What is the Baptist view of Tradition.

There is one MAJOR flaw with your suggestion. That is Jesus argued against doing things for tradition. Back when Jesus walked the earth the Jews put traditions even above God's Law.

Do you know what traditions are? Things that are done because they have always been done that way. Its like the robotic worship of Muslims, it does no good and earns no favor from God.

We have the record of the Acts of the Apostles in the Scriptures.

For most baptist I think the stumbling block is not the traditions themselves,or at least not all of them. The problem lies in elevating tradition to the same level,and authority of scripture.

God Bless Jax

RaylightI said:

Hi.

Nobody can deny as far as I'm concerned that we need Tradition ( Holy or Apostolic Tradition ) in many parts of our Christianity. We need to understand how the early Church understood the Bible, how it dealt with issues, and what happened after the time of writing the NT.


What is the Baptists view of ( Holy or Apostolic ) Tradition ?


( Excuse my bad English please, it is not my native language ).

Click to expand...

Look for the word "tradition" in a bible search and see that it has a negative connotation

Mark 7:9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

I think most baptists, including myself (i'm nondenominational but reformed baptist in theology), would consider scripture to be the one inerrant all-sufficient rule of Christian faith and practice.

Anything in tradition that contradicts scripture is wrong, and tradition on its own has no bearing on doctrine. Where tradition and scripture agree, its all good.

98cwitr said:

Look for the word "tradition" in a bible search and see that it has a negative connotation

Mark 7:9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

Click to expand...

True enough that tradition simply for traditions sake falls outside the Good News. But certainly not ALL traditions are to be seen in a negative light. Traditions of God are commanded to be followed:


1 Cor. 11:2 'I commend you because you remember me in everything and remember the traditions just as I have handed them on to you.' St. Paul encourages the faithful of Corinth for following the traditions he taught them...
There must be SOME traditions that we should keep.

2 Thess. 2:15. 'Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.' Demonstrates that not all traditions were written down; some were told to them verbally. Do not so easily throw away tradition just because it wasn't written on paper. St. Paul communicates that some things were verbally passed on.

2 Thess. 3:6. 'Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according to the tradition that they received from us.' Again, St. Paul tells us that the traditions that he passed on are to be followed.

In the spirit of fairness, these three examples must be examined in context. In the passage from 1 Cor. We see that Paul is asking the people to imitate him. And he reminds us that Christ is to be the head of each household...we are to cover ourselves in Christ. We could probably debate as to 'How?' We accomplish this, and therein most likely lies the oral portion of the tradition we are to keep...

2 Thess. 2 tells us just prior to this that we are not to be lawless men. We ARE Christ's fruits, and we should act like it! So, 'traditionally', we are to be good stewards of our corner of the earth...obey our laws, keep Gods Commands.

2 Thess. 3 tells us to work hard...in Christ's work. We should not slack off in bringing others to the Truth!

I like the topic very much. Thank you for the opportunity to think and converse about it!

Peace in Christ

"...all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved." ( Matthew 22:29, 31, 32; Ephesians 2:20; Acts 28:23) London Baptist Confession of Faith 1689 chapter 1.10

RaylightI said:

Hi.

Nobody can deny as far as I'm concerned that we need Tradition ( Holy or Apostolic Tradition ) in many parts of our Christianity. We need to understand how the early Church understood the Bible, how it dealt with issues, and what happened after the time of writing the NT.


What is the Baptists view of ( Holy or Apostolic ) Tradition ?


( Excuse my bad English please, it is not my native language ).

Click to expand...

Hi raylight,

Well, the issue of traditions can be a difficult subject. Yes, I think we should follow the tradition of baptizing believers. We find that that's how it was done in the early fellowships of the believers. However, walking down the aisle before and after a service with some canister of incense because it is some tradition that is supposed to infer the coming and going of the Holy Spirit, well I don't find any indication in the Scriptures that any of the early fellowships practiced that.

Sadly, tradition can get so ingrained and be so old a practice that people just don't understand that it's some meaningless tradition. They begin to adopt the attitude of, "well, that's the way it's been done here since before I was a kid and that's the way it's going to stay."

Some fellowships begin traditions based on writings of what many refer to as the early church fathers. I don't find that acceptable. The only men in all of new covenant history that I know that I know knew the truth about how we should worship are those who wrote to us in the new covenant writings. I don't have any earthly idea whether St. so-and-so of so-and-so was born again. All I really know about that person is that they seemed to have been respected among certain people as faithful. There are several fellowships that I absolutely believe have placed tradition in exactly the same place that Jesus rebuked the Jews for. They have established traditions of men and set them above what God asks of us and then gone to the extreme of making various claims to allude that if one doesn't keep these traditions they will not gain eternal life.

For example, I can't find even the hint of an evidence that our confessing sins to one another or to some special person has any direct affect on our salvation or forgiveness. It is just a practice that Paul encouraged one time among the believers and it was one to another, not to any particular person. I personally believe that Paul gave that instruction so that we would be held accountable and that it does give us even more incentive to rid sin from our lives. After all, it gets tiresome every week to sit before a group of believers or even a very good friend who is a believer and every week say to them, "Well, I committed that same sin again.", over and over and over. By confessing it to others we are admitting that we are fully aware that it is sin and acknowledging it and hopefully getting some feedback in the way of encouragement and prayer from other believers.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

The recorded and preserved Word of God "is" the Final Court Of Arbitration until the LORD puts His foot on the dirt of the Earth once more. Jesus has had it recorded that we should worship Him, the Father and the Holy spirit in truth and in spirit. He also has seen to the opinion of God was preserved about the traditions of men and the light there is very dim, indeed.

The youth of any age are irritating to old men like me but, you will not ever see me jump up and get into their faces as long as they can demonstrate from scripture why they are choosing to worship in the manor they have chosen. May god bless their pea pickin' hearts, they are not me! I have seen to it that my ugly, old, face was seen in their chosen venue of worship so that they know my support. They have been known to force me to turn my Hearing Aides off but the smile was never erased as they worshipped our God with their hearts.

Tradition, poo fah!

There are Traditions (essential of the faith) & traditions(non-essentials that every church does). The issue is churches blur the lines on Tradtions and traditions. Most churches would place 10% tithe in Tradition, but I would classify that as tradition. How a church does communion is tradtion in the Baptist church, while Communion is Tradtion.

traditions haven't gone away. Churches just don't admit to having them, unless it involves a potluck

Hawkiz said:

True enough that tradition simply for traditions sake falls outside the Good News. But certainly not ALL traditions are to be seen in a negative light. Traditions of God are commanded to be followed:


1 Cor. 11:2 'I commend you because you remember me in everything and remember the traditions just as I have handed them on to you.' St. Paul encourages the faithful of Corinth for following the traditions he taught them...
There must be SOME traditions that we should keep.

2 Thess. 2:15. 'Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.' Demonstrates that not all traditions were written down; some were told to them verbally. Do not so easily throw away tradition just because it wasn't written on paper. St. Paul communicates that some things were verbally passed on.

2 Thess. 3:6. 'Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according to the tradition that they received from us.' Again, St. Paul tells us that the traditions that he passed on are to be followed.

In the spirit of fairness, these three examples must be examined in context. In the passage from 1 Cor. We see that Paul is asking the people to imitate him. And he reminds us that Christ is to be the head of each household...we are to cover ourselves in Christ. We could probably debate as to 'How?' We accomplish this, and therein most likely lies the oral portion of the tradition we are to keep...

2 Thess. 2 tells us just prior to this that we are not to be lawless men. We ARE Christ's fruits, and we should act like it! So, 'traditionally', we are to be good stewards of our corner of the earth...obey our laws, keep Gods Commands.

2 Thess. 3 tells us to work hard...in Christ's work. We should not slack off in bringing others to the Truth!

I like the topic very much. Thank you for the opportunity to think and converse about it!

Peace in Christ

Click to expand...

What would you say the difference is between a tradition and what Protestants would call an "Ordinance?"

