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.

Do you have any problem with this photo?


E Morales
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
32 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

No one. But the woman in the photo is holding an assault rifle and a Bible. The only purpose of this rifle is to kill people. So, as she is holding a Bible I want to know where in the Bible it is justified to kill people. Can you give me an answer?

To' me it is a sin to show the Bible and at the same time show it is acceptable to kill people. Show me where in the Bible this would be acceptable. 

Same with a sword. They were made to kill, that is why swords are made for battle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
18 minutes ago, Martyr_4_FutureJoy said:

... no one set them straight until God sent a messenger to tell them ?      I think the assembly in Corinth learned or at least they were told and shown in the Bible how to correct the unnecessary sickness and deaths occurring.

Is that even desired here , or anywhere on the internet for that matter ?   (i.e. who is providing healing?)  

p.s. there are a few sites providing healing information.   When the government finds them, whether real or just for show or for profit selling a way to be healed,  they are usually deleted.

Edited by Martyr_4_FutureJoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
3 minutes ago, Martyr_4_FutureJoy said:

Any example ever seen on the site , or only in private unposted conversations ? 

This board has been going on since 2001. Yes it has taken place. We've had some become Christians, we've had couples meet on here and then get married, and I've seen people turned away from God due to attitudes of members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Just now, PastorMatt said:

This board has been going on since 2001. Yes it has taken place. We've had some become Christians, we've had couples meet on here and then get married, and I've seen people turned away from God due to attitudes of members.

Are you side-stepping on purpose, or do you have any real examples (in their own words/posts) of someone becoming a Christian to show ? (not getting married - thousands get married after meeting on some internet site,  Christian or not).   I did read one example of two people went looking for someone or someplace in person to be saved after reading information or testimony on this site or another Christian testimony online somewhere.   No names nor verification was available though.

Every forum /site/ I've ever seen or read about or could find had more people turned away from God due to the attitudes of members.  This is the standard in and of the world,  and even occurred in the Bible daily.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Brother Matt, it would appear from all of Jeff's posts in this thread that he does not know the difference between self defense and murder, which are two completely different subjects. He, as well a Bill do not understand that just because they "see" a gun, it is meant to kill people. There are many uses for guns other than killing people. This kind of person would be appalled if you told them that there are people that own guns just to collect and display them.

But we also have Jeff so adamantly focused on medicine and the medical establishment that he can hardly think or talk about anything else. This is all mixed in together in different threads to the point that what he writes makes no sense, not even to himself as per his replies.

I am almost to the point of putting them both on "ignore" and not replying to their posts and feeding their prejudice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

Same with a sword. They were made to kill, that is why swords are made for battle. 

And Jesus called Peter to task for using his sword. Nowhere does Christ condone killing others. Indeed, the Bible and Christ teaches pacificism.

Proverbs 25

21  If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat,

and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink,

22  for you will heap burning coals on his head,

and the Lord will reward you.

Christ said to 

love your enemy

turn the other cheek

go the extra mile. 

Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all.

Nothing in Jesus Sermon on the Mount gives permission to kill. 

Either put your faith in Christ or in your weapons. You cannot do  both. 

Jesus denied using violence.

John 18:36 ESV / 270 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
5 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

And Jesus called Peter to task for using his sword. Nowhere does Christ condone killing others. Indeed, the Bible and Christ teaches pacificism.

Your arguing a point that nobody is arguing or disagreeing with. Too funny really. You created an argument, then debate that argument you created. :42_confused:

4 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Jeff, are you seriously almost indicating that the owner of this board may be lying? You almost demand that he provide "evidence" for what he said about people getting saved here

I'm starting to think Bill and Jeff are the same person. lol

@Bouncing Bill For the 1,2454,544,144,654,554,222,445 time please follow the board rules and use KJV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Bill, the subject at hand which was advocated by you is that the gun shown is an "assault weapon". You, like many before you, consider anything that looks mean an assault weapon, just by its looks. Others commented that a sword can qualify as an assault weapon. So, true to your colors you once again deflect and try to get the thread going in another direction. Not all guns are made for killing and not all guns kill.

As I said in one of my first replies to you; Assault is an action, not a device.

6 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

Your arguing a point that nobody is arguing or disagreeing with. Too funny really. 

I'm starting to think Bill and Jeff are the same person. lol

I don't think they are the same person; but they both have minds that zero in on certain specific things to the exclusion of anything else. I think this is called a "one track mind".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
3 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

I don't think they are the same person; but they both have minds that zero in on certain specific things to the exclusion of anything else. I think this is called a "one track mind".

