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
On 10/22/2016 at 11:36 AM, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

No.632.png

 

This can not be a sign because it occurs after Mohammed died. He died in 632 and but this is revealed in 795. This is called hindsight. 

The Lunar Tetrad is on a never ending cycle until God Intervenes during the end of days.

John Henry are you into the Bible Code?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 377
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
23 hours ago, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

Wow! You come up with some wild off the wall ideas! 

Where did I set a date?  I have never set dates.  Not a Rosenthal fan.  Never studied anything of his.

Briefly my end time beliefs are Pre-Tribulation Rapture, and no one knows the day or hour (Matt. 24:36), but we do know the generation (Matt 24:32-34).  We are now in the last days.

I've been trying to show you simple truth, but you come up with nutty false accusations.

I asked that because your chart gives the year 2000 as the beginning of the kingdom.

This is 2016. I am just wanting to hear your answer to this question along with the following -

Did you design all of these charts you are posting? Or are you using someone else's work here? And if you didn't, who did them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 hours ago, MountainChristian said:

This can not be a sign because it occurs after Mohammed died. He died in 632 and but this is revealed in 795. This is called hindsight. 

The Lunar Tetrad is on a never ending cycle until God Intervenes during the end of days.

John Henry are you into the Bible Code?

No, these tetrads and the other signs from heaven that occurred on set Feasts days were not revealed until modern times. You are, therefore, right about hindsight. 

However, during the period of the 795 / 796,  842 / 843 &  860 / 861 tetrads God raised up kings to keep the Moslems at bay, and out of Europe.  If not we would all be speaking Arabic now. 

You are also likely right about the tetrads being on a cycle, but that does not change anything.  God knows all and He knew when Israel would return to their Homeland, when they would regain the Capital, and when the UN would be established which would oppose them at every turn, etc,. etc. 

These phenomena could not have been signs till our day because tetrads and other astronomical phenomena could not have been known to fall on the Biblical feast days until our end time increase of knowledge.  Of necessity this prophesied increase of knowledge was required in order for this wonder to become known.

Daniel 12:4:  "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

Not only the tetrads falling on the Biblical feast days, but historical hind sight is also needed, especially on the first 5 tetrads: 

THE 162 / 163 TETRAD:

Foxe's Book of Martyrs places the beginning of the 4th of ten great early Christian persecutions in 162 AD under the Roman Emperor Marcus Antoninus (161 - 180 AD).  Foxe writes: "The fourth persecution, under Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, ... a man of nature more stern and severe; and, ... toward the Christians sharp and fierce; by whom was moved the fourth persecution.  The cruelties used in this persecution were such that many of the spectators shuddered with horror at the sight, and were astonished at the intrepidity of the sufferers. Some of the martyrs were ... scourged until their sinews and veins lay bare, and after suffering the most excruciating tortures that could be devised, they were destroyed by the most terrible deaths." 
In the Spring of 162 AD the Tiber flooded over its banks destroying much of Rome, drowning many animals and leaving the city in famine. 
Antoninus was co-emperor with Lucius Verus from 161 to 169 AD. In 161 AD the Parthians ousted the king of Armenia, a Roman ally and launched an attack on Syria. That winter the Roman Senate gave it's assent to send Verus to direct the Parthian war in person. Verus arrived in Antioch, Syria in 162 AD.  His generals captured Seleucia and Ctesiphon in 165 AD bringing the campaign to an end.  Verus returned to Rome in triumph, but the returning army carried with them a plague which spread through the Roman Empire between 165 and 180 AD.  The epidemic was named, The Antonine Plague. It ultimately killed an estimated five million people including both co-emperors. It devastated the Roman Empire from Asia Minor to as far as the Rhine.

THE  795 / 796,  842 / 843,  860 / 861 TETRADS:

From this historical map we see that Charlemagne stop Islam from coming any further into Europe than Spain, and that the Byzantines kept them out of Eastern Europe until the 1500's.

