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.

HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?


John81
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Members
13 hours ago, DaveW said:

Science and the Bible do not oppose each other.

 

Carbon dating has slightly higher than ZERO accuracy in anything more than 50000 years, due to the half life of Carbon 14 - how about you do some genuine research into it. At less than 50000 years there are so many assumptions required that the accuracy you quote of 67% is an absolute made up figure (not by you necessarily, but by whoever you are quoting).

As to formation of geology etc, you might want to look at the region around Mt St Helens, where you will see geological structures which, according to some qualified geologists, are indistinguishable from such structures in may other places (Grand Canyon for instance), but they were OBSERVED IN REAL TIME to have formed in a matter of weeks, rather than "millions of years". Yet evolutionary scientists dismiss the Mt St Helens structures are being the aberration, claiming that the normal way is over great spans of time.

How is this scientific? True science is based in observation, and the plain fact is that the so called science that leads to a belief in millions of years is 100% speculation and 0% observation.

Add to this that there is no known natural biological mechanism to add information to DNA, and it has never been observed to happen (as per true scientific method), and therefore there is no scientifically acceptable way that evolution could possibly happen - if you put aside the speculation and storytelling that is normally associated with evolutionary teaching, and you are left with ABSOLUTELY NO RATIONAL REASON to accept either millions of years, or evolutionary theories.

Read the Bible.

Test what it says against genuine science, using true scientific method.

Ignore the so called experts who tell you to trust them.

They are no different to the Catholic priests throughout time who told people that the Bible was too difficult for the normal to understand and just to trust them.

This is exactly the argument that is used by so called scientists today - it is too difficult for a non-expert to understand so just trust me.

The Bible says to trust no-one, except God.

1 John 4:1
(1)  Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
 

 

 

 

DaveW,

There are actually special preparations that would ensure accuracy of Carbon Dating of objects greater than 50,000 years. My 67% confidence level is from memory. So as to the Zero level of confidence you quoted, you are incorrect. I would suggest you do as you had suggested and read one of the various publications on the subject. The reliability of the results can be improved by lengthening the testing time. For example, if counting beta decays for 250 minutes is enough to give an error of 80 years or more with 68% confidence. 

As far as the reference to Mount St Helens/ Grand Canyon events, you have to understand the science of Geology. The Hawaiian versus events you stated are completely different types of geologic processes. There are several volcano types. My St Helens was a Composite type,  which is typically steep-sided, symmetrical cones of large dimensions, oftentimes very explosive. Hawaiian islands were formed by what is called a Shield Volcano which is composed more of fluid rather than explosive lava flows, forming the islands over the hotspot I have previously mentioned. This is a process that formed these island over millions of years. This is all scientific fact that is verifiable. The sudden changes you mention from the Mt St Helens events has happened many times over the course of history all over the world. God's creation is wonderful. Next you will be telling me Earth is the center of the universe or some nonsense about us not animals.  Just because we believe in Jesus does not mean we have to be blind to scientific facts, which is also God's creation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

JesusLivesInUs

When science disagrees with the Bible, the Bible is always right. It's amazing how the Bible ends up proving Science wrong. At one point, Science said the earth was flat. The Bible said it was round.

There is significant Biblical and Scientific evidence of a young earth, Probably around 6-10 thousand years old, not billions or trillions.

If you want to say evolution is true, do it from Scripture, not faulty science and I am happy to engage in a discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The bible is the most historically accurate book on the planet. Leading scholars will attest to this. What may seem like a contradiction with science in the bible, it is because of the lack of understanding of what the words meant back in those times. When the bible speaks of the 4 corners of the Earth which many bible teachers translate it to as 4 quadrants, or as I would say...North, South, East, and West. Why would God need thousands or millions of years to create sea creatures and birds? When Jesus walked the Earth, He said such things as..."be healed." and they were healed in an instant by His "Spoken Word". Peter cut off Malchus' ear and Jesus replaced it like Mr. Potato head (my apologies, I couldn't think of another example). The wisdom and knowledge of man is at times unreliable. Even if 500 leading scientists disagree with the bible, well guess what? It is written: let God be true, but every man a liar. (Rom.3:4)

Edited by (Omega)
Additional info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I Tim 6:20: O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

Any attempt to reconcile God's Word to humanism (the worship of man & science) is simply masking shame in Christ, the Cross and God's Word. To have shame in God's Word among the heathen is to have shame in Christ. Christ is the Living Word who framed the worlds, The Bible is His Direct and Complete Revelation to man. Without the Word, there is no redemption.

