msew
Junior Member
Posts: 127
|
Post by msew on Oct 9, 2008 23:47:19 GMT -5
Nathan, there are many house churches who have what the NT speaks about, meals where the rememberence (eucharist) takes place. Just because the people behaved badly in the NT does that mean we should be like them and move on to another form? The form of fellowship as we see it among the F&W's is ritualistic, stiff, silent (apart from the prayer and speeches) intimidating and unatural.
I would love to find a home church where the real and imtimate fellowship/love feast takes place because I see it as very scriptural.
The workers control participation in the bread and wine which is believe is heresy. If we look to Jesus' example we would see a very different approach towards taking the bread and wine.
I also believe it should be one loaf and glasses of wine. In the context of a meal this seems right and proper. It wouldn't fit into what has become the norm for most churches. (A sip and a crumb).
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Oct 10, 2008 21:39:53 GMT -5
To RON: In our worship in the Sunday morning meeting we separate ourselves from the influence of the world for a time to focus on our personal battle to reclaim, renew and refresh our commitment to serve and walk with Jesus. The token of the bread and wine is to remind us of the spiritual strength that is ours in Jesus.
You have WINE in your meeting? Wow I'm impressed. What country do you live in? Do you also use unleavened bread as Jesus did?
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Oct 10, 2008 22:28:25 GMT -5
The (Methodist) church I attend uses grape juice as well. I haven't asked why. Children are encouraged to partake if they wish, maybe that's why.
|
|
msew
Junior Member
Posts: 127
|
Post by msew on Oct 11, 2008 16:22:42 GMT -5
~~~ We have full meals on Sunday in USA we call them potlucks after the meetings where the friends brings foods for all to partake. We did it once in awhile. Too burdensome! worrisome for some... in preparing foods every week.
Nathan, my friend, you have described something that is a far cry from the Biblical perspective and nothing to do with worship. Too burdensome to follow the pattern of the NT? Now you wouldn't say that if we were discussing 2X2 ministers residing in folks homes would you?!! Of course it seems burdensome to you but not to those who find it perfect for real fellowship/dialogue. If the pattern for the Sunday am meeting is the passover meal then there are many bits missing in the 2X2 ritual.
I like the 2x2s worship format..... testimonies, pray, sings... in rememberance of Jesus our Lord and Savior with the bread and wine. Simplicity, NOT too many rituals. Perfect as it is.
That is just an opinion, not a Biblical based answer. When you promote your church as the "only right way" then it should be perfectly following Biblical teaching and practice, shouldn't it?
The 2X2's follow some NT practices and not others, just like every other church. All do SOME things according to Biblical principals. None do everything. So many churches get twisted up with "getting it right" that they fail to think about the message they are proclaiming. Firstly isn't it salvation that Jesus is all about?
In the end though if the people don't know about God's true message of salvation then all their practices no matter how true to form they are will be for nought.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Dec 22, 2008 2:21:20 GMT -5
Maybe I should round this off, having started the discussion. I am happy to say that the whole question has now been reconsidered and common sense asserted itself, in that any ruling which would deny believers this sacrament cannot be a right one under the circumstances of our mission church. So with great gladness, we were all able to partake this Sunday for the first time and from now on. We are a small band of all nationalities and former persuasions - and yes we have real wine in little cups and whole unleavened bread. Deo gratias!
Just a comment on something I read here, I know it is up to the individual to examine himself before partaking, but when scripture says that you could eat and drink unto damnation, would you aid someone in doing this, ie if they were, say, living in sin but still presented themselves for the bread and wine? Would you feel like saving them from themselves, or are you passing judgment on them?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Dec 23, 2008 1:35:27 GMT -5
That's a very good point. I'm sure it is the basis of decisions made by some of the workers.
|
|
alana
Senior Member
Posts: 267
|
Post by alana on Dec 26, 2008 10:13:37 GMT -5
Does it then follow that if we do not partake regularly of the bread and wine for whatever reason, then we are breaking a commandment from Jesus? Why are people so strung up on making everything a commandment or a rule? Jesus gave this advice more as an INVITATION or a RECOMMENDATION than as a commandment.