During the 66 years of these 3 tetrads the expansion of Islam into Europe was stopped by Charlemagne (b. 748 - 814; r. 768 - 814), King of Franks, in the west; and slowed by the Byzantine Emperor Theophilos (b. 813 - 842 AD, r. 829 - 842) in the east.  In 795 AD Charlemagne established a defensive barrier between France and Spain to wall-out Islamic invaders.  Theophilos lost Sicily to the Muslims in 842 AD and died the same year. 

al-Mu'tasim bi-'llah (795 - 842 AD) was the eighth Abbasid caliph, ruling from 833 to his death in 842.  Mu'tasim was notable as a warrior caliph, waging almost continuous war against the Byzantine Empire, where he personally led the celebrated Sack of Amorium in mid-August 838 AD.  The Sack of Amorium was one of the major events in the long history of the Arab-Byzantine Wars. Anatolia was the birthplace of the ruling Byzantine dynasty.
By the year 860 AD the Greek Byzantine Empire had already been confined by the Muslims to parts of Italy, the southern coasts of the Balkans and Asia Minor.  A major wake up call for the Byzantium to the continued threat posed by Islam came that year.  There were three emirates, namely, 1) the emirate of Melitene under Umar al-Aqta,  2) the emirate of Tarsus under Ali ibn Yahya and 3) the emirate of Qaliqala (Theodosiopolis).  Umar, in particular, was a major threat to Byzantium when he raided and plundered deep into Asia Minor in 860 AD.  Shortly thereafter another raid followed by the forces of Tarsus under Ali, and also a naval attack from Syria sacked the major Byzantine naval base at Attaleia. It was a year of great disaster for Byzantium.  In the summer of 863 AD, Umar struck again, joining forces with the Abbasid general Ja'far ibn Dinar al-Khayyat for a successful raid into Cappadocia. The Arabs crossed the Cilician Gates into Byzantine territory, plundering as they went. Umar's forces represented the bulk of his emirate's strength.  On the Byzantine side, Emperor Michael III had assembled his army to counter the Arab raid, and met them at a battle in an area called Marj al-Usquf (Bishop's Meadow) near Malakopeia, north of Nazianzus.  The battle was bloody with many casualties on both sides; according to the Persian historian al-Tabari, only a thousand of Umar's army survived.  The Byzantines moved quickly to take advantage of their victory: a Byzantine army invaded Arab-held Armenia, and sometime in October or November, defeated and killed the emir Ali ibn Yahya. Thus, within a single campaigning season, the Byzantines had eliminated the three most dangerous opponents on their eastern border.  These successes proved decisive, as the battle permanently destroyed the power of Melitene. The Byzantine victory altered the strategic balance in the region and halted the advance of Islam. 

THE 1493 / 1494 TETRAD:
During the Catholic Inquisitions on March 31, 1492 King Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain sign the Alhambra decree, expelling all Jews from Spain unless they convert to Roman Catholicism.  On the last day of 1492 about 100,000 Jews were expelled from Sicily by Ferdinand II the Catholic.
On August 3, 1492 Christopher Columbus began his first voyage across the Atlantic Ocean, intending to reach Asia.  Columbus returned to Spain from his first voyage of discovery on March 15, 1493 (2 days after Purim)He departed on his second voyage on September 24, 1493 (2 days after Trumpets) and returned to Spain on August 20, 1494.
William Tyndale was born in 1494 (date unknown).  In 1536 Tyndale was convicted of heresy for his Bible translation work. He was executed by strangulation and then burned at the stake. Tyndale's dying prayer that the King of England's eyes be opened was fulfilled in two kings. Just two years later with Henry VIII's authorization of The Great Bible for the Church of England, and 75 years later in godly King James.  The King James Bible is about 80% William Tyndale's work. Tyndales Bible was the first printed Bible in English.  Tyndale's work continues to play a key role in getting God's word to the English-speaking world. The Tyndale Bible was the first of seven translations that culminated in the "pure words" of The King James Bible (Ps. 12:6-7).
 
