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.

Mid Tribulation fleeing of Israel


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

10 hours ago, robycop3 said:

  OF COURSE the  name "Russia" isn't in Scripture. It didn't exist then. And neither did Islam. But those nations & peoples that DID exist then, & whose names have changed, are named in Scripture, and it's known to us what became of those peoples & what nations they're in today. And, of course, Persia(Iran), Ethiopia, and Libya all existed then and now.

    Scripture doesn't give too many names of people or countries for then-future times too often, but often clearly implies them. It DOES give Cyrus' name before he ruled Medo-Persia, and while Rome existed in Daniel's time, it  does not name Rome as becoming a great empire.

My point is that you are making categorical statements which are actually beyond Scripture.

I stated that it was probably reasonable speculation, but it is not certain.

Only a few years ago people were referring not to "Russia" per se but to "the Soviets" in relation to this.

There is a small but significant difference.

Many many years ago people were pointing to Napoleon as the anti-christ.

The point is that you don't know for certain if Russia will even be in existence when the times you are talking about actually happen.

There could be some sort of socio-political upheaval which changes the whole landscape (politically and nationally) before the anti-christ is revealed.

So again, it is reasonable speculation, BUT IT IS SPECULATION.

I really wish people would not state as fact that which can only be speculation, and they do it so often with prophecy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
15 hours ago, robycop3 said:

Sure!

Ezekiel 38:Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, “Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him, and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks into your jaws, and lead you out, with all your army, horses, and horsemen, all splendidly clothed, a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords. Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya are with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Gomer and all its troops; the house of Togarmah from the far north and all its troops—many people are with you.

 

14 “Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say to Gog, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “On that day when My people Israel dwell safely, will you not know it? 15 Then you will come from your place out of the far north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great company and a mighty army.   

 

3) Feel free to quote the Bible, if you do we ask that you use the KJV. This is done to avoid confusion.
The Administrators and Moderators of this site believe that the KJV is Gods preserved Word for the English speaking people, and we ask that you respect that and use the KJV when quoting scripture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DaveW said:

 

My point is that you are making categorical statements which are actually beyond Scripture.

I stated that it was probably reasonable speculation, but it is not certain.

Only a few years ago people were referring not to "Russia" per se but to "the Soviets" in relation to this.

There is a small but significant difference.

Many many years ago people were pointing to Napoleon as the anti-christ.

The point is that you don't know for certain if Russia will even be in existence when the times you are talking about actually happen.

There could be some sort of socio-political upheaval which changes the whole landscape (politically and nationally) before the anti-christ is revealed.

So again, it is reasonable speculation, BUT IT IS SPECULATION.

I really wish people would not state as fact that which can only be speculation, and they do it so often with prophecy.

 Well, Russia IS "Russia" right now. We don't know what it may be called in the future. And the peoples I named that are no longer nations are mostly in what is now Russia.

A "soviet" is a govt. council within Russia. The Soviet Union was made up of such councils that answered to the central govt. of Russia in Moscow. They were not independent, of course. But, as you know, Scripture specifically IDs those peoples, with several of those nations still existing today, so there should be no question that they'll be in that army that will intend to destroy Israel.

  I'm a person who believes Scripture as literally as possible. While I know there's some symbolism, similes, & metaphors within Scripture, they always represent a literal person, place, thing, or event.  And, Scripture points to a future coalition of mostly-Muslim nations that'll be led by what is now Russia against Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

And again....... you refuse to acknowledge the point - what you state goes beyond the Scripture. 

When you go beyond Scripture,  you go into the arena of speculation and men's philosophy and ideas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DaveW said:

And again....... you refuse to acknowledge the point - what you state goes beyond the Scripture. 

When you go beyond Scripture,  you go into the arena of speculation and men's philosophy and ideas.

 

  Gog, Magog, Rosh, Meshech, Tubal, Togarmah, & Gomer are all in Scripture. And, while their posterity isn't called by those names now, they still all exist, & I pointed out what became of them over time. I think you're arguing just to argue.

Edited by Salyan
Euphemisms and vulgarity are not welcome here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Not arguing for arguments sake - trying to give you some advice.

Proverbs 12: 1  Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, DaveW said:

Not arguing for arguments sake - trying to give you some advice.