He that believes in Me, shall NOT BE ASHAMED (Romans 9:33 & 10:11)

John 1: 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear (IOWs: no evolution, no big bangs, no beach erosion, no formation of mountains by tenonic plates, nothing on this world naturally created or contributed to the creation of anything else on this world). If you can see it here, God put it here Himself.

Unregenerate "faith" is not saving faith. Most last days "professing christians" will hear "I never knew you" at the Great White Throne. That is all this thread is really about, this man is crying out for help IMO.

 

Edited by wretched
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Due to the half life of Carbon 14 there is insufficient amounts of it remaining to give any worthwhile readings beyond 50000 years. There simply isn't enough left to measure.

You try to sound like you know what you are talking about, but you clearly do not.

I do not know much about geology, but I do know that qualified geologists state that the structures are indistinguishable.

The kind of volcano is irrelevant to my point, but it does show that you are not interested in truth.

And therefore I am no longer interested in your opinion.

Would you mind giving your salvation testimony in the intro section?

I would be interested in reading that.

Edited by DaveW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
10 hours ago, JesusLivesInUs said:

This is a process that formed these island over millions of years. This is all scientific fact that is verifiable.

How is it verifiable? Who observed it? 

Have you performed the laboratory tests yourself? Are you speaking from your personal lab results? Did you calibrate your instruments correctly and use Standard Methods to obtain your results? Did you use a known standard? Did you verify the Chain of Custody (and sign it) in order to prove that the samples hadn't been tampered with? Did you forget to fix the font when you copied and pasted parts of your posts? 

I mean no disrespect, but we are more interested in knowing your own thoughts from your own personal experiences. If you personally have proven evolution, then please share that with us. 

At this point, you are telling us that we're wrong in our belief, yet you've told us nothing which proves such. In fact, much of what you have stated directly opposes the Lord's own words; of whom, you have professed belief in.

I beseech you to reassess what you are placing your faith in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators
On 11/28/2017 at 6:50 AM, JesusLivesInUs said:

. Next you will be telling me Earth is the center of the universe or some nonsense about us not animals.  Just because we believe in Jesus does not mean we have to be blind to scientific facts, which is also God's creation.

First, I don't believe there are any geocentrists on the board (I may be wrong), although there are creationists who are, wrongly, geocentric in their universe eye-view.  But what I want to address is "some nonsense about us not animals..." Now, it is obvious that you accidentally left out a word or two and so this clause is not self-explanatory. So forgive me if I jump to the wrong conclusion as to your intent. Were you saying that humans not being animals is nonsense? Because, I'm sorry to tell you (well, no I'm not) that, if that is your intent, the nonsense lies on your side of the court - we are not animals. Humans were created in the image of God, with a soul. Animals were not. Humans were given dominion over the animals.

Just because we don't have to be blind to scientific facts, it does not follow that we have to blindly accept the unbliblical teachings of "science falsely so called." In fact, we are commanded to avoid them: 

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith..." 1 Tim. 6: 20, 21

Believing in Jesus means accepting Him at His Word - and His Word is very explicit in teaching us that He is the Creator. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't usually watch David Attenborough's nature  progammes on TV, but last night i saw a few minutes of Blue Planet. He said there was a barren Island in the Galápagos  Islands.  There is a lizard there that he said is the only sea going lizard anywhere in the world,  he said they arrived on the island on driftwood, and when there was no food they evolved into sea going creatures to be able to get food.  They must have evolved as soon as they arrived or they would have starved.  OH no wait!  Evolution takes thousands or millions of years.  

Of course there is no evidence for any of this and they call this science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I'm not a scientist by any means, but there are several fairy tales where a frog turns into a prince. Evolution is a good analogy of that sort of fairy tale. The only difference is time.

Edited by (Omega)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • Members

John...you stated in a rather long posting

 

With some trepidation, I toss my two cents into the fire. Here are the questions I will raise and attempt to answer:

(1) Is the real age of a material thing, if it was created supernaturally, what it appears to be? As we will see, the Bible answers this question.
(2) Is it possible to determine the age of any physical thing without first determining whether it was created in time or in eternity?
(3) Were the days of creation, which are described in the first chapter of Genesis, twenty-four hours long, or could they have been much longer?
(4) Is it possible to be truly scientific, if you reject the fact that the earth and its creatures were supernaturally created by God ?ex nihilo? or out of nothing?

