Is Feet washing an ordainance that Jesus put in the Church.

[Brother Bob]

1 Timothy, chapter 5
"9": Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man,

"10": Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.

This Scripture here is in 1 Tim: and it is talking about a widow indeed is one who hath washed the Saints' feet. It didn't say washed anyone's feet but said the Saints' feet so must of been practice with church people and this was after the Last Supper.

Jesus commanded the Apostle to go into all the world and preach the Gospel and we take that as us too. So why would we cast aside the washing of feet and try to say "well" that was just the Apostles.

I really not too concerned about what others do until they try and condemn what we do then I take offense. I don't have to follow some Baptist creed but I do have to follow the Scriptures.

What you think Jeep?

 

[Jeep Dragon]

(Col 2:16) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
(Col 2:17) Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
(Col 2:18) Let no man beguile you of your reward, in a voluntary humility and worshiping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
(Col 2:19) And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.
(Col 2:20) Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
(Col 2:21) (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
(Col 2:22) Which all are to perish, with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

I do not want to take these verses out of context, but it looks like it says that if any doctrine is man-made, we should not let people judge us concerning their acknowledgement. It is our duty, guided by the Holy Spirit, to recognize the ordinances (if any) are to be observed. If we find commands in their clear context to be specific to us, we must follow them. If we do not see them as a clear ordinance, we must be spirit lead to not offend people if they expect us to observe them.

I have no idea concerning "foot washing" as an ordinance. I've always assumed that the context behind foot washing was that people's feet had to be washed during such times because their feet would directly attract dirt. Also, some things were address directly back then because it both applied back then, and would not hurt to be in the Bible now to let the Holy Spirit let the people who take it as an ordinance be able to bless people in an environment where it would be acceptable and appreciated.

 

[Brother Jeremy Slone]

Webster Dictionary

Ordinance n. Statute
Commandment n. a law or order
Statute n. a law

Acts 15:20 , I think I have more than two or three.

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
John 13:14-15 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.

these teaching here I could make the same points on the first that some of you make on the second. Except those of you that say Christ was just washing their dirty feet. then you probably thought Mary was just washing his dirty feet with her tears.

You know I could see some one in need and feel in my heart to do something for them. Some of you would say thats a good thing to do. But you know what, its a commandment. But I guess this is why we have different handles in front of Baptist. ..........bro. jeremy

 

[Brother Bob]

I think feetwashing is a means of showing humbleness towards one another in the church and also to show that whether we are the ear or the mouth or some uncommonly part we still are all equal in the eyes of God. I for one do not understand how we get around "if I your Lord and Master have washed your feet, then you should also ought to wash one another's, for I have given you an example that you should do one unto the other. He was our example in all things and I don't think we can pick and choose. I think some think it is to belittleing to wash your brother's feet but I take it as an honor.

I agree with you Jeremy and also understand your view Jeep.

 

[TomVols]

Bro Bob wrote:

You don't think it is sinning as long as they do not equate it with Lord's Supper or Baptism. I told you that we do equate it with, and consider it a part of the Lord's Supper, so therefore to not be sinning we can't do that, is what I take you to be saying, if its something different say so.

I see your logic here, but remember that I said this:

there is no Scriptural evidence or command for it to be a continual church practice/ordinance. I don't think churches that practice this are sinning so long as they do not equate it with LS or baptism. rlvaughn is right about that.

I was basically agreeing with what rlvaughn said in that just because something may or may not be an ordinance doesn't mean it cannot be practiced. I further said:

I wouldn't say a church is sinning if they consider FW an ordinance, but as I said I do not believe it is appropriate to say all churches must practice something the Scriptures do not command all churches to practice, and it is not appropriate to say the Scriptures equate FW with bapt/LS when it clearly does not.

That's the context, that's what I said and am saying. I do not believe one's doctrine of ordinances is the bene esse of whether or not one is a heretic :smilewinkgrin:

Regarding Baptist distinctives, you wrote:

What ever they are they are man made so I could care less

Well, you brought 'em up :laugh: Interestingly enough, some pentecostals, Churches of God, etc., practice FW for what it's worth.

1 Tim 5:10 doesn't appear to be strong evidence that the church practiced FW. If that's the case, then did the church practice child-rearing, also mentioned in v. 10? And if FW was in connection with LS, why is LS not mentioned? Just food for thought :thumbs:

As I said, I do not believe FW is a 3rd "ordinance" because the Bible is my guide andmy guide gives me no room to allow this. You disagree. Somehow, I think we're both still saved :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Brother Bob]

I think we're both still saved :smilewinkgrin:

Well, we agree on this anyway. Your Mom and Dad ever long for the good ole days when they were with the United?

 

[TomVols]

Your Mom and Dad ever long for the good ole days when they were with the United?

No. This United Baptist Church (there are few here in Eastern TN) was very unscriptural in its practice and theology. That's why I left (I left years before they did) and when they eventually saw this, they left, too. This particular church adopted very strange practices and unbiblical doctrines, and allowed certain people to engage in gross immorality unchecked, and a myriad of other things. There is only one other United Baptist church that I know of in our county, and it is about 25 miles away. It's been a long time since I've worshipped at that church. I believe they've dwindled down to just a few. My parents saw how faithful to the Word my home church is and it didn't hurt that they could walk to the church since both are along in years. My mother is unable to attend due to failing health, but my father attends every service. He decided age isn't going to slow him down :smilewinkgrin: But truthfully his health is better than hers.

I feel bad for that old church. They lost the concept of what it meant not only to be a United Baptist church, but a Baptist church and a church in general. My heart weeps for them and I pray they turn if Jesus has not already removed their candlestick.

