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 7th Shemita is here


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
5 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I deny that I, in any way, hold to replacement theology Dave.

I try to take the scriptures as they are, and I try not to add to the meaning of them. Unlike most seminarian type teachers who just repeat what they have been taught to repeat, as if it is true doctrine.

I do not think that Christianity replaced the nation of Israel. Nor do I think they took over the promises given to Israel. All the promises were given to them before the cross. And that is the main difference between you and me, I think.

I believe the promises about eternity are to all the seed, those born again, whether Jew, Gentile, or Israelite. God is no respecter of persons, for the first shall be last, and the last shall be first.

All who enter eternity that are born again receive the same things, no inequality, no special people above another, no double brides for God.

God's people have always been and shall always be the believers in the Lord. There were lost Jews as well as lost Gentiles since the beginning of the nation of Israel (for Jews and all the other tribes) and Adams creation (for Gentiles).

The denial was not that hard was it?

 But the doublespeak explanation is confusing..........

As for Eric's "teaching" here - Eric "interprets", but doesn't present doctrine very often.

Personally, I think he often overstates his interpretations and applications, and I  have told him so before.

But he doesn't teach false doctrines like some here do, and he doesn't try to overthrow the faith of some,  as some here do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 377
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
8 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I deny that I, in any way, hold to replacement theology Dave.

I try to take the scriptures as they are, and I try not to add to the meaning of them. Unlike most seminarian type teachers who just repeat what they have been taught to repeat, as if it is true doctrine.

I do not think that Christianity replaced the nation of Israel. Nor do I think they took over the promises given to Israel. All the promises were given to them before the cross. And that is the main difference between you and me, I think.

I believe the promises about eternity are to all the seed, those born again, whether Jew, Gentile, or Israelite. God is no respecter of persons, for the first shall be last, and the last shall be first.

All who enter eternity that are born again receive the same things, no inequality, no special people above another, no double brides for God.

God's people have always been and shall always be the believers in the Lord. There were lost Jews as well as lost Gentiles since the beginning of the nation of Israel (for Jews and all the other tribes) and Adams creation (for Gentiles).

Daniel 12:3 teaches that those who win many to righteousness will shine as the stars for ever and ever. Those that don't won't shine as the faithful. They will not be equal in heaven.

1 Corinthians 3:11-15 Some may lose all their rewards when they are judged others will have rewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
11 hours ago, Eric Stahl said:

1) Daniel 12:3 teaches that those who win many to righteousness will shine as the stars for ever and ever. Those that don't won't shine as the faithful. They will not be equal in heaven.

2) 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 Some may lose all their rewards when they are judged others will have rewards.

1) This reference does not show a contrast at all Eric - for those that 'be wise' are the saved. Your comment - "Those that don't won't shine as the faithful" does not exist. There you go again Eric, adding to the word of God.

2) You really need to look more into what you comment about Eric. Read verse 1-10? This is not in what you put on the 'foundation', but what others put on it. Paul showed that 'false teaching' affects others in this life, not in eternity. Generally people tend to put some verses like this in the time of eternity, and have been taught that by many corruptors of God's word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

1) This reference does not show a contrast at all Eric - for those that 'be wise' are the saved. Your comment - "Those that don't won't shine as the faithful" does not exist. There you go again Eric, adding to the word of God.

2) You really need to look more into what you comment about Eric. Read verse 1-10? This is not in what you put on the 'foundation', but what others put on it. Paul showed that 'false teaching' affects others in this life, not in eternity. Generally people tend to put some verses like this in the time of eternity, and have been taught that by many corruptors of God's word.

You are so desperate to prove Eric wrong that you are clutching at straws.

1. It is not stated but it is a reasonable assumption given the context.

2.

1 Corinthians 3

 1  And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

 2  I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

 3  For ye are yet carnal: for whereasthere is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

 4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

 5  Who then is Paul, and who isApollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?

 6  I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

 7  So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

 8  Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

 9  For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye areGod's building.

 10  According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

 11  For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

 12  Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

 13  Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

 14  If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

 15  If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Considering vs 14 says "if any man's work abide WHICH HE HATH BUILT THEREUPON....."

I can see why people would think it is talking about the works that a man builds upon the foundation.

Paul is teaching that a saved man's works in this life will be judged, but not for his salvation.

That is contextually correct, and you are twisting Scripture.

On these two references Eric is far closer than you are.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, DaveW said:

You are so desperate to prove Eric wrong that you are clutching at straws.

1. It is not stated but it is a reasonable assumption given the context.

2.

1 Corinthians 3

 1  And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

 2  I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

 3  For ye are yet carnal: for whereasthere is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

 4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

 5  Who then is Paul, and who isApollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?

 6  I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

 7  So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

 8  Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

 9  For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye areGod's building.

 10  According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

 11  For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

 12  Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

 13  Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

 14  If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

 15  If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Considering vs 14 says "if any man's work abide WHICH HE HATH BUILT THEREUPON....."

