Does the Bible ever limit social contact between believers?

Does the New Testament ever advocate limiting social contact with another believer?

Romans 14:1-15" TARGET="_blank">Romans 14:1-15:6 teaches the necessity of preserving unity among believers by receiving one another to eat meals together. If verses 5, 14, 15 in chapter 16 refer to three separate churches in Rome, then social contact among believers also preserves a right relationship among assemblies in an area.

2 Thessalonians 3:6-165" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3:6-165 in notably different. The apostle advocates limiting social contact with certain believers. The believers who were not working, using the Lords coming as their reason, were becoming busy-bodies, adversely affecting the heavier of others. If they would not obey Pauls teaching in this letter (verse 14), the believers were to withdraw from them (Verse 6) and have no company with them (Verse 14). This discipline within the assembly could be called "social discipline."

In addition, the words, "have no company," are the same as in 1 Corinthians 5:9" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:9 and 11. There in verse 11, "have no company: includes "with such an one, no not to eat." Both 2 Thessalonians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3 and 1 Corinthians 5" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5 are assembly actions. Social division in the assembly is contrary to the teaching of the New Testament, but social discipline is not a decision by individuals, but by the assembly.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What is the best selling Bible translation (verion) in the United States?

What is the best-selling Bible version in the USA?

Answer: The NIV.

Interesting trends: Shown below are sales rankings realeased by the Christian Booksellers Association for the years 2011, 2009 and 2006.

The Reina Valera 1960 (RVR 1960) moves up to number 6 from 10th place in 2006.

The English Standard Version (ESV) was first published in 2001 and currently holds fifth place in unit sales.

March 2011

Bible Translations - Based on Dollar Sales

1 New International Version various publishers - NIV
2 King James Version various publishers - KJV
3 New King James Version various publishers - NKJV
4 New Living Translation Tyndale - NLT
5 English Standard Version Crossway - ESV
6 Holman Christian Standard Bible B&H Publishing Group - HCSB
7 New American Standard Bible update various publishers - NASB
8 The Message Eugene Peterson, NavPress -
9 Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish) American Bible Society and licensees - RVR 1960
10 Amplified Bible Zondervan

March 2011
Bible Translations - Based on Unit Sales

1 New International Version various publishers
2 New Living Translation Tyndale
3 King James Version various publishers
4 New King James Version various publishers
5 English Standard Version Crossway
6 Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish) American Bible Society and licensees
7 H olman Christian Standard Bible B&H Publishing Group
8 The Message Eugene Peterson, NavPress
9 New American Standard Bible update various publishers
10 Other Translations

2009
Bible Translations - Based on Dollar Sales

   1. New International Version
   2. New King James Version
   3. King James Version
   4. New Living Translation
   5. English Standard Version
   6. Holman Christian Standard Bible
   7. New American Standard Bible updated
   8. The Message
   9. New International Readers Version
10. Today’s New International Version

2009
Bible Translations - Based on Unit Sales

   1. New International Version
   2. King James Version
   3. New King James Version
   4. New Living Translation
   5. English Standard Version
   6. Holman Christian Standard Bible
   7. The Message
   8. New International Readers Version
   9. New American Standard Bible updated
10. Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish)

2006 - Based on Unit Sales

   1. New International Version
   2. New King James Version
   3. King James Version
   4. New Living Translation
   5. English Standard Version
   6. Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish)
   7. Holman Christian Standard Bible
   8. New American Standard Bible updated
   9. The Message
10. New International Readers Version

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why did our Lord, though not partaking of the bread when instituting His supper, drink of the cup?

Can there be some spiritual truth hidden in this?

