1. 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!

What's Your View of the Lord's Supper?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by dr396, Mar 17, 2004.

  1. dr396

    dr396 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem with your position Caissie is that you have to assume that Paul and the apostles took the Supper in the wrong way. History teaches us that from the outset the tradition of the Supper was very often (perhaps even once a week). Paul's rebuke of the Corinthians seems to invoke images of a celebration that took place often, not once a year. So were the apostles and Paul wrong and did Paul teach the Corinthians wrong in your opinion?

    D.R.
     
  2. Caissie

    Caissie New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I do not think that the apostles were wrong and I do not think that Paul was wrong. See wopik's arguement for "often". I agree with him. Paul does not say do this often, He says as often as you do this (Big difference). We got this tradition from the Catholic Church, who got it from pagan worship.
     
  3. Debby in Philly

    Debby in Philly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    ...and therefore are in danger of punishment for their hypocrisy.

    Our Baptist church has communion on the first Sunday of each month. And on the evening of Holy Thursday, it is observed following a light meal of soup, bread, and fruit, around tables.
     
  4. dr396

    dr396 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Caissie,

    We got no such thing from the Catholic church. Why do I know that? Because I have studied pre-Catholic and post-Catholic church history. You should too. Go get Justo Gonzalez' book on church history. You will see that the early church was persecuted for participating in "Love Feasts" that very obviously took place "often." Additionally, Jesus' words quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians reflect a lack of emphasis on the amount of times the Supper is to be conducted (hence the wording, "as often as you drink. . .") and seem to emphasize the attitude that accompanies the action. But again the whole context in 1 Cor. seems to suggest an event that occurred often (possibly even once a week), not one that happened only on Passover. So in order for your position to be right (i.e., the Supper only taken at Passover), the early church along with Paul must be wrong in how they took it.

    D.R.
     
  5. dr396

    dr396 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Debby,

    that sounds really interesting. I like the Thursday night thing and the almost whole meal along with it. What church do you attend in Philly? I worked with M-Fuge of the SBC in Philly for a summer in 2001 and loved it. Since then I have thought about church planting in the Temple area.

    D.R.
     
  6. dr396

    dr396 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Caissie,

    One more thing about the pagan charge. The pagans were the ones who were persecuting the Christians regarding the Supper. They were the ones charging the Christians with eating flesh and drinking blood. Gonzalez in his "The Story of Christianity" says this, "We are told in the Book of Acts that from the very beginning the early church had the custom of gathering on the first day of the week for the breaking of bread. The reason for gethering on the first day of the week was that this was the day of the resurrection of the Lord. Therefore, the main purpose of this service of worship was not to call the faithful to repentance, or to make them aware of the magnitude of their sins, but raher to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and the promises of which that resurrection was the seal."

    Later he says, "From that time, and throughout most of its history, the Christian church has seen in communion its highest act of worship. Only at a relatively recent date has it become common practice in many Protestant churches to focus their worship on preaching rather than on communion . . . "

    You can go on reading and he says that at the beginning the communion services were full meals, but were later reduced probably due to the rumors about the "love feasts" where they ate flesh and drank blood and called each other brother and sister. It was also thought that they engaged in orgies that only members could participate in (because communion was closed back then to the non-Baptized).

    In all of this it just does not seem logical to believe that all of these early Christians were wrong in how they took the Supper or that they got anything from the pagans, the very people who mocked and persecuted them for the Supper in the first place.

    D.R.
     
  7. Caissie

    Caissie New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do know that Paul had a communion with people (Acts 2), and you are right that was a full meal. That is communion, I never said that there was anything wrong with that. But we are not talking about communion, we are talking about "The Lord's Supper". The Supper that Jesus told us to do in remembrance of him. That is the Supper that they were doing at the time Christ spoke those words...The Passover Supper.

    Also, this site shows the pagan history behind the "communion/mass" that the Catholic church brought to the Christians.

    http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/monstr.htm
     
  8. dr396

    dr396 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Caissie,

    First of all, that full meal they were taking was the communion taken "often." The "Lord's Supper" and communion are the same thing. The fact that He instituted it at the Passover does not mean that is the only time it can be done or in that way (with a full meal). He still downplayed how often it was done by saying, "as often as you do this." Had He wanted it to be taken only once a year, then He likely would have communicated it, don't you think? Also, the only elements used in the Supper are the bread and wine. Both of these were continual symbols in His ministry regarding the partaking of them. The slaughter of the lamb was what was important in that symbol, hence to eat the lamb does nothing for the overall symbolism of the Supper. The bread and wine are what are most important here, and that is why it seems perfectly logical and not unbiblical to take with just those elements.

    As for your link. I will not read things that are driven by numerology. It is not an exact science and it is dangerous. You can take almost anyone's name and it will add up to 666. That is crap. Also, this is one man on a mission who has little clout theologically in the whole of conservative Christianity. Be careful what you read and who you count on for "facts."

    D.R.
     
  9. Michael52

    Michael52 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
    25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 1 Cor. 11:24-25 (ESV)

    Why? - He said "Do this..." (a commandment!)
    When? - "...as often as you drink it..." (unspecified timing)
    Manner/purpose? - "...in remembrance of me."

    Do you think the Lord had wrangling over carnal technicalities in mind when he said this?
     
Loading...