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.

What would you do?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

A friend and I were discussing this .   She attends a different church a Brethen Assembly.   They are very conservative,  close to IFB in practice and standards, at least her assembly is.  Well they have this woman that attends every once in awhile.   She dresses , well like the world,  the bible would call it a harlot.   Anyway, she is unsaved as of yet.   She wears what my friend says is "cleavage first" and a short skirt.    I asked has anyone said anything to her?   She said, no we just warmly welcome her.   Well I thought that  was really great.  But the truth is Im not so sure what my church would do.  We rarely have visiters that dont belong to another church.  Im not sure what would happen if she came to ours. I personally would welcome her, but others where I attend may do differently.    Some are very protective of their families,  and rightly so.    Opinions on what you might do?   

Edited by Thief on the Cross
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Amen. I agree.   Heartstrings.   We had a woman that attended years ago , she was a bit of a wild one.  Didnt dress terribly inappropriate.   She ended up leaving after some less than kind things were said to her.  The woman who said these things was very upset with herself after , but it was too late then.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

She is lost, you can't, or shouldn't, in my opinion dictate how a visitor dresses. Jesus takes me "just as I am". We should follow His lead in this. The only exception I would make is if this caused some sort of uproar in the membership, then one of the ladies should gently take her under her wing and explain.

I can't think of of anything positive that could come from trying to change a lost person. She would most likely just stop coming, which would be a shame and a lost opportunity for The Holy Spirit to work on her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I went to one church down south, a long while ago, that the women had gotten spare modesty attachments for dresses. They were about the size of a hand towel and attached to the garment. If a new person came and was clear they were trying but just didn't know how to cover properly, one of the older ladies would kindly take here aside and explain the churches modesty requirements and show her how to attach it. Typically those who dressed immodestly did not come on their own but were invited by a conservative relative who would take them aside, so there was not to big of a problem with it for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
15 hours ago, John Young said:

I went to one church down south, a long while ago, that the women had gotten spare modesty attachments for dresses. They were about the size of a hand towel and attached to the garment. If a new person came and was clear they were trying but just didn't know how to cover properly, one of the older ladies would kindly take here aside and explain the churches modesty requirements and show her how to attach it. Typically those who dressed immodestly did not come on their own but were invited by a conservative relative who would take them aside, so there was not to big of a problem with it for them. 

I was told of a church that had spare neck ties at the door, if you showed up without one you were given one to put on.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

WOW!

28 minutes ago, Thief on the Cross said:

I was told of a church that had spare neck ties at the door, if you showed up without one you were given one to put on.   

...and what if you didn't? 

That sounds like more emphasis on the "outside of the cup".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

The majority of our men show up without neckties. While our ladies dress modestly for the most part, several of them still wear pants. They are Christians, not unsaved who attend irregularly. However, we are praying and trusting the Holy Spirit to reach our members as we teach and model Bible principle.  

What might I do in the case of the OP? I would try to befriend the woman - in church and out. Invite her to lunch, and after getting to know her a bit - and her getting to know me and to know that I genuinely care for her - I would ask if she would like to do a Bible study. On salvation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
24 minutes ago, HappyChristian said:

The majority of our men show up without neckties. While our ladies dress modestly for the most part, several of them still wear pants. They are Christians, not unsaved who attend irregularly. However, we are praying and trusting the Holy Spirit to reach our members as we teach and model Bible principle.  

What might I do in the case of the OP? I would try to befriend the woman - in church and out. Invite her to lunch, and after getting to know her a bit - and her getting to know me and to know that I genuinely care for her - I would ask if she would like to do a Bible study. On salvation. 

Just for the person reading this who is not aware - Happy Christian is a lady, and a Pastor's wife - I would suggest that a man not befriend a lady in this way. A man do this for a man, and a woman do this for a woman - or a couple do this....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators
4 hours ago, DaveW said:

Just for the person reading this who is not aware - Happy Christian is a lady, and a Pastor's wife - I would suggest that a man not befriend a lady in this way. A man do this for a man, and a woman do this for a woman - or a couple do this....

Yes, DaveW, thanks for clarifying that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think that not only can and should we have standards of dress in our churches, but that we most definitely do.  I don't believe that there is anyone here that would agree to allow a woman into their church wearing a bikini or a man wearing a speedo; even if it was a church built on a beach.  They would most certainly be spoken to and asked to leave and come back wearing more appropriate clothing.  It is because so many churches have relaxed their expectations of attire that so many people in the world no longer know what is appropriate attire for church; they need to be taught. 

