Communion: Take it Seriously.

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.
28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.
31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged.
32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

1 Corinthians 11:27-32

Communion should be taken seriously. But as often as we can, in remembrance of Him (1 Cor 11:25).

The good in Communion as a religious rite and ordinance, is that it is a “means” and a “constituted means” to remember Christ. Not the necessary to satisfy what is sufficient, which is remembering Christ, but simply a means in which the action (in this case, communion) can be a cause for an effect (in this case, remembering Christ).

If we can do it as many times and as often as we can. Why not? If it is a means to remember Christ why not?

I think the question goes forth from the imperative voicing in Paul’s following statements, right after the quoted imperative of Christ for believers to practice Communion as often as we can.

The question is, what then is often? The point of Communion practiced often as 1 Cor 11:26 says, is to “proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

However Paul’s following statements emphatically states that whosoever practices this rite in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and the blood of the Lord. It almost seems threatening when verse 29 says “for anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”

It seems like an impossible task that is mandated on believers, to do something as often as they can, yet at the same time to take it seriously every single time. To that end, this is what the Word of God calls for and I don’t think believers can and should beat around the bush regarding the measure of what Communion requires because the remembrance of Christ is at stake and a disregard for that practice is a pronouncement of judgment on oneself, but more so it is a defamation of the death of Christ when this ordinance is practiced so flippantly.

Well the question is still left unanswered, how often should we do it then.

Personally, I am convicted through scripture that we shouldn’t need to do it every week. And just because we don’t do it every week doesn’t mean it is not being practiced “often”. My church practices bimonthly and I think it is completely acceptable and even profitable to do so. I think that because I see that my Church is seeking a desirable end that is consistent and accurate to scripture especially to 1 Corinthians 11. The specific principle, to 1 Corinthians 11, as directed to social snobbery of the Corinthian church, is to practice Communion as to proclaim the Lord’s death as a public devotion to Christ’s work and His eventual coming, but also a practice of private devotion, in which the practice Communion is to remind the redeemed that Christ has most definitely redeemed us to justification before a most holy God by the blood of Christ and that His resurrection is evidence for our future resurrection in a glorified state. To neglect Communion as a private devotion, as in, coming before the communion table a worthy manner, demonstrated by a heart of repentance tested through personal examination and discernment of the Word, is to utterly denigrate and disparage the glory of the Cross and it’s work the personal heart of man.

The heart that I only know of. And the heart that only you know of.

I think this is the scariest thing. We might be obedient almost every time by our public devotion shown through Communion, as I am very much encouraged when I see the proclamation of Christ by my friends and fellow church members partaking in the eating of the bread and drinking of wine (grape juice). However if even one man (or I) comes before the communion table without a heart of repentance as my personal devotion, I am pronouncing judgment on myself. And this judgment is something that only I will know of and no one else.

So is it necessarily wrong to do it every week? I don’t think so. And is it necessarily right to do it bimonthly? I don’t think so either. But what I am convicted by, is that a church takes Communion seriously and the church should take directive measures to take communion seriously. The implications behind a bimonthly (or any discerned amount of space of time) practice of Communion delineates to the congregation that this ordinance is an ordinance that is practiced to obey the various mandates of the new covenant, but also it must be taken seriously as an activity of private devotion, hence the spreading of time in order for the church to proclaim to its congregation that communion is not meant to be ritualistic and redundant, but taken seriously as it is a opportunity for both private and public devotion to be practiced and obeyed.

In that end, I realized, as emphatically expressed in A.W Tozer’s rut, rot, or revival and P.A’s incite on desirable ends being sought by constituted means, the christian man need not get caught up and overwhelmed by the means as that might lead to legalism, but rather seek out the desirable end which is a sanctification of the heart from the reminded of the work of the Lamb of God, in which God is most glorified.

And I wish to see that. In myself and in my church. I want to see the Lord Jesus Christ glorified in whatever we do just as the chapter before 1 Corinthians 11 so mightily exhorts the christian man to do.

the unrighteous demonstrates the Righteousness of God.

So this is basically what I learned in my readings today. And I usually don’t post up personal writings like this, but there is something that struck me deep and I thought sharing this might be beneficial.

Romans 3:1-8

Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written,

“That you may be justified in your words,
and prevail when you are judged.”