We think the idea that the Lord partook of the cup (as above) is based on a misunderstanding of the accounts of the Institution, and on a false inference. The misunderstanding arises from the position of the words, “I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine,” in the Matthew and Mark accounts, and the false inference, from the idea that the Lord had necessarily that moment drunk of the cup in question. It is clear from the Luke 22" TARGET="_blank">Luke 22: account that there were two cups, that in the 17th verse which was the passover cup, and the other the cup of the new supper, the memorials of His body and blood. It was to the former (see v. 18) that the Lord’s words, above quoted, refer. The Lord did not Himself partake of the emblems of His death in either kind, as Luke’s account shews.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How can the content of gospel messages be made interesting?

How can the content of gospel messages be made interesting?

Of first importance is the spiritual power of the message (1 Corinthians 2:4)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 2:4). Second is its clarity (1 Corinthians 14:8,9)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:8,9). For a message to reach an unbeliever, it must capture and retain his attention. Since the gospel is for the benefit of believers (Ephesians 4:12)," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 4:12), they also deserve an interesting presentation of this beloved message.

True and relevant illustrations develop interest and fasten truth in the memory. They are supplements, however; Scripture is central. Variety is important, but that doesn’t require novel passages. The power of a passage is not in what is forced into it, but in what is found within it (Hebrews 4:12);" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 4:12); preaching communicates that power. The New Testament is the primary resource for a New Testament gospel. Many gospel principles and helpful illustrations come from the Old Testament, but their power is in their relationship to New Testament truth. The parables of the Lord and His miracles are rich resources. His interviews with individuals are instructive. The messages in Acts provide rich material for preaching. Great gospel texts, in both the Old and New Testament, are a staple for preaching. Preaching on Ephesians 2:8, 9," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 2:8, 9, for instance, could take various forms: illustrated by the uplifted serpent or by David and Mephibosheth (2 Samuel 9);" TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 9); viewed from the standpoint of the Ephesians who first heard it; developed from the three major words of the text (grace, faith, saved); unified with all the Bible by tracing the thread of "grace" which runs through the New Testament or the entire Bible; compared to the Lord’s conversation with the rich, young ruler. The Bible’s living truth should be vibrant in our lives and our preaching.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Were OT believers born again?

Were Old Testament believers born again?

All believers in any dispensation are born again. Without the new birth, no one can see the kingdom of God (John 3:3)." TARGET="_blank">John 3:3). The Lord teaches there must be a new life to enter the kingdom of God, whatever the dispensation (John 3:5)." TARGET="_blank">John 3:5). Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets will be seen in the kingdom of God (Luke 13:28)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 13:28). Abraham and Moses knew God in an intimate way. John 17:3" TARGET="_blank">John 17:3 teaches that knowing God requires eternal life (being born again).

J. Abernathy

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is taking the bread and the cup an addendum to the Breaking of Bread?

Is taking the bread and the cup an addendum to the Breaking of Bread?

The reason for this question is likely because sometimes taking the bread and cup may appear to be rushed, a necessary ritual before a hurried conclusion to the meeting. As with the assembly in Troas on the first day of the week (Acts 20:6, 7)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:6, 7), our stated objective in our primary meeting on Lord’s Day is to break bread. Our singing, thanksgiving, and Scripture readings are subservient to this purpose. "This do in remembrance of Me" (Luke 22:19;" TARGET="_blank">Luke 22:19; 1Co 11:24, 25)" TARGET="_blank">1Co 11:24, 25) specifically refers to taking the bread and drinking the cup. An unlearned believer (14:16, 23, 24) may enter into the hymns and prayers of worship, but can remember the Lord only when he is in assembly fellowship and partakes of the two emblems, the bread and cup. Remembering the Lord in the breaking of bread is the high point of the gathering. All that precedes it leads up to it; all that follows flows from it.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What does the "fear of death" mean in Hebrews 2?

What is the significance of "fear of death" in this passage?

