Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         33
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Jesus' coming Kingdom on land.


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
20 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Yet there are no 12 tribes being ruled by the disciples.

Maybe another thing is being taught by the Lord?

Covenant/replacement, whichever YOU prefer to call it... requires much twisting and omission of large amounts of the word of God. YOU may feel I am erroneous in "particular verses", but if I do err... it is in taking the word of God LITERALLY... God meant what was said and said what was meant by GOD!  God didn't make any mistakes in His wording. No mere human knows more than God did when He inspired His words of the bible... to make such claims as you did in reference to Jesus' words: "Maybe another thing is being taught by the Lord?"

You do not believe Jesus meant the actual words He said, and yet earlier you made this statement directed at me: "Your verses here are the usual 'hype' from 'unstudied' content, just rattled off from previous teachers 'of the word', that teach a bunch of mumbo jumbo and tell the sheeple what to believe instead of just accepting the pure word of God from HIS writings."

So which is it? Either you accept "the pure words of God from His writings" as you first claimed, or is it that you believe "another thing is being taught by the Lord" than what His very words actually said.

 

Lastly you called me mean-spirited. Who made these condescendingly snide remarks? It wasn't I, it was you who said:

Towards Alan: "One unfounded opinion, Alan. Sorry to hear this of you." 
Toward Pastor Markle: "The important thing is 'what does Markle think it means?',  which implies something of major importance. Evidently."
Towards me: "You have plenty to learn in making statements like this in a public forum.
Towards Alan: "You are not paying attention Alan. So unlike you"
Towards No Nicolaitans: "Oh yeah, and this might be a clue NN - "
Towards No Nicolaitans: "That man enough for you?"
Towards No Nicolaitans: "Sounds like a question. Am I missing something?"                                                                                                                              Towards me: " your record is not good enough to condemn my view "
Towards me: " "Your verses here are the usual 'hype' from 'unstudied' content, just rattled off from previous teachers 'of the word', that teach a bunch of mumbo jumbo and tell the sheeple what to believe"

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
21 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Can you define regeneration?

I am in it. Aren't you?

Yet there are no 12 tribes being ruled by the disciples.

Maybe another thing is being taught by the Lord?

Yes. The disciples are 'ruling' over the saved and elect children of God as witnesses for all ages to see. You know, the Israel of God, that are all the saved?

Sound silly to you?

It doesn't to me.

 

19 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I believe what the scriptures say, along with what they teach, being lead by the Spirit of God using all the scriptures together.

 

In the above statement I mean that I follow what the scriptures say, with the thought in mind that the scriptures do teach things they may state, in various places, with import on blending together the knowledge of God, leading me to the correlation of the whole set of scriptures, within the cover of my bible.

In other words, every verse by itself is not clear doctrine alone, but the whole set of scriptures give the whole doctrinal picture for us to know what is right to believe.

Hence, in the regeneration of the disciples, they rule by testimony, not literal thrones, based upon the whole set of scriptures. It is because of them testifying through their preaching and teaching, the gospel of Jesus Christ and his eternal kingdom, and writing of the scriptures that teach that.

 

What's strange is, I follow the same when determining what scripture teaches. Yet, when I "use all the scriptures together", I see that the Bible teaches things that will literally happen. When I study "the whole set of scriptures" to get "the whole doctrinal picture", I see clearly that the Bible teaches things that will literally happen.

Hence, though I'm not Pastor Markle, yes...I can define regeneration...and I can define it in the context in which it is used.

Matthew 19:28
And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Now, from what I can tell, you seem to agree that the Lord Jesus Christ will one day (in the future) literally sit on a throne. Why is his throne literal, but the other thrones aren't? On to "regeneration"...

You are applying regeneration to personal salvation; of which, a person who is born again is definitely regenerated. However, this verse isn't referring to personal regeneration. Please note that the wording is...in THE regeneration. Christ isn't talking about the disciples personal regeneration. He's talking about a specific regeneration that will occur when he sits on his throne. He's talking about the regeneration that will happen to the earth during his reign on earth...when things return to how they were on earth before man sinned...the lion will lie down with the lamb, long-physical life, etc. He's talking about how the earth will undergo a regeneration during his literal 1,000 year reign on earth.

