• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Closed communion

Earth Wind and Fire

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I went to a particular Lutheran Church a few miles from me that claimed to be conservative and bible driven... but the first thing I noticed was that nobody brought their own personal bibles with them. Next they barred me, a practicing Baptist from communion... apparently I wasn’t doing it properly. Then one of the elders told me to my face that Baptists were heretics. I called the pastor of that church and told him I had decided not to go there anymore & he kinda got upset. He told me that I was in error but with time he would teach me correctly how to interpret the Bible...I declined.
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Check out the Last Supper. Were the multitudes present, or just the 12?
There were no Christians before Christ's death and resurrection. His disciples really didn't understand what Christianity was until Pentecost. In fact, there was no Church until Pentecost.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Closed communionists are not holding the Last Supper as a model to be replicated exactly. In the realm of the closed part of communion, most see it as indicating principle. If the last/first supper was a private observance restricted to those whom Jesus invited, there would be no reason to suppose the Lord's Supper in the church age cannot also be a private observance restricted to those whom Jesus invites. Maybe that helps explain how closed communionists see it supporting their position without trying to create an exact replica.

I see your point but I think there are too many holes in using the Apostles-only as even a guideline. Many of the things that happened in the early church are not normative for today. The book of Acts is a transitionary book in some aspects. Very few people recommend selling all personal possessions and giving the proceeds to the church. Then there is the whole sign gifts thing, but I digress.

One of the reasons a pastor gave me for practicing closed communion is to prevent unbelievers from partaking, so as not to bring judgment upon themselves. While admirable, it fails to consider that no one possesses perfect knowledge. Unbelievers can be very convincing imposters. I do not get too bent out of shape about the differing Baptist practices on the Lord's Supper because there as so many Baptist flavors to choose from. Not happy with how First Baptist Church practices the Lord's Supper? Go to Main St. Baptist. Personally, I can live with my current church's position because it is faithful to the gospel, which I believe is paramount.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Hmmm. Are you saying you don't believe the Last Supper was a literal last supper? Are you saying it didn't occur, or that it didn't occur as the bible describes?

Believing it was a literal supper? Yes. That is on me. I believe it occurred just as the bible says.
Ok, trying to make it a precise, literal model to be followed exactly.
 

rlvaughn

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I see your point but I think there are too many holes in using the Apostles-only as even a guideline...
Brother, to clarify, the incident may be used by some as proof of closed communion, or as a guideline how it should be carried out -- but my point was only that it is consistent with closed communion (seemingly more so that with open). The case for closed communion must be built on other things. Nevertheless, there probably are some who use the Last Passover/First Lord's Supper as proof.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
In my opinion that is what you did in post 12.
Your opinion is way off the mark. You couldn't be more wrong.

Where do you see a claim of the Last Supper being a "precise, literal model?"

"Check out the Last Supper. Were the multitudes present, or just the 12?"

Please. You can't just make this stuff up as you go along.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Your opinion is way off the mark. You couldn't be more wrong.

Where do you see a claim of the Last Supper being a "precise, literal model?"

"Check out the Last Supper. Were the multitudes present, or just the 12?"

Please. You can't just make this stuff up as you go along.
Not making anything up. You brought up who was present.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Not making anything up. You brought up who was present.
Of course you are. It is impossible to infer from "Check out the Last Supper. Were the multitudes present, or just the 12?" that I was implying or suggesting "that it a precise, literal model to be followed exactly."
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Of course you are. It is impossible to infer from "Check out the Last Supper. Were the multitudes present, or just the 12?" that I was implying or suggesting "that it a precise, literal model to be followed exactly."
Then how is it a model for closed communion?
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It was an organized (with a pastor/shepherd, and officers) assembly of baptized believers.
Can you logically draw from this instance that Jesus would not be willing to serve communion to all believers? This was a particular instance where he had a specific reason to have an intimate moment with the 12.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Can you logically draw from this instance that Jesus would not be willing to serve communion to all believers? This was a particular instance where he had a specific reason to have an intimate moment with the 12.
I can only say what He did.
 
Top