SBC poll (and anyone else using the BFM2000): Do you practice this principle for the Lord's Supper?

[Van]

The BFM2000 says of baptism (Article VII), "Being a church ordinance, it [baptism] is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord's Supper." [underlined added]

My guess is "the church ordinance" refers to water baptism as a prerequisite to membership in the local assemble. Leaving aside the issue of whether water baptism is a prerequisite of salvation, it is not a prerequisite of taking the elements in remembrance of Him. Anyone professing they believe in Christ, and thus have been spiritually "baptized" into Christ may partake in His remembrance.

Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!​

God did not say for us to examine visitors to see if their papers are in order.

 

[rlvaughn]

The context of self-examination in relation to the Lord's supper is found in 1 Corinthians 11:28. Paul is not encouraging everyone who feels like it to decide if they want to partake of the Lord's supper, but is writing to the church of Corinth, exhorting them -- who are otherwise qualified to partake -- to examine themselves and participate in a knowingly self-examined state. This is not a plea to open communion to anyone who thinks they should have it.

 

[Van]

But it is for anyone who believes they are indwelt. Or so it seems to me.

 

[TCassidy]

This is not a plea to open communion to anyone who thinks they should have it.

In fact it is the opposite. Paul is appealing to the unity of the local church at Corinth.

 

[Van]

To restate the obvious, the decision to partake is left to the individual, not to the elders.

 

[rlvaughn]

As for me, I have not stated that this is a decision of the elders. Ultimately it is a Bible issue, with a church setting her practice according to discerning what the Bible teaches on the matter.

The broad context of 1 Corinthians 11 determines those whom Paul exhorted to examine themselves. Those were saved baptized members of the church at Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:2-3, 14-16). Members one of another, they were seriously divided among themselves (1 Corinthians 1:10-11). When they brought their divisive spirit to the Lord's table, they were guilty of sinning against the body and blood of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:27) and brought God's judgment upon themselves (1 Corinthians 11:29, 31-32) -- even to the point of sickness and death (1 Corinthians 11:30). To these, in this state of obstinacy, Paul adjures "let a man examine himself." All these saved baptized church members need to give serious reflection to their manner of partaking the Lord's supper before they eat the bread and drink the cup. The self-examining self-discerning church member will partake in a worthy manner and will not be judged by God (1 Corinthians 11:31). "Let a man examine himself" is not about "who" -- the extent of participation. It is about the manner "how" -- the manner of participation.

 

[Van]

And if a person decides they are not indwelt, they can still join in? Not how it reads. Fruit inspectors can be found in many churches, but scripture teaches us we are not to be fruit inspectors.

There is an old story about a little boy in church. Everyone stood, but the little boy remained seated. His father whispered "stand up." The boy remained seated. The father grabbed the back of the boy's shirt and stood him up. In the little boy's mind, he said, I am standing up on the outside, but sitting down on the inside. We do not need folks to take communion properly on the outside, but we need folks to honor Christ on the inside.

 

[Yeshua1]

No, "necessary evidence of one's faith and repentance" as I said.

I think that you are saying here that if one knows water Baptism should be done to us after being saved, and have decided to not do that, one is in a state of rebellion, so while saved, would not be in a fit state to partake, correct

 

[Greektim]

I think that you are saying here that if one knows water naotism should be done to us after being saved, and have decided to not do that, one is in a state of rebellion, so while nit saved, would not be in a fit state to partake, correct>

If you could fix the spelling and grammar, that way I know precisely what you are asking and can answer correctly.

 

[The Biblicist]

Are you truly saved if you refuse to be obedient and thus unrepentant of sin? That is the logic in these confessions. One who is saved is one who is repentant. One who is repentant is one who is obedient. One who is obedient is one who obeys the command to be baptized. In this case, baptism is a necessary evidence of one's faith and repentance.

Well, that would certainly rule out the thief on the cross. If there are "exceptions" then it is not a "necessary" evidence but just an evidence. Moreover, is sprinkling and pouring "obedience" to the Biblical command or disobedience even if it done in ignorance? So can ignorance be excused as "obedience"?

 

[Greektim]

Well, that would certainly rule out the thief on the cross. If there are "exceptions" then it is not a "necessary" evidence but just an evidence. Moreover, is sprinkling and pouring "obedience" to the Biblical command or disobedience even if it done in ignorance? So can ignorance be excused as "obedience"?

If you really want to go there... then fine.

Yes the thief is ruled out... b/c he never had an opportunity for either baptism OR Lord's Supper. But I am positive that the truly converted and regenerated would be obedient to the positive commands of the Law of the New Covenant (though the interpretation of that Law varies). And the thief did show forth evidence of conversion and regeneration.

 

[Salty]

Well, that would certainly rule out the thief on the cross. If there are "exceptions" then it is not a "necessary" evidence but just an evidence. Moreover, is sprinkling and pouring "obedience" to the Biblical command or disobedience even if it done in ignorance? So can ignorance be excused as "obedience"?

COC explains that by saying that since Christ had not yet risen from the dead- we were still under the Law - thus no baptism necessary.

 

[evangelist6589]

If you could fix the spelling and grammar, that way I know precisely what you are asking and can answer correctly.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[Salty]

Don't hold your breath.

Yea - a lot of us are used to holding our breath.........................

 

[JonC]

Don't hold your breath.

Again....the speck and the log comes to mind.

 

[The Biblicist]

If you really want to go there... then fine.

Yes the thief is ruled out... b/c he never had an opportunity for either baptism OR Lord's Supper. But I am positive that the truly converted and regenerated would be obedient to the positive commands of the Law of the New Covenant (though the interpretation of that Law varies). And the thief did show forth evidence of conversion and regeneration.

So are all aspects of the New Covenant dependent upon "opportunity"? Still sprinkling, pouring as well as all wrong motives behind baptism would be considered disobedience.

COC explains that by saying that since Christ had not yet risen from the dead- we were still under the Law - thus no baptism necessary.

That is simply a denial of Christ's own baptism, all the baptisms by John, the baptisms of the apostles whereas Mark 1:1 explicitly states that the baptism of John was inclusive in the New Testament gospel ministry.

 

[Yeshua1]

So are all aspects of the New Covenant dependent upon "opportunity"? Still sprinkling, pouring as well as all wrong motives behind baptism would be considered disobedience.



That is simply a denial of Christ's own baptism, all the baptisms by John, the baptisms of the apostles whereas Mark 1:1 explicitly states that the baptism of John was inclusive in the New Testament gospel ministry.

Water Baptism as a sign to being a member in the local church, but not needed to being seen as part of the true church!

 

[rsr]

According to the survey, 52 percent of SBC churches offer the Lord's Supper to "anyone who has put their faith in Jesus Christ." Thirty-five percent say "anyone who has been baptized as a believer" may participate. Five percent of SBC churches serve communion to "anyone who wants to participate," while 4 percent of churches don't specify any conditions for participation.

LifeWay Surveys Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches | LifeWay Research

 

[Greektim]

LifeWay Surveys Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches | LifeWay Research

Helpful, thanks. The stats were what I figured.

 

[Salty]

What I found interesting is that 1% serve communion every week.