If you distill the question into a shorter form I'll attempt to answer...also, this is a Baptist forum. You may ask questions but not teach Roman Catholic teaching.

Hawkiz said:

The question I was answering was asking about the differences between Tradition and ordinances.

Click to expand...

I cannot speak for all Baptists but I am of the Puritan tradition and therefore use confessions of faith and catechisms to engage other Christians and the world about what I believe.

From the London Baptist Confession of 1689:

Chapter 28: Of Baptism and the Lord's Supper

1._____ Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ordinances of positive and sovereign institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus, the only lawgiver, to be continued in his church to the end of the world.
( Matthew 28:19, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:26 )

2._____ These holy appointments are to be administered by those only who are qualified and thereunto called, according to the commission of Christ.
( Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 4:1 )

Chapter 29: Of Baptism

1._____ Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.
( Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2;12; Galatians 3:27; Mark 1:4; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:4 )

2._____ Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.
( Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36, 37; Acts 2:41; Acts 8:12; Acts 18:8 )

3._____The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, wherein the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
( Matthew 28:19, 20; Acts 8:38 )

4._____Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance. ( Matthew 3:16; John 3:23 )

Chapter 30: Of the Lord's Supper

1._____ The supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, to be observed in his churches, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance, and shewing forth the sacrifice of himself in his death, confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17,21 )

2._____ In this ordinance Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sin of the quick or dead, but only a memorial of that one offering up of himself by himself upon the cross, once for all; and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same. So that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominable, injurious to Christ's own sacrifice the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect.
( Hebrews 9:25, 26, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:24; Matthew 26:26, 27 )

3._____ The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use, and to take and break the bread; to take the cup, and, they communicating also themselves, to give both to the communicants.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, etc. )

4._____ The denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this ordinance, and to the institution of Christ.
( Matthew 26:26-28; Matthew 15:9; Exodus 20:4, 5 )

5._____ The outward elements in this ordinance, duly set apart to the use ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, although in terms used figuratively, they are sometimes called by the names of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ, albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.
( 1 Corinthians 11:27; 1 Corinthians 11:26-28 )

6._____ That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ's body and blood, commonly called transubstantiation, by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense and reason, overthroweth the nature of the ordinance, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.
( Acts 3:21; Luke 14:6, 39; 1 Corinthians 11:24, 25 )

7._____ Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.
( 1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 )

8._____ All ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Christ, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against him, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto; yea, whosoever shall receive unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, eating and drinking judgment to themselves.
( 2 Corinthians 6:14, 15; 1 Corinthians 11:29; Matthew 7:6 )

______________________________________

The majority of Baptists would hold to the memorial view as taught by Zwingli and the Anabaptists which declares the elements to be symbolic of the cross only.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lASO9Un1EQU

Other Baptists, Baptists like myself would hold to either a sacramentalism common among Reformed churches which declares some kind of instrumentality within the elements that feeds us by faith. This is not the same as ex opere operato.

The minority view, which I believe is biblical but does kinda split hairs, is known by symbolic parallelism. The elements are symbolic only but we feed upon Christ by faith, our faith represented in the memorial of the Lord's Supper.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

The following is a quote from Hercules Collins, a 17th century Baptist, who edited a well known and used Reformed confession for Baptist use. You could say he baptized the confession.


The Sacraments

Lesson 25

Q. 65 It is by faith alone that we share in Christ and all his blessings: where then does that faith come from?

A. The Holy Spirit produces it in our hearts1 by the preaching of the holy gospel,2 and confirms it through our use of the holy sacraments.3

1John 3:5; 1 Cor. 2:10-14; Eph. 2:8
2Rom. 10:17; 1 Pet. 1:23-25
3Matt. 28:19-20; 1 Cor. 10:16

Q. 66 What are sacraments?

A. Sacraments are holy signs and seals for us to see. They were instituted by God so that by our use of them he might make us understand more clearly the promise of the gospel, and might put his seal on that promise.1 And this is God’s gospel promise: to forgive our sins and give us eternal life by grace alone because of Christ’s one sacrifice finished on the cross.2

1Gen. 17:11; Deut. 30:6; Rom. 4:11
2Matt. 26:27-28; Acts 2:38; Heb. 10:10

Q. 67 Are both the word and the sacraments then intended to focus our faith on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as the only ground of our salvation?

A. Right! In the gospel the Holy Spirit teaches us and through the holy sacraments he assures us that our entire salvation rests on Christ’s one sacrifice for us on the cross.1

1Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 11:26; Gal. 3:27

Q. 68 How many sacraments did Christ institute in the New Testament?

A. Two: baptism and the Lord’s Supper.1

1Matt. 28:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-26
Baptism

Lesson 26

Q. 69 What is Baptism?

A. Immersion or dipping of the Person in Water in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, by such who are duly qualified by Christ.1
1Mat. 3.16. John 3.23. Acts 8.38, 39. Rom. 6.4.
Q. 70 Who are the proper Subjects of this Ordinance?

A. Those who do actually profess Repentance towards God, Faith in, and Obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ.1
1Acts 2.38. Acts 8.36, 37.
Q. 71 Should infants, too, be baptized?

A. No, for we have neither Precept nor Example for that Practice in all the Book of God.
Q. 72 Does the Scriptures forbid the Baptism of Infants?

A. It is sufficient that the Divine Oracles commands the baptizing of Believers, unless we will make ourselves wiser than what is written. Nadab and Abihu were not forbidden to offer strange Fire, yet for doing so they incurred God’s Wrath, because they were commanded to take Fire from the Altar.!
1Mat. 28.18, 19. Mark 16.16. Lev 9.24. 10.16.
Q. 73 May not the infant children of believers under the Gospel be baptized since the infant descendants of Abraham were circumcised under the Law?

A. No. Abraham had a command from God to circumcise his infant descendants, but believers have no command to baptize their infant children under the Gospel.1
1Gen. 17.9, 10, 11, 12.
Q. 74 If the infant children of believers are in the Covenant of Grace with their parents, as some say, why may they not be baptized under the Gospel, as well as Abraham’s infant descendants were circumcised under the Law?

A. By the infant children of Believers being in the Covenant of Grace, it must either be meant of the Covenant of Grace absolutely considered, and if so, then there can be no total and final falling away of any infant children of believers from the Covenant, but all must be saved.1
1Jer. 32.38, 39, 40. Joh. 10.28.
Or, 2. They must mean conditionally, on consideration that when they come to an age of maturity, they by true faith, love, and holiness of life, taking hold of God’s Covenant of Grace, shall have the privileges of it. This being their sense, I then ask what real spiritual privilege the infant children of believers have more than the infant children of unbelievers, if they live also to years of maturity, and by true faith and love take hold God’s Covenant? I further demand, whether the Seal of the Covenant does not belong as much to the children of unbelievers as to the children of believers? and more too, since some infant children of unbelievers take hold of God’s Covenant, and some infant children of believers do not2; as this often occurs to the sorrow of many godly parents.
2 Isa. 56.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Acts 10.34, 35. John 3.16.
3. Suppose all the infant children of believers are absolutely in the Covenant of Grace; believers under the Gospel should not baptize their infant children any more than Lot had warrant to circumcise himself or his infant children, although he was closely related to Abraham, a believer, and in the Covenant of Grace too: since circumcision was limited to Abraham and to his family. Also by the same rule we should bring infants to the Lord’s Table, since the same qualifications are3 required for the proper administration of Baptism as for the Lord’s Supper.
3 Acts 2.41, 42.
4. We must know the covenant made with Abraham had two parts: first, a spiritual, which consisted in God’s promising to be a God to4 Abraham, and5 all his spiritual descendants in a particular manner, whether they were circumcised or uncircumcised, who believed as Abraham the Father of the Faithful did. This was signified by God’s accepting them as his people who were not descended6 from Abraham, but through Jesus Christ, the Gentiles, the uncircumcised who believed, should have their faith counted for Righteousness, as Abraham’s was before he was circumcised.7
4Gen. 17.19, 21. Gen. 21.10. Gal. 4.30.
5Acts 2.39. Rom. 9.7, 8, &c.
6Gal. 3.16, 28, 29.
7Rom. 4.9-14.
5. This promise consisted of temporal good: so God promised Abraham’s Seed should enjoy the8 land of Canaan, and have plenty of outward blessings, and sealed this promise by circumcision. It was also a distinguishing character of the Jews being God’s people from all the Nations of the Gentiles, who were not yet the spiritual descendants of Abraham: but when the Gentiles came to believe, and by faith became the people of God as well as the Jews, then9 Circumcision, that distinguishing mark, ceased. The character of being the children of God now is faith in Christ and circumcision of the Heart. Whatever reason may be given for the Infants of Believers to be Baptized first, as their being the children of believers; or secondly, their being in the Covenant; or thirdly, that the infant descendants of Abraham a believer, were circumcised; all this you see avails nothing: for circumcision was limited to the family of Abraham and all others, though believers, were excluded. It was also limited to a particular day, the eighth day, and what ever reason might be given, it was not to be done before or after. It was limited to male and did not include female; if Baptism came in the place of circumcision, and is the seal of the Covenant under the Gospel as circumcision was under the Law, none but the males must be baptized, because none but the Males were Circumcised. But as the Law regulated circumcision, now the Gospel regulates Baptism, and it depends purely upon the will of the Law-giver, at what periods of time, upon what Persons and terms Baptism is to be administered. We will do well, then, to heed what is declared in Scripture, especially Acts 3.22.
8Gen. 15.18. Gen. 17.8, 9, 10, 11. Gen. 12.6, 7. Gen. 13.15, 16, 17. Gen. 15.16.
9John 1.12. Rom. 2.28, 29. Phil. 3.3. Gal. 3.26, 27, 28.
Lesson 27

Q. 75 How does baptism remind you and assure you that Christ’s one sacrifice on the cross is for you personally?

A. In this way: Christ instituted this outward washing1 and with it gave the promise that, as surely as water washes away the dirt from the body, so certainly his blood and his Spirit wash away my soul’s impurity, in other words, all my sins.2

1Acts 2:38
2Matt. 3:11; Rom. 6:3-10; 1 Pet. 3:21

Q. 76 What does it mean to be washed with Christ’s blood and Spirit?

A. To be washed with Christ’s blood means that God, by grace, has forgiven my sins because of Christ’s blood poured out for me in his sacrifice on the cross.1 To be washed with Christ’s Spirit means that the Holy Spirit has renewed me and set me apart to be a member of Christ so that more and more I become dead to sin and increasingly live a holy and blameless life.2

1Zech. 13:1; Eph. 1:7-8; Heb. 12:24; 1 Pet. 1:2; Rev. 1:5
2Ezek. 36:25-27; John 3:5-8; Rom. 6:4; 1 Cor. 6:11; Col. 2:11-12

Q. 77 Where does Christ promise that we are washed with his blood and Spirit as surely as we are washed with the water of baptism?

A. In the institution of baptism where he says: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”1 “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”2* This promise is repeated when Scripture calls baptism the washing of rebirth3 and the washing away of sins.4

1Matt. 28:19
2Mark 16:16
3Tit. 3:5
4Acts 22:16
*Earlier and better manuscripts of Mark 16 omit the words “Whoever believes and is baptized . . . condemned.”
Lesson 28

Q. 78 Does this outward washing with water itself wash away sins?

A. No, only Jesus Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sins.1

1Matt. 3:11; 1 Pet. 3:21; 1 John 1:7

Q. 79 Why then does the Holy Spirit call baptism the washing of rebirth and the washing away of sins?

A. God has good reason for these words. He wants to teach us that the blood and Spirit of Christ wash away our sins just as water washes away dirt from our bodies.1 But more important, he wants to assure us, by this divine pledge and sign, that the washing away of our sins spiritually is as real as physical washing with water.2

11 Cor. 6:11; Rev. 1:5; 7:14
2Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:27


Of the Lord’s Supper.

