Jack Schaap's view of communion

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by Logos1560, Jan 8, 2007.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    On a list of top ten stories about fundamentalism, the following made Dan Burrell's list [www.danburrell.com]

    7. Jack Schaap and Communion

    "The pastor of what is arguably the largest church in all of “fundamentalism” published a book which has recently been examined for multiple controversial passages which compare the Ordinance of Communion to sexual intercourse with Christ. Jack Schaap, son-in-law of the late Jack Hyles, is the Senior Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana. For many years, the church boasted to be the “World’s Largest Sunday School” and is one of the landmark churches of the most strident branch of Independent Baptist fundamentalism. In his book, “Marriage: Divine Intimacy” which has a publication date of 2005, but which was mostly distributed in 2006, he compares communion with sexual acts. As outrageous as this sounds, the words speak for themselves.
    Wikipedia cites specific passages that are easily verified…
    In Jack Schaap’s book on Marriage, titled Divine Intimacy (published by Hyles Publications, 2005), Schaap teaches that when a Baptist takes Holy Communion, he is not taking the Body and Blood of Christ, but is engaging in “Spiritual Sex” with God.[3] He also teaches that the Independent Fundamental Baptist - as the Bride of Christ - is the female corresponding to the male of Christ.[4] He also makes the claim that the Word translated as “laid” in Psalm 119:30 (I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments have I LAID before me…) means sexual intercourse.[6]. ^
    3. Marriage The Divine Intimacy, Hyles Publications 2005. Page 42 pp3
    4. ^ Marriage The Divine Intimacy, Hyles Publications 2005. Page 42 pp3
    5. ^ Marriage The Divine Intimacy, Hyles Publications 2005. Page 43 pp1
    6. ^ Marriage The Divine Intimacy, Hyles Publications 2005. Page 44 pp2
     
  2. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,941
    Likes Received:
    370
    :confused:.........uh............:(.......:eek:

    May I go out on a limb and assume that this is not one of those old fashoned baptist churches?
     
  3. ccrobinson

    ccrobinson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    :eek:


    First Baptist of Hammond? They're as old-fashioned as old-fashioned gets.

    Again... :eek:
     
  4. Pastor KevinR

    Pastor KevinR
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's Just Crazy

    Poor Hermeneutics (poor spelling:smilewinkgrin: )
     
  5. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,941
    Likes Received:
    370
    Oh, that’s just my southern dialect. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  6. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,941
    Likes Received:
    370
    I wonder if any aspect of this is taken out of contest. I could see him comparing the intimate relationship of Christ to His Church to that of husband and wife, but not as this article would indicate.

    I have seen things taken out of context in the past, but I don’t know about this one.

    I guess the only way to find out what he really means is to read the book.

    So, if anyone reads it, let me know. :)
     
  7. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    I went to another board where they had posted some excerpts of this.......

    Schaap is not talking about communion primarily. This is a book on the marriage relationship. It is not for single people, but for people who want help in their marriage relationship. So I take it some of it is a bit more explicit than would be normal for the average reader.....but so is Song of Solomon to most people.

    The parts that were posted, well, Im not sure if Id go as far as Pastor Schaap goes, but I also do not think the article as stated in the OP is completely fair. Schaap is not talking about "sex", he is talking about intimacy......and in our world of today, where sex is almost always a dirty word or being used in a filthy manner, we aren't used to it being spoken of in this way. He is discussing the intimacy that a Christian can have with God.....a SPIRITUAL relationship. Frankly I think it is us in our carnality that takes it the wrong way and puts something perverted on what he wrote.
     
    #7 bapmom, Jan 8, 2007
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2007
  8. IFB Mole

    IFB Mole
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree bapmom. Unless you read the book IN ITS CONTEXT one may go to the wrong conclusion
     
  9. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    From Chapter Three: Divine Intimacy
    By Jack Schaap Copyright 2005 Hyles Publications

    Quote:
    pg 40-44

    The physical act of romance says "union, one body." The one body says, "I am in union with God through this symbol." However, a person who has physical romance without marriage is symbolizing spiritual union without Christ. God hates sexual sins because they teach that one can have a relationship with God apart from the union of Jesus Christ. That is why Jesus said, "...This is my body which was given for you..." representing the unique, close intimacy of the believer and God.