So lets have a go at your questions...

 

First, as a scientist, I would have to say the age of the Earth can definitely be 6,000 years ol, as Yes, as a long time missionary, the geneologies show that it is just over 6000 years old including Jacobs Trouble (with Laban) of 21 years)

(1) Is the real age of a material thing, if it was created supernaturally, what it appears to be? As we will see, the Bible answers this question.

 

Id rather you not use the word supernatural, as evolutionists use it in their supernatural theory that violates all the laws that were created in the Beginning. Evolutionists believe in magic and their supernatural theory that violates all the rules and LAWS of Biology and PHYSICS including the Second Law of THERMODYNAMICS. Evolutionists use the word 'natural' as a cop out as if evolution and beneficial mutations are natural. Its word games as that is all they have for proofs, that and intimidation as if science was created by evolution. NO SCIENCE is LAWS is and were created at GENESIS

Age can not be proven, beyond a few thousand years, thats a given. Even radioactive decay is limited with parameters constants that demand no change in the past, which is untrue...And yet Evolutionists deal with billions of years and toss it around and change it at will with their ever changing theories and billion million year approximations. none of which can be proven. They say a fossil is, lets say a billion years old because it is in a layer that is a billion years old. The geologists turn around and say the layer is a billion years old because the evolutionists say the fossils then were a billion years old
 

(2) Is it possible to determine the age of any physical thing without first determining whether it was created in time or in eternity?

In time, means after time was created... time was created by the Lord via light speed.... as it is the barrier between the ETERNAL NOW and the direction of TIME (Entrophy) Evolution contradicts and violates the 2nd Law of THERMODYNAMICS. Creation or the Creator created time, and its by design and corelates to distance, and speeds, as the equation states distance=time x speed. SEE sacred geometry as all speeds, distances, and ytimes are related and are ot separate entities. All things were created to be in harmony and balance. Hyperlinks later if need be for explanation.

 

(3) Were the days of creation, which are described in the first chapter of Genesis, twenty-four hours long, or could they have been much longer?

Remember Light was the first creation, and of course the parameters of Light meaning light speed which puts us in TIME. The Sun and Moon were created which cycles and revolutions gave us the seasons and the solar year, etc... as well as our Earth;s rotation of 24 hours. Yes, the days are exact and are 24 hours... Besides between the arrival of the Suns light for created plants, there obviously were only 24 hours, as they couldnt wait a billion years for the Suns created light to shine on us. SEE Link to Tabernacle of the Sun for its designed distances etc..

 

(4) Is it possible to be truly scientific, if you reject the fact that the earth and its creatures were supernaturally created by God ?ex nihilo? or out of nothing?

To be scientific one has to study the laws of science and proven facts and principles and observations etc etc.... theories are only theories especially when they are unprove-able and untestable as with the unscieitnfic theory of evolution. And your word 'out of nothing' doesnt apply logically to a Creator of everything, because God> Science as He created Science.

Laws are not greater than the one who created all of them (String Theory, TOE etc..) God>Science>all matter

 

In other words, God id MORE than all that He Created... For even if all Creation was destroyed, It would not dimminish His POWER, as He would simply just reCREATE over again... nothing deletes or depletes His POWER as He is all powerful and what He makes is not out of nothing, but from EVERYTHING..

Evolutionists create theories out of nothingness and from simply LUCK and CHANCE. Nothing the Creator has created ever is nothing but is part of the whole Creation as a WHOLE and as a PLAN. The Lord does not go by LUCK and CHANCE but by DESIGN and INTELLIGENCE

 

IHSS (In His Scientific Service

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 2/20/2009 at 5:24 PM, John81 said:

HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?



By Bill Sizemore

February 20, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

.................................................................................................. (edited due to length)

http://www.newswithviews.com/Bill/sizemore166.htm

 

On 2/20/2009 at 6:08 PM, John81 said:

I am posting this because the author takes a bit of a different tact than most. It would be interesting to see how some might corborate or refute some of his ideas.