But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) By no means! For then how could God judge the world? But if through my lie God’s truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.

brief context:

• Rom 2:25-29 Paul identifies a Jew “who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.” and not a Jew who is one “outwardly”

What is the advantage of being a Jew then? What was the God’s purpose and plan for Israel if Jesus comes along seemingly nullifying the past covenants by establishing the new covenant. Paul says there is great value in being a Jew, because the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. Oracles in greek says Logion, which is a form of the common word Logos, which is normally translated “word” and more specifically identified as “the Word of God” which demonstrates the testimonies and principles of divine reasoning and order. Calvin comments that “oracles” means the covenant which God revealed first to Abraham and to his posterity and law unfolded to the Prophets within this covenant timeline. I note this because although it might seem like excess information, I realized a pretty cool and simple truth which is that the Word of God was given to a select few and it has been passed on from generations to generations to the first coming of Christ as man. This word was also established through the authority of God’s promises and covenants to the prophets of the past and through those promises words were inspired for the telling of a coming Messiah and of the Law for which Israel need be obedient to. The more I read the OT the more the OT history simply, reflects Israel’s response (a rebellious response if I might add) to God’s promises and laws.

The above info comes in full circle then, because it is then realized that Jews were so privileged and fortunate to first have the law in an express form, unlike the Gentiles who knew of the law in heart and morale, but nothing in stone that would assist them from being held accountable to the side of God that is full of Wrath.

Verse 3 states “Does their faithlessness (Jews) nullify the faithfulness of God”? The NASB, which I first read seemed more confusing in that it said, “if some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it”? The double negative action tripped me out. Regardless NASB seems to be a less favorable translation to go to then the ESV because the NASB translated unfaithfulness to unbelief. What I observed from this question presented by Paul is that, Jews never not believed. They had every reason to believe especially in contrast to the modern world. It makes me question how can you NOT believe when you experienced the exodus, when you experienced Canaan, when you experienced the kingdom of David and Solomon, and when you have the testimonies of all the fathers before you. It doesn’t make sense to me that the progeny of whom the covenant was established for, would not believe. This leads me to the obvious conclusion that Israel (Jews) were just utterly UNfaithful.

So the question brought up, in regards to the Jews’ constant disobedience was, does the unfaithfulness of the Jews nullify the faithfulness of God? Paul responds with a vehement “May it never be!” and responds with a rather statement which Paul writes “Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, ‘That You may be justified in Your words, and prevail when You are Judged.’” You are Judged literally means when You are judging or when God is judging. Paul cites Psalm 51:4, which is most likely an account of David being convicted of his sins, both in committing adultery with Bathsheba and planning out the murder of Urijah the Hittite. Paul demonstrates through OT literature that all men are judged in their sins and God is righteous in his judgment. Therefore God always prevails in his judgment because he is justified for his judgment on account that all mankind has sinned against the Lord. In light of citation that Paul used from the Psalms, Paul’s argument demonstrates that the unrighteous gives evidence of God’s righteousness.

Paul continues on with the questions “if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Basically what should our response be in light of knowing that God is indisputably righteous in the midst or mankind’s unrighteousness. “The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He?” Of course not God’s wrath demonstrates that He is righteous. If He had not shown wrath how is God righteous in the midst of an unrighteous world? “If through my lie the truth of God abounded to His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner?” Just because we are unrighteousness and God is glorified by the echoes of our unrighteousness, it doesn’t mean God allows unrighteousness and sin. In the end, if we are sinners and counted unrighteous God’s glory comes from his wrath and judgment against those who rebelled against the most Holy God. Therefore we as man cannot say “Let us do evil that good may come”?

That is the end of verse 8. As many of you may know the following verses describe who qualifies to be men under judgment. If not, let the word of God remind you.

Romans 3:23

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

I’m glad that righteousness may be imputed in me through Christ, because I know that without it, God would not be just. Without it, God would not be God.

Love is the Superlative

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

1 Corinthians 13:8-13

Prophecy and knowledge will pass away.

Tongues will cease.

But love never fails.

And someday it will be fully realized in heaven.

Thoughts on Biblical Hermeneutics

the self-righteous thinks

Applied to biblical study, interpretation becomes not discovering the absolute truths of God’s Word, but winning others over to what the text “means to us” because our system for explaining it is the most internally coherent and satisfying

Walt Russell

The Sweep of the Bible

To understand the Bible, it is essential to grasp the sweep of that history from creation to consummation. It is also crucial to keep in focus the unifying theme of Scripture. The one constant theme unfolding throughout the whole Bible is this: God for His own glory has chosen to create and gather to Himself a group of people to be the subjects of His eternal kingdom to praise, honor, and serve Him forever and through whom He will display His wisdom, power, mercy, grace, and glory. To gather His chosen ones, God must redeem them from sin. The Bible reveals God’s plan for this redemption from its inception in eternity past to its completion in eternity future. Covenants, promises, and epochs are all secondary to the one continuous plan of redemption.

John MacArthur

Simply put (also by John MacArthur)

From predestination to glorification, the Bible is the story of God redeeming His chosen people for the praise of His glory.

