Interesting Question.


My good friend Eron ( who doesn't have faith in my blogging but rightfully so) has asked a question of me.



Should unbaptized believers partake of the Lord's Supper?


Very interesting.

My first thought is... no biggy. of course they should be able. But then I thought well... why do i say that. Why do we even say that you are saved w/out baptism ( i believe you can be)?

The main instance we turn to is when Jesus talks with the thieves hanging with him on the cross in Luke 23. The first thief tells Christ to save himself and them, because he is the messiah.

The second thief rebukes him saying they are just for their suffering, where Christ is being punished unjustly and asks Jesus to remember him in his kingdom. You can call this a deathbed conversion. Obviously the first criminal simply wanted to be freed. The second realized his state (a sinner) and realized that Christ was being punished for nothing. Obviously neither of these men were Christ followers. I think that the second man was face to face with Jesus, realized his sin, saw the sinlessness of Christ, saw his need for repentance, and cried out for God to remember him in paradise. I don't necessarily believe this is a basis for the believe that baptism is not necessary for salvation... but then again maybe it is. We know that baptism is important and is a sign of commitment and a new life.

There are several and I mean several passages that deal w/ new believers needing to be baptized. Paul and Peter specifically tell people to repent and be baptized (1 