Short skirts, tight clothing, low cut tops and tank tops are just as inappropriate as bikinis and speedos when attending church.  Not only do we have the right to set a higher standard of attire in our churches, but I believe that we have an obligation to our congregations to keep such things out of our services.  We want new converts and visitors, but not at the expense of corrupting our members.  We would not allow someone to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes in a service or attend a service while they are drunk.  We would not allow homosexuals to display affection at our churches.  We wouldn't allow people to sit at a table in the back and gamble.  There are all sorts of things that we would not allow; why should the issue of attire be any different?

Most Catholic churches in Rome will tell women when they are not dressed appropriately and will not let them enter until they are.  Muslim communities, some even in the United States, expect women to dress appropriately out on public streets.  Many worldly establishments have certain dress codes that are accepted.  Many schools, nightclubs and places of business have strict dress codes.  If evil religions and worldly places can require such things, why do we think that we cannot?  I feel ashamed and embarrassed that Muslims have more conviction about modesty than we do.

Since we are set apart and are to be an example and a light to the world, we should be holding ourselves to a higher standard.  We should not be lowering certain standards in order to appeal to sinners.  Yes, we are to be understanding, to a certain degree, to new converts and visitors, but we must also let them know that there is a level of attire and behavior that will not be allowed in our places of worship.

Edited by Brother Stafford
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

I think that not only can and should we have standards of dress in our churches, but that we most definitely do.  I don't believe that there is anyone here that would agree to allow a woman into their church wearing a bikini or a man wearing a speedo; even if it was a church built on a beach.  They would most certainly be spoken to and asked to leave and come back wearing more appropriate clothing.  It is because so many churches have relaxed their expectations of attire that so many people in the world no longer know what is appropriate attire for church; they need to be taught. 

Here's a thought stemming from this point. It's a little bit 'culturally defined', but bear with me. 

The culture at large has a certain sense of 'appropriate dress' or behavior. It varies by location, and definitely isn't up to Biblical standards, but it's there. No one in the world (with a reasonable amount of maturity and self-awareness) would wear that speedo or bikini to a board meeting, or a symphony orchestra. I think they also have a general sense of what is acceptable for visiting a church, and generally, what visitors wear is acceptable - for all but the most modest churches (which is a sad statement on the state of Christianity at large - I'm thinking evangelical churches - more so than on the world). Unless a church's doors actually opened onto the beach sand, I really don't see any visitor ever trying to wear a swimsuit to church.  The 'swimsuit argument' is probably a bit of a straw man.

That all said, if a visitor did walk in in something that even the world culture understood was inappropriate for the setting, I think it would be appropriate to kindly challenge them on that. They either already know that it's inappropriate, or they are severely socially challenged. However, if what they are wearing meets the norms of what the culture/churchianity at large accepts as appropriate church wear, than they are actually trying to be appropriate and respectful. To fail to recognize that, and immediately challenge them to meet 'our' standards... isn't good.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
3 hours ago, Salyan said:

No one in the world (with a reasonable amount of maturity and self-awareness) would wear that speedo or bikini to a board meeting, or a symphony orchestra... Unless a church's doors actually opened onto the beach sand, I really don't see any visitor ever trying to wear a swimsuit to church.  The 'swimsuit argument' is probably a bit of a straw man.

You missed my point.  I was using an extreme example to illustrate that every church believes in a certain minimum of appropriate attire that is expected to be allowed entrance into their services.

3 hours ago, Salyan said:

That all said, if a visitor did walk in in something that even the world culture understood was inappropriate for the setting, I think it would be appropriate to kindly challenge them on that... However, if what they are wearing meets the norms of what the culture/churchianity at large accepts as appropriate church wear, than they are actually trying to be appropriate and respectful.

The problem is that the world keeps changing what it believes to be appropriate attire.  There are things that I have seen women wear to church that even prostitutes would not have worn an hundred years ago; one of the reasons being that they would have been arrested.  The world's acceptable standards get lower and more inappropriate every year.

3 hours ago, Salyan said:

No one in the world (with a reasonable amount of maturity and self-awareness) would wear that speedo or bikini to a board meeting, or a symphony orchestra.

...Yet.

Not long ago, there was a time where no woman would have even considered being seen in public in yoga pants (essentially, slightly more modest pantyhose), but they are 100% comfortable with it today.  When my mother was a young woman, her brothers chased her into the backyard shed for wearing pants and would not let her come out until she agreed to put her dress back on.  There is a photograph of my grandmother lifting the front of her dress, just barely above her knees in order to expose her knees, that she always covered with her hand while we looked through her photo albums when I was a boy. 

3 hours ago, Salyan said:

That all said, if a visitor did walk in in something that even the world culture understood was inappropriate for the setting, I think it would be appropriate to kindly challenge them on that.

Letting the world set the standards for when we draw the line in our churches is a dangerous thing because of the ever lowering of standards of decency.   Again, since many people no longer know what is appropriate to wear in to a church, they need to be taught.  As I said above, we are to be understanding, to a certain degree, with new converts and visitors, but not to the point of allowing unacceptable immodesty.

