KenH
Well-Known Member
It is not foolish to say such, as it was not. Jesus was not baptized in His own name or in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it was not Christian baptism.
-
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!
Communion
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
It is not foolish to say such, as it was not. Jesus was not baptized in His own name or in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it was not Christian baptism.
unprofitable
Active Member
Then His baptism was invalid and John the Baptist and Christ did not accomplish the fulfilling for all righteousness. If Christ was not be able to accomplish his will, the you really do not believe in the sovereignity of God
What do the Scriptures state?
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. 32But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
The discipline of the Lord’s table elements rests squarely upon the individual’s self examination.
When it comes to this memorial, no one other than the individual is to decide if they are worthy.
That is the Scriptures.
Churches with close and even closed communion do violate and disregard this statement by Paul.
unprofitable
Active Member
When the Son came up out of the water,the Father said, this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased. Christ was the first to receive the baptism of the new covenant, this representing him being the firstborn from out of the dead (ones). How could the father be pleased with the son if he did not receive Christian (the originator/his own commandment) baptism.
Such an interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:28 ignores the fact that in context this statement was not made indiscriminately, but to the church at Corinth.
Church folks are urged to examine themselves to know they are partaking the Lord's supper with proper discernment. Making a wide invitation to all people to partake the Lord's supper just because they are present at such a service is a dangerous encouragement to eat the bread and drink the cup unworthily, without discerning the Lord's body.
unprofitable
Active Member
Bro Aged Man, Paul was preaching to the members of the church at Corinth. Remember the verses come out of Corinthians. Do not destroy the scriptures by thowing it out into the world.
Paul begins the letter in Cp 1 vs 2, "Unto THE CHURCH of God which is AT CORINTH. that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints, with all that in every place (churches) call upon the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord, both their's (churches) and ours.
This was a circular letter and Paul covered the address not only to the church at Corinth but to any other body of Christ that would read it. It is a warning to those IN THE CHURCH. Look at verse 18 of Chapter 11. "For first of all, when ye come together (WHERE) in the CHURCH. He is speaking to the members of the church at Corinth. He is rebuking them for the manner in which they (the members) are observing the Lord's supper. He is telling the members at Corinth to examine themselves, not anyone not a member.
Paul begins the letter in Cp 1 vs 2, "Unto THE CHURCH of God which is AT CORINTH. that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints, with all that in every place (churches) call upon the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord, both their's (churches) and ours.
This was a circular letter and Paul covered the address not only to the church at Corinth but to any other body of Christ that would read it. It is a warning to those IN THE CHURCH. Look at verse 18 of Chapter 11. "For first of all, when ye come together (WHERE) in the CHURCH. He is speaking to the members of the church at Corinth. He is rebuking them for the manner in which they (the members) are observing the Lord's supper. He is telling the members at Corinth to examine themselves, not anyone not a member.
unprofitable
Active Member
Bro RIVaughn, Amen brother.
It was stated that a visitor should not be give communion because we do not know his spiritual condition.
Well, do we really know the spiritual condition of church members. How many pastors are living in sin - that the church is unaware of?
AS a pastor, I will mention that it is for those who are born again and then I will ask the congregation to examine themselves and leave it up to them.
Well, do we really know the spiritual condition of church members. How many pastors are living in sin - that the church is unaware of?
AS a pastor, I will mention that it is for those who are born again and then I will ask the congregation to examine themselves and leave it up to them.
unprofitable
Active Member
Bro Salty,
If a member is living in open rebellion he is to be disciplined and not allowed to eat since he would not be in fellowship with the church. If it is a sin not known by the church that only the MEMBER knows of, he is warned to repent before proceeding with the ordinance.
The Passover was not given to nor observed but by the nation of Israel. No one else could eat of it. Likewise someone who is not a member of the body of Christ has not right to the holy ordinance give to the church.
The book of Jude deals with "certain men who crept in unawares" who were "spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear". Such were some at Corinth. They were not outside the church.
If a member is living in open rebellion he is to be disciplined and not allowed to eat since he would not be in fellowship with the church. If it is a sin not known by the church that only the MEMBER knows of, he is warned to repent before proceeding with the ordinance.
The Passover was not given to nor observed but by the nation of Israel. No one else could eat of it. Likewise someone who is not a member of the body of Christ has not right to the holy ordinance give to the church.
The book of Jude deals with "certain men who crept in unawares" who were "spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear". Such were some at Corinth. They were not outside the church.
I never suggested making a wide invitation outside of the severe warning provided in the Scripture that goes along with the self examination.
That said, there should be no refusal of offer by the assembly, the refusal rests solely upon the one offered to partake.
There is no “condemnation” nor “blessing” that I have noticed concerning the unworthy partaking that is against the assembly.
The reproach by God is toward the individual(s) who partake unworthily.
The point I am making is that those who are closed communion- state we dont know the spiritual condition of non-members.
Well, they may not know the spiritual condition of their own members - and that includes their pastors.
From a thesis: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/...r=&httpsredir=1&article=1428&context=doctoral
Lifeway "discovered that approximately two hundred pastors were being fired from their churches each month."
Granted, not all of the 200 were "fired" for sin - but I would think many were.
Thus saying that we want to know the spiritual condition is not a valid reason.
I talked to one pastor about closed communion - he said they do it to make sure they are in doctrine agreement.
So I asked - If a missionary your church financially supports, would he be able to partake. The answer was no - because he is not a member. So I responded - well if you support him - doesn't he agree with you in doctrine? He was unable to answer - His wife mentioned -"good point"
And someone mentioned about having to be a Baptist --- HOGWASH!!! Unless the Last supper (c 33AD) was a Baptist church - that also fails the test! - and since there were no women there - maybe females should not take communion - rather the husband would be taking for his family!
When you observe the Lord's supper, who do you invite to partake and in what language do you invite them?
Not sure what you mean by "no refusal of offer by the assembly," but think you probably mean the church administering the ordinance has no right to refuse anyone? Is that right? Do you invite excluded church members to partake the Lord's supper with you?
That God's reproach "is toward the individual(s) who partake unworthily" in no way contradicts the fact that the individuals Paul instructed to examine themselves were in the church of Corinth. Neither should we surprised that God would not hold the church responsible for the individual's false self-examination.
Do you agree that Paul’s statement absolves the assembly of responsibility and imposes the examination upon the individual persons in attendance?
God holds the church responsible for what they can and should know (see 1 Corinthians 5:1-13, for example) and not for what they cannot know (the internal heart motivation of the partaker). The church at Corinth was to deal with the former (5:3-5), and God was dealing with the latter (11:29-30).
Perhaps you would consider answering my questions as well? Thanks.
Last edited:
KenH
Well-Known Member
Balderdash. Jesus certainly wasn't baptized because He had sins to repent of, nor was Jesus baptized in response to God having regenerated Him and given Him a new heart to replace a heart of stone as Christians have since Pentecost after His crucifixion.
Certainly the church is to exercise discipline of their members; however, is that the issue Paul is concerned with when it comes to communion? No, which, just as you pointed out, was because church dicjiplune was lax resulting in excessive behaviors in which some individuals not examining themselves, and therefore some who partook unworthily were taken from the assembly.
The Corinthian letter, both in chapter 5 and in 11, it was assembly leadership failed in its duty to carefully instruct, however, individuals were still held responsible for their own behavior and their standing before God.
In responding to your post, I am also answering your question.
The leadership, specifically using
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. 32But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
It is not up to the assembly to withhold what the Lord said to take in His memory.
In my opinion, the imploring for self examination should also coincide with time for such examination.
Self examination takes quiet uninterrupted self introspection. Not a sound other then weeping in repentance, calling out to God for forgiveness, and other such expressions coming as the work of the Holy Spirit is taking place in individuals.
People get agitated when a group is in total silence. There becomes a sense of unease, even a foreboding. At the end of the silence, the elements are passed, eaten, a hymn is sung and folks leave silently.
But you know all this. I write for the casual readers for you are a much learned and respected participant.
A pertaining issue to this thread is that most churches withhold the lord’s table from not baptized children of Christian parents.
why?
Are the children not under the authority of the home?
I am not stating an opinion one way or another, rather expressing a thought.
why?
Are the children not under the authority of the home?
I am not stating an opinion one way or another, rather expressing a thought.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
I must admit that I have a problem with some of the comments I have read here. If the Holy Spirit has led someone to want to take communion who are we to say no. It is God that judges the heart and convicts the person.
If a stranger walked into some of the assemblies pictured here what would they think of Christians?
If a stranger walked into some of the assemblies pictured here what would they think of Christians?
Is there a reason we call it the Lords Table and NOT the First Baptist Church Table?
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
Only for the Born Again with their hearts well-tuned.
“For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.” 1 Corinthians 11:29–30 (KJV 1900)
“For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.” 1 Corinthians 11:29–30 (KJV 1900)