nope. For me this is not all about Israel. But the Kingdom of Heaven. If indeed after this many years out of the land. God intends to bring about the Kingdom of Heaven.

That would mean a lot of peoples play a part in this. Including the Jews and Israel. However the big news is the Kingdom of Heaven. Christian Zionism lol. I don't know I'll stick with the Kingdom of Heaven

One other thing I want to add. Or two. Praying for the peace of Jerusalem. Also those that love Jerusalem. Praying (as Christians have been for years) Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done. Potentialy in my mind anyway accomplishes both of those things in a Saintly way. Both the peace and the loving of Jerusalem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I found this on the IsraelVideoNetwork website…an article listing “16 Things That Give Israel A Bad Name But Aren’t Really True”The first statement listed was "Jews in Israel are White European Colonialists"   Then the question “What Is Another Word for ‘Israeli?’ ”   The Answer: Indigenous!

 

“The Jewish people are indigenous to Israel, the birthplace of their identity and unique culture, and have maintained a documented presence there for over 3,000 years. Half of modern Israel’s Jews returned home to Israel from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Jews who came from Europe were not colonialists. They did not represent a foreign power and rejected any identification with European nations. They were idealists who sought to restore and preserve their unique heritage and fought for the same rights that are granted to all peoples: self-determination and independence in their ancestral home. Over 150 years ago, Jews returned in ever-larger numbers, again became the majority in Jerusalem in the 1860s, and established Tel Aviv in 1909. In 1920 the international community officially recognized the indigenous rights of the Jewish people and endorsed the restoration of the Jewish Homeland.”

 

I recommend reading that entire list of 16 statements and the responses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

First off, he did, and is still 'building his church'. And he started it with the foundation of the Prophets

​I believe that this is what you're referring to?

Ephesians 2:20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

I can see why you would attribute "prophets" as being the Old Testament prophets; thereby, including them in the church. However, in the very next chapter of Ephesians, we find this...

Ephesians 3:5
Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

Paul wasn't referring to the Old Testament prophets; he was referring to the prophets who were alive (now) at the time of his writing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

​I believe that this is what you're referring to?

Ephesians 2:20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

I can see why you would attribute "prophets" as being the Old Testament prophets; thereby, including them in the church. However, in the very next chapter of Ephesians, we find this...

Ephesians 3:5
Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

Paul wasn't referring to the Old Testament prophets; he was referring to the prophets who were alive (now) at the time of his writing.

 

 

​Perhaps we could call one of the hotlines to a prophetic ministry and see what a contemporary prophet has to say on the matter.:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

​I believe that this is what you're referring to?

Ephesians 2:20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

I can see why you would attribute "prophets" as being the Old Testament prophets; thereby, including them in the church. However, in the very next chapter of Ephesians, we find this...

Ephesians 3:5
Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

Paul wasn't referring to the Old Testament prophets; he was referring to the prophets who were alive (now) at the time of his writing.

 

 

​You are using a bit of creative license with this thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

​You are using a bit of creative license with this thinking.

​It's the law! You have to have a license for everything so the government can get your money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

​I believe that this is what you're referring to?

Ephesians 2:20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

​Actually: 

 
Matthew 2:23 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
Matthew 5:12 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
Matthew 5:17 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Matthew 7:12 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
Matthew 11:13 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matthew 16:14 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Matthew 22:40 Read whole chapterSee verse in context
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
 
 

 
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)

×
×
  • Create New...