Lords Supper(who)

[Bro Tony]

The question is still valid. Are there many individual churches today, or is there one great big one?

The answer is yes.

You say there are separate churches, then you say there is only one. At least stay on one side of the fence or the other.

There is only one side of the fence I would choose to be on, and that is what the Bible teaches. There is one church, that meets in many different fellowships. How many different churches do you suppose will be in heaven?

If a church observes closed communion, that is their right.

This issue like so many others has nothing to do with "rights". We can do a lot of things because it is our right to do so, but that does not make it biblically right. You can only speak of tradition, you cannot justify closed communion Scripturally. If your church chooses to do it, then they have that right, just don't put forth that the Bible teaches such, acknowledge that you are going according to tradition.

Bro Tony

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by geneo:
Who is invited to participate in the Lords Supper when our church practices "open Communion"?

All believing Christians.

 

[natters]

I don't think closed communion is scriptural. There is only one body, only one faith. Communion is with Christ's body (1 Cor 10:16), not with a local assembly.

As I understand it, the early church had communion every time they met together. When Paul went on his journeys and visited them, I cannot imagine any of them saying to him "Sorry Paul, communion is only for members of this local assembly."

MTA said "However, I cannot understand why anyone would want to."

I once spent several months away from home, and the church I chose to attend while away from home practiced closed communion. Many times I sat and watched disappointed while those around me participated. Yes, that church had that "right", and I never vocally challenged it, but I think their "right" was "wrong".

 

[MTA]

Originally posted by Bro Tony:

This issue like so many others has nothing to do with "rights". We can do a lot of things because it is our right to do so, but that does not make it biblically right. You can only speak of tradition, you cannot justify closed communion Scripturally. If your church chooses to do it, then they have that right, just don't put forth that the Bible teaches such, acknowledge that you are going according to tradition.

Bro Tony

I can appreciate your position, but I never offered anything more than the scriptural interpretation that closed communion is based on. Whether you adopt it or refute it is neither here nor there. It simply is an interpretation and a chosen manner that independent bodies of baptised believers have chosen to follow. The Lord's Supper is a memorial service, an ordinance to be observed by members of the Lord's church, wherever it is established. Each church can determine the manner of the observance and that is their right as independent bodies.

My friend, neither can you justify an open or close table scripturally. It is all a matter of interpretation.

 

[Bro Tony]

And to your last post I can say that I have appreciated the discussion. It is good to deal with these matters and then to walk away as brothers & sisters even though we may not agree on all issues. As long as we agree on the essentials.

God Bless,
Bro Tony

 

[natters]

MTA, you say you offered scriptural interpretation, but I am unclear which scriptures you interpreted. Can you provide them?

 

[MTA]

Luke 22nd Chpt.

 

[Bro Tony]

MTA,

With all due respect. I have re-read this chapter and fail to see where it teaches at all about closed, close, or open communion. The only way someone could come up with a particular view of communion in this passage is to have a pre-conceived idea and then read that idea into the text. Please help me understand which verses teach closed communion in this or any other verses. It is my desire to be a biblical christian.

Bro Tony

 

[geneo]

guys,thanks for all your replys. I didn't want to get into a heated discussion. your thoughts were very educational.

Our church started out closed communion. This does have some plus's. Then we went to open communion, this was for bibilcaly baptised beleivers.

Now we have evolved to "ALL" christians, this gives me some trouble. I have always been taught to associate with "like faith and order"

However it is the Churches "right " to invite who they choose. not the 'RIGHT" of the visitor to intrude. God blesses me with many endevors,and this has surly been one of them geno

 

[MTA]

Bro. Tony:

Here is where the interpretation comes from as I know it:

Christ served the supper to the twelve apostles that constituted the first church. It was not open to any others, although there were other believers at the time. Still, Christ chose to observe it with the twelve He called out. When he served the supper he said that as often as they partook of the supper they were to do so in rememberance of Him.

Christ never exclusively said that the supper was to be a closed, close, or an open table. We each interpret the best way to observe the memorial, based on who the supper was served to and who was instructed to carry on the memorial.

Our church observes a closed service for the Lord's Supper and for us, and those of us in our Association, that is the common practice. I have also known of some that open the table to members of sister churches of like faith and order that are visiting and that is their right to do so. I don't know of any in our fellowship that practice an open table and like geneo, I would personally have some difficulty with that from the like faith and order standpoint, but that is neither here nor there regarding the church's right to self-govern and open the table to whoever they chose to.

 

[Bro Tony]

MTA,

Thanks for your view of this. I am not in agreement, but I do appreciate you sharing your interpretation.

God Bless,
Bro Tony