• 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!

Do reformed baptist see Communion Different Fron other baptists?

JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Speaking of this issue, and as the two of you seem to hold the elements of Lords Supper as symbolic (as do I), how do you address the condemnation for those who take it in an unworthy manner?

1 Corinthians 11:27-29

27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.



.
 
A

AresMan

Active Member
Site Supporter
DaChaser1 said:
As regarding IF it is symbolic in nature, or somehow presense of Jesus in it?
Click to expand...
No, Reformed Baptists are probably the most outspoken I have seen against the Roman Catholic (and Lutheran) idea of transubstantiation.

The difference between Reformed Baptists and other Baptists on their view of the Lord's Supper is probably related to how they defend their baptistic understanding of it against other denominations.

Reformed Baptists are usually covenantal to some extant and will defend their view of the Lord's Supper and baptism (credo) against other Reformed denominations by their view of how the New Covenant relates to (and is different from) the Old Covenant. A HUGE part of the Reformed Baptist defense of credobaptism is in the definition and application of the New Covenant defined in Jeremiah 31:31-34 as an "invisible" covenant that is equivalent to the elect. According to Jeremiah 31:34 in the New Covenant "all shall know [the Lord] from the least to the greatest of them." It is not a "mixed" (or "visible") covenant of elect and non-elect like the Old Covenant with ethnic Israel that was based on households and had "covenant breakers." Because the New Covenant is with individuals and includes only the elect "in His blood," the "sign of the covenant" should be protected and administrated to those who profess and express faith in the gospel.

One argument that Reformed Baptists use against Presbyterians concerning baptism is with the administration of the Lord's Supper. Many Presbyterians protect the ordinance of the Lord's Supper the same way Baptists protect the ordinance of baptism based on Paul's warnings in 1 Corinthians 11. Reformed Baptists ask Presbyterians why they cannot be consistent with both ordinances if both are related to the New Covenant. After all, Jesus said the cup is "the New Covenant in My blood." If the blood of Christ washes away sins, and Jeremiah 31:34 says that in the New Covenant "I will take away their sins and remember them no more," then it would seem that all members of the New Covenant are elect, and the church should attempt to administer it only to the elect. The same with baptism, and there is not a single clear instance of anyone in the New Testament being baptized who did not profess faith in the gospel.

There could be so much more that could be said about the debate over baptism and the Lord's Supper and the definition of the New Covenant between Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians. The subject is fascinating.
 
David Lamb

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
Can't answer for all baptists holding Reformed doctrines (I don't know them all :laugh: ). But I have not come across any who believe what you seem to be asking about - some sort of "consubstantiation". Do you have any reason to think that Reformed /Doctrines-of-Grace/Calvinistic baptists have different ideas to other baptists on this matter?
 
Jerome

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From Nathan Finn's White Paper on the Lord's Supper:

http://www.baptisttheology.org/papers.cfm

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.” Here Baptists follow the practice of the Swiss reformer Huldrych Zwingli and their close cousins in the Free Church tradition, the Anabaptists. The memorial view focuses on thanksgiving for the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and expectation of the marriage supper of the Lamb in the coming Kingdom of God.
In contrast to the memorial view, some Baptists hold to a view of the “spiritual presence” of Christ in communion, following the Genevan reformer John Calvin. The spiritual view contends that, when the church observes communion, Christ is uniquely present in their midst through the person of the Holy Spirit. This presence is spiritual and is not to be confused with the “real presence” espoused by Roman Catholics and some Anglicans and Lutherans, who claim that Christ is actually present (albeit mysteriously and miraculously) in the bread and wine of communion. . . .The “spiritual presence” understanding of the Lord’s Supper is especially common among some moderate Southern Baptists and in the Reformed Baptist tradition.
Click to expand...
 
Jerome

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From the Spring 2011 'ARBCA Update' newsletter:

http://www.arbca.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=93&Itemid=69

The Means of Grace, though very familiar to all members of the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America, drew much scrutiny from the pulpit and the pews at this year’s ARBCA General Assembly, held at Trinity Reformed Baptist Church in La Mirada, Calif. The GA, which attracted 149 attendees, . . . .discussed at length some of the points made by member church pastors who gave the six keynote addresses on a variety of subjects relating to the means of grace.

The six keynote speakers and their topics were:
. . . .
■ Dr. Richard Barcellos of Heritage Baptist Church, Owensboro, Ky., spoke on "The Lord’s Supper as Means of Grace," focusing on the benefits that communion conveys to believers – it’s not just a memorial meal. Those benefits include sanctifying grace indued to the soul, the benefits of Christ’s body and blood nourishes believers’ souls, the frequency of the supper, and its links with the past, "do this in remembrance of Me", present "the cup of blessing which we drink," and future "do this till I come," as recorded by Christ’s directives. He noted that "baptism is a sacrament of spiritual birth; the Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of spiritual feeding."
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top