Proverbs 12: 1  Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.

  So, please tell me how I'm going beyond Scripture when I named nations & peoples FROM Scripture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It’s been a few years since I studied out this subject - but I do remember reading/studying articles, books, etc. that traced these OT people groups to modern cities, areas, peoples, etc. They very clearly showed their connections to arab and muslim nations today - so would have to agree with Roby on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

OK then, since it is apparently so difficult to understand....

You posted this:

On 3/17/2019 at 6:54 PM, robycop3 said:

  The Gog-Magog war will be when a coalition of Muslim states asks Russia to arm them & lead them against Israel. This will be after the "beast" brokers some kinda deal which will cause Israel to disarm & become "a land of unwalled villages". (The Muslims will have disarmed also, but the old hatred will still be there.) Given the rapidity with which most modern militaries can now move, they'll be able to move faster in the future & will launch their attack before the beast can react. But GOD will intervene for Israel, as Scripture says.

 

  Preterists believe Jesus' warning to flee Jerusalem was carried out during the Roman sieges of 68-70 AD, but, after Vespasian ended the first siege, it was some eight months before his son Titus returned with a larger army which conquered & sacked Jerusalem & destroyed the temple. People had PLENTY of time to escape Jerusalem between the sieges. They didn't have to flee immediately as Jesus warned, so Jesus was referring to another event that'll occur very shortly after the beast commits the "abomination of desolation".

I asked:

On 3/17/2019 at 8:07 PM, DaveW said:

I'm sorry - could you point me to the verse that says the Muslims will join with the Russians?

I can't seem to find it in my Bible.

You replied:

On 3/17/2019 at 8:49 PM, robycop3 said:

Sure!

Ezekiel 38:Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, “Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him, and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks into your jaws, and lead you out, with all your army, horses, and horsemen, all splendidly clothed, a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords. Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya are with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Gomer and all its troops; the house of Togarmah from the far north and all its troops—many people are with you.

 

14 “Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say to Gog, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “On that day when My people Israel dwell safely, will you not know it? 15 Then you will come from your place out of the far north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great company and a mighty army. 

  Drawing a line due north from Jerusalem, the next major nation that line reacher is Russia!

"Gomer" was the Cimmerians of what's now southern Russia & the area of Galatia & Cappadocia

"Togarmah" was an ancestor people of several Turkish peoples and of southeast Anatolia. And i'm sure you know that Magog, Rosh, Meshach & Tubal were all peoples of what's now Russia. In ancient times they had at least one leader called Gog, so the prophecy must be about a modern Russian leader.  I'm sure  you know the current nations named in this prophecy are all Islamic, as are the peoples descended from those old, no-longer-extant nations. In the future,  when they're disarmed, they'll still have plenty of petrodollars, while even now we see Russia is money-strapped, barely able to sustain its military. Russia doesn't exactly care for Israel either, so it won't be hard for the Muslim nations involved to hire Russia to arm & lead them to war.

 

Now please note: NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE PASSAGE YOU QUOTED DO YOU SEE EITHER RUSSIA OR THE MUSLIMS MENTIONED.

I then replied:

On 3/17/2019 at 9:18 PM, DaveW said:

Oh OK - so it they aren't actually named in the Bible and you are speculating that these that you refer to are the the same as those to whom the Bible refers....

Just so we understand that the Bible doesn't actually NAME either Russia or Muslims in fact.

Is it reasonable speculation? Yeah, probably, but IT IS NOT STATED.

Note that I said I thought it was probably reasonable speculation, but YOU STATED IT AS OUTRIGHT FACT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS.

In STATING IT AS OUTRIGHT FACT you are going beyond the Bible.

As unlikely as it appears to us today, you have to agree that it is possible (Incredibly unlikely, but possible) that in some way the Muslim religion ceases to exist before the time of the passage to which you refer.

And as unlikely as it appears to us today, it is possible that Russia could cease to exist before the time spoken of in the passage you refer to.

THEREFORE because of the fact that you STATE THESE THIGNS IN THE TERMS OF A CATEGORICAL FACT you are going beyond the Bible.

It is really not all that difficult to understand.