I can see why people would think it is talking about the works that a man builds upon the foundation.

Paul is teaching that a saved man's works in this life will be judged, but not for his salvation.

That is contextually correct, and you are twisting Scripture.

On these two references Eric is far closer than you are.........

You need to reread verse 10 my friend. 

That's the defining verse.

Thanks anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
3 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

You need to reread verse 10 my friend. 

That's the defining verse.

Thanks anyway.

And you need to read the rest of the passage.

That's the rest of the passage........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 9:04 AM, Genevanpreacher said:

Where?

And no, Eric, it was to 'believing' children of his. Whether Israelites or not.

God always did and always will only talk to his children, those born of him. He NEVER speaks to those who are not his, this way.

Nebuchadnezzar, Balaam, Pharaoh, (a few of them), Darius, God has spoken to those who were not His children, many times, sometimes directly, sometimes through His prophets.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Nebuchadnezzar, Balaam, Pharaoh, (a few of them), Darius, God has spoken to those who were not His children, many times, sometimes directly, sometimes through His prophets.  

Sorry Mike, but you didn't notice the words "this way" in my post?

2 hours ago, DaveW said:

And you need to read the rest of the passage.

That's the rest of the passage........

Yes Dave. As I referenced in my post above. I did reference vv. 1-10.

And read them.

And they support my view easily. No straw grasping at all.

Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
12 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Sorry Mike, but you didn't notice the words "this way" in my post?

Yes Dave. As I referenced in my post above. I did reference vv. 1-10.

And read them.

And they support my view easily. No straw grasping at all.

Thanks. 

Not sure what you mean by "this way". I tried going back through posts to decipher it, but not seeing it well enough to understand it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 7/4/2016 at 3:24 PM, Eric Stahl said:

He did repeat it through the 2 prophets. Besides it was a warning to Israel not the Church.

Uke - my statements were in response to "it was a warning to Israel not the Church".

Since believers are the subjects to whom the Lord tells the 'future' to - when he speaks of it, it is for their benefit, not the lost uncaring and haters of the Lord.

Unless of course he is showing to 'his' how he takes care of those who hate him.

It's not always a cut and dried issue. I know that. But when it clearly is shown that God's relationship is with those who have a relationship with him, all through scripture, I have a very easy time making these statements. 

God says things from his mouth to us for our benefit, not the losts benefit.

So books where Prophets are speaking of future events - he says them for the benefit of believers. In the past he spoke to believers from the seed of Jacob. Before that he spoke to the seed of Shem and others. Before that he spoke to the sons of Adam who called upon the Lord.

All believers. 

That's my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
44 minutes ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Uke - my statements were in response to "it was a warning to Israel not the Church".

Since believers are the subjects to whom the Lord tells the 'future' to - when he speaks of it, it is for their benefit, not the lost uncaring and haters of the Lord.

Unless of course he is showing to 'his' how he takes care of those who hate him.

It's not always a cut and dried issue. I know that. But when it clearly is shown that God's relationship is with those who have a relationship with him, all through scripture, I have a very easy time making these statements. 

God says things from his mouth to us for our benefit, not the losts benefit.

So books where Prophets are speaking of future events - he says them for the benefit of believers. In the past he spoke to believers from the seed of Jacob. Before that he spoke to the seed of Shem and others. Before that he spoke to the sons of Adam who called upon the Lord.

All believers. 

That's my point.

I don't know if this is clumsy wording, but the Gospel is for the benefit of unbelievers.

It seems that at points in this quote you are expanding your scope beyond prophecy. If that is the case then you are outright wrong.

But again, God on occasion told unbelievers of future events - a couple of kings for instance were told of their own future, and they clearly did not believe in the One True God when the prophecy was given to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Uke - my statements were in response to "it was a warning to Israel not the Church".

Since believers are the subjects to whom the Lord tells the 'future' to - when he speaks of it, it is for their benefit, not the lost uncaring and haters of the Lord.

Unless of course he is showing to 'his' how he takes care of those who hate him.

It's not always a cut and dried issue. I know that. But when it clearly is shown that God's relationship is with those who have a relationship with him, all through scripture, I have a very easy time making these statements. 

God says things from his mouth to us for our benefit, not the losts benefit.

So books where Prophets are speaking of future events - he says them for the benefit of believers. In the past he spoke to believers from the seed of Jacob. Before that he spoke to the seed of Shem and others. Before that he spoke to the sons of Adam who called upon the Lord.

All believers. 

That's my point.

When God judges Israel with fire the Church will already be in heaven. After the fire falls and kills 2/3 of the people of Israel all the survivors will be saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Do you all know that interest rates on government bonds are so low you have to pay interest to some governments to take your money. The world is panicking. Many countries are in danger of defaulting on their payments. The prices of commodities have fallen and the value of their monies have fallen against the dollar.

Ask the third world people if the shemita has hurt them!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 7/8/2016 at 9:51 AM, DaveW said:

I don't know if this is clumsy wording, but the Gospel is for the benefit of unbelievers.

