Do Baptists Use the Term "Sacrament" in Communion?

[HopefulNChrist]

Some do, but out of bad habit from their previous experience in other denominations. The term "sacrament" usually refers to a material substance or rite that confers God's grace upon the one who receives it. Communion does not confer God's grace through the means of bread and wine, although Christians are always receiving the grace of God to do any good action or meditation.

Then for the sake of others because of that bad habit, it would do well not to cause them to stumble by not using that term sacrament.

In? No.

And yet you say this below...

I believe that the practice of communion within the fellowship of believers is a touchpoint to Christians over the last 2,000 years, as well as a connection to the heavenly realm, and the real presence of Jesus, as we "recognize the body" of Christ gathered with us.

Catholic can still relate to those self same words on how they are receiving the sacraments in the Baptist church. Not good, brother.

Baptists rarely make the error, so I'm not sure what your concern is all about.

I hope in Him that you will. Our examination of our faith places Christ in us. There is no coming to nor walking away from in regards to His Presence at communion. To say otherwise is to deny His Presence being in you always since salvation.

1 Corinthians 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Paul's words warns believers not to treat the wine and the bread as the actual blood and body of Christ in order to avoid idolatry. How Paul used the word "communion" is meaning referring symbolically in relation to.

He points out how bread is used symbolically in another way below.

17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Then Paul refers to how Israel performed under the Old Covenant system of sacrifices to defer from the New..

18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. 22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

Do not the Catholic Church insists that priests has to be celibate in order to perform the Mass, otherwise married priests can only perform communion? Does not the Mass make that one time sacrifice for sin "made" present by the celibate priest as if they are stronger than Jesus in making Him come down ( how is that voluntary as they say ) and inhabit that sacrifice again?

All those verses to those few churches in Revelation that refers to sacrifice unto idols is referring to the Mass version of communion.... and Luke 13:24-30 signify an iniquity of eating & drinking in His Presence; so that also include the iniquity by Baptists that they believe they are holding communion with the presence of the Holy Spirit being in the worship place.

That, brother, is my concern.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

I pray that God is peradventuring right now in showing why Baptist cannot hold any terms nor any appearance of evil in holding communion as originating from the dead works of Catholicism.

You are drawing an unbiblical comparison. Real faith produces works, but works do not necessarily produce faith. Moreover, grace is not opposed to effort, it is opposed to earning. Earning is an attitude, while effort is simply obedience. If you have true faith, you will be relying on God's grace combined with your effort to produce work for the Kingdom of God.

Matthew 12:35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

Our words matter if our faith is to be seen as standing apart from the dead works of Catholicism. It would be the same as hiding our faith under a bushel because Catholics thinks we are saying the same thing and doing the same thing when coming into His Presence in communion. There can be no partiality with the wicked, right brother?

It's easy. I've done it many times.

My point is .. since you had said that.. is not to use that term "sacrament" at all. But some of your words in this post as quoted does lend to strengthening Catholics in their wickedness.

I had come across some Catholic believers that believe they are saved, but they are remaining in the Church to witness to others. The problem here is... they are still in that Church for which the means of salvation comes by, and so even if they do say that to others, to them, they are staying just in case they are wrong. Again, light under a bushel.

Who are you addressing?

Referring to the questions in the poll survey. I was hoping no Baptist believes that. I had visited a Methodist Church only one time but in that one time for someone's funeral, they had preformed the Mass, and I was like.. how did this happened?

I read an article about Lutheran churches in the UK apologizing to the Catholic Church as they recognize that they were no different from the Catholic Church. Hence .. a little leaven leavens a whole lump.

How long will it be that Baptists will see no difference of coming into His Presence when holding communion to be the same as taking communion with His Presence in the sacraments? Even your words repeated again in quote below make me wonder.

I believe that the practice of communion within the fellowship of believers is a touchpoint to Christians over the last 2,000 years, as well as a connection to the heavenly realm, and the real presence of Jesus, as we "recognize the body" of Christ gathered with us.

I am alarmed for my brothers in the Baptist churches..​

 

[HopefulNChrist]

Continued from last post....

Sorry, since in Christ we "live and move and have our being," we cannot help but be in the presence of Christ.

If we believe He is in us always, then there is no coming into His Presence in the worship place at communion, now is there?

Ah, you are venting at ghosts from your past... That doesn't make for a good conversation with others.

The appearance of evil in the past is being seen again presently, which alarms me.

Not at all. It is completely appropriate to ask for the Spirit to make Himself known and work in our midst as the larger body of Christ. The invocation of the presence of the Triune God....

You should check this thread in this forum at the link below.

Understand God's Prayer System

It is the same rudiment by which slain in the spirit and holy laughter comes by. Another appearance of evil Baptist not abstaining from when Jesus Christ & the Holy Spirit is in us always.

is all about recognizing that we are PART of the body of Christ, not simply individuals. While it is true that somehow the fullness of the Godhead lives within us as individual temples of the Holy Spirit, there is something greater that happens when we join with our sisters and brothers in Christ in unity and worship.

1 Corinthians 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

That is the reality of the New Covenant as opposing the Old Covenant when God's presence was in the Temple at Jerusalem.

It is because of that new reality is why we never have to ask for the Holy Spirit to come, so that we can test the spirits by knowing that He is in us so that the spirit outside of us is for sure, the spirit of the antichrist.

1 John 4:1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world....4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

I embrace all of the teachings of Jesus, but I fail to see why this is particularly relevant here.