I really don't see what is so difficult about believing that all this is by the design of the Almighty.  It is wonderful!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
17 hours ago, OLD fashioned preacher said:

Well, I'm sure you won't like this ------ but --- Yes, he's a moderator and No, the attitude you appear to be displaying toward said moderator is not going to be tolerated.

 

But it's ok for others to do it to a newbie!?  You guys are either not reading the thread before you pop off, or you're just piling on.  The moderator spoke inappropriately, but he apologized and I accept his apology.  Are you a Moderator?  There are things I don't tolerate also, my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
12 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Mine was not a dress down John Henry. You spoke your opinion and I spoke mine. Nothing personal was meant, we just have differing opinions. When I posted my reply it was as a Christian Brother, not as a moderator that was reprimanding someone.

I did not put you in a class with unbelievers at all. I simply pointed out what we, as Christians should be concerned with and provided scripture as my argument.

If you were offended at my post I respectfully apologize, I meant no offense. I was simply stating my opinion on a subject you provided.

Brother Jim,

I accept your apology my brother, but it most certainly sounded like a dress down to me. 

About 1/3 of the Bible is prophetic, and it is a very wonderful subject.  I love it!  We need to study the whole Bible, but it seems that most preachers neglect this important subject. 

Thanks again for the apology.

Your friend,

John Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
10 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I asked that because your chart gives the year 2000 as the beginning of the kingdom.

This is 2016. I am just wanting to hear your answer to this question along with the following -

Did you design all of these charts you are posting? Or are you using someone else's work here? And if you didn't, who did them?

Brother? Could you please respond to my last post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators
15 hours ago, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

But it's ok for others to do it to a newbie!?  You guys are either not reading the thread before you pop off, or you're just piling on.  The moderator spoke inappropriately, but he apologized and I accept his apology.  Are you a Moderator?  There are things I don't tolerate also, my friend.

Well, now...nobody spoke inappropriately to you. You TOOK what he said inappropriately. Before YOU continue to pop off, take care. Yes, both Jim and OFP are Mods. As am I. And there are things we will not tolerate - like the attitude you are giving off. Jim did not apologize as a Moderator - he took the high road and apologized because you took such offense. Apparently you do not tolerate others expressing their opinions while you express yours.

Just a friendly warning: take care how you speak. You might be a noob, but there's no need to be a boor. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, HappyChristian said:

Well, now...nobody spoke inappropriately to you. You TOOK what he said inappropriately. Before YOU continue to pop off, take care. Yes, both Jim and OFP are Mods. As am I. And there are things we will not tolerate - like the attitude you are giving off. Jim did not apologize as a Moderator - he took the high road and apologized because you took such offense. Apparently you do not tolerate others expressing their opinions while you express yours.

Just a friendly warning: take care how you speak. You might be a noob, but there's no need to be a boor. 

 

Well, well, well, HappyChristian:

I have moderated groups for many, many years.  Warm greetings when new members come in are appropriate and I am fair when giving warnings. 

Brother Alan tells me that Jim is a good man, and that is what I thought when he appoligized, but him liking the above Nicolaitan reprimand makes me wonder about his sincerity.  Is this the way you treat new members of your churches?!

Please remove me from Online Baptist.  When applying somehow I came in both as JohnHenry and JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com.  I asked a moderator to remove JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com, but no action was ever taken.  Please make sure all my personal info is removed.

Sincerely,

John Henry

Retired Army/USAF

Missionary in S.E.A., 28 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One final post:

Both the discoverer of the astronomical sign of tetrads falling on the Biblical feast days, Mark Biltz, and the one who popularized it, John Hagee, are in grave doctrinal error. Biltz, because of his vile heresy of Kabbalah which greatly dishonors the Lord Jesus Christ, and Hagee because of his dual salvation heresy, one for the Jews and another for others. However, the errors of these two false teachers do not change the fact that the tetrads falling on the feasts are a valid Biblical end time sign.  