 

[Brother Bob]

Well, your dad sounds like me and he will push on until he falls over. May God bless them both. There are many United in Kentucky and seems the farther North you go the more but they are like the rest of us, they have split after split over the years until we are all small groups. We practice as the old timers and go from church to church each weekend and therefore have good crowds and plenty of visiting preachers. We and when I say we I mean the New Salem, Sardis, Northern New Salem, Friendship, Indian Bottom and Union Associations still hold to very strict living and practice. Our doctrine has not changed to any great extent but some would say different but I do not think so. We practice as our forefathers did and we in no way would allow any immorality among us. I worry about us though for when I was young we had to go to church and that was our Sunday School and stuck with us but now that part is different and we seem to be losing our young. I pray all the time over it but alone do not have the answer. Thanks for your reply and blessings,

 

[TomVols]

Interesting that you mentioned associations. That's one thing this old church eschewed. They claimed they were of the devil. Churches were not to associate with one another formally. Not that there were many United left to associate with, mind you, but they preached against associating with churches (they really preached against Southern Baptist churches). The church also had weekly services (AM, PM, Wed PM). From what I gather, the church used to be part of an association but the church just slipped downward on the downgrade, and slid too far. The church saw a split in the late 80s. A church split off and became a Southern Baptist church. Truthfully, they saw what the rest of us didn't want to see. Eventually, the rest of us opened our eyes (Thank God).

 

[Jeep Dragon]

Food for thought:

According to the Bible, a church consists of two offices: a bishop and deacons.
Bishop is mentioned 4 times in the Bible (I Timothy 3:1-2, Titus 1:7, & I Peter 2:25). All are from the same word ep-is'-ko-pos/ep-is'-ko-pay meaning a superintendent, a Christian officer in charge of a church, or an overseer.
Deacon is only mentioned twice in the Bible (I Timothy 3:10,13). Both are from the same word dee-ak-on-eh'-o meaning an attendant, someone who waits upon, or a servant. According to the Bible the offices in a church are either a bishop (overseer) or a deacon (servant).

A church in the Bible is always ek-klay-see'ah meaning a religious congregation, a synagogue, Christian community, or an assembly.

Whenever there is a gathering of any group of people, at least one person must lead the goup and at least one (hopefully more than one) has to do the duties of service for that group. Anything less would be a mob and not an assembly. It only makes sense that the Bible would expect Christians to assemble together, thus God has administered these two offices to keep order in the gathering.

The Bible mentions gifts of the church:

(1Co 12:27) Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
(1Co 12:28) And God hath set some, in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Pastors in the Bible is always raw-aw' meaning basically a tender of a flock. The exception of the word Pastors is in:

(Eph 4:10) He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
(Eph 4:11) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
(Eph 4:12) For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

The word pastors is poy-mane' having a literal and figurative meaning of shepherd.

If one searches throughout the Scriptures it is very difficult to find where a pastor and a bishop are the same person. Of course one person could fulfill both of those roles as most churches today do.

Why am I yapping on about this when it seems to have nothing to do with the subject?

Maybe, churches in the new testament started off as simple gatherings in houses during times when Christians were persecuted. As persecution ceased, people wanted more organization in the church, thus more "offices" were created and more "authority" was given to men. Look at the hierarchy of offices in the Roman Catholic Church. Besides bishop and deacon, all the other offices were man-made.

Since Rome was a dominating government, people adopted the structure of the Roman church. The separatists decided that they had had enough of the forced religion and formed their own churches. However, they were still greatly under the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, thus many of the customs and ordinances were preserved within their own churches. Man-made authority was still dominant and people assumed that men have a God-given authority to rule other people's spiritual lives.

If one studies the New Testament carefully and thoroughly, one will find commandments from Jesus directly or indirectly given to all of us to obey as the Holy Spirit leads us. One would also find the two offices of a church, the gifts of a church, and Paul's guiding principles for how churches should be run to keep harmony in the assembly.

The idea of certain commands being "church ordinances" may have been adopted from tradition as passed down from Roman influence. We have the Lord's commands for all of us to follow as the Holy Spirit leads us. But, since these commands were told either do always or do often, man naturally tries to codify and organize such to make it easier to follow the commands, yet too much "administered organization" can cause such to become mindless mechanisms that lose the heart.

My advise to everyone is to love the Lord with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind. Don't let traditions and ordinances belittle the commands that Jesus told us to do with a heart of service. Just be careful, my friends. raying:

 

[Brother Bob]

My advise to everyone is to love the Lord with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind. Don't let traditions and ordinances belittle the commands that Jesus told us to do with a heart of service. Just be careful, my friends. raying:

We practice the communion once a year. I think it has much more meaning than when some do it so often it becomes mechanical. I will leave these words with all:
"Make it as sure as you can, for you only pass this way but once."

 

[TomVols]

I agree with you that churches should not do it mechanically, and I've seen many who do it often do it in a meaningful way. If someone can look at the broken body and shed blood of Christ in a mechanical way without passion and heart, then something's wrong.

 

[Brother Bob]

Had a preacher friend say once, if you put a whiskey bottle half full and sit it in the church window everyone will talk about it. If you leave it there for a year or more no one will even see it. There is a lot of truth in that.
The Lord's supper, we cover the table with a white cloth as to represent the shroud and believe me, I instruct everyone to think of the table and the contents as being the body of our Lord and the blood of our Lord with complete silence until the communion part is over. During the feetwashing we sing hymns and then we sing one and go out. It is a very special moment in our church and I always look forward to it.