How important is the Lord's Supper to you?

[mfblume]

It is serious business!

[shazeep]

ty, Light; that would seem to cover the attitude of one partaking, and seems to lend creedence to Esaias' 'full meal' approach. But what about the period? Ty.

[Light]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ty, Light; that would seem to cover the attitude of one partaking, and seems to lend creedence to Esaias' 'full meal' approach. But what about the period? Ty.

When God instituted the passover the Lamb of God was not in the picture.

14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever

43 And the Lord said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of passover:There shall no stranger eat thereof

44 But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

At the last supper Jesus is obeying Gods ordinance by observing the Passover. When He finishes the passover meal Jesus then institutes communion because there is no need to slay a lamb anymore, Jesus will become the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Only those who are save can partake of communion.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Light

When God instituted the passover the Lamb of God was not in the picture.

14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever

43 And the Lord said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of passover:There shall no stranger eat thereof

44 But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

At the last supper Jesus is obeying Gods ordinance by observing the Passover. When He finishes the passover meal Jesus then institutes communion because there is no need to slay a lamb anymore, Jesus will become the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Only those who are save can partake of communion.

The idea that non Christians are to be excluded from the Lord's Supper is an ancient one for certain. However it is based on two things. First, the prohibition against the uncircumcised eating the passover. However the NT is clear that Jesus is our Passover. The uncircumcised in heart cannot eat the new covenant Passover until they become circumcised in heart, because nobody can partake of Christ without faith. This is not about bread but the Bread from Heaven, Christ himself.

Second, the eating damnation because he discerns not the body of Christ. But that is a valid argument only if transubstantiation is true. Paul warned against eating the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner, specifically by being a pig and not sharing with the brethren, thus not discerning the Lord's body which is the community of the brethren.

While we certainly are not to give what is holy unto dogs, I still cannot see Jesus refusing to eat with someone who is sincerely interested in learning of him.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ty, Light; that would seem to cover the attitude of one partaking, and seems to lend creedence to Esaias' 'full meal' approach. But what about the period? Ty.

Paul's statements about the Lord's Supper seem to fit the idea of frequent communion rather than once a year. Church history shows no debate to my knowledge regarding weekly vs yearly, thus I assume the ancient practice of weekly (even daily) partaking to be of apostolic origin.

[Lafon]

Paul, in explaining to the saints at Corinth the reason why they were to partake of the Lord's Supper, said, "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come" (I Corinthians 11:26).

By this statement it is readily apparent that Paul was NOT establishing any sort of "schedule" regarding how often this sacred symbolic act is to be accomplished, only that it be done "often."

However, there is also an important element of Paul's statement which it seems many, if not most, fail to take note of, and it is this .... by one's participation in the act of eating the bread and drinking of the cup, they are SHEWING their "identification" with the Lord's death UNTIL He comes. The question, of course, is in what manner does one's participation in the Lord's Supper "shew" such a thing? I tender the following for consideration:

We who have been made the recipients of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and been immersed in the waters of baptism for the remission of sins "in the NAME of the Lord Jesus Christ," do, in all reality, "shew," signify, or declare our identification/relationship with Him, both in our daily lives AND will do so as well when we experience death. By partaking of these sacred symbols we are publicly proclaiming (shewing) that identification.

Therefore, as for me, I am adamantly opposed to allowing any who has not taken heed to and obeyed the command to repent. and be baptized in the NAME of the Lord Jesus, and been filled with His Spirit, to partake of the Lord's Supper, for in so doing they will not have properly "discerned the Lord's body"! As stated by Paul, even in his day MANY had participated when they were unworthy, and had done so to their own damnation. Makes me wonder how many continue to do so today, albeit unwittingly, because they do not properly comprehend what Paul has written.

[thephnxman]

In Remembrance of Me…

The Lord’s Supper: a time of renewal and faith. Of renewal, because we are called to remember His sacrifice; of faith, because we must not lose sight of His impending return.

Of Renewal
If we recall His work on the cross, we will not “…eat of this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily…”. It is a time not only of personal examination, but reflecting upon what the Lord’s sacrifice means (present tense) for each one as an individual.

The apostle goes on to say, “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.” Why? Because they (as we) were not aware of the power there is in “…discerning the Lord’s body (sacrifice)”. In discernment, there is a remembrance of what the Lord accomplished on the cross: “…he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and by his stripes we are healed.” We do not mention the redemption, for we cannot be redeemed “again”; that is, we are His already. What? You see, “…there is no more sacrifice for sin.”

Of Faith
“…then we which are alive and remain…comfort one another with these words.” If the Lord’s soon return brings apprehension, doubt, or fear, when it should instill joy, then it is time to examine our lives and our faith. It is time to repent and renew our vows and recall that the Lord promised to return. When we see the dark clouds gathering and the night falling, that is the time to gird up our loins like men: that the light of the Lord may shine through in the Church.

I have seen the Lord perform healings, and even reviving the hearts of individuals by sharing the Lord’s Supper. I’m sure that many others have seen and bear witness to His works as well.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Paul, in explaining to the saints at Corinth the reason why they were to partake of the Lord's Supper, said, "For as often as ye eat this bread, anrd drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come" (I Corinthians 11:26).

By this statement it is readily apparent that Paul was NOT establishing any sort of "schedule" regarding how often this sacred symbolic act is to be accomplished, only that it be done "often."

However, there is also an important element of Paul's statement which it seems many, if not most, fail to take note of, and it is this .... by one's participation in the act of eating the bread and drinking of the cup, they are SHEWING their "identification" with the Lord's death UNTIL He comes. The question, of course, is in what manner does one's participation in the Lord's Supper "shew" such a thing? I tender the following for consideration:

We who have been made the recipients of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and been immersed in the waters of baptism for the remission of sins "in the NAME of the Lord Jesus Christ," do, in all reality, "shew," signify, or declare our identification/relationship with Him, both in our daily lives AND will do so as well when we experience death. By partaking of these sacred symbols we are publicly proclaiming (shewing) that identification.

Therefore, as for me, I am adamantly opposed to allowing any who has not taken heed to and obeyed the command to repent. and be baptized in the NAME of the Lord Jesus, and been filled with His Spirit, to partake of the Lord's Supper, for in so doing they will not have properly "discerned the Lord's body"! As stated by Paul, even in his day MANY had participated when they were unworthy, and had done so to their own damnation. Makes me wonder how many continue to do so today, albeit unwittingly, because they do not properly comprehend what Paul has written.

If a person has repented and been baptised, but has not yet received the Holy Ghost, would you oppose their participation in the Lord's Supper?

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

If a person has repented and been baptised, but has not yet received the Holy Ghost, would you oppose their participation in the Lord's Supper?

Absolutely, that is, "IF" they asked me whether it was appropriate for them to participate.

The reason why I would do so is because of the words of Romans 8:9, to wit, "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

To me it seems rather clear that only those who have been "born again of the water and of the Spirit" should participate in such a sacred symbolic act, however, I do know that there are those who would disagree.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Esaias

If a person has repented and been baptised, but has not yet received the Holy Ghost, would you oppose their participation in the Lord's Supper?

Yes