1: John 81 hasn't been on here in quite some time

2: He pasted in a "News With Views" article by a Berry, not by John.

3:  He never stated he agreed (see post # 2 & 3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And so to answer the original question of the OP.... the Earth is just over 6,000 years if we use Genesis as our scientific measuring ruler.

IE... Each generation being given by Genesis or Moses the author ..... and if added together like Usser did or anyone can do, it shows the Earth is not billions and billions of years old.

Thats an unproven fallacy of unscientific evolution...

IMO

David

40 minutes ago, OLD fashioned preacher said:

 

 

 

3 hours ago, OLD fashioned preacher said:

 

1: John 81 hasn't been on here in quite some time

2: He pasted in a "News With Views" article by a Berry, not by John.

3:  He never stated he agreed (see post # 2 & 3)

Yea tis true as evolutionists almost always run when faced with any kind of scientific opposition...or any questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
10 minutes ago, Davidjayjordan said:

 

 

Yea tis true as evolutionists almost always run when faced with any kind of scientific opposition...or any questions.

Repeat ---- John was not an evolutionist (secular nor theistic) nor a day/age theorist. He was a member (and prolific poster) for MANY years here. He left and was not run off. Is he still alive? Not really sure. Is he missed here, yes.

It behooves an individual to not spout off with limited knowledge (at 70 I would assume that life has taught this. As an individual who professes around 58 years with the Lord, I would think Scripture has taught this)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

John 81 was not an evolutionist. He copied and pasted an article from someone else as an article of interest. He did not say he agreed with it. 

John was a very prolific poster here and a staunch IFB. He just disappeared after having been on these forums for many years. No one kows what happened to him, but I suspect he passed away.

Wow OFP, we posted almost the same words at just about the same time. You may have beat me to it I since saw that there was a new post as I was typing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 minutes ago, OLD fashioned preacher said:

Repeat ---- John was not an evolutionist (secular nor theistic) nor a day/age theorist. He was a member (and prolific poster) for MANY years here. He left and was not run off. Is he still alive? Not really sure. Is he missed here, yes.

It behooves an individual to not spout off with limited knowledge (at 70 I would assume that life has taught this. As an individual who professes around 58 years with the Lord, I would think Scripture has taught this)

Wow, spouting off was rather aggressive when all I said was evolutionists seldom if ever answer questions. """Yea tis true as evolutionists almost always run when faced with any kind of scientific opposition...or any questions."""

Lets encourage them to answer questions, there must be an evolutionist somewhere HEREIN that wants to scientifically defend evolution. For lets be objective rather than subjective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
4 minutes ago, Davidjayjordan said:

Wow, spouting off was rather aggressive when all I said was evolutionists seldom if ever answer questions. """Yea tis true as evolutionists almost always run when faced with any kind of scientific opposition...or any questions."""

Lets encourage them to answer questions, there must be an evolutionist somewhere HEREIN that wants to scientifically defend evolution. For lets be objective rather than subjective.

 

Aggressive? Yes, I admit it was but you had quoted my post in which I made it clear that it was not the stance of the poster (John 81). This was the context in which you accused an evolutionist of fleeing.

As I stated before, IF there is an evolutionist here it will probably be a lurking visitor who may or may not come out of the shadows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

OK, most evolutionists run, I dont know John or Bill or the author, as I was posting genrically and being objective rather than subjective...but in general most evolutionists run and wont answer questions.

And now that I know there are no evolutionists HEREIN, there surely wont be hardly any discussion on this debate evolution/creation sub forum....as we surely all be creationists. TTL...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
11 hours ago, Davidjayjordan said:

John...you stated in a rather long posting 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Davidjayjordan said:

OK, most evolutionists run, I dont know John or Bill or the author, as I was posting genrically and being objective rather than subjective...but in general most evolutionists run and wont answer questions.

And now that I know there are no evolutionists HEREIN, there surely wont be hardly any discussion on this debate evolution/creation sub forum....as we surely all be creationists. TTL...

 

No, you were posting directly by name.

You were corrected on your misunderstanding - at least twice.

Instead of apologising to John - even if he never sees it - you refuse to admit your mistake and instead attack the messengers.

 

Just laying out the correct details here, that's all.

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
      Dedicated
    • Mark C earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Razor earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Mark C earned a badge
      First Post
    • Razor went up a rank
      Collaborator
  • 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...