    When a person takes the bread during the Lord's Supper, he is not actually eating Christ's body. That person is saying, "This element represents something." The person who deeply loves Christ understands that when He receives Christ as Saviour, it is a spiritual intercourse. A person receives the body of Christ. A Christian is the female gender in the spiritual realm, and God is the male gender of the spiritual realm. When a person receives Christ as Saviour, he is receiving Christ as a lover.
     
  10. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    and while what you just quoted, Logos, may make my "sensitivity alarms" go off, I believe mostly it is because when the majority of people talk like this they are trying to be inappropriate. Dr. Schaap is not. Are you offended by the song "Jesus, Lover of my Soul"?


    In surrounding passages of the paragraphs you quoted he makes it clear that he is speaking symbolically. He is not claiming that the Christian literally has a sexual experience with God.......

    He is speaking about a spiritual connection with God.....something which is pictured by the marriage relationship.
     
  11. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Spiritual intercourse" ....What kind of context was that written in?
     
  12. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmm... I wonder what it means in the passage when Jesus says "depart from me I never "knew" you? .... this puts a new light on that scripture.
     
  13. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pastor Tim,

    you are being unfair. Are you going to ask me about every turn of phrase he uses throughout the whole book? I gave you my opinion on what he meant, based on many things Ive heard him preach.....his style, etc. I can't go through and defend every little word he may or may not use.

    However, I daresay that some of you will be offended by what he wrote simply because he is who he is and has taken over where he has taken over. Some of you are just waiting to find a "good" excuse to point out how he's turning into some kind of a liberal or going charismatic or something.

    The book is a book on marriage, and intimacy within marriage. Intimacy in a marriage is not dirty, it is not shameful. There is nothing wrong with comparing it to a spiritual relationship with God. That is not dirtying our spiritual relationship. I do think that our reactions here show some of how we view the marital intimacy issue.


    Edit - I am editing this to add that I have not read the book, only excerpts posted somewhere else. Please be aware that the article referenced in the OP is what I think does the book an injustice. It places a spin on what was written, so then anyone reading the actual excerpts will be predisposed to also place that spin on what was written.
     
    #13 bapmom, Jan 8, 2007
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2007
  14. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bapmom, I think you have misread my intentions...

    I really wonder how he would interpret the word "knew' in the scripture I referred to... I, myself, have often thought that this meant a deeper intimacy than just a casual knowing someone.

    I know how easy it is to be misrepresented... just look at the way people treat Rick Warren.

    And yes, I am not a fan of Schaap... as a matter of fact, I would not walk across the street to hear him... he is, in my opinion, an egomaniac... only after the power his father-in-law had. But that does not mean that he cannot be misrepresented.

    I would be interested in hearing from someone that has read the whole book.
     
  15. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    my humblest apologies then, Pastor Tim.

    I appreciate your willingness to remain open-minded about this. My own sarcastic bent sometimes colors what I read, too! lol :thumbsup:

    :flower: (olive branch)
     
  16. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you have not read the book then how can you objectively speak to these issues either?

    In the same way anyone that hasn't read the book has no place criticizing it either.

    Just curious?
     
  17. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    No problem... I admit this is hard for me to be open minded about.. considering my feelings about him... but I have seen how those that don't like Rick Warren take things he says out of context, and I don't want to be guilty of this concerning Schaap.


    And :flower: right back at ya!
     
  18. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    PastorSBC,

    because, as I said, the "problematic" passages were quoted in entirety on that other board, and I read them before I posted here. From what I read I have enough context to determine for myself an opinion of what his intentions were. I also read his own descriptions of what he intended in this book.
     
  19. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where can we find his own intentions.... Is there a link?
    I have also been reading on other boards about this situation, and from what I pick up, even die-hard fundamentalists of his brand are saying he crossed the line. Have you seen this also?
     
  20. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    I havent seen most other reactions.....except for at OnlineBaptist (If Im allowed to reference another board......please forgive if Im not supposed to do that!)

    I guess what Im trying to say is, this is my off-the-cuff responses here. If someone can show me real reasons why this is wrong than Im willing to listen. Know what I mean?

    I saw his description of the book when I googled "Divine Intimacy by Dr. Jack Schaap" and found the description of the book from Hyles Publications. The fact that its a marriage book means something to me, when in the OP it is put forth as some kind of commentary on Communion. (Which, btw, most IFBers don't call it Holy Communion, we call it the Lord's Table or the Lord's Supper. And that is a significant difference to us.)

    This is something I might ask my preacher about, too. The sense I get though is that most people are responding according to the spin article, rather than solely what they've read themselves.
     

Share This Page

Loading...