more emphasis on the Lord's Supper than other worship?

Do you have questions about the nature, work, purpose, or pattern for the church? This is the place to share your thoughts and questions with others.

Moderator: grand_puba

Post Reply
User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

more emphasis on the Lord's Supper than other worship?

Post by email » Fri Sep 05, 2008 6:08 am

The question came up in Sunday School last week about the Lord's Supper, "Do we put more emphasis on the Lord's Supper than on other parts of Worship?" What the person was referring to was that we sometimes take it to homes of the shut-ins or hospitalized members to take. How would you answer this question? I feel maybe we have in the past. Put more emphasis on the communion not considering other parts of worship. Singing,teaching,preaching and etc.

Thanks for any thoughts you may have.

In Christ
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Re: Lords Supper

Post by m273p15c » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:06 pm

Thanks for the good question!

In some ways, the Lord's Supper is not worthy of any more emphasis than any other act of worship. They are all offered to the holy God, and are therefore worthy of our utmost efforts, because He is worthy of our all and demands nothing less.

However, the Scriptures do offer some debatable distinction in this verse:
But we sailed away from Philippi after the Days of Unleavened Bread, and in five days joined them at Troas, where we stayed seven days. Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight. (Acts 20:6-7)
Every other element of worship* can be considered optional on Sunday. However, the Lord's Supper is commanded to be observed on the first day of the week. We are not required to sing, pray, or study the Bible on the first day. However, we do those things, because we can, and because we desire them. As illustration, we don't have to eat carnal food every Sunday, but we do it, because we can, we desire it, and we need it, just as we need the spiritual food that comes from singing, praying, and studying the Bible. Incidentally, anyone who is trying to eliminate certain elements of worship, because he can, manifests a lack of spiritual maturity, desire, and health.

More than likely, New Testament brethren met multiple times a week to worship and study. The infancy of the church and strong persecution would have placed additional pressure on them to meet more frequently (Acts 2:42-46; Hebrews 10:25-39). Only in this way do I think the Lord's Supper is to be considered special: Every other form of worship can and should be observed at every opportunity possible, be it Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, or Saturday. However, the Lord's Supper can only be rightly observed on the first day of the week, if we desire to walk after the New Testament pattern (Acts 20:6-7). Therefore, when we come together on Sunday, we come together especially for that purpose, because we have not had opportunity on any other day since the past Sunday, and we will not have another opportunity until the next Sunday.

* Now, here's the monkey wrench, if there is one - contribution. Contribution is also commanded upon the first day of the week. However, if you notice the command, it is clearly worded as a "rider". They were already coming together on the first day of the week (I Corinthians 16:1-2). They were simply being commanded to contribute in addition to their other activities. The assumption was that they were already meeting, so this would indicate some difference, since the Lord's Supper would have been commanded from the beginning (Acts 2:42).

Personally, although I am not sure it is wrong to give the Lord's Supper outside the assembly, I do not believe it was the original intention. The Lord's Supper is an activity that was reserved for the assembly, ("when you come together", I Corinthians 11:17-20, 33). There is a loss of "communion" with the brethren, when one takes it apart from the congregation. Paul encourages the brethren to wait for one another, so it is important that a person not take the supper alone. However, Paul was dealing with a case of choice, not of forced circumstances. Furthermore, a shut-in can certainly at least "commune" with the Lord and with all saints universal, as do all assembled Christians on the first day around the globe (I Corinthians 10:16-17; Matthew 26:29; Luke 22:16). Therefore, in my own mind, I think there is some justification for either way of handling this non-ideal case. In absence of clearer personal understanding, I would encourage each man and autonomous congregation to do what is right according to his own conscience and understanding of Scripture in this case. Personally, I would feel strange to partake if I was a shut-in, because of I Corinthians 11, but I certainly would not deprive a brother of what he thought was needed. "Let each be fully convinced in his own mind" (Romans 14:5)

I pray this helps, and may God help us to have a sincere love of the truth.
May God help us to love truth sincerely and supremely (II Thessalonians 2:11-12)

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

Re: Lords Supper

Post by email » Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:43 pm

Thank you for you reply on this it will help me in discussing this question Sunday.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Re: Lords Supper

Post by m273p15c » Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:10 am

Great! Glad to hear it!
May God help us to love truth sincerely and supremely (II Thessalonians 2:11-12)

Post Reply