I guess that is more what I was referring to. Too much alike in I'm right everyone else is wrong mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Jeff, are you seriously almost indicating that the owner of this board may be lying? You almost demand that he provide "evidence" for what he said about people getting saved here.

You are drawing very close to being shut out of this site.

Why do you think that ?  

Even the Apostles in the KJV Bible said clearly to prove everything even if an Apostle sent by God said it, and something to the effect, at times anyway,  of having two or more witnesses as well.

 It seems direct questions and answers ought to be welcome and practiced in all honesty and integrity and forthrightness in any group of believers.  

I have continually sought for anyone,  any post,  any reference to anyone ever being saved by online sites or resources for over a decade.  

If anyone can present this,  good and well.  Best of course if someone who is a member on any site is able to post it themselves that they were saved (if possible).  If not,  no worries per se.   I will keep looking, watching , and testing as the Bible says to do.

Same if someone want to know how to cure , for instance,  scurvy.    Will they just take an anonymous internet source without verification as proof,  or will they keep seeking validation for the cure ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
2 minutes ago, Martyr_4_FutureJoy said:

Even the Apostles in the KJV Bible said clearly to prove everything even if an Apostle sent by God said it, and something to the effect, at times anyway,  of having two or more witnesses as well.

Then why you browsing the forum in "Hidden" mode? 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

If brother Matt knows of people who have been saved here, that is good enough and his saying it is a reply. It would seem that just because a person that was saved does not reply to you, that it just isn't valid. Did you ever stop to think that that or any other saved person may have never even returned to this site?

But for you to indicate that you question the truthfulness of Bro. Matt's reply is simply wrong and un-Christ like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

Then why you browsing the forum in "Hidden" mode? 🤣

Why not ?   I usually forget visitors and some members cannot see if I am online or not.   When I am finished posting,  I usually log off. 

  Notice I am not quiet. (i.e. while posting regularly,  it is obvious to other posters I am not "Hidden". )

   I have answered questions in a timely manner,  instead of side-stepping them.     

Sometimes members wait until I log off before they will post answers to questions or other topics, but at least they post answers to questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not hidden.   Seeing if I am on or offline does not change anything that I can see or realize, nor should it for anyone else.

Refusing to answer questions though,  ongoing ?   When Bill did that,  several posters claimed he was constantly side-stepping to avoid the questions.   Does that apply only to Bill , and not to everyone else ?   A double standard so to speak ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

(last (just posted)) first.   How many times is it written in Scripture that someone, anyone, who causes (by their own actions or disobedience) a brother or a sister weak in faith to stumble in their faith a serious sin --- so much so as this in KJV >>  

from KJV Biblegateway

"The Greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven

18 At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

2 He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.

Causing to Stumble

6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come!"

==================================================================

34 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

Your arguing a point that nobody is arguing or disagreeing with. Too funny really. You created an argument, then debate that argument you created. 

I'm starting to think Bill and Jeff are the same person. lol

@Bouncing Bill For the 1,2454,544,144,654,554,222,445 time please follow the board rules and use KJV.

Did I ever not use KJV , other than a few times long ago whether I realized it or not ? 

Bill concentrated on the killing physically aspect.  

I was trying to find out if anyone else noted the murder according to Scripture (KJV) aspect,  not physical murder.   i.e. when someone hates another, 

but that was not even the main point going forward - the one we never got to that is quite evident in the picture,  and no one else at all seems or seemed to realize.

"Causing someone weak in faith to stumble"  is the aspect I was addressing.

If someone put a picture of a thousand gold coins spilt all over a street  and said come get them ,  after a vault truck overturned,  would that not be a stumbling block to someone who wanted the gold ? 

Another poster, long term summed it up I think very well in the following post/ quote: 

 

On 8/30/2018 at 2:31 PM, Brother Stafford said:

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.

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.

...Yet.

 

 

QUOTE CONTINUED: "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. 

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."

 

Another group likewise pointed this out

Well,  if I can find it again,  I may post it.  I had a short observation from  followers of God who consider such blatant immodesty a sin for any believer,  and directly disobedient of God's Instructions, 

and a cause of sin in observers with weak faith or barely able to stay moral.

 

3 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

Also, I can care less if you are in hidden mode or not. I just found it ironic for someone who says they are more upfront thank others to be walking around here in "Hidden" mode. Whatcha hidden? 

There appears to be nothing hidden in my posting and answering questions.   If something is hidden from you,  that is God's Doing,  not my status.

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

  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • 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...