Lesson 29

Q. 80 How does the Lord’s Supper remind you and assure you that you share in Christ’s one sacrifice on the cross and in all his gifts?

A. In this way: Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat this broken bread and to drink this cup. With this command he gave this promise:1 First, as surely as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup given to me, so surely his body was offered and broken for me and his blood poured out for me on the cross. Second, as surely as I receive from the hand of the one who serves, and taste with my mouth the bread and cup of the Lord, given me as sure signs of Christ’s body and blood, so surely he nourishes and refreshes my soul for eternal life with his crucified body and poured-out blood.

1Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25

Q. 81 What does it mean to eat the crucified body of Christ and to drink his poured-out blood?

A. It means to accept with a believing heart the entire suffering and death of Christ and by believing to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life.1 But it means more. Through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us, we are united more and more to Christ’s blessed body.2 And so, although he is in heaven3 and we are on earth, we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone.4 And we forever live on and are governed by one Spirit, as members of our body are by one soul.5

1John 6:35, 40, 50-54
2John 6:55-56; 1 Cor. 12:13
3Acts 1:9-11; 1 Cor. 11:26; Col. 3:1
41 Cor. 6:15-17; Eph. 5:29-30; 1 John 4:13
5John 6:56-58; 15:1-6; Eph. 4:15-16; 1 John 3:24

Q. 82 Where does Christ promise to nourish and refresh believers with his body and blood as surely as they eat this broken bread and drink this cup?

A. In the institution of the Lord’s Supper:
“The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 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.’ In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”1
This promise is repeated by Paul in these words:
“Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.”2
11 Cor. 11:23-26
21 Cor. 10:16-17

Lesson 30

Q. 83 Are the bread and wine changed into the real body and blood of Christ?

A. No. Just as the water of baptism is not changed into Christ’s blood and does not itself wash away sins but is simply God’s sign and assurance,1 so too the bread of the Lord’s Supper is not changed into the actual body of Christ2 even though it is called the body of Christ3 in keeping with the nature and language of sacraments.4

1Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5
2Matt. 26:26-29
31 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:26-28
4Gen. 17:10-11; Ex. 12:11, 13; 1 Cor. 10:1-4

Q. 84 Why then does Christ call the bread his body and the cup his blood, or the new covenant in his blood?

(Paul uses the words,a participation in Christ’s body and blood.)

A. Christ has good reason for these words. He wants to teach us that as bread and wine nourish our temporal life, so too his crucified body and poured-out blood truly nourish our souls for eternal life.1 But more important, he wants to assure us, by this visible sign and pledge, that we, through the Holy Spirit’s work, share in his true body and blood as surely as our mouths receive these holy signs in his remembrance,2 and that all of his suffering and obedience are as definitely ours as if we personally had suffered and paid for our sins.3

1John 6:51, 55
21 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:26
3Rom. 6:5-11



Lesson 31

Q. 85 How does the Lord’s Supper differ from the Roman Catholic Mass?

A. The Lord’s Supper declares to us that our sins have been completely forgiven through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ which he himself finished on the cross once for all.1 It also declares to us that the Holy Spirit grafts us into Christ,2 who with his very body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father3 where he wants us to worship him.4 But the Mass teaches that the living and the dead do not have their sins forgiven through the suffering of Christ unless Christ is still offered for them daily by the priests. It also teaches that Christ is bodily present in the form of bread and wine where Christ is therefore to be worshiped. Thus the Mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ and a condemnable idolatry.

1John 19:30; Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25-26; 10:10-18
21 Cor. 6:17; 10:16-17
3Acts 7:55-56; Heb. 1:3; 8:1
4Matt. 6:20-21; John 4:21-24; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3

Q. 86 Who are to come to the Lord’s table?

A. Those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins, but who nevertheless trust that their sins are pardoned and that their continuing weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to lead a better life. Hypocrites and those who are unrepentant, however, eat and drink judgment on themselves.1

11 Cor. 10:19-22; 11:26-32

Q. 87 Are those to be admitted to the Lord’s Supper who show by what they say and do that they are unbelieving and ungodly?