...and during THAT regeneration (as the verse above teaches along with all of scripture used together and using the whole set of scriptures to get the whole doctrinal picture)...during THAT regeneration, the Lord Jesus Christ will sit on his throne, and the apostles will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel...literally.

So, no...you're not in the regeneration Genevan.

I only have one last question to ask you; after this, I won't ask you any more questions.

You've made your position clear. You say that you aren't a replacement theology adherent; however, it's clear that you are...at least it is to me. If nothing else, you've replaced literal Bible interpretation with spiritual interpretation. So my final question to you is...

What is your purpose for being here on Online Baptist?

If you follow all of scripture as you claim, the Bible is clear that you shouldn't fellowship with people here...unless that's not literal either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Evidently I am here to do nothing but get chastised for what I believe and to be castigated for teaching and preaching contrary to people who like to replace Jesus Christ's Bride with a lost jewish population in eternity.

Replacement theology is what you all teach in lifting up a lost bunch of jews as God's people and blaspheme God's word, just like your predecessors did before you.

Lucky for planet earth, that teaching only goes back a few generations.

Otherwise the world would have no hope of learning the truth - that Christians are God's only chosen people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

You seem like a nice enough guy Genevan; apparently you also seem to have a good sense of humor. At the same time, you bring a lot of castigation upon yourself by how you use such smart aleck remarks towards others. I was literally appalled a few weeks ago when you kept mocking Trapperhoney's use of "hubby" . You took her term of endearment for the man she loves, and you used it to mock her...repeatedly. 

No one here replaces Christ's bride with lost Israel that I'm aware of. All that I'm aware of is that God made promises specific to his chosen people Israel; promises as yet unfulfilled. Either God lied, or he will keep his promises...and those promises have nothing to do with his chosen people...the church.

For the life of me, I don't see how that's so hard to understand and acknowledge...but you're free to believe what you want. Just don't act surprised and play the victim when you are challenged for propagating your beliefs here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On ‎2015‎年‎11‎月‎15‎日‎ ‎上午‎, HappyChristian said:

I've skimmed through this thread just now and found just what I, sadly, expected to see. GP - watch your attitude. Many of your comments have been dismissive and smart-alecky.That is not to continue. Period. 

And let it be herewith known: just because one of us might not like a question about the Bible does not make it "fatuous." Be mature and simply answer the question, without unnecessary appellation. 

Here's another "f" word that seems to be going on on a couple folks' part: "fractious."  Enough already.

Thank you.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 11/14/2015, 4:11:30, Invicta said:

Brother Scott

I have not been available for a while however I am now.

  Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
34  Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
35  Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
37  Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

The Jews handed over Jesus to the Romans saying he claimed to be a king. 

Jesus said , My kingdom is not of this world:(It is a spiritual kingdom)  if my kingdom were of this world,(Which is not) then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now (at this present time)  is my kingdom not from hence.(It is exists but is not of this world.it is a spiritual kingdom.)

Pilate knew Jesus was a king. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King?  He knew, and wrote above the cross .JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20  This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. 21  Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews.
22  Pilate answered, What I have written I have written. JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.20  This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.21  Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews. 22  Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

But Jesus' kingdoms is a spiritual kingdom, not of this world,.Seeing as somebody brought up Daniel, let's look up a couple of his other prophecies, 

Dan 2:44  And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. 45  Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Jesus set up his Kingdom in the days of the Roman kings and when He returns with his saints He His Kingdom will break in pieces all the previous kingdoms. At that time, Dan 7:18  But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever. Not just for 1,000 years but for ever and ever. 

I guess you satisfied Scott, Invicta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
12 minutes ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I guess you satisfied Scott, Invicta.

Brother "Genevanpreacher,"

Brother "invicta" did indeed answer my question concerning the meaning of the word "now."  In that I am satisfied.