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

1 Timothy 4:1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

The hypocrisy is saying He is in us and outside of us visiting us again and again and again when He has never left us inside.

Hopefully, the Lord is helping you to see now.

​

 

[Baptist Believer]

Then for the sake of others because of that bad habit, it would do well not to cause them to stumble by not using that term sacrament.

Sure.

Words often have baggage that we do not intend, that's heard by others to have a particular meaning where not existed.

For instance, I used the word "deplorable" to describe a situation with an acquaintance, apparently very shortly after Hillary Clinton had used an extremely clumsy metaphor to describe certain types of people who were energized by Candidate Trump's campaign and rhetoric. Since I don't follow Hillary Clinton and did not regularly watch cable news channels, I didn't know that word -- a word I've used since I was in grade school -- had baggage. I learned about that baggage when the acquaintance unloaded on me with a torrent of accusations and insults.

So sacrament sets some people off. It bothers me because I know some of the history behind the usage of the word. Others, especially those who are reacting against Roman Catholicism or those who embrace it, hear the baggage.

However, whenever we say something about God, we are always in danger of being misunderstood. But it is better to speak and give context to words than no to speak at all.

And yet you say this below...

Because it is obviously a biblical position, at least to many of us.

Catholic can still relate to those self same words on how they are receiving the sacraments in the Baptist church. Not good, brother.

That's the danger of being a biblical witness.

I'm not going to respond in detail to the rest of your digression on everything that concerns you about Roman Catholicism since it all revolves around a fundamental error you are making.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

I pray that God is peradventuring right now in showing why Baptist cannot hold any terms nor any appearance of evil in holding communion as originating from the dead works of Catholicism.

You are making much out of a common misinterpretation of 1 Thessalonians 5:22.

Clearly you believe it is a prohibition against being misunderstood, and other people drawing false conclusions about you. That's an impossible standard to live. Moreover, Jesus continually failed to live us to the standard you believe is in that verse. Not to mention Paul, every New Testament Christians, and every one of us who has even lived our faith publicly.

Simply put, what Paul is saying there is, "Abstain from evil every time it appears" or "abstain from every form of evil."

I hope that eases your soul.

 

[HopefulNChrist]

Sure.

Words often have baggage that we do not intend, that's heard by others to have a particular meaning where not existed.

I am talking about the origin of words; where it started. That is why sacraments, Eucharist, Mass, the holy word of "holy" communion, and anything originating from the Catholic Church should be dropped.

For instance, I used the word "deplorable" to describe a situation with an acquaintance, apparently very shortly after Hillary Clinton had used an extremely clumsy metaphor to describe certain types of people who were energized by Candidate Trump's campaign and rhetoric. Since I don't follow Hillary Clinton and did not regularly watch cable news channels, I didn't know that word -- a word I've used since I was in grade school -- had baggage. I learned about that baggage when the acquaintance unloaded on me with a torrent of accusations and insults.

So sacrament sets some people off. It bothers me because I know some of the history behind the usage of the word. Others, especially those who are reacting against Roman Catholicism or those who embrace it, hear the baggage.

However, whenever we say something about God, we are always in danger of being misunderstood. But it is better to speak and give context to words than no to speak at all.[/QUOTE]

Better not to use words that originated first elsewhere that testifies to the world its original meaning and not just to Christians if "Protestants" wants to have their faith as standing apart from the dead works of Catholicism. Martin Luther failed to complete the reformation. His failure is why the Lutherans in the UK has apologized to the Catholic Church for leaving it. You keep using those terms, they will forget their modified use of the term and go back to the original use and actual meaning of those terms. Get that? You want to avoid that mistake? You want your brothers not to stumble? Drop it.

Because it is obviously a biblical position, at least to many of us.

Hope you brought your sled because you are on that slippery slope and sliding. You are in iniquity, brother. and you know it not.

That's the danger of being a biblical witness.

I'm not going to respond in detail to the rest of your digression on everything that concerns you about Roman Catholicism since it all revolves around a fundamental error you are making.

Luke 13:24-30 addresses those in iniquity as eaten and drunken in His Presence. So how much abstaining from appearance of evil do you discern with Him at that throne of grace that you need to do now?

You are making much out of a common misinterpretation of 1 Thessalonians 5:22.

Clearly you believe it is a prohibition against being misunderstood, and other people drawing false conclusions about you. That's an impossible standard to live. Moreover, Jesus continually failed to live us to the standard you believe is in that verse. Not to mention Paul, every New Testament Christians, and every one of us who has even lived our faith publicly.

Simply put, what Paul is saying there is, "Abstain from evil every time it appears" or "abstain from every form of evil."

I hope that eases your soul.

It doesn't when you are not even doing that. Christ's Presence in according to our faith is Him being in us. There is no coming into His Presence at communion when He is in us always. To say both is hypocrisy and thus denying Him as in you every time you say you are coming into His Presence in the worship place at communion or any other time.

The difference between the Old Covenant and the New is our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit now; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 and Jesus Christ is located in us as that is the faith YOU are to keep by our words ( 2 Corinthians 13:5 ) and any one testifying to that spirit in the worship place as being the Presence of God is failing the test of spirits by John in 1 John 4:1-4

So don't take traditions that has always been when it has not been proven by YOU with Him by the KJV.

 

[Yeshua1]

Continued from last post....

If we believe He is in us always, then there is no coming into His Presence in the worship place at communion, now is there?



The appearance of evil in the past is being seen again presently, which alarms me.



You should check this thread in this forum at the link below.