I also find it interesting that some of the strongest push-back I receive on this issue is from female church members.  When I have invited non believers as guests, often they ask my what they should wear, but if they don't ask, I will just tell them that the men usually wear suits and the women wear loose fitting, high neckline dresses that come below the knees when seated.  I have never had any of my guests balk or complain at all.  They always seem to understand and respect it.

Also, requiring a certain standard is also to make sure that the guests are not uncomfortable.  As a man, I would feel incredibly uncomfortable being the only one in a t-shirt and jeans.  I know that women feel equally uncomfortable when they are the only one under dressed.  I attended a Baptist friend's wedding years before I was saved.  My girlfriend, at the time, was going to meet me there.  Being raised Catholic, I thought I should wear a suit, but she showed up wearing a tight black dress that came to her mid thigh and high heels.  I don't know if I have ever seen another woman blush as much as she did.  She was so uncomfortable that she asked me if she could wear my suit coat and she asked me if we could leave the second the ceremony was over.  Had my friend taken a moment to make sure we were on the same page, or had I made sure she knew how to dress for a church, we could have saved my girlfriend a tremendous amount of humiliation.

I have heard a handful of stories, mostly from women, that tell of a visiting female guest being spoken to about her attire and that that guest never returned.  I have heard the same scenario illustrated, time and time again, that if we hold to such standards, then visitors will be so offended that they shall return again no more.  I have never witnessed it happening, but even if a visitor, who was dressed too immodestly for church, got so offended by a kind and loving explanation of the dress requirements that they never returned, I have no problem with that.  If they are put off by such a reasonable request, they probably were not in the frame of mind to get much out of the service anyway. 

We are not to lower our standards for unbelievers.  Many IFB churches have adopted worldly CCM music for their services to appeal to more people.  Some have even started being okay with bible versions, other than the KJV being used by members. Churches in almost every denomination have full scale coffee shops and there are even some that have actual Starbucks in them.  Standards slip a little bit at a time and never stop falling unless intentional action is taken to stop it and/or reverse it.  We are not to lower our standards to accommodate the world.

Edited by Brother Stafford
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

The problem is that the world keeps changing what it believes to be appropriate attire.  

This is true.

I also find it interesting that some of the strongest push-back I receive on this issue is from female church members.  When I have invited non believers as guests, often they ask my what they should wear, but if they don't ask, I will just tell them that the men usually wear suits and the women wear loose fitting, high neckline dresses that come below the knees when seated.  I have never had any of my guests balk or complain at all.  They always seem to understand and respect it.

That was kinda my point too. When people know what to wear, they're happy to comply. I was speaking to those outsiders who don't know how 'we' precisely dress, so are dressing as they've seen other churches dress. They are trying to be respectful. 

And pushback can come for two reasons: either the women don't agree with the standards themselves (pretty sure that's not me; I'm one of the most conservative in my church), or they have the feminine understanding to know what the unsaid response might be.

We are not to lower our standards for unbelievers.  Many IFB churches have adopted worldly CCM music for their services to appeal to more people.  Some have even started being okay with bible versions, other than the KJV being used by members. Churches in almost every denomination have full scale coffee shops and there are even some that have actual Starbucks in them.  Standards slip a little bit at a time and never stop falling unless intentional action is taken to stop it and/or reverse it.  We are not to lower our standards to accommodate the world.

Never said we should. I was saying that we need to be considerate of the fact that these people are trying to be respectful, in their way, and recognize that we should not expect unbelievers to act like believers. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

I also find it interesting that some of the strongest push-back I receive on this issue is from female church members. 

And yet you ignore my question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
5 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

The problem is that the world keeps changing what it believes to be appropriate attire.  There are things that I have seen women wear to church that even prostitutes would not have worn an hundred years ago; one of the reasons being that they would have been arrested.  The world's acceptable standards get lower and more inappropriate every year.

Brother Stafford,

I certainly agree that the world keeps changing its standards of appropriate cultural attire, and that in many cases it changes toward that which would be Scripturally defined as immoral.  Certainly, when that occurs, we should NOT follow along in the way with them.

Yet it is not always wrong for God's people to adapt with the changing standards of cultural attire.  In fact, the suit coat and tie is a cultural development.  They certainly are not found within Biblical revelation.  Furthermore, pants-wear as outerwear (on men or women) is also a cultural development.  Such also is not found within Biblical revelation.  

Here is a question I have often wondered -- If I (an American man) showed up to most Fundamental Baptist churches wearing an embroidered robe, including tassels and bells on its hem, and wearing a girdle type belt, how would I be accepted in such churches? 

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 9 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...