There are three types of Lord’s supper doctrinally – you either
believe in open, close, closed.
Open would be that any believer is free to observe it.
Close would be that only believers of likeminded churches in faith and
Closed would be confined to members of your church. Closed communion
is usually observed at the Sunday Night service, to keep out
strangers. It’s usually not recieved too well when the bread and juice
pass by Christians who don’t understand the position.
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the
blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of
the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for
we are all partakers of that one bread.” (1 Corinthians 10:16–17, KJV)
Since we found yesterday that the word Church is local only and not
universal, the body referred to in 1 Cor. 10:17 is then a local,
individual church. This took me a long time to be comfortable with – I
was too wedded to the idea that the Lord’s Table is open to every
Christian. But we conform our beliefs to Scripture and not the other
The partakers of the bread must all belong to that church. So the
Lord’s table is closed, not close. If you believe the Church is an
invisible universal entity, then you’d naturally gravitate towards
Since we saw yesterday that’s not the case Biblically, that leaves
only one answer.
Baptism comes from an understanding that one is being buried with the
Lord. Your entire body must be placed under the water. Some churches
hold to a belief it must be natural water. I’ve never seen unnatural
water, so yes, you can use tap water.
Just make sure the pump for the baptismal is grounded. We don’t want
the burial literal.
I heard it for years that Baptism is the door of the church. It’s too
well established. I bow my head to it, and there you go.
There’s three ways into the door – letter, statement, and baptism. If
you were baptised once by a Bible believing church, it’s valid. You
can then bring a letter from that church making that known.
Suppose you leave your church on bad terms? Or they have become
Ichabod (candlestick removed)?
The letter is either not forthcoming, or invalid. The letter has to be
from a church. That’s why we have statement. The statement is that you
are a believer in Christ, have been born again, and were baptised.
As mentioned yesterday, the Baptist brider would be reading this and
saying, “yes, but…”
In their eyes, the person administering the baptism must have the
authority to administer baptism. If baptism is the door into the
church, and the true church must be able to prove its descent from the
Jerusalem church started between Matthew 16&18, then the person
administering the baptism must have been baptised by a true church.
That’s a convoluted belief that I don’t agree with, but recognize you
may be asked to be re-baptized if you join an IFB church, as some of
those are Briders.
My seminary was Baptist Brider. I learned a HUGE amount attending
there. I still dont agree with Brider distinctives.
An article intended to clear up misunderstandings now has left you
Just think of closed baptism, and baptism-letter-statement. You’re
good to go.
Ekklesiology is the study of the church, it’s offices and officers.
I’m going to strongly say at the outset that while I suppose you could
call me Landmarkist, I’m not a Baptist Brider.
I believe John the Baptist had a limited office, that of making
straight the paths for the Lord. He was the forerunner, that was all.
If you know much about Baptist Briders – and I don’t think any of my
readers are Briders – you’ll know that’s a sharply defining statement.
Can any believer baptize you? Yes. That’s another sharply defining
doctrinal belief. Every Baptist Brider would read that and shout, “NO!”
Do I believe a Charismatic church could do a year long Biblical study
on doctrine, get themselves doctrinally right, stop the Charismatica,
and become a true church of the Lord Jesus Christ? Yes. There’s some
pre-suppositions there, such as recognizing they may have called upon
the wrong Jesus Christ for salvation and rectified that, etc.
But a Baptist Brider would say no. To the Brider, only a church that
is directly descended from the original Jerusalem church started by
Jesus Christ between Matthew 16 and 18 is a true church. The others
are not true churches.
My belief is that the beliefs and practices of a church define
themselves as a true church of the Lord Jesus Christ. That’s why the
Lord threatens in Revelation 2&3 to remove the candlesticks of those
churches. Can a true church lose their status as a church?
Yes. The Lord states that in Revelation 2&3.
so then it must be that a false church, if they adopt the true beliefs
and practices of a church can become a true church.
Let’s define the word Church bibilically. A church is a local, visible
assembly of believers.
What is the Church not?
It is not an invisible universal assembly of all the saved.
You heard me. That term is actually Kingdom. Too many Christians have
been borrowing the Augustinian definition of the Church without
stopping to examine their Bibles. Elementary hermeneutics teaches us
that we define a worod by the Bible and that if a word is present 50
times with one meaning and 1 time with another, we go with the 50.
More clear interpretations trump less clear.