However, I am not satisfied with the position of his answer.  Toward that I intend a further response.  Yet just as he needed time in order to present his response, so I need time in order to present my response.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 11/14/2015, 4:11:30, Invicta said:

Brother Scott

36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jesus said , My kingdom is not of this world:(It is a spiritual kingdom)  if my kingdom were of this world,(Which is not) then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now (at this present time)  is my kingdom not from hence.(It is exists but is not of this world.it is a spiritual kingdom.)

Concerning John 18:36.

In John 18:36 our Lord Jesus Christ presented two basic truths concerning His kingdom.  The first of these truths He presented in the opening portion of His statement – “My kingdom is not of this world.”  The second of these truths He presented in the closing portion of His statement – “But now is my kingdom not from hence.”  In both cases our Lord presented these truths from the negative perspective, concerning something that is not true about His kingdom, and thereby implying something that is true about His kingdom.

In the first place, the Lord declared, “My kingdom is not of this world.”  Herein the negative truth concerning our Lord’s kingdom is rooted in the prepositional phrase, “of this world.”  The preposition “of” is translated from the Greek preposition “ek,” meaning “out of” and indicated the source of origin.  As such, our Lord was revealing that His kingdom is not out of this world as its source of origin.  Furthermore, our Lord was implying that His kingdom is rather out of a different source of origin, that is – out of heaven above as its source of origin.  Even so, with this statement our Lord was not specifically indicating the character of His kingdom, whether it is a physical kingdom or a spiritual kingdom, but was rather indicating the origin of His kingdom, that it is not out of this world, but is out of heaven above.  Now, from this truth we might come to understand that our Lord’s kingdom is a spiritual kingdom, in contrast to a physical kingdom; however, that was not the specific point that our Lord was revealing with His declaration.

In the second place, that Lord declared, “But now is my kingdom not from hence.”  Herein again the negative truth concerning our Lord’s kingdom is rooted in the prepositional phrase, “from hence.”  At this point it is important for us to understand that this is a different and additional truth concerning our Lord’s kingdom because the prepositional modifier is different.  Herein the prepositional modifier is not “out of,” but is “from.”  Actually, the entire prepositional phrase “from hence” is translated from the Greek adverb “enteuthen,” meaning “in, on, at, from the present place” and indicating the location of presence.  Since the only location directly referenced in the context is “this world,” we would understand that “this world” is the location intended by the phrase “from hence.”  As such, our Lord was revealing that His kingdom was not located in, on, at, from this world.  Furthermore, our Lord was implying that His kingdom was rather in, on, at, from a different location, that is – the location of heaven.  However, there is one further modifier in our Lord’s declaration.  It is the adverb “now,” meaning “at the present time.”  Even so, our Lord was revealing that His kingdom was not in, on, at, from the location of this world at the present time in which He was speaking.  However, this declaration does not at all exclude the possibility that our Lord’s kingdom might be in, on, at, from this world as its location at some time into the future from when our Lord was speaking.  This declaration does not directly promise that our Lord’s kingdom will be located in, on, at, from this world sometime in the future; but it does not directly exclude that possibility either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Bro Scott  (you can address me as David)

I will ask you a question which I asked Eric a number of times and which he avoided answering as far as I can remember,

Are you in Christ's kingdom?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
46 minutes ago, Invicta said:

Bro Scott  (you can address me as David)

I will ask you a question which I asked Eric a number of times and which he avoided answering as far as I can remember,

Are you in Christ's kingdom?

 

Brother David,

As a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal and eternal Savior from sin, I am indeed a citizen of Christ's heavenly kingdom.  However, as such a citizen, I am presently dwelling as a stranger (foreigner) and pilgrim in this world.

Furthermore, as a citizen of Christ's heavenly kingdom and in accord with God's Holy Word, I have full assurance of faith that our Lord Jesus Christ shall sometime in the future, as the King of kings of His kingdom, descend out of heaven to establish His kingdom on, in, at, from this world, such that His heavenly kingdom will then also be His earthly kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
30 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother David,

As a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal and eternal Savior from sin, I am indeed a citizen of Christ's heavenly kingdom.  However, as such a citizen, I am presently dwelling as a stranger (foreigner) and pilgrim in this world.