A. No, that would dishonor God’s covenant and bring down God’s anger upon the entire congregation.1 Therefore, according to the instruction of Christ and his apostles, the Christian church is duty-bound to exclude such people, by the official use of the keys of the kingdom, until they reform their lives.

11 Cor. 11:17-32; Ps. 50:14-16; Isa. 1:11-17
Q. 88 How should this Ordinance of the Lord’s Supper be closed?

A. In singing Praises to God vocally and audibly for his great Benefits and Blessings to his Church in the shedding of the most precious Blood of his Son to take away their Sin; which Blessings are pointed out in this Sacrament. Also we find our Lord and his Disciples did close this Ordinance in singing a Hymn or Psalm; and if Christ sang, who was going to die, what cause have we to sing for whom he died, that we might not eternally die, but live a spiritual and eternal life with Father, Son, and Spirit in unexpressible Glory.1
1Mat. 26.30

I still attend a Baptist church, and have my entire life, but I am definitely swayed by Lutheranism's view on baptism and Communion. Because of the Lutheran impact, the Baptist view on baptism and the Lord's supper seems not thought out, as if there were born out of a tradition of anti-Catholic leanings instead of fully developing the parts of Tradition out. Here's what I mean. Baptist theology rejects the idea baptism saves, thus baptism of infants is invalid. However, Baptist theology does hold to original sin, born with a sinful nature. If we are born with a sinful nature then if we die we will go to hell apart from Christ. Yet Baptist theology sides with children who die will go to heaven. But why will they go to heaven if they are dead in original sin? Catholics and Lutherans both baptize infants for their salvation. Now the Baptist theology would answer salvation is not by baptism but faith and the individual has to make as conscious decision. But if God alone saves and draws men to Himself, then I'm rather confused how baptism is a rejected form of salvation by the church, when we have many accounts in Scripture tieing baptism with salvation, but never a sinner's prayer. I guess my question from me would be how does the Baptist theology come to its conclusion on baptism is a token action?

Hawkiz, you must refrain from teaching Roman Catholic doctrine in the Baptist forums. I think you'll find plenty Baptists on this forum know and understand Roman doctrine better than a Jack Chick tract. I understand your zeal to dialogue but, for the sake of new Christians attending Baptist churches, you should refrain from teaching.

You mentioned that many who follow Zwingli do not believe in all that Zwingli taught...or something like that. This example is a good illustration of how Protestants/Baptists view tradition. Baptists who share a common faith with Zwingli concerning the Lord's Supper do not share that faith because of Zwingli, rather, they may use Zwingli's writings to articulate what they believe. Throughout church history God has given us godly men to lead, teach and pastor the us. We do not look to these godly men for all the answers but seek to understand the word of God in the context of the church.

I hope that helps,

jm

JM said:

Hawkiz, you must refrain from teaching Roman Catholic doctrine in the Baptist forums. I think you'll find plenty Baptists on this forum know and understand Roman doctrine better than a Jack Chick tract. I understand your zeal to dialogue but, for the sake of new Christians attending Baptist churches, you should refrain from teaching.

You mentioned that many who follow Zwingli do not believe in all that Zwingli taught...or something like that. This example is a good illustration of how Protestants/Baptists view tradition. Baptists who share a common faith with Zwingli concerning the Lord's Supper do not share that faith because of Zwingli, rather, they may use Zwingli's writings to articulate what they believe. Throughout church history God has given us godly men to lead, teach and pastor the us. We do not look to these godly men for all the answers but seek to understand the word of God in the context of the church.

I hope that helps,

jm

Click to expand...

My mistake and deepest apologies. I forgot we were under the 'Baptist' heading within the Forums and realize I erred in diving that deep into,Catholicism outside of the Catholic or General Theology Forums. I will cease and desist.

Peace in Christ

Hey, ask all the questions you like. Don't let me put you off...we just need to be careful about new believers who may come to this forum seeking Baptist answers and get slowed down by conflicting posts.