So go through all the verses in the Bible of church, and write down
whether it is local or universal. If it could go either way, write LU.
Count the L’s. You’ll stop using the term “Universal church” in a
matter of minutes.
If you’ve been reading this blog, you’ll know I place a LARGE emphasis
on soteriology. Shame to know everything there is about Jesus Christ
and not bother getting saved. Eternity is a long time to be wrong.
and a painful experience.
Soteriology is the opposite of Hamartiology.
I’ve read articles where teachers have tried to teach that the
doctrine “one sin will send you to hell” is wrong. Their attitude is
that we inherit the sin of Adam and Eve, and thus we are destined for
Hell anyway. This may be true – but I find it’s far easier to explain
to people that we are personally responsible for our sins.
One sin will send you to Hell.
Grasp that. Now, how many times have you sinned?
How can you overcome the sin? You’ve offended a thrice-Holy God. your
hands and all their works are stained by that sin.
You are incapable of overcoming that. Every work you attempt to
perform to overcome that is insufficient. And if it were sufficient,
your hands are stained by the sin, and everything they touch is
There is no way. you are doomed forever to Hell.
So God decided long before He created us that He himself would die for
us. Bear our penalty. Suffer in our place. He created us knowing we
would sin and reject Him. And He suffered and died for us.
Because we were worthy? No. Because we were not.
God is love.
What work do we have to do to earn this? Crawl on our knees from one
place in our country to the farthest point? Offer one thousand perfect
sacrifices? Do one thousand good works in a row before we sin again?
Two things we must do. Repent – recognize we are sinners deserving of
Hell. Turn to God in our most wretched moment and declare ourselves
powerless. Try this lengthy prayer – “Lord God, save me!”
The next thing we must do is accept it.
Jesus died for our sins.
Can we lose that salvation once we gain it?
No. It’s not your salvation to lose!
I struggled with this issue until I heard someone say that from the
pulpit. I’m serious, at that moment my life was changed.
My salvation comes from Jessus Christ. It’s His to Give.
If we could lose it, nobody would make it to heaven. We’d lose it in
minutes, and thus Christ would have died in vain.
Soteriology is recognizing Hamartiology, its consequences, and calling
upon God to save us. Literally, everything we’ve studied up till now
is bound up in this lesson. God, Christ, Holy Spirit, Bibliology,
Hamartiology are bound in Soteriology.
Calling upon the wrong Jesus to save you will result in hell fire. The
“first born again man” concept of the word-faith preachers cannot
save. The “Good moral teacher” cannot save. The “first man to keep the
Torah and thus was chosen as Moshiakh” of the Torah Observant
Messianics cannot save.
But the “God in Human flesh, eternally existent Son of God” saves.
Jesus of Nazareth is God in human flesh, one third of the Trinity,
eternally the Son of God in ways we cannot understand – this one saves.
God is love. Christ is Love. Christ is forgiveness.
Jesus of Nazareth- Yeshua Ha’Netzari (or Notzri depending on your
accent!) – is not a man who ended up God somehow. He always was God.
Pre-existenent. Always the Son of God.
Took your place on the Cross.
Gave you salvation.
The Holy Spirit sealed you unto the day of redemption
Question of the day – what if the tree of life in the garden of Eden
was cross shaped?
As you all know, because I blab about it ad nauseum, Logos 8 is out. And of course it came out two days after I had the money for it, but I’d spent it. If Logos had announced version 8 was out, I’d have already written articles on how to use it, etc.
I’m in the middle of a theology primer series right now, so it’s
either interrupt that to talk about Logos or just wait until I’m done.
That part I haven’t decided. I could get the feature upgrade for $74,
or Logos Baptist Starter for $70. I really can’t see the difference in
the two packages, so I’m going to go with Baptist Starter.
For another hundred – which I don’t have but would love – I could
upgrade to Baptist Bronze, which is the package I had with Logos 7. I’
d gotten Logos 6 Baptist Starter a while ago, then gotten regular
Bronze. I can’t remember if I got the Baptist Bronze or not. It’s been
a busy couple of years.
I know Logos 7 didn’t last long compared to 6 or 5. I’m thinking it
came out a year too early.
I’m rambling. Too much coffee I guess, and a snuffly nose which I keep getting up to go blow my nose, and by the time I come back to my Dell laptop, I’ve lost my train of thought.
I’m going to get Logos 8. Okay, back to your regularly scheduled day.