Next the load of guilt creeps in and with it in juxtaposition, the smug selfrighteusness of the goodie goods.
Enough to put anyone off for all their lives! I am wondering how it became to be just a preference of various churches whether to have bread and wine and how often. I am in a little church abroad at the moment where there is no pastor except in the larger city and therefore we are not given the option. My husband is very concerned about this, but I am a bit on the fence as to how serious a matter this is. Why can't you do it yourselves. Have a private service or invite friends?
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Dec 27, 2008 5:32:54 GMT -5
Scripture contains many commandments and rules rather than recommendations or invitations. Just the way it is. Where it comes to the bread and wine, Jesus said "This do" which sounds to me more like a commandment than any other way of looking at it. At the very least it would seem to be something Jesus very much wants us to do. He said "with desire have I desired to share this meal with you". It was therefore concern which crept in at not being able to do this rather than guilt.
Happily our church has now resolved the problem and we can now have the bread and wine each Sunday.
|
|
julio
Junior Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by julio on Dec 27, 2008 16:16:47 GMT -5
As has been mentioned, Jesus said "this do in remembrance". I wish the workers would not cling to previous decisions that have been made about denying people this privilege.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Dec 28, 2008 11:10:54 GMT -5
Julio, although I am not with workers in so many of their attitudes, but as I mentioned previously, there is scriptural support for denying the unworthy. If I was asked to give the bread and wine to someone who I personally knew was being wilfully or continuously sinful, then I would not want a part in helping that person to eat and drink 'unto damnation' (those are the words). The hard part is not applying our own judgements to others, but somewhere the line has to be drawn.
|
|
|
Post by geometricjeff on Jan 6, 2009 0:21:21 GMT -5
I thought that Christ's command was much more than remembering. In St. Luke's Gospel, 22:19, Christ says to "... do this in memory of me." He wanted us to "do this". What does "this" refer to? I thought it refers to what Christ had just done, which is to give them His Body: "Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, 'This is my body....'" So..... Isn't it part of His command that we eat His Body (and drink His Blood)?
I don't see how we can read St. Luke 22:19 without reference to what happened earlier as recorded in St. John's Gospel, 6:52 - 55. There, when Christ told them that He was going to offer them His flesh and blood to eat and drink, they were incredulous, responding (v. 52), "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" Christ responds in verse 55 by answering their confusion and concerns very plainly and emphatically: "For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink."
It seems to me that Christ's command includes that we eat His Body and drink His Blood - which is what He had his apostles do at the Last Supper, and what He promised His disciples at the synagogue in Capernaum that He would do - and not eat and drink mere tokens, mere bread and wine.
St. John the Baptist, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, proclaimed Christ "The Lamb of God". Any practicing Jew of that time would immediately know that a lamb of God gets sacrificed to God, and then eaten.
As far as whether it is a commandment or a recommendation: It sounds like a command to me, but a command issued out of love. Recall that at that same Last Supper, Christ very clearly said (St. John 13:34), "I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another." In fact, read chapters 13 - 16 and count how many times Christ uses variations of the word "commandment". You know, this is our divine Saviour, at His last meal - during Passover, no less - offering the gift of Himself, and clearly wanting us to receive the gift of His Body and Blood - I better feel guilty if I don't do as He desparately wants me to do.
I saw some earlier discussion about whether someone can/should exclude people from receiving Holy Communion. I think the Holy Spirit has told us "Yes". In St. Paul's "First Letter to the Corinthians", he wrote - again, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - "It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans--a man living with his father's wife.... The one who did this deed should be expelled from your midst." (Chapter 5, verses 1 and 2.) I presume that St. Paul intended that if this man presented himself for Holy Communion while still living in this sin that he should be refused. What is interesting is that the remainder of St. Paul's discussion of this case - verses 3 - 13 - is clearly in a Eucharistic context. But, if there be any further doubt, St. Paul concludes in verses 11 - 13 by writing, "But I now write to you not to associate with anyone named a brother, if he is immoral, greedy, an idolater, a slanderer, a drunkard, or a robber, not even to eat with such a person. For why should I be judging outsiders? Is it not your business to judge those within? God will judge those outside. 'Purge the evil person from your midst.'" Apparantly St. Paul expected us to make a determination on who is worthy to receive Holy Communion.