At least three explanations are possible for the statement in verse 16, "takes hold of the seed of Abraham" (JND). One is that it is just a way of stating for Hebrew readers that He became a man (wouldn’t everyone want to be a child of Abraham?). That would seem to merely repeat the truth of the earlier verses (vv 6-8) and also slight the accuracy of the Spirit’s inspiration. Second, some take it to refer to Abraham’s spiritual seed, all believers. That seems to be out of context with Abraham’s importance in the rest of Hebrews (6:13-18; 11:8-10) and it is truth from Galatians, rather than Hebrews.

The third possibility, taking it to mean that in becoming a man, Christ undertook to meet the need of the literal seed of Abraham, seems more consistent with the thrust of Hebrews. Abraham’s posterity possessed covenant promises from God. It was an everlasting covenant that promised them both the Land for an everlasting possession (Gen 17:4-8)" TARGET="_blank">Gen 17:4-8) and an Heir ("Thy Seed," singular) to possess it (13:15). But how could an heir claim an everlasting possession in a realm under the bondage of corruption (Rom 8:21)" TARGET="_blank">Rom 8:21) and death? The devil, who stands opposed to every purpose God has for His Son, accomplished a masterful stroke in Eden. All things might have been committed to the Son (John 3:35)," TARGET="_blank">John 3:35), but how could that work out in a creation where Satan held authority (Luke 4:6)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 4:6) and exerted the power of death? All the seed of Abraham lived with the "fear of death" in a realm of bondage under a ruler more fearsome than a Pharoah. None of them could claim the Land for an everlasting possession.

The expression "takes hold of" occurs one other time in Hebrews. "I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt" (8:9, quoting Jer 31:32)." TARGET="_blank">Jer 31:32). That redemption from Egypt prefigures another greater redemption when the Lord will bring them into their land for an everlasting inheritance. How?

There was One Who "took part" of flesh and blood with the children of Abraham’s line (Mat 1:1)," TARGET="_blank">Mat 1:1), Who would - by dying and breaking the power of death - nullify him that had the power of death. Now living and exalted, He waits for the day when His people willingly turn to Him and He will bring them into their promised rest.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What time of day should the church celebrate the Lord's Supper?

Why is the Lord’s Supper kept on Lord’s Day morning when according to the Book it was always celebrated in the evening?

The hour for the observance of the Passover was definitely laid down by Jehovah. It was to be “in the evening” ( Exodus12:6)," TARGET="_blank">Exodus12:6), but no such order is given for the celebration of the Supper. No doubt, our Lord instituted His supper at the close of the paschal feast, but He neither enforces the time on the Apostle, nor does Paul in 1 Corinthians 11" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11: . When he reminds the Corinthian saints that it was “the same night that He was betrayed” that our Lord took the bread, etc., the emphasis seems clearly on the proximity to His betrayal, rather than to the fact that it was eventide. In other words, it was not the time of day, but the time in relation to what was to follow.

Christianity is not a system worked on a time-table, like Judaism—”Ye observe days and months and times and years” (Galatians 4:10)." TARGET="_blank">Galatians 4:10). Certain ceremonialists are intensely occupied with the time of the observance, the colour, etc., of the bread (it must not be white, and it must be unleavened!), the kind of wine (it must be “unfermented”). But this verges at best on a mechanical imitation. One wonders why these good folk do not insist on reclining on couches, as no doubt our Lord and His disciples did, or at any rate observing the Lord’s supper on the very day He instituted it. Nothing we can make in the way of bread or wine could adequately represent the holiness or purity of Christ. To interpret the leaven of the Old Testament by literal leaven is not an intelligent understanding of the types. An Old Testament type refers to a New Testament reality. No, we are not to examine the table to see if there be any leaven or “ferment” thereon, but ourselves, lest there be any old leaven of wickedness in us, or malice or untruth.

The early disciples may always have broken bread in the evening, but if so, it was for convenience sake (as they were working all Lord’s Day, as all other days), and that is quite have never heard that any teaching is supposed to depend on evening communion. But how the legal mind of man loves to enforce its enactments on all! “Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath madç us free and be not entangled again in the yoke of bondage,” and if men insist on legislating where the Word of God does not, let us not follow them or be moved by them.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Does "doing all the right things" make a group of believers an assembly?