Furthermore, as a citizen of Christ's heavenly kingdom and in accord with God's Holy Word, I have full assurance of faith that our Lord Jesus Christ shall sometime in the future, as the King of kings of His kingdom, descend out of heaven to establish His kingdom on, in, at, from this world, such that His heavenly kingdom will then also be His earthly kingdom.

I think that is what I was trying to say in my previous posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
15 minutes ago, Invicta said:

I think that is what I was trying to say in my previous posts.

Brother David,

I do apologize, for I did not quite understand the above from your previous posts.

I would add concerning my comments above that my first paragraph would fit with Jesus' opening declaration in John 18:36 -- "My kingdom is [present tense existence] not of [as its source of origin] this world [but is out of heaven as its source of origin, being a heavenly kingdom]."  I would further add that my second paragraph would fit with Jesus' closing declaration in John 18:36 -- "But now [at this present time] is my kingdom not from [located on, in, at] hence [this world] [yet sometime in the future that kingdom shall be located on, in, at, from this world]."

Finally, it is my understand concerning your position of belief that we would be in agreement on the following:

1.  That Christ's kingdom is a heavenly kingdom, having its source of origin out of heaven, not out of the earth (God-made, not man-made).
2.  That Christ the King and Christ's kingdom are presently "based" in heaven.
3.  That all genuine believers are citizens spiritually of Christ's kingdom.
4.  That Christ the King and Christ's kingdom will sometime in the future come down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.
5.  That Christ's kingdom, when it comes down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth, shall exist eternally as a kingdom located and "based" on the earth.

However, it is my understanding that we would be in disagreement on the following:

1.  Concerning the timing wherein Christ the King and Christ's kingdom shall come down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.
2.  Concerning the events that shall immediately follow this coming of Christ the King and Christ's kingdom down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.

Am I correct in my above understanding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
28 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother David,

I do apologize, for I did not quite understand the above from your previous posts.

I would add concerning my comments above that my first paragraph would fit with Jesus' opening declaration in John 18:36 -- "My kingdom is [present tense existence] not of [as its source of origin] this world [but is out of heaven as its source of origin, being a heavenly kingdom]."  I would further add that my second paragraph would fit with Jesus' closing declaration in John 18:36 -- "But now [at this present time] is my kingdom not from [located on, in, at] hence [this world] [yet sometime in the future that kingdom shall be located on, in, at, from this world]."

Finally, it is my understand concerning your position of belief that we would be in agreement on the following:

1.  That Christ's kingdom is a heavenly kingdom, having its source of origin out of heaven, not out of the earth (God-made, not man-made).
2.  That Christ the King and Christ's kingdom are presently "based" in heaven.
3.  That all genuine believers are citizens spiritually of Christ's kingdom.
4.  That Christ the King and Christ's kingdom will sometime in the future come down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.
5.  That Christ's kingdom, when it comes down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth, shall exist eternally as a kingdom located and "based" on the earth.

However, it is my understanding that we would be in disagreement on the following:

1.  Concerning the timing wherein Christ the King and Christ's kingdom shall come down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.
2.  Concerning the events that shall immediately follow this coming of Christ the King and Christ's kingdom down out of heaven to be located and "based" on the earth.

Am I correct in my above understanding?

Brother Scott

Yes I believe so.  

Col 1:13  Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

When Jesus returns with His Church, his kingdom will be on earth.
His Church is his spiritual kingdom now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
38 minutes ago, Invicta said:

Brother Scott

Yes I believe so.  

Col 1:13  Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

When Jesus returns with His Church, his kingdom will be on earth.
His Church is his spiritual kingdom now. 

Amen! concerning Colossians 1:13.

On the other hand, I am not certain that I myself would narrow our Lord Jesus Christ's "spiritual kingdom now" to just "His Church."  At first thought, I would include the Old Testament believers therein as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Amen! concerning Colossians 1:13.

On the other hand, I am not certain that I myself would narrow our Lord Jesus Christ's "spiritual kingdom now" to just "His Church."  At first thought, I would include the Old Testament believers therein as well.

! agree with that but I would include OT believers in the church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
55 minutes ago, Invicta said:

! agree with that but I would include OT believers in the church.

Ahhh.  Well then we would also have a disagreement concerning the definition of "the church," what I would call specifically -- "the New Testament church."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Ahhh.  Well then we would also have a disagreement concerning the definition of "the church," what I would call specifically -- "the New Testament church."

Would you like to expand on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Invicta said:

Would you like to expand on that?

Brother David,

Although I could probably (???) give a one or two line answer and explanation, I would prefer some time to present my thoughts in a more organized fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Invicta said:

! agree with that but I would include OT believers in the church.

No OT believers are in the church. John the Baptist, the greatest OT saint, was said to be a "friend" of the bridegroom. Until Christians get this down they'll keep breaking their theological necks on the bible. Just about every false doctrine is the appropriation of scripture from one group of people in the bible to another group of people. The Catholic Church is an expert at this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recent Achievements

    • Mark C earned a badge
      First Post
    • Razor went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Mark C earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • KJV1611BELIEVER earned a badge
      First Post
    • KJV1611BELIEVER earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Popular Now

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 0 replies
    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 1 reply
    • Razor

      Psalms 139 Psalm 139:9-10
      9. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; 10. even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy righthand shall hold me. 
       
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West  »  Pastor Scott Markle

      Advanced revelation, then...prophecy IS advanced revelation in the context of the apostles.
      I really do not know where you are going with this. The Bible itself has revelations and prophecies and not all revelations are prophecies.
      Paul had things revealed to him that were hid and unknown that the Gentiles would be fellow heirs.
      How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Eph 3:3-9
      And I do not mean this as a Hyper-dispensationalist would, for there were people in Christ before Paul (Rom. 16:7). This is not prophecy for there are none concerning the Church age in the O.T..
      Israel rejected the New Wine (Jesus Christ) and said the Old Wine (law) was better, had they tasted the New Wine there would be no church age or mystery as spoken above. to be revealed.
      It was a revealed mystery. Sure there are things concerning the Gentiles after the this age. And we can now see types in the Old Testament (Boaz and Ruth) concerning a Gentile bride, but this is hindsight.
      Peter could have had a ham sandwich in Acts 2, but he did not know it till later, by revelation. But this has nothing to do with 1John 2;23 and those 10 added words in italics. Where did they get them? Did the violate Pro. 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Where did they get this advance revelation? Was it from man, God or the devil?
        I just read your comment and you bypassed what I wrote concerning book arrangement, chapters being added and verse numberings and such. There is no scripture support for these either, should we reject these?
      Happy New Year
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West

      Seeing it is Christ----mas time and I was answering question on Luke 2:33 concerning Jesus, Mary and Joseph . I thought it would be fitting to display a poem i wrote concerning the matter.
      SCRIPTURAL MARY

      I WALK NOT ON WATER NOR CHANGE IT TO WINE
      SO HEARKEN O’ SINNER TO THIS STORY OF MINE
      I, AM A DAUGHTER OF ABRAHAM SINNER BY BIRTH
      A HAND MAID OF LOW ESTATE USED HERE ON EARTH
      MY HAIR IS NOT GENTILE BLOND, I HAVE NOT EYES OF BLUE
      A MOTHER OF MANY CHILDREN A DAUGHTER OF A JEW
      FOR JOSEPH MY HUSBAND DID HONOUR OUR BED
      TO FATHER OUR CHILDREN WHO NOW ARE ALL DEAD
      BUT I SPEAK NOT OF THESE WHO I LOVED SO WELL
      BUT OF THE FIRST BORN WHICH SAVED ME FROM HELL
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               2
      WHEN I WAS A VIRGIN UNKNOWN BY MAN
      THE ANGEL OF GOD SPOKE OF GOD’S PLAN
      FOR I HAD BEEN CHOSEN A FAVOUR VESSEL OF CLAY
      TO BARE THE SON OF THE HIGHEST BY AN UNUSUAL WAY
      FOR THE SCRIPTURE FORETOLD OF WHAT WAS TO BE
      SO MY WOMB GOD FILLED WHEN HE OVER SHADOW ME
      BUT THE LAW OF MOSES DID DEMAND MY LIFE
      WOULD JOSEPH MY BETROTHED MAKE ME HIS WIFE
      I THOUGHT ON THESE THINGS WITH SO NEEDLESS FEARS
      BUT A DREAM HE RECEIVED ENDED ALL FEARS
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                              3
      THEN MY SOUL DID REJOICE IN GOD MY SAVIOR
      HE SCATTERED THE PROUD AND BLESS ME WITH FAVOR
      O’ THE RICH ARE EMPTY, THE HUNGRY HAVE GOOD THINGS
      FOR THE THRONE OF DAVID WOULD HAVE JESUS THE KING
      BUT BEFORE I DELIVERED THE MAN CHILD OF OLD
      CAESAR WITH TAXES DEMANDED OUR GOLD
      TO THE CITY OF DAVID JOSEPH AND I WENT
      ON A BEAST OF BURDEN OUR STRENGTH NEAR SPEND
      NO ROOM AT An INN, BUT A STABLE WAS FOUND
      WITH STRAW AND DUNG LAID ON THE GROUND
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
                                                  4
      MY MATRIX WAS OPEN IN A PLACE SO PROFANE
      FROM THE GLORY OF GLORIES TO A BEGGAR’S DOMAIN
      SO WE WRAPPED THE CHILD GIVEN TO THE HEATHEN A STRANGER
      NO REPUTATION IS SOUGHT TO BE BORN IN A MANGER
      HIS STAR WAS ABOVE US THE HOST OF HEAVEN DID SING
      FOR SHEPHERDS AND WISE MEN WORSHIP ONLY THE KING
      BUT HEROD THAT DEVIL SOUGHT FOR HIS SOUL
      AND MURDER RACHEL’S CHILDREN UNDER TWO YEARS OLD
      BUT JOSEPH MY HUSBAND WAS WARNED IN A DREAM
      SO WE FLED INTO EGYPT BECAUSE OF HIS SCHEME
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               5
      SO THE GIVER OF LIFE, THE ROCK OF ALL AGES
      GREW UP TO FULFILL THE HOLY PAGES
      HE PREACH WITH AUTHORITY LIKE NONE BEFORE
      PLEASE TRUST HIS WORDS AND NOT THE GREAT WHORE
      HER BLACK ROBE PRIEST FILL THEIR LIPS WITH MY NAME
      WITH BLASPHEMOUS PRAISE, DAMMATION AND SHAME
      THERE ARE NO NAIL PRINTS IN MY HANDS, MY BODY DID NOT ARISE
      NOR, AM A DEMON OF FATIMA FLOATING IN THE SKY
      THERE IS NO DEITY IN MY VEINS FOR ADAM CAME FROM SOD
      FOR I, AM, MOTHER OF THE SON OF MAN NOT THE MOTHER OF GOD
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
      6
      FOR MY SOUL WAS PURCHASED BY GOD UPON THE CROSS
      FOR MY SINS HE DID SUFFER AN UNMEASURABLE COST
      I WILL NOT STEAL HIS GLORY WHO ROSE FROM THE DEAD
      ENDURING SPIT AND THORNS PLACED ON HIS HEAD
      YET, IF YOU WISH TO HONOR ME THEN GIVE ME NONE AT ALL
      BUT TRUST THE LAMB WHO STOOL IN PILATE’S HALL
      CALL NOT ON THIS REDEEMED WOMAN IN YOUR TIME OF FEAR
      FOR I WILL NOT GIVE ANSWER NEITHER WILL I HEAR
      AND WHEN THE BOOKS ARE OPEN AT THE GREAT WHITE THRONE
      I AMEN YOUR DAMNATION THAT TRUST NOT HIM ALONE
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, O’ SINNER TRUST ME NOT

                       WRITTEN BY BRO. WEST
       
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...