State the exact same premise in the terms of likely speculation, or even in terms of probable fulfillment, and I have no problem - I actually agree that in light of what we know today, your premise is the most likely - BUT IS IT NOT BIBLICAL FACT.

And for reference I mentioned that people at one time thought that Napoleon was the anti-Christ. It seemed to make sense to them at the time, but THEIR SPECULATION WAS WRONG

A good number of people also thought that Hitler was the anti-Christ. It made sense to them at the time, but THEIR SPECULATION WAS WRONG.

 

And by the way, there is no indication of Muslims in the Bible - it is various brands of Arab peoples that can be referred to Biblically, but not muslims in general. The fact that the overwhelming majority of Arab nations are also Muslim is true, but biblically irrelevant. You can point to various brands of Arab peoples and SPECULATE about a muslim link, but biblically the only true link that can be made is to their Arab heritage, not their religion per se.

 

In STATING SUCH THINGS AS OUTRIGHT FACT you are going beyond the Bible, and that leads to dangerous places.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DaveW said:

OK then, since it is apparently so difficult to understand....

You posted this:

I asked:

You replied:

Now please note: NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE PASSAGE YOU QUOTED DO YOU SEE EITHER RUSSIA OR THE MUSLIMS MENTIONED.

I then replied:

Note that I said I thought it was probably reasonable speculation, but YOU STATED IT AS OUTRIGHT FACT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS.

In STATING IT AS OUTRIGHT FACT you are going beyond the Bible.

As unlikely as it appears to us today, you have to agree that it is possible (Incredibly unlikely, but possible) that in some way the Muslim religion ceases to exist before the time of the passage to which you refer.

And as unlikely as it appears to us today, it is possible that Russia could cease to exist before the time spoken of in the passage you refer to.

THEREFORE because of the fact that you STATE THESE THIGNS IN THE TERMS OF A CATEGORICAL FACT you are going beyond the Bible.

It is really not all that difficult to understand.

State the exact same premise in the terms of likely speculation, or even in terms of probable fulfillment, and I have no problem - I actually agree that in light of what we know today, your premise is the most likely - BUT IS IT NOT BIBLICAL FACT.

And for reference I mentioned that people at one time thought that Napoleon was the anti-Christ. It seemed to make sense to them at the time, but THEIR SPECULATION WAS WRONG

A good number of people also thought that Hitler was the anti-Christ. It made sense to them at the time, but THEIR SPECULATION WAS WRONG.

 

And by the way, there is no indication of Muslims in the Bible - it is various brands of Arab peoples that can be referred to Biblically, but not muslims in general. The fact that the overwhelming majority of Arab nations are also Muslim is true, but biblically irrelevant. You can point to various brands of Arab peoples and SPECULATE about a muslim link, but biblically the only true link that can be made is to their Arab heritage, not their religion per se.

 

In STATING SUCH THINGS AS OUTRIGHT FACT you are going beyond the Bible, and that leads to dangerous places.

 

 

 

  Still don't know what you're getting at, as neither Islam nor Russia existed in Biblical times. But God, of course, knew they WOULD exist, so He mentioned the peoples that would  become parts of Russia, and some whu would become Islamic nations. Had God said "Russia" or "Islam" to Ezekiel, he wouldn't have known what God was talking about.

   God didn't name Assyria or Babylon well-in-advance to Israel & Judah when He told each of them they'd be conquered by strong nations from the north, although both Assyria & Babylon existed at the time. But he DID tell Hezekiah that some day the gold & silver in the temple would be carried off to Babylon.

 

  I don't see how maning nations from Scripture and pointing out the current nations that descended from them is going beyong the Bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, robycop3 said:

  Still don't know what you're getting at, as neither Islam nor Russia existed in Biblical times. But God, of course, knew they WOULD exist, so He mentioned the peoples that would  become parts of Russia, and some whu would become Islamic nations. Had God said "Russia" or "Islam" to Ezekiel, he wouldn't have known what God was talking about.

   God didn't name Assyria or Babylon well-in-advance to Israel & Judah when He told each of them they'd be conquered by strong nations from the north, although both Assyria & Babylon existed at the time. But he DID tell Hezekiah that some day the gold & silver in the temple would be carried off to Babylon.