Understand God's Prayer System

It is the same rudiment by which slain in the spirit and holy laughter comes by. Another appearance of evil Baptist not abstaining from when Jesus Christ & the Holy Spirit is in us always.



1 Corinthians 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

That is the reality of the New Covenant as opposing the Old Covenant when God's presence was in the Temple at Jerusalem.

It is because of that new reality is why we never have to ask for the Holy Spirit to come, so that we can test the spirits by knowing that He is in us so that the spirit outside of us is for sure, the spirit of the antichrist.

1 John 4:1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world....4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.



2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

1 Timothy 4:1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

The hypocrisy is saying He is in us and outside of us visiting us again and again and again when He has never left us inside.

Hopefully, the Lord is helping you to see now.

​

We come into the presense of the throne of God, correct?

 

[HopefulNChrist]

We come into the presense of the throne of God, correct?

That has nothing to do with communion service.

That throne of grace is in Heaven where the risen Christ is serving as our only Mediator between us and God the Father in Heaven.

We approach that throne of grace by coming to the Son in coming to the Father in prayer in Jesus's name.

The Lamb of God is our Passover; He is the means by how we can approach God the Father in Heaven at that throne of grace.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. 14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. 15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

There is no throne of grace on earth presently to "go to" in coming to God the Father by. That is why no matter where you are, you can come to God the Father by the only way of the Son in prayer.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I am talking about the origin of words; where it started. That is why sacraments, Eucharist, Mass, the holy word of "holy" communion, and anything originating from the Catholic Church should be dropped.

The English language is a pagan tongue, yet you use it. I suspect you still refer to the days of the week (Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday) even those those names represent rank paganism. So don't make a case about "the origin of words" unless you are willing to repent.

Better not to use words that originated first elsewhere that testifies to the world its original meaning and not just to Christians if "Protestants" wants to have their faith as standing apart from the dead works of Catholicism.

I'm a Baptist, not a Protestant. The Baptist movement is part of the Radical Reformation, not part of the Protestant tradition.

You keep using those terms, they will forget their modified use of the term and go back to the original use and actual meaning of those terms. Get that? You want to avoid that mistake? You want your brothers not to stumble? Drop it.

(1) I don't use those terms and never have.
(2) You obviously want to stand on your soapbox and rail at everyone, but I'm not interested in playing your game.

Hope you brought your sled because you are on that slippery slope and sliding. You are in iniquity, brother. and you know it not.

Nonsense. I simply stated that many of us see it as a biblical position but I offered no defense of it simply because we have to get at a more fundamental error you are making about 1 Thessalonians 5:22. You simply cannot know if my position is biblical or not without hearing it, so stop those accusations that I am on a "slippery slope" (a fallacy, BTW) and "in iniquity."

You have judged falsely, so we can be sure you are not a prophet of God in this situation.

Luke 13:24-30 addresses those in iniquity as eaten and drunken in His Presence. So how much abstaining from appearance of evil do you discern with Him at that throne of grace that you need to do now?

You apparently didn't follow up with the link I provided for 1 Thessalonians 5:22. Here it is again, please use it this time:

"Abstain from evil every time it appears" or "abstain from every form of evil."

It doesn't when you are not even doing that. Christ's Presence in according to our faith is Him being in us. There is no coming into His Presence at communion when He is in us always.

What you say when you make this claim is that:
(1) The time of communion, breaking the bread and drinking the wine as commanded by Jesus is spiritually meaningless to celebrate in a community of faith. You are apparently trying to claim that there is no spiritual reality beyond the functions of eating and drinking.
(2) That there is no spiritual "body of Christ" in a church, DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING Paul's clear teaching that we are members of the body of Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:12-27). You claim Christ's presence in our individual being is the only thing we need to recognize. You would DENY that the gathering together of the saints -- the body of Christ -- is of no value and does not make Christ known more fully and we see Him in each other.
(3) You would deny Paul's warnings about eating the bread and drinking the cup in an unworthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:27) and that there are divine judgments on people who do not "judge the body rightly" (1 Corinthians 11:29-32). If there is nothing special going on at the Lord's table, then you would not have these warnings.

Quite frankly, it sounds as if YOU are someone who does not even recognize the body of Christ (fellow believers aka saints) appropriately, nor understand the divine significance of what is happening at the celebration of communion with Christ and the saints. You are in danger of bringing judgment to yourself in those holy moments. Fortunately, God is graceful toward the ignorant. Of course now you are no longer innocently ignorant. You need to read 1 Corinthians very carefully so that you can understand the body of Christ.

To say both is hypocrisy and thus denying Him as in you every time you say you are coming into His Presence in the worship place at communion or any other time.

The difference between the Old Covenant and the New is our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit now;

No, that's not THE difference, but it is one difference.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 and Jesus Christ is located in us as that is the faith YOU are to keep by our words ( 2 Corinthians 13:5 ) and any one testifying to that spirit in the worship place as being the Presence of God is failing the test of spirits by John in 1 John 4:1-4

Nope. You are very good at telling people what you think. You don't seem to be very good at hearing a different perspective or having your beliefs corrected by scripture.

So don't take traditions that has always been when it has not been proven by YOU with Him by the KJV.

How did the KJV get involved in this discussion? Moreover, where did you get the idea that my views are founded in tradition?

And if you are a KJVO person, you don't get to accuse others of being uncritically wrapped up in tradition.

 

[HopefulNChrist]

The English language is a pagan tongue, yet you use it. I suspect you still refer to the days of the week (Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday) even those those names represent rank paganism. So don't make a case about "the origin of words" unless you are willing to repent.

And what day of the week is referring to an evil practice in Christianity? None. What day of the week has originated from the works of Catholicism for salvation? None. So hardly the same context, brother, so be reasonable there.

I'm a Baptist, not a Protestant. The Baptist movement is part of the Radical Reformation, not part of the Protestant tradition.

It needs to continue that reformation by dropping terms that originated from the works of Catholicism.

(1) I don't use those terms and never have.

Requoting you that sounds Catholic to me.

"I believe that the practice of communion within the fellowship of believers is a touchpoint to Christians over the last 2,000 years, as well as a connection to the heavenly realm, and the real presence of Jesus, as we "recognize the body" of Christ gathered with us." end of your quote.

Ask a Catholic if that is not something a Catholic understand as inferring the works of Catholicism. I'll call on up now to assess. @Adonia Please read the quote between " … " above of @Baptist Believer and does it sound catholic or not?

(2) You obviously want to stand on your soapbox and rail at everyone, but I'm not interested in playing your game.

It seems like you are playing a game with me when you used that poor example as an excuse to keep using Catholic terms, but I can give a benefit of the doubt to continue this conversation in the hopes that God is ministering..

Nonsense. I simply stated that many of us see it as a biblical position but I offered no defense of it simply because we have to get at a more fundamental error you are making about 1 Thessalonians 5:22. You simply cannot know if my position is biblical or not without hearing it, so stop those accusations that I am on a "slippery slope" (a fallacy, BTW) and "in iniquity."

Well, only Jesus can help you see the necessity to NOT talk like that. In according to our faith, and even when testing the spirits, He is in us as opposed to the spirit of the antichrist that is in the world; hence outside of you in the worship place.

You have judged falsely, so we can be sure you are not a prophet of God in this situation.

So you do not apply the warning by John to not believe every spirit but test them in 1 John 4:1 and that test is knowing He is in us as opposed to whatever that spirit that comes into the worship place as that spirit of the antichrist? 1 John 4:4

You apparently didn't follow up with the link I provided for 1 Thessalonians 5:22. Here it is again, please use it this time:

"Abstain from evil every time it appears" or "abstain from every form of evil."

When there is no partiality with the wicked, there is no mimicking any appearance of evil with the wicked.

What you say when you make this claim is that:
(1) The time of communion, breaking the bread and drinking the wine as commanded by Jesus is spiritually meaningless to celebrate in a community of faith. You are apparently trying to claim that there is no spiritual reality beyond the functions of eating and drinking.

When the only function of communion is to do this in remembrance of Me, and to do this knowing Him being in us ALWAYS in according to our faith, then there can be no words nor conversation of Him being in the worship place at communion.

(2) That there is no spiritual "body of Christ" in a church, DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING Paul's clear teaching that we are members of the body of Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:12-27). You claim Christ's presence in our individual being is the only thing we need to recognize. You would DENY that the gathering together of the saints -- the body of Christ -- is of no value and does not make Christ known more fully and we see Him in each other.

The only spiritual body are the bodies of believers that are the temples of the Holy Ghost ( 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ) and it will not add the presence of the spirit in the worship place to that testimony, because that is the spirit of the antichrist.

(3) You would deny Paul's warnings about eating the bread and drinking the cup in an unworthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:27) and that there are divine judgments on people who do not "judge the body rightly" (1 Corinthians 11:29-32). If there is nothing special going on at the Lord's table, then you would not have these warnings.

That body is the body of believers. the believers is a part of that body. We are not eating ourselves nor His body. That would be making the bread more than what it is as opposing the function Jesus set it for; to do this in remembrance of Him.

1 Corinthians 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. 22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

Your reference is about just NOT using communion to satisfy hunger and thirst; that is another unworthy manner to avoid..

Quite frankly, it sounds as if YOU are someone who does not even recognize the body of Christ (fellow believers aka saints) appropriately, nor understand the divine significance of what is happening at the celebration of communion with Christ and the saints. You are in danger of bringing judgment to yourself in those holy moments. Fortunately, God is graceful toward the ignorant. Of course now you are no longer innocently ignorant. You need to read 1 Corinthians very carefully so that you can understand the body of Christ.

You do seem to be mixing the two unworthy manners up. You still consider communion as a holy moment. I believe communion is to be done in remembrance of what He has done in thanksgiving. It is an ordinance; it cannot be a holy moment if one wishes to avoid idolatry and to have their faith clearly seen as standing apart from Catholicism..

So why go beyond the words with terms in relation to communion of what none of the disciples nor Paul has written?

 

[Baptist Believer]

And what day of the week is referring to an evil practice in Christianity? None. What day of the week has originated from the works of Catholicism for salvation? None.

You seem to think that Catholicism is worse than rank paganism.

So hardly the same context, brother, so be reasonable there.

The train of reasonableness left the station with your first response to me. You have accused me of all sorts of things and have been consistently wrong, but won't give it up when I point out your errors.

It needs to continue that reformation by dropping terms that originated from the works of Catholicism.

Have you noticed that no one answered yes to your poll? I have NEVER used the word "sacrament" to describe communion, yet you pretend that I do since I have heard it before. Have you noticed that I actually disapprove of the use of the term and refer to the use of it as a "bad habit"? The only person I have heard use the term in reference to communion is my current pastor, and it is truly a "bad habit" left over from his upbringing in a Presbyterian church. And I'm not going to condemn him because our church knows his heart and in the context of his ministry before our church we know he does not believe communion is a means of grace.

So you need to calm down and pay attention to what other people write.

Requoting you that sounds Catholic to me.

(1) I didn't use the word "sacrament" at all, yet you keep obsessing over it.
(2) The problem with the way it "sounds" is with you, not me.

"I believe that the practice of communion within the fellowship of believers is a touchpoint to Christians over the last 2,000 years, as well as a connection to the heavenly realm, and the real presence of Jesus, as we "recognize the body" of Christ gathered with us." end of your quote.

It's biblical. Roman Catholics don't own the Bible. You are reading in your Roman Catholic fears.

Ask a Catholic if that is not something a Catholic understand as inferring the works of Catholicism.

A Roman Catholic person might assume some thing I have not said, but they would also quickly know that I understand communion differently. Just because some aspects of biblical teaching overlap Roman Catholicism doesn't mean the Bible is wrong. I have a number of Roman Catholic family members, as well as former Roman Catholic family, and none of them have confused what I believe with Roman Catholicism.

It seems like you are playing a game with me when you used that poor example as an excuse to keep using Catholic terms, but I can give a benefit of the doubt to continue this conversation in the hopes that God is ministering..

BE VERY SPECIFIC: What "Catholic terms" am I using?

Well, only Jesus can help you see the necessity to NOT talk like that. In according to our faith, and even when testing the spirits, He is in us as opposed to the spirit of the antichrist that is in the world; hence outside of you in the worship place.

I can tell that you haven't actually followed the link again. If you truly understood the meaning of 1 Thessalonians 5:22 and Paul's teaching on the body of Christ (see previous posts), you wouldn't make such unbiblical accusations.

So you do not apply the warning by John to not believe every spirit but test them in 1 John 4:1 and that test is knowing He is in us as opposed to whatever that spirit that comes into the worship place as that spirit of the antichrist? 1 John 4:4

No, I do test the spirits and know what is of God and what is false religion. You are preaching false religion because you are unwilling to believe the plain teaching of scripture regarding the body of Christ and you willing misuse of 1 Thessalonians 5:22 to condemn others about things they have not even said or written.

When there is no partiality with the wicked, there is no mimicking any appearance of evil with the wicked.

That's simply a false interpretation. Jesus worked on the Sabbath, so -- in your theology -- He was evil. Therefore, your theology is antichrist.

When the only function of communion is to do this in remembrance of Me...

That's not the only function of communion.

...and to do this knowing Him being in us ALWAYS in according to our faith, then there can be no words nor conversation of Him being in the worship place at communion.

If those of us who are Christians are in the worship place, then He is there. Moreover, when the members of the body of Christ gather as a spiritual body, there is a greater manifestation of His presence with us. Or was Jesus just a big lair when He taught, "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them" (Matthew 18:20)?

The only spiritual body are the bodies of believers that are the temples of the Holy Ghost ( 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ) and it will not add the presence of the spirit in the worship place to that testimony, because that is the spirit of the antichrist.

Then you have rejected Jesus, as well as Paul, an apostle of Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:12-27). You are the one promoting antichrist teachings.

That body is the body of believers. the believers is a part of that body. We are not eating ourselves nor His body.

No kidding. If you thought I was saying what you are "refuting" here, that just underlines how much you have NOT been paying attention to what I have written. I HAVE NEVER promoted such a view.

It is an ordinance; it cannot be a holy moment if one wishes to avoid idolatry and to have their faith clearly seen as standing apart from Catholicism..

I realize that you may not be able to believe this, but I almost never think about Roman Catholicism. It is not a reference point for me like it seems to be for you. I have never been a Roman Catholic and I have never believed it's unique teachings. You are reading your obsession with the Roman Catholic church into other people. It sounds like you need to sort that out and figure out why you do that.

Any time I intentionally engage with Jesus and my brothers and sisters in Christ is a holy moment. We are called to worship individually and corporately, and the corporate moments have special significance. The scripture is quite clear about that.

So why go beyond the words with terms in relation to communion of what none of the disciples nor Paul has written?

I really don't. I summarize and explain what has been written.

Why do you constantly drag Roman Catholicism into our conversation?

 

[HopefulNChrist]

Have you noticed that no one answered yes to your poll? I have NEVER used the word "sacrament" to describe communion, yet you pretend that I do since I have heard it before. Have you noticed that I actually disapprove of the use of the term and refer to the use of it as a "bad habit"? The only person I have heard use the term in reference to communion is my current pastor, and it is truly a "bad habit" left over from his upbringing in a Presbyterian church. And I'm not going to condemn him because our church knows his heart and in the context of his ministry before our church we know he does not believe communion is a means of grace.

We are not to condemn believers but the works, brother. Here is a testimony from a fellow Baptist in this thread.

You also might find that thinking amongst Southern Baptist moderates:

Southern Baptist theologian Nathan Finn explains:

http://v7.swbts.edu/tasks/render/file/?fileID=822376A2-AA7F-3A6A-E6628478A88E74D5

Broken up to read in quote better.

"most Baptist churches prefer to call them 'ordinances'"

"Most Baptists have historically held a 'memorial view' of the Lord’s Supper, recalling Jesus’ command that the ordinance be observed 'in remembrance of me.'"

That is the view I am defending whereas you seem to be aligned with the other view below, right?

"In contrast to the memorial view, some Baptists hold to a view of the 'spiritual presence' of Christ in communion"

"The 'spiritual presence' understanding of the Lord’s Supper is especially common among some moderate Southern Baptists and in the Reformed Baptist tradition"

I am opposing that second position because it cannot pass the litmus test of testing the spirits in 1 John 4:1-4

Then you said..​

So you need to calm down and pay attention to what other people write.

I believe I was.

(1) I didn't use the word "sacrament" at all, yet you keep obsessing over it.
(2) The problem with the way it "sounds" is with you, not me.

When a presence is inferred as being in the sacraments per Catholicism, in so receiving at the Mass, what is the difference with the inference of His Presence at communion in making communion more than what it is, like the Catholic did?

It's biblical. Roman Catholics don't own the Bible. You are reading in your Roman Catholic fears.

I just believe that Romans Catholics will see you holding to that view of being more than a memorial service as they do.

Indeed, it is anathema if any one says they are only to do communion in remembrance of Him..

A Roman Catholic person might assume some thing I have not said, but they would also quickly know that I understand communion differently. Just because some aspects of biblical teaching overlap Roman Catholicism doesn't mean the Bible is wrong. I have a number of Roman Catholic family members, as well as former Roman Catholic family, and none of them have confused what I believe with Roman Catholicism.

If it overlaps Romans Catholicism, then you have to be reading & applying His words wrong. There can be no partiality with the wicked in this matter.

BE VERY SPECIFIC: What "Catholic terms" am I using?

His Presence being at communion service. Recognizing the bread as the actual body of Christ. I am beginning to see the word "communion" as "remembrance" in regards to the Lord's death for us by Whom we have been redeemed by..

It is a rest in remembrance, acknowledging Him in us as what He has accomplished on the cross and by His resurrection & ascension. To serve as a function for something else is hardly a rest.

I can tell that you haven't actually followed the link again. If you truly understood the meaning of 1 Thessalonians 5:22 and Paul's teaching on the body of Christ (see previous posts), you wouldn't make such unbiblical accusations.

Maybe if you explain by Him, the meaning of antichrist, you might see at the very least what I am saying. Antichrist means "instead of Christ" or more precisely, "instead of the Son". The spirit of the antichrist will seduce believers to not focus on the Son in worship but on chasing after them, even for feeling their presence in the worship place.

That also should apply for applying His Presence in the sacraments in regards to Catholicism, because that makes the sacraments the antichrist when seeking to receive Him as if by receiving the elements at communion.

In that same sense, receiving His Presence in the worship place at communion is the same appearance of evil when He has been in us and with us always when we came to the worship place for communion, and will be still in us always after communion. So should our words reflect what we really believe? I would say so now more than ever.

No, I do test the spirits and know what is of God and what is false religion. You are preaching false religion because you are unwilling to believe the plain teaching of scripture regarding the body of Christ and you willing misuse of 1 Thessalonians 5:22 to condemn others about things they have not even said or written.

Explain to me what John is saying on how to test the spirits in 1 John 4:1-4 and do take note of verse 4 because that is the line of discernment for that test.

That's simply a false interpretation. Jesus worked on the Sabbath, so -- in your theology -- He was evil. Therefore, your theology is antichrist.

Matthew 12:1-7 dictates that Jesus is Lord of the sabbath. He gave 2 examples of O.T. saints PROFANING the sabbath but said they were guiltless because they were in the Temple. And so to defend His disciples, He then declare that One greater than the Temple was here for why His disciples were guiltless also. All believers that profane the sabbath day are guiltless because Jesus Christ is in us as it is His righteousness that is able to make us stand apart from the law. That is His glory.

our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit: 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 & Jesus Christ is in us : 2 Corinthians 13:5 and that is why all believers are guiltless for profaning the sabbath as Jesus is Lord of the sabbath day and not the other way around.

That's not the only function of communion.

That is where our contention is at, brother. It can only be for the function of remembrance because that is all He said to do communion for.

If those of us who are Christians are in the worship place, then He is there. Moreover, when the members of the body of Christ gather as a spiritual body, there is a greater manifestation of His presence with us. Or was Jesus just a big lair when He taught, "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them" (Matthew 18:20)?

Brother.. in context of Matthew 18:19-20, Jesus was referring to His future role as being our only Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5 & Hebrews 4:12-16

When Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit or the Father, He always use "he" or "him", but in Matthew 18:20, He said " I ".

That is how you rightly divide the word of truth so you can apply the test in 1 John 4:4 as that spirit outside of you in the worship place is NOT the Holy Spirit nor the Spirit of Christ.

Then you have rejected Jesus, as well as Paul, an apostle of Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:12-27). You are the one promoting antichrist teachings.

1 Corinthians 12:12-27 is referring to individual believers that make up the assembly by how the Holy Spirit will manifest the gifts through to profit the body withal.

Why do you constantly drag Roman Catholicism into our conversation?

By how you believe communion serves more than the function of just doing it in remembrance of Him. So do they.

 

[Baptist Believer]

That is the view I am defending whereas you seem to be aligned with the other view below, right?

No, I do not hold Calvin's view.

I hold to the view that Christ is in the midst of His people, both individually and corporately, because of scripture.

I am opposing that second position because it cannot pass the litmus test of testing the spirits in 1 John 4:1-4

Sure it can. 1 John 4:1-4 is not relevant. I do not hold to Gnosticism. Unless you think that Jesus cannot be present unless He is seen, then I don't know what your point would be. Jesus has a resurrection body that has different properties than ours. Moreover, Jesus could see Nathanael under the fig tree without being physically present to him (John 1:48-50) even during His incarnation.

Then you said..

​

I believe I was.

No, you were not. You were reading in all sorts of things that I don't believe.