Martin Luther before the Diet of Worms, Here I stand!

Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other – my conscience is captive to the Word of God… God help me! Here I stand.

The Authority of Scripture from God. The Best Way to End

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

So shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but s it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

Isaiah 55:11

Priorities in Discernment

A little over half a year ago I went over a book called the Discipline of Spiritual Discernment with my Outreach group and I have gleaned much from studying biblical discernment from this book as well as a few other articles regarding this topic (of course my greatest source was the Bible). Anyhow I realized I have posted only a few things that I have learned from this book, which is really not representative of how much this book has influenced my process and goal in discernment. I do have to say that this book is one of my favorites because of its simplicity, urgency, and its applicability concerning discernment, so I want to write about this book one more time (maybe I’ll write more in the future).

I will quote the Challies’ definition of discernment before I go on.

Discernment is the skill of understanding and applying God’s Word with the purpose of separating truth from error and right from wrong.

One of the most memorable and applicable lesson I learned from this book was on prioritizing different issues concerning discernment. He includes this idea of prioritization in the chapter The Heart of Discernment and cites 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 which says,

Test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil

right below the chapter title. Before writing about prioritization Challies writes of what we (Christians) must not judge and what we must judge. [On a sidenote I'd like to say the phrase "You can't judge me" is not fully accurate in terms of scripture.] Challies divides up What We Must Not Judge into two categories which are 1) Going beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:3-7) and 2) Matters of Conscience (Romans 14:1-4). In What We Must Judge, Challies cites 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 (the above reference) and exhorted his readers to Test (examine, prove, try, or discern) Everything. Scripture mandates the Christian to not pass judgment for it is not in our capacity to know the matters of one’s conscience. Ultimately it is before the Master that he stands or falls (Romans 14:1-4). However in our testing, we are to determine what evils we are to reject and what good we are to embrace. Also in our testing of “everything”, everything really means everything. Everything means life, activities, all men, whatsoever, whosoever, reading a book, watching a movie, engaging in evangelism, forming friendships, studying different doctrines, and studying the Bible. Yes, it does concern people especially in the local church. We see in 2 Corinthians 8:22 of Paul’s decision to send an unknown brother whom Paul has tested and found earnest and able to minister to serve in the local church along with Titus.

There is a fine line between passing judgment and testing everything. The prior concerns acting as God while the the latter concerns the role of man for the purpose of embracing truth and abstaining from evil. If this is unclear I hope the Biblical references above might corroborate to what has been written thus far and if you want further clarity read the scripture annotations in context of the chapter and book and hopefully that’ll help.

Upon distinguishing What We Must Judge and What We Must NOT Judge Challies writes about Priorities in which he talks about three levels of theological urgency that was proposed by Dr. Albert Mohler.

The First-Level issues of theological urgency concerns the most central and essential to the Christian faith. Examples of these include the doctrines of the Trinity, atonement, the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ, justification by faith alone, and the authority of Scripture.

The Second-Level issues of theological urgency are “doctrines that believers may disagree on but which still represent important issues and will from significant boundaries between Christians.” These are doctrines that often divide denominations and some examples of the division includes the meaning of baptism or the continuing miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit.

The Third-Level issues are “those over which Christians may disagree even while maintaining close fellowship and remaining in the same local church” and examples include the dispute over the interpretation of the end times or whether Christians may consume alcohol in moderation.

Regarding these issues Challies writes

As men and women of discernment, we should focus our efforts on matters that are of the greatest consequence. Our efforts in discernment are most important when the issues at stake are issues that sit at the very heart of the Christian faith. We must ensure that we do not become distracted by smaller issues when foundational matters are being disputed and are under attack.

and he finishes off the chapter with

The two areas where we must practice spiritual discernment are the same as the two general themes of Scripture: what we must believe about God and how God calls us to live on the basis of those beliefs or, said otherwise, the truth of God and the will of God.

As I write this post and reflect upon these truths charged by scripture expressly and implicitly, I am reminded again that I MUST not major on the minors and minor on the majors. Echoing my pastor’s sermon this past sunday, I just don’t think this is what a Christian is meant to act in regards to looking and searching (sometimes meticulously) for flaws in order to create divisions. I don’t think Christians are meant to pick and choose according to dispensationalism and covenant theology, drinking in moderation and abstinence, and what type of speakers and theologians are best.

I hope I can look beyond my preferences in order that I may “encourage one another and build up one another” (1 Thes 5:11) and that “all things be done for building up” (1 Corinthians 14:26).

In the end, I pray that I may continue in growth and discernment of embracing truth and abstaining from evil so that God may be my testimony and that He shall be glorified.