 

  I don't see how maning nations from Scripture and pointing out the current nations that descended from them is going beyong the Bible.

God through Daniel did mention the medes and the Greeks before hand and God actually named Cyrus 150 years before he was born in Isaiah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Invicta said:

God through Daniel did mention the medes and the Greeks before hand and God actually named Cyrus 150 years before he was born in Isaiah.

 Correct! but He didn't mention Russia nor Islam. But history shows Magog, etc. became part of what's now Russia, Turkey, etc. same as Persia became Iran. I can't see how calling those ancient peoples by the names of the nations they later became is going beyond the Bible. As things stand right now, there's no nation named Magog with a leader called Gog, so why not use their current names?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
15 hours ago, robycop3 said:

 Correct! but He didn't mention Russia nor Islam. But history shows Magog, etc. became part of what's now Russia, Turkey, etc. same as Persia became Iran. I can't see how calling those ancient peoples by the names of the nations they later became is going beyond the Bible. As things stand right now, there's no nation named Magog with a leader called Gog, so why not use their current names?

Magog is now Georgia, now independent from Russia, I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 3/22/2019 at 7:45 AM, robycop3 said:

  Think you're right, but they might well go along with Russia in that future war.

Ezekiel 38:3-7

3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:

4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:

5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:

6 Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.

7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.

 

Russia is the guard so Russia is Magog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Eric Stahl said:

Ezekiel 38:3-7

3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:

4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:

5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:

6 Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.

7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.

 

Russia is the guard so Russia is Magog.

  That's what I've said for years. Russia is cash-strapped now, & will continue to be. Once the AC brokers a deal which'll cause the Muslims & Jews to disarm,  the Muslims, still bearing their hatred of Israel, will make a deal for Russia to arm &  lead them in an attack upon Israel, which'll then be "a land of unwalled villages".

 

  Notice that  all the nations that existed then, as well as those that were formed from those that no longer exist are all Muslim, except those that are now part ofd Russia. And also notice that Arabia, the seat of Islam, is not among them.

 

  The Muslims have never been very good fighters , except for the Turks, & WW1 showed they were pretty inept at MODERN warfare. Thus, they'll want Russia to lead them, both for their battle expertise, & their arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, robycop3 said:

  That's what I've said for years. Russia is cash-strapped now, & will continue to be. Once the AC brokers a deal which'll cause the Muslims & Jews to disarm,  the Muslims, still bearing their hatred of Israel, will make a deal for Russia to arm &  lead them in an attack upon Israel, which'll then be "a land of unwalled villages".

 

  Notice that  all the nations that existed then, as well as those that were formed from those that no longer exist are all Muslim, except those that are now part ofd Russia. And also notice that Arabia, the seat of Islam, is not among them.

 

  The Muslims have never been very good fighters , except for the Turks, & WW1 showed they were pretty inept at MODERN warfare. Thus, they'll want Russia to lead them, both for their battle expertise, & their arms.

I believe it will be the Shiite Muslims with Russia and the antichrist with the Sunni Muslims from the tribes of Sheba and Dedan in Arabia.God will turn back the Russians till Israel destroys her neighbors. Psalm 83 and Obadiah. Then God will pull Russia against Israel and the antichrists army. Ezekiel 38 & 39

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2019 at 4:36 PM, Eric Stahl said:

I believe it will be the Shiite Muslims with Russia and the antichrist with the Sunni Muslims from the tribes of Sheba and Dedan in Arabia.God will turn back the Russians till Israel destroys her neighbors. Psalm 83 and Obadiah. Then God will pull Russia against Israel and the antichrists army. Ezekiel 38 & 39

  I believe GOD will directly intervene for Israel here, as Israel will be disarmed. This will be the first of His showing the Jews that Jesus is indeed Messiah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, robycop3 said:

  I believe GOD will directly intervene for Israel here, as Israel will be disarmed. This will be the first of His showing the Jews that Jesus is indeed Messiah.

Israel will not give up her nukes. She will blow away Syria Isaiah 17 and Egypt Isaiah19.And all her neighbors Psalm 83. Israel 's glory will be made thin also Isaiah17  so the antichrist will come to help Daniel 11:36-45.

 

Obadiah :18

18 And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • 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...