Does "doing all the right things" make a group of believers an assembly?

No. The title used in the New Testament for an assembly is "church of God." This indicates both the ownership and origin of an assembly. It originates with a divine work. Only God can save souls, but the existence of a number of believers doesn’t constitute an assembly. In Athens, we have no indication of the planting of an assembly, although a number there were saved (Acts 17:34)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 17:34). In the "pattern assembly" at Jerusalem, "they that gladly received His word" were baptized and added to "the fellowship" (Acts 2:41, 42)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:41, 42). This willingness to receive the truth of God is essential in the planting of an assembly, because believers are to "continue steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine." How will these new believers know how to function as an assembly without being taught?

More than that, if the Lord is working to plant an assembly, we would expect some indication that He is raising up a plurality of men with shepherd hearts (Acts 20:28)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:28). Novices are not yet fitted for that work (1 Tim 3:6);" TARGET="_blank">1 Tim 3:6); however, when God is forming an assembly, we would expect some among these new believers to display a potential for that work.

The Lord Jesus explained His use of the word "church" (Mat 18:17)" TARGET="_blank">Mat 18:17) by saying, "Where two or three are gathered together in My name . . ." (v 20). Those gathered did not gather themselves, but are drawn to "the name" by another agent, evidently the Spirit of God. This is related to the Old Testament expression, "the place which the Lord shall choose to place His name there" (Deu 16:2)." TARGET="_blank">Deu 16:2). The Lord establishes the testimony (places His name) and believers are drawn to what He has established.

"Doing all the right things" will never make a company an assembly if the Lord has not first of all made it an assembly.

David Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is there a difference between the

Is there a difference between the “Principalities” and “Powers” mentioned in Ephesians 1:21; 3:10; 6:12;" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:21; 3:10; 6:12; Colossians 1:16;" TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:16; 2:10 and 2:15?

Some of the statements made concerning them suggest that they are good, others that they are evil.

The words “principalities” and “powers,” when used together, define the status of certain who hold high place of rule, whether among men, or among angelic beings. In the former connection they are found in Titus 3." TARGET="_blank">Titus 3. i, where we are exhorted to be subject to them; while of the latter the clearest example is perhaps Ephesians 6:12, in which they are definitely set in contrast with “flesh and blood.” In some passages, as Romans 8:38," TARGET="_blank">Romans 8:38, Ephesians 1:21," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:21, Colossians 1: 16," TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1: 16, they occur in a statement of such a character that it might perhaps be thought of as inclusive of both.
With regard to those principalities and powers which are angelic, there certainly does seem to be a difference on the lines indicated in the question above. Against those mentioned in Ephesians 6:12" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 6:12 we have to fight, and verse I shows that their leader is the Devil. But on the other hand, the principalities and powers of Ephesians 3:10," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 3:10, who are even now learning lessons through the Church of the manifold wisdom of God, can scarcely be thought of as other than good, especially when comparison is made with the similar statement of 1 Peter 1:12," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 1:12, “Which things angels desire to look into.” It must not be thought however that their being described as “in heavenly places” is sufficient proof of their goodness, since this is the very same term which is rendered “high places” in connection with those of chapter 6. z (see R.V.).
According to Col 1:16," TARGET="_blank">Col 1:16, all principalities and powers were created by Christ, and this of course implies that they were all good originally. But we read in Jude 6" TARGET="_blank">Jude 6 (R.V.) of “Angels which kept not their own principality,” an expression which will at once suggest a reason why there should now be found both good and evil amongst them. Then in Revelation 12:7-9" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 12:7-9 we read of a conflict between good angels under the leadership of Michael and evil angels led by the Devil, in which the latter and his host will be defeated, and cast down to the earth from the heavenly position until then occupied by him.
W.R.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu