Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | mouse2 | 50544 | ||
Part 2 Tim, 3. Lord’s Supper: You wrote: Passages describe occurrences of the Lord's Supper, but no passage defines how often one must observe the Lord's Supper or on what day. Let’s examine this. Acts 2:42 “They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Note the word “continually” denoting some degree of regularity and frequency. Let’s read on. Acts 20:7 “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.” Note, “on the 1st day of the week”, how often does the first day of the week occur? Would you agree, every day? For what purpose were they meeting? To break bread. Certainly God needn’t put in every 1st day of the week, it is implied in 1st day of the week. He did not with Exodus 20:8 did He? "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” It was also implied every Sabbath day. A little further we walk. 1 Cor 11:20 “Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper,…” What were they to do when they met together? To eat the Lord’s Supper, yes? Finish reading the passage before you get too excited that I have contradicted myself. 1 Cor 16:2 “On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.” Did they meet regularly? Yes. When? On the first day of the week. To do what here? To give. How often? Every 1st day of the week. So we have the Lord’s Supper observed when they met together (1 Cor 11:20). They met together on the 1st day of the week (1 Cor 16:2) and they did what? Partook of the Lord’s Supper (and gave of their means). 4. Baptism for the remission of sins: You wrote: As the numerous posts on this issue illustrate, there is not a unanimous understanding of what the Bible teaches on this issue. Perhaps, with a little examination of what Christ taught, we can gain some understanding. Read Mark 16:15-16: belief and baptism hand in hand. Read Acts 2:36-41: What had they heard and what had they done? Vs 37 they are “pierced to the heart” . VS 38 what are they told to do? Repent and what? VS 40 they are urged to “Be saved!” How? Vs 41 “So then…” Next, Read Acts 8:26-39. Eunuch is reading vs 28. Philip teaches him vs 35. Exclamation “Look! Water…” vs 37 needs to believe and in vs 38 what? Saul to Paul, read Acts 9:4-19. Hears the Lord’s voice vs 4-6. he is blinded vs 8-9. he receives his sight vs 17-18. What’s the first thing this man does after not eating for 3 days? Vs 18. Then what in vs 19? Why baptism if he was saved without it? Where in Scripture was he saved without it? Read Acts 22:16 for more details from Paul. Two more: Cornelius. Read Acts 10:1-48. Note vs 2. What kind of man was he? Yet he is told to send for Peter. Vs 22 we have the reason for summoning Peter. VS 24 was it important? Vs 34-44 Peter is preaching and teaching. Holy Spirit has come upon the gentiles in vs 44, yet Peter orders them to be baptized vs 48. Read Acts 16:25-34. We have the Jailor now. Vs 29-30 he has been listening to Paul and Silas, no doubt. He certainly saw their condition. Vs 31 Believe! Did it stop there? Vs 32 Paul and Silas spoke to them. What happened in vs 33? Vs 34 is interesting “…and rejoicing greatly having believed in God…” Baptism was included in that belief. Many more examples in Acts. Now what is so confusing about what God asks of us? Why the debate? Where do we come up with things like “Just ask Jesus into your heart?” I have yet to find that one. “We only need faith?” Seems Cornelius had lots of faith and that alone did not save him. 5. Scriptural name: “Almost doesn’t deserve a response.” Hmmm. Is what we are called by unimportant, of no consequence? God certainly made a point of names. He named the 1st man-Adam Gen 5:2. Adam named Eve Gen 3:20. God changed Abram’s name (Gen 17:5), Sarai’s name (Gen 17:15), and Jacob’s name (Gen 32:27-28). Will you now tell me that is of no significance? It was not important? Does God record frivolity? Church of Christ is a designation representing to whom we belong, to whom we owe our allegiance (Acts 4:12). Still believe names are not that important? Bear with me through a syllogism or two. True False “The Bible condemns human names.” 1 Cor 1:12 True False “ ‘Methodist’, or any other human name you wish to use, is a human name?” True False “Therefore, the name “Methodist” is under condemnation.” How about this one: True False “Man is commanded to glorify God in the name ‘Christian.‘ ” 1 Peter 4:16 True False “Catholics, or any other human name you wish to use, is trying to glorify God in the name ‘Catholic’. “ True False “Therefore, Catholics are in disobedience to God’s command.” mouse2 |
||||||
2 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 50559 | ||
Greetings Mouse2! 3) The Lord's Supper: Again, an argument from silence. Not one verse you listed says, "Celebrate the Lord's Supper every Sunday". Notice though that Acts 2:46 says that they met daily. Should we celebrate communion daily. Notice also that 2:46 also specifically says that they broke bread in their homes. So, is the Church of Christ violating Scripture by celebrating the Lord's Supper in a church building? 4) See my many posts on this issue! :-) 5) Quote for me the verse which prescribes the name a Church should use! Concerning your first syllogism: It is false. 1 Cor. 1:12 does not condemn human names, it condemns division caused by following a man rather than Christ. The Church was not saved by Paul, or Peter, or Apollos, but by Christ. On that we agree! :-) My friend, it seems to me that most of what the Church of Christ identifies as being the distinctives of the 'true' Church are simply the opinions of men. They are simply not prescribed in Scripture. They are arguments from silence, not Scripture. The most upsetting part of this whole discussion is that you and your church do not consider someone like me a brother in Christ, simply because I don't belong to your group. It doesn't matter that I have been obedient to Rom. 10:9. It doesn't matter that I have been baptized. It doesn't matter that I have been following Christ for 32 years. All that matters is I'm not part of your group. That fact saddens me greatly. But, you will be very surprised when you meet me in Heaven! :-) Your Brother in Christ, (Whether you know it or not)! Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | mouse2 | 50606 | ||
Indeed. Good Luck. | ||||||
4 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 50609 | ||
Mouse2, your terse comment [Indeed. Good Luck] to Tim Moran in response to his observation that you may be surprised to see him in heaven, is something I find in poor taste at the least; a personal affront and insult is a more candid and accurate way of describing it. Tim has testimony after testimony posted on this forum that leads one surely to believe that he is indeed a regenerate child of the King. That Tim Moran is a Christian I have no doubt whatsoever. Mouse2, an apology to this Christian is the order of the day for you! --Hank | ||||||
5 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | mouse2 | 50640 | ||
Correct. I did let mouth get ahead of my mind. Mouse2 |
||||||