Replies

It is clear that almost no denomination obeys the Scripture illustration, which is once, each week, on the first day of the week, when the whole assembly gathers, to which all of its constituents are assembled for worship and collection of contributions to the ministry.

Though I agree with you about many points, I do not on this topic. Whatever Scripture "illustration" we are given about the remembrance of the Lord's Supper, nowhere is the frequency commanded. Paul said in I Corinthians 11:25-26,

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.

I believe Paul's rebuke of the Corinthians was their coming together for "love feasts" (which was a communal "covered dish" type of activity) and was done to ensure no one went hungry among their fellowship. That's why Paul said if they were so hungry they couldn't help butting in line and gobbling up the food and wine (getting drunk in the process) so that others went without, they should eat before they got there. This denotes, to me anyway, that this was not the same thing as the Lord's Supper observance where a loaf of bread was passed around, each person breaking off a piece, the cup passed around for a sip and the words of remembrance for which this ordinance was done spoken by the leader of the local church.

As is the same issue of what day(s) of worship are and what feast days and sabbaths are set aside, Paul said each man must be fully persuaded in his own mind because it is between him and God:

Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.… (Romans 14:4-6)

We have liberty in these areas and in others, such as food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality (Acts 15:29) as well as the major tenets of the Christian faith, we should be obedient and in unity. There is no mention from the Apostles about how often the Lord's Supper observance was to happen - not even the precise day of worship - as the times they lived in getting together on a regular basis may have been difficult. Though we do know that the early church gathered together on the first day of the week in several references and also some writings of early Christians regarding the process of their worship time.

Those are my thoughts anyway. Have a good night.

You need to rethink as to whether or not you ought to make appearance at the assembly on the first day of the week, and whether or not the assembly has been ordered to remember the Lord then with breaking of bread. It is in that remembrance/sacrificial worship that His death is rehearsed and demonstrated, to ourselves and to the world, and that our remembrance ought to be visible, voluntarily obedient, and often. Such times ought always to be preceded by attention to 1 John 1:9, else we would participate unworthily.

In fact, in the early churches the weekly expectation of the breaking of bread was so universal and understood, as was the reservation of the Sabbath from Adam's time, that any variation from it was not even discussed, and personal examination to discern if oneself be "in The Faith" was a prerequisite to the Remembrance. Such frequency is not overtly commanded because the pattern was inherited from the God-ordered frequency given in the desert (manna), and which stretched backward throughout the history of mankind.

I do not believe the Romans passage applies to the issue here at all, to the matter of assembling on the first day of the week. The Romans text addresses extraordinary, voluntary commitments which ought not to be sources of division.

On the other hand, the day of assembly and its objective ought to be understood, and not a source of divisions either. The primary Scriptural reason to assemble ought to be to show forth His death, and it ought to be the focus of the observance, to preach by example what Paul voiced that he came to the Corinthians determined to know nothing but Jesus, and Him crucified.

In Acts 20:7, the disciples were habitually convening the first day of the week to break bread. Here the Koine grammar takes first place above your opinion. The verb convene is in the perfect tense (once established, with continuing result), passive voice (the convention time was imposed on them), and the participle mode (convening). And the habitual special reason since it was established when the risen Christ appeared (Jn. 20:19) on the first day of the week, was afterward was set to be the day and purpose for breaking of the bread loaf. Paul again emphasized that this day of assembly was also a day to bring gifts for the missions (1 Cor. 16:1-2).

I do not believe the entire context of the Bible allows us in this later age, after centuries of compliance, to have a choice in this matter, and I believe that churches are failing because of disobedience to this primary imperative, "Do this in remembrance of Me.".In 1 Cor. 11:24 and 25, the emphasis is not "as often as" (which ought to be very often), but on the command itself, where "do" is in the present, active, imperative sense, that is: "You all (the assembly addressed) be constantly/persistently doing this!"

One of the reasons for making communion observance infrequent is because of the danger of frequency making it trite. And that can happen when a denomination, like the Romanists, conduct a mass every time they turn around, completely missing the significance of meditation and contemplation with guidance by the Spirit, rather than just mechanical ritualizing and going through the motions of partaking, thinking this is a means of swallowing Jesus and grace every repitition.

The Plymouth-type brethren escape this, by the mode of conduct in the weekly observance. The flow is always Spirit-led and unsearchable (but the finalization is not)--a song, a prayer, an observation of cross-related scripture introduced by one brother, built on by another likewise prepared by the Spirit to complement the first thought, then another, then adventitiously a hymn speaking to the theme appearing, perhaps another prayer, then at a clearly propitious time the passing of the bread loaf and then the wine, concluding the moment of peace with The God and Father, Who administered His punishment for our reconciliation.

This is worship. The (ordained) teaching time is scheduled for a bit later.

The mistake of Catholic-derived churches (Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran), as well as the typical Baptist and other congregations is to reserve the service for the conduct of the preacher and his particular liturgy, and giving the parishioners/lay people no involvement nor leading by the Spirit other than just a fraction of a minute of ingesting the elements. This makes the whole thing a rather wooden performance, quite unlike the original drama that we ought to be mimicking. Well, you can see the result.

I understand that you wish to disagree at this stage of your understanding, but I would beg you to reconsider your position, and apply a greater effort and an open mind with the Bible's instruction in this matter, including the habits of the Apostles.