It seems that at points in this quote you are expanding your scope beyond prophecy. If that is the case then you are outright wrong.

But again, God on occasion told unbelievers of future events - a couple of kings for instance were told of their own future, and they clearly did not believe in the One True God when the prophecy was given to them.

Yes God did talk to a "couple of kings", but to the benefit of believers.

Not talking about the gospel here Dave. Talking about people who are already saved.

Reread with a little flexibility, as I do make mistakes in wording sometimes.

And I did reread my post multiple times, and I don't see your issue.

Yes the gospel is for the lost, but that's not what we were talking about was it. We were discussing to 'whom' God speaks in prophetic discussions from the OT.

It was to believers and for the benefit of believers that the Lord spoke through his prophets what he did or was going to do. Whether judging kings - for them abusing his children, or for the authority he 'allowed those kings', to be abused.

Even when God sent prophets to worldly kings for their punishment, or 'reguidance', it was always for his people's benefit.

Also with the gospel of Jesus Christ - for the benefit of those who would believe the gospel. Those who will believe in Jesus Christ with all their heart are God's people. Even before they are saved,  for God knows them from the womb. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 7/8/2016 at 9:51 AM, DaveW said:

I don't know if this is clumsy wording, but the Gospel is for the benefit of unbelievers.

No, Dave it is not for the benefit of unbelievers. 

It is for the benefit of those that WILL believe. 

Technicality?  Yes.

Yes the gospel saves the lost, but ONLY when they believe it.

Then that means they are saved and no longer lost. Hence, behold - a child of God.

So - when does the gospel benefit one who dies and goes to hell Dave? It doesn't. Yet when one becomes a believer,  that same gospel DOES benefit them.

But I sit here talking too much.

The 7th Shmita is nothing Eric.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
39 minutes ago, Eric Stahl said:

Do you all know that interest rates on government bonds are so low you have to pay interest to some governments to take your money. The world is panicking. Many countries are in danger of defaulting on their payments. The prices of commodities have fallen and the value of their monies have fallen against the dollar.

Ask the third world people if the shemita has hurt them!

 

 Mt 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. 
 25 ¶ Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 
 26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 
 27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 
 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 
 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 
 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? 
 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 
 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 
 33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. 
 34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
3 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

 Mt 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. 
 25 ¶ Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 
 26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 
 27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 
 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 
 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 
 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? 
 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 
 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 
 33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. 
 34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. 

Do you have a winter coat? Do you own a car or home? Do you have food where you sleep at night? Would you like to have food again next week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, Eric Stahl said:

Do you have a winter coat? Do you own a car or home? Do you have food where you sleep at night? Would you like to have food again next week?

We live just like the Church always has Eric. One day at a time. Working with our hands whatever the Lord supplies for us to do to get our daily bread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Yes Eric, I do have all those things. I have them because God graciously supplies them for me, just like the verses I gave you indicate.

 Mt 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. 
 34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

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   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 9 Guests (See full list)

  • Recent Achievements

    • Bro. West went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Nathan Mosel earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Bro. West earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Bro. West went up a rank
      Rookie
    • SureWord went up a rank
      Experienced
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Popular Now

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Bro. West  »  BrotherTony

      The original question by Brother Tony was about Peter being wrong in Acts two. Peter is responsible only for the light God gave him at that point. Later God gave him more light as in Acts 10. He is not the only one to have this happen Apollos (Acts 19:1-7) He was re baptized, why because he did not reject more light given to him.
      Cornelius was another who went by the light that he had, but when Peter spoke to him he received that light, in fact Peter may have received light himself not only about the gentiles, but that the Holy Spirit was given before baptism. (Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Act 10:47) This is different than Acts 2:38.
      My main point is that the book of Acts is a book of progressive revelation and to rest your doctrine now on Acts two will produce damnable heresies. I know this first hand as being a member of the “Church of Christ” in good old Tennessee as a youth. I could of died and went to hell. Here in Indiana we have plenty that place the plan of salvation in Acts two. No, I am your Brother and not a MR. West, that is if you believe what Peter said again: For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 1Pe 3:18. This is the ministry of reconciliation spoke by Paul.
      So let me “TROLL” on out of here. Yours Brother West.
       
       
      · 5 replies
    • farouk  »  Rebecca

      Hi Ms @RebeccaGreat new avatar; so does the rabbit have a name?
      · 1 reply
    • farouk  »  Salyan

      Hi @SalyanInteresting avatar picture there; so does it refer to the Shield of Faith (Ephesians 6), perhaps?
      · 2 replies
    • farouk  »  trapperhoney

      Hi @trapperhoney; great header verse from Acts 20.24! I've thought a lot about that verse in the past...
      · 2 replies
    • farouk  »  John Young

      Hi @John Young Great photo of you guys! (your wife?) I've been away a long while from this site but came back recently...
      · 1 reply
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...