When a presence is inferred as being in the sacraments per Catholicism, in so receiving at the Mass, what is the difference with the inference of His Presence at communion in making communion more than what it is, like the Catholic did?

That's a false conclusion made from a false assumption.

I just believe that Romans Catholics will see you holding to that view of being more than a memorial service as they do.

That's a false conclusion made from a false assumption.

If it overlaps Romans Catholicism, then you have to be reading & applying His words wrong. There can be no partiality with the wicked in this matter.

That is patently false reasoning. The Roman Catholics believe in a Triune God. I assume that you do as well. If not, then you are a full-blown heretic. Therefore, there can be significant overlap between Roman Catholicism and biblical Christianity.

His Presence being at communion service.

That's a false conclusion drawn from your false assumptions.

Recognizing the bread as the actual body of Christ.

Since I don't do that at all, you are completely wrong. Your false assumptions stoked by your obsession with Roman Catholicism has made you a false prophet.

I am beginning to see the word "communion" as "remembrance" in regards to the Lord's death for us by Whom we have been redeemed by..

You are making up your own definitions for words. Communion comes from "common union," which is the bond we celebrate around the Lord's table. That is what I mean by communion and not much more.

Maybe if you explain by Him, the meaning of antichrist, you might see at the very least what I am saying. Antichrist means "instead of Christ" or more precisely, "instead of the Son". The spirit of the antichrist will seduce believers to not focus on the Son in worship but on chasing after them, even for feeling their presence in the worship place.

I have no idea why you assume I am chasing experiences or that I am not focused on Christ in worship. You are completely wrong.

That also should apply for applying His Presence in the sacraments in regards to Catholicism, because that makes the sacraments the antichrist when seeking to receive Him as if by receiving the elements at communion.

That's a false conclusion drawn from your false assumptions.

In that same sense, receiving His Presence in the worship place at communion is the same appearance of evil when He has been in us and with us always when we came to the worship place for communion, and will be still in us always after communion. So should our words reflect what we really believe? I would say so now more than ever.

You simply don't accept Paul's teaching about the body of Christ (God's people as members of His body). My words reflect what I believe. Your words reflect that you don't understand the scripture.

Explain to me what John is saying on how to test the spirits in 1 John 4:1-4 and do take note of verse 4 because that is the line of discernment for that test.

John states that the Spirit dwelling in us is more powerful that all personalities, ppwers, and earthly kingdoms of the world. That DOES NOT mean that God is confined to human bodies or that the Spirit is not in the world. Scripture, over and over, demonstrates that God operates independently of human bodies.

Matthew 12:1-7 dictates that Jesus is Lord of the sabbath. He gave 2 examples of O.T. saints PROFANING the sabbath but said they were guiltless because they were in the Temple. And so to defend His disciples, He then declare that One greater than the Temple was here for why His disciples were guiltless also. All believers that profane the sabbath day are guiltless because Jesus Christ is in us as it is His righteousness that is able to make us stand apart from the law. That is His glory.

our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit: 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 & Jesus Christ is in us : 2 Corinthians 13:5 and that is why all believers are guiltless for profaning the sabbath as Jesus is Lord of the sabbath day and not the other way around.

Since not everyone agrees with that, you cannot claim that 1 Thessalonians 5:22 requires that we must not have others misinterpret what we are doing based "on appearances," like you have been doing.

That is where our contention is at, brother. It can only be for the function of remembrance because that is all He said to do communion for.

I don't have time to write a treatise on the subject, but you are missing that communion is about worship, recognizing the gathered body of Christ in others, and sharing intimate communion with God. It is a time of refocusing, remembering, and engagement in the tactile realities of the kingdom of God.

Brother.. in context of Matthew 18:19-20, Jesus was referring to His future role as being our only Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5 & Hebrews 4:12-16

Unless you are one of those people who push all of Jesus' teachings into the future, then that is simply wrong. It was true at the time He said it in their present reality of the Kingdom of the heavens/God, and it is still true today. Moreover, the point is that even now, we are in the presence of Jesus as members of His body gather. You are trying to make it into one or the other, either living inside of us or living outside of us, when the simple truth is that He is Lord of all and living both within and without us.

When Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit or the Father, He always use "he" or "him", but in Matthew 18:20, He said " I ".

I guess you don't know the gospels well enough to know that Jesus interceded for His disciples all the time, that He sent them out with His authority, and they used His name to do works of power.

That is how you rightly divide the word of truth so you can apply the test in 1 John 4:4 as that spirit outside of you in the worship place is NOT the Holy Spirit nor the Spirit of Christ.

That's simply wrong. Again, you restrict God to human bodies when Jesus explicitly compared the Spirit to the wind (John 3:8). God is not a parasite or "body snatcher."

Paul even stated that in God, "we live, move, and have our being" (Acts 17:28). I guess you don't know that Paul is quoting pagan poetry there to say something true about God. It was by Epimenides and was originally a hymn to Zeus. So do you think that Paul was antichrist for saying something that might be misunderstood by the pagans?

1 Corinthians 12:12-27 is referring to individual believers that make up the assembly by how the Holy Spirit will manifest the gifts through to profit the body withal.

Sure, Paul was using it as an illustration, but it is part of a consistent witness of the New Testament of our place in Christ. Peter describes us as "living stones" being built up together as a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5), not just individual stones as temples of the Holy Spirit. Together we make up a larger spiritual house.

That's the point I have been making. I guess I wrongly assumed that you were familiar with the New Testament and could put all of that together without having to quote a bunch of verses.