|
|
|
Post by geometricjeff on Jan 6, 2009 0:37:47 GMT -5
One person wrote this about the Eucharist: "It was not sterile and purposely guilt inducing, nor grace giving as some of the sacramental churches view it. Instead it was a time to gather with each other around Jesus. " St. Paul says that if we eat and drink unworthily, we face condemnation. If it has the power to condemn, I certainly hope it also has the power to provide grace.
Another person wrote: "The whole purpose of the Eucharists is in rememberance of Jesus' love, life, sacrifice, death on Calvary's, resurrection.... NOT coming to eat food together." I agree that it is not all about eating a meal. But, it cannot be that the *whole* purpose is *rememberance* of Jesus' love, life, etc. I say this because certainly the first Eucharist - i.e., the Last Supper - had a valid purpose, but there was yet no death and resurection to remember, because as you know they hadn't happened yet. In fact, judging by the comments and questions we read that the apostles shared at the Last Supper, they were still almost comically clueless about what was going on. Nevertheless, I believe that first Eucharist had a purpose, a much deeper purpose, and still acheived that purpose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2009 16:21:31 GMT -5
In one of the recordings of the last supper Jesus said "as oft as ye drink it (the cup), (do it) in remembrance of me"
I don't read a ritual into this --- just the thought, when we drink or eat it can remind us of Jesus. Jesus actually spoke against ritualistic service to God.
|
|
|
Post by geometricjeff on Jan 7, 2009 0:06:12 GMT -5
In one of the recordings of the last supper Jesus said "as oft as ye drink it (the cup), (do it) in remembrance of me" I don't read a ritual into this --- just the thought, when we drink or eat it can remind us of Jesus. Jesus actually spoke against ritualistic service to God. I don't know about that. The Last Supper took place in the midst of a well-established ritual: Passover. St. Luke's Gospel tell us that when Christ was born, His parents presented Him in the temple and offered two turtle doves - another ritual. The same gospel also tells us that every year He went to Jerusalem for the Passover festival - another ritual. He preached in the synagogues, so He participated in that ritual service. He underwent the ritual of the baptism of St. John the Baptist. And then there were the ritual-like things He did - e.g., healing a blind man by smearing a paste of mud and His spittle on the eyes, etc. I don't think rituals are necessarily bad. (In fact, I think God made us to need them.) I don't think Christ was averse to rituals. I think He does not like it when people focus more on the externals of the rituals, instead of what the rituals are pointing us toward, what they are telling us, what they are expressing and revealing to us. I think if you reread the Book of Revelation, you'll see described in there an elaborate heavenly ritual. Maybe you meant something different by "ritual" than what I'm thinking?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2009 6:58:47 GMT -5
There was abundant ritual in the old testament -- and Jesus was anxious to fulfill the old ---- but he was quite careful not to create ritual in his example for us. The last supper in the upper room was part of the old testament fulfillment of the passover -- which seems few feel that he taught we should continue to celebrate.
Claiming that he initiated a ritual for his followers, in the fact that they shared wine and bread at this meal is far fetched. That Jesus wished his teaching to be remembered after his Crucifixion is hardly the same thing, as asking this to become a weekly ritual to follow.
|
|
|
Post by geometricjeff on Jan 7, 2009 20:52:54 GMT -5
There was abundant ritual in the old testament -- and Jesus was anxious to fulfill the old ---- but he was quite careful not to create ritual in his example for us. The last supper in the upper room was part of the old testament fulfillment of the passover -- which seems few feel that he taught we should continue to celebrate. Claiming that he initiated a ritual for his followers, in the fact that they shared wine and bread at this meal is far fetched. That Jesus wished his teaching to be remembered after his Crucifixion is hardly the same thing, as asking this to become a weekly ritual to follow. I don't think it is far fetched. Most people from early on understood what Christ wanted us to do as being wrapped within ritual. Ritual is very natural to humans - you see it in all times, in all settings (both good and bad). It comes from God Himself. I don't see how I can think that Christ would be opposed to ritual when (1) God Himself prescribed rituals to Moses, one having to do with Passover which was a prefigure of the Last Supper; and, (2) the holy apostles, filled with the Holy Spirit, themselves engaged in rituals (e.g., Acts 21: 17-26). If thinking that Christ expected ritual to be attached to the Eucharist is far-fetched - meaning, very unlikely - then we'd have to conclude that nearly all people have misunderstood Christ's intent from the very beginning. That implies that very few people "get it", now or in the past 20 centuries.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Jan 7, 2009 21:23:20 GMT -5
If thinking that Christ expected ritual to be attached to the Eucharist is far-fetched - meaning, very unlikely - then we'd have to conclude that nearly all people have misunderstood Christ's intent from the very beginning. That implies that very few people "get it", now or in the past 20 centuries. It would appear so.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jan 8, 2009 10:38:52 GMT -5
It seems clear cut to me that Jesus initiated a ritual of bread and wine in remembrance of his body and blood. For the word ritual you could substitute 'practice' which perhaps makes it easier to accept if there is something about the word 'ritual' which is disliked. He said distinctly we were to do this regularly (as often ye are gathered together). Why would anyone want to devalue this essential part of Christian life by wanting to make it less significant?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2009 12:33:51 GMT -5
Efforts to present Christ as a simple constructor of religious ritual, seems to cheapen the beauty of his message and of the hope and promise that he offered mankind.
His message was a message of reality -- and to me it is clear that the ritual of the old testament was fullfilled in him-- and not something he planned should be dragged into the future by religious fanatics -- (although many groups have done this)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2009 14:09:19 GMT -5
On the rare occasions we have gatherings in our home, they frequently have included "breaking" bread and "drinking" wine in rememberance of our Lord. It is not merely "ritual" rather a part of our own belief in the Lord thinking of His righteous life offered in death for our own unrighteous ones. Perhaps it could be thought of as "Focus."
Being "worthy" for us is not from our own lives' deeds, but by our current desires to allow the Holy Spirit to dwell within us, and manifest his fruit. Rather simple as far as we are concerned. We also partake of those emblems at any fellowship service where we are welcomed when they are included.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jan 8, 2009 14:17:27 GMT -5
It seems clear cut to me that Jesus initiated a ritual of bread and wine in remembrance of his body and blood. For the word ritual you could substitute 'practice' which perhaps makes it easier to accept if there is something about the word 'ritual' which is disliked. He said distinctly we were to do this regularly (as often ye are gathered together). Why would anyone want to devalue this essential part of Christian life by wanting to make it less significant? So it would seem the f&w are in violation of this clause by not serving communion at wed. night meeting, Sunday special meetings, Sun. convention meetings, and... well... even gospel meetings, considering that 99 percent of the attendees are church members and their families.
|
|
|
Post by geometricjeff on Jan 8, 2009 19:39:56 GMT -5
Efforts to present Christ as a simple constructor of religious ritual, seems to cheapen the beauty of his message and of the hope and promise that he offered mankind. His message was a message of reality -- and to me it is clear that the ritual of the old testament was fullfilled in him-- and not something he planned should be dragged into the future by religious fanatics -- (although many groups have done this) Who are the people who are trying to present Christ as a "simple constructor of religious ritual"? I can't say that I've ever met anyone who thinks that all that matters is the externals of the rituals, that all Christ was trying to establish was an empty ritual. I'm keeping this thread alive because I believe that the desire for ritual connected with vital events is something God planted in our human nature as something good, and I think that is worth stressing. If I'm right, then that raises the question: Are we doing harm, are we being unnatural, are we being untrue to ourselves (and God) by downplaying the role of ritual? I'm wondering how much of our discussion is based on different colorings of the word "ritual", how much is due to different thoughts on what Holy Scripture says, how much is due to different views on human nature?
|
|
|
Post by selah on Jan 8, 2009 20:40:30 GMT -5
I realize this is a bit like choking on a knat, but....
He actually didn't say "as often as ye are gathered together." That seems to be a f&w interpretation. He said, "whenever you drink it," (NIV) or "as oft as ye drink it." (KJV)
I haven't found anywhere where He says, as often as ye are gathered together.
Blessings, Linda
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2009 1:38:01 GMT -5
I realize this is a bit like choking on a knat, but.... He actually didn't say "as often as ye are gathered together." That seems to be a f&w interpretation. He said, "whenever you drink it," (NIV) or "as oft as ye drink it." (KJV) I haven't found anywhere where He says, as often as ye are gathered together. Blessings, Linda I don't read alot of difference between "when you drink it" or "as oft as you drink it" -- The thought was that being reminded of Christ is something that is well to be done in even the more everyday aspects of daily life -- such as drinking and eating. He didn't suggest the initiation of a new ritual in this 'one time' any more than in his suggestion of the "washing of feet" in another place in scripture. He was describing important principles and values -- but wasn't out to create another simple ritual that the world was already filled with.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jan 9, 2009 3:36:59 GMT -5
The occasion was the Passover (ritual?) which they were observing. It was Jesus' last time to be with his disciples before He died on earth and He had important things to impart to them. The sharing of the bread and wine and what it was to mean to them was explained by Him. He told them to do this in remembrance of Him (unlike foot washing). Sorry about the mistranslation Linda, maybe I shall switch back to the old King James! Edgar, how can we do this as Jesus commanded without describing it as a ritual, practice, communion or Eucharist or whatever name is put upon it? I do agree that the F & W don't like naming anything! The apostles put this into practice immediately and with instructions how to do this worthily, as an essential part of the life of Christians.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2009 4:56:07 GMT -5
That it was the ritual of the passover that was the reason for this particular gathering, is of course significant MsMarie. But the idea wasn't to perpetuate the idea that Christians should continue to celebrate this old testament request. To me, there is nothing to suggest that his idea was to create a replacement ritual either.
Jesus wish was simply when you drink wine and eat your bread together -- remember me. He definitely WASN'T suggesting that they create a new tradition of eating and drinking. It was 'when' or 'as oft' as you drink wine and eat bread -- remember me!!
The term "as oft" or "when" you eat and drink, gives absolutely no backing for the idea that it be done once a week, in a worker specified Sunday morning. How often do we eat and drink? ---
The idea that the term 'break bread' all of a sudden changed from meaning eating together , and now implied a new religious ritual, is far fetched.
Edgar
I don't doubt the fact that in the period after Jesus walked the earth, different religious constructions, and religious zealots have hijacked the term 'breaking bread' to signify a ritual that even today is practiced in many different ways and in many different forms --- But I firmly believe that when Jesus used the term it simply meant the sharing of bread and wine together -- a simple social meal in the company of friends. Each time, a wonderful opportunity to remember and apply the beautiful principles that Jesus died to leave with us. Not once a week, nor once a year --- but every time(as oft) we have the privilege of being together with those we learn to love and respect. Is this expecting to much? Did Jesus suggest less?
PS Was the following meant as a ritual -- or as a principle? John 13:14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
If you are so inclined, you can turn everything into a ritual -- however I believe that it will do far more good -- and be more in line with Jesus spirit, to regard it as a basic principle to apply to our daily lives. (and do less to nurture the self-righteous tendencies in human nature!!)
|
|
|
Post by lin on Jan 9, 2009 16:09:41 GMT -5
Where you meet do they have this ritual Edgar?
|
|
|
Post by selah on Jan 9, 2009 21:23:28 GMT -5
Hi Edgar...just clarifying that my comment was not about the difference between "when you drink it" and "as oft as you drink it"....but, since those both mean practically the same thing, I meant there is a difference between those sayings and the one that says, "as oft as ye are gathered together."
The first sayings mean when you drink, the second means when you gather.
I agree, the point is not about the actual ritual, but about the meaning behind it.
Blessings, Linda
|
|