The tetrads and other prophetic truths not known to true Baptists is exactly the reason they need to be made known.  The tetrads falling on the feasts of the Lord were not started by heretics; but were only made know by them. As I said, both Mark Biltz, and John Hagee are heretics.  However, I follow the evidence, and the Biblical, scientific and historical evidence for tetrads as signs is irrefutable. The tetrads are additional evidence proving the validity of God's word. And no, I have not read any of Biltz or Hagee books and do not know if they predicted any thing or not.  All signs point to the return of Jesus Christ and no one knows the day or hour of his return, and many also have to do with Israel.

I realize that most of us IFB brethren are anti-signs, especially the signs in heaven, and love to quote Matthew 12 where the Lord dressed down the unbelieving Jewish leaders down, and ignore other Scriptures that tell us that they are end time signs. Some IFB brethren have ignorantly condemned these signs.  They need to repent.  About 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy and to ignore any part of that 1/3 is sin.

I don't thing there is anyone more dedicated to Baptist principals than I am.   KJV only, salvation by grace through faith in the Seed of the woman only, soul winning, local church only, pre-millennial, pre-tribulation rapture of all church Age saved. etc.

"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.   Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.   Brethren, pray for us." (1 Thessalonians 5:23-25)

John Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Guess no answer.

I thought this a little funny -

5 hours ago, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

I realize that most of us IFB brethren are anti-signs, especially the signs in heaven, and love to quote Matthew 12 where the Lord dressed the unbelieving Jewish leaders down, and ignore other Scriptures that tell us that they are end time signs. Some IFB brethren have ignorantly condemned these signs.  They need to repent.  About 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy and to ignore any part of that 1/3 is sin*.

And the NT writers stressed this idea where?

Yes they pointed out some prophecy - but studied the supposed 1/3 of scripture that is prophecy?

Not in the bible.

They were too busy preaching the gospel to the lost - and most prophecy they did teach on dealt with proving that Jesus was the Christ they were waiting for. Not 'end times' mumbo jumbo like JBH is pushing against us 'lost baptists', since we just don't 'get'  some of the "any part" he said that is showing that we are in "sin"*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

I'm sorry, but I didn't see anywhere that John indicated that anyone was "lost". And he didn't say not "getting" what he said was sin. He said ignoring it was. I know, maybe that sounds like semantics, but let's be accurate here.

The fact of the matter is that we are indeed in the end times. We have been since Christ ascended to Heaven. Jesus is coming again. And that is the blessed hope to which we all are to look forward. 2 Tim 4:8 even mentions a crown for those who love his appearing - that would indicate to me that God wants us to want Christ to return...and when we want something, do we not talk about it? Is it not true that the fact of His returning would tend to make us more vested in spreading the Gospel?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

JBH said -

"Some IFB brethren have ignorantly condemned these signs.  They need to repent.  About 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy and to ignore any part of that 1/3 is sin."

This is where I got that we 'lost baptists' don't 'get' it. Semantics? None taken. As it is plain he thinks we (who are Baptists) won't follow 'signs' because we...what did he say..."ignorantly condemned", which means he thinks we are too stupid to see the truth clearly.

My opinon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

Semantics - none taken? I think you misunderstood - semantics simply means "the meaning of something."  

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but not to say that someone said something they didn't. Inferred opinion is one thing. Opinion based on what was actually said is another. I would completely agree that he thinks those who disagree with him are too stupid to see the truth clearly.

That said, it's done. He's gone from the forum and so further discussion about it is moot.

Edited to add: feel free to discuss the substance of what he posted, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Clipboard01.jpgClipboard02.jpgClipboard03.jpgOMX_Iceland_15_SEP-OCT_2008.png

1st we see in 2008, 6.98 was rounded up, no problem with that. But 777.68 was rounded down, problem. The problem is 778 doesn't fit the numerology pattern of 7s. 

2nd, we see in 2008 things got worse, much much worse. 

These patterns was going to repeat last year 2015. The sign failed. God didn't fail, just man saying this was a sign from God. Man failed to understand what is a sign from God. Man added to the Bible using Genesis 1:14.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

For seasons, days, and years was cast away in the explanation of the Tetrads. The pattern of the Tetrads was created by God, only man saying they mean this or they mean that if false.

Jonathan Cahn was left off of the list of false teachers, and he is the brainchild of this falsehood. He is also the brainchild of the Shemitah. The Shemitah meant we was going to be freed from this life of sin. The wonderful rapture was going to take place sometime during the year. Another failed latter day prophet.

So what is a sign? When the sun backs up in the sky, that's a sign. Isaiah 38:8 When the sun and the moon stop, that's a sign. Joshua 10:13 

11 hours ago, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

About 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy and to ignore any part of that 1/3 is sin.

The problem is adding prophecy to the Bible. We have all the signs we need in the pages of the Bible. If the Tetrads or a Shemitah-Rapture was a prophecy it would be in the Bible, not just tacked on to a single word.  

11 hours ago, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

Some IFB brethren have ignorantly condemned these signs.  They need to repent.

Ignoring false prophecy isn't a sin. Ignoring a false prophet isn't a sin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

Mountain's post (and I think GP mentioned it in an earlier post as well...others may have, too) highlights a big problem with the idea of seeing signs: Most of it is hindsight, things that have already happened. So it's easy to fit those into the picture we want to create. That's not how prophecy works.

Also manipulating data to make it fit, as in rounding 777.68 down to 777. Using improper mathematics actually undermines one's cause rather than helping it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 10/29/2016 at 1:35 PM, HappyChristian said:

Semantics - none taken? I think you misunderstood - semantics simply means "the meaning of something."  

Yes it does - but only in context, of which nothing was taken.

Semantics has different types - 

"the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including [1] formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, [2] lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and [3] conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning."

Atleast that's what I read on the internet.

You stated  - "I'm sorry, but I didn't see anywhere that John indicated that anyone was "lost". And he didn't say not "getting" what he said was sin. He said ignoring it was. I know, maybe that sounds like semantics, but let's be accurate here."

So no, no semantics at all - I meant what I said - and you didn't represent what I meant or said.

I stated 'lost baptists', as in baptists that just don't know what they are doing, not salvation-wise. And when I stated that we just don't 'get' it - c'mon, surely you understand that I meant 'understand it' - right?

I think others 'got my drift' - and understood I was being figurative. 

With that said - I agree with the rest of your statement and am glad he is gone.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 28/10/2016 at 0:18 PM, JohnBaptistHenry@yahoo.com said:

Antoninus was co-emperor with Lucius Verus from 161 to 169 AD. In 161 AD the Parthians ousted the king of Armenia, a Roman ally and launched an attack on Syria. That winter the Roman Senate gave it's assent to send Verus to direct the Parthian war in person. Verus arrived in Antioch, Syria in 162 AD.  His generals captured Seleucia and Ctesiphon in 165 AD bringing the campaign to an end.  Verus returned to Rome in triumph, but the returning army carried with them a plague which spread through the Roman Empire between 165 and 180 AD.  The epidemic was named, The Antonine Plague. It ultimately killed an estimated five million people including both co-emperors. It devastated the Roman Empire from Asia Minor to as far as the Rhine.

There was a plague that spread throughout the world at the end of WW1, spread by returning soldiers,or some reports say that it began in North America, and taken to Europe by troops,and spread faster by returning troops.  It was first believed to be a new and strange and virulent form of pneumonia, but later recognised to be flu, with went with the pneumonia.  It killed more people than the war.

Was that a sign?

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, 21 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...