By how you believe communion serves more than the function of just doing it in remembrance of Him. So do they.

But that's irrelevant since we believe different things about it.

By your logic, if you believe in a Triune God, I could condemn you for doing the same because that's "Catholic."

PLEASE. Before you respond, look up the references I have given and carefully read and think through what I have written. I don't want to keep rehashing the same points over and over again because you are making false assumptions.

 

[HopefulNChrist]

No, I do not hold Calvin's view.

I hold to the view that Christ is in the midst of His people, both individually and corporately, because of scripture.

Sure it can. 1 John 4:1-4 is not relevant. I do not hold to Gnosticism. Unless you think that Jesus cannot be present unless He is seen, then I don't know what your point would be. Jesus has a resurrection body that has different properties than ours. Moreover, Jesus could see Nathanael under the fig tree without being physically present to him (John 1:48-50) even during His incarnation.

​

No, you were not. You were reading in all sorts of things that I don't believe.


That's a false conclusion made from a false assumption.


That's a false conclusion made from a false assumption.


That is patently false reasoning. The Roman Catholics believe in a Triune God. I assume that you do as well. If not, then you are a full-blown heretic. Therefore, there can be significant overlap between Roman Catholicism and biblical Christianity.


That's a false conclusion drawn from your false assumptions.


Since I don't do that at all, you are completely wrong. Your false assumptions stoked by your obsession with Roman Catholicism has made you a false prophet.


You are making up your own definitions for words. Communion comes from "common union," which is the bond we celebrate around the Lord's table. That is what I mean by communion and not much more.


I have no idea why you assume I am chasing experiences or that I am not focused on Christ in worship. You are completely wrong.


That's a false conclusion drawn from your false assumptions.


You simply don't accept Paul's teaching about the body of Christ (God's people as members of His body). My words reflect what I believe. Your words reflect that you don't understand the scripture.


John states that the Spirit dwelling in us is more powerful that all personalities, ppwers, and earthly kingdoms of the world. That DOES NOT mean that God is confined to human bodies or that the Spirit is not in the world. Scripture, over and over, demonstrates that God operates independently of human bodies.


Since not everyone agrees with that, you cannot claim that 1 Thessalonians 5:22 requires that we must not have others misinterpret what we are doing based "on appearances," like you have been doing.


I don't have time to write a treatise on the subject, but you are missing that communion is about worship, recognizing the gathered body of Christ in others, and sharing intimate communion with God. It is a time of refocusing, remembering, and engagement in the tactile realities of the kingdom of God.


Unless you are one of those people who push all of Jesus' teachings into the future, then that is simply wrong. It was true at the time He said it in their present reality of the Kingdom of the heavens/God, and it is still true today. Moreover, the point is that even now, we are in the presence of Jesus as members of His body gather. You are trying to make it into one or the other, either living inside of us or living outside of us, when the simple truth is that He is Lord of all and living both within and without us.


I guess you don't know the gospels well enough to know that Jesus interceded for His disciples all the time, that He sent them out with His authority, and they used His name to do works of power.


That's simply wrong. Again, you restrict God to human bodies when Jesus explicitly compared the Spirit to the wind (John 3:8). God is not a parasite or "body snatcher."

Paul even stated that in God, "we live, move, and have our being" (Acts 17:28). I guess you don't know that Paul is quoting pagan poetry there to say something true about God. It was by Epimenides and was originally a hymn to Zeus. So do you think that Paul was antichrist for saying something that might be misunderstood by the pagans?


Sure, Paul was using it as an illustration, but it is part of a consistent witness of the New Testament of our place in Christ. Peter describes us as "living stones" being built up together as a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5), not just individual stones as temples of the Holy Spirit. Together we make up a larger spiritual house.

That's the point I have been making. I guess I wrongly assumed that you were familiar with the New Testament and could put all of that together without having to quote a bunch of verses.


But that's irrelevant since we believe different things about it.

By your logic, if you believe in a Triune God, I could condemn you for doing the same because that's "Catholic."

PLEASE. Before you respond, look up the references I have given and carefully read and think through what I have written. I don't want to keep rehashing the same points over and over again because you are making false assumptions.

I am withdrawing from the forum, brother. It seems we are not all speaking the same thing nor having the same judgments, and when we are not all using one Bible version, it stands to reason why that can never happen.

Thank you for sharing. I am withdrawing to admonish you and can only ask you to go to Jesus to ask Him if everything is okey dokey between you & Him, because I am saying you are not abiding in Him as you should be, in word & deed in Jesus's name, but only He can confirm that to you.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I am withdrawing from the forum, brother. It seems we are not all speaking the same thing nor having the same judgments, and when we are not all using one Bible version, it stands to reason why that can never happen.

Not at all. You are hiding behind the KJV when the real issue is that you don't know the scriptures, you make false judgments, and you don't truly engage with the positions of other people. I didn't realize until very recently that you exclusively use the KJV for some reason, but the differences in the translations do not change our positions. Your views are unsustainable even with the peculiarities of the KJV.

Your big problem now is that you have been told the truth and you are accountable to God for what I and others have said. You cannot expect God to bless you if you deny His word. Moreover, you will face judgment for it.

Thank you for sharing. I am withdrawing to admonish you and can only ask you to go to Jesus to ask Him if everything is okey dokey between you & Him, because I am saying you are not abiding in Him as you should be, in word & deed in Jesus's name, but only He can confirm that to you.

I'm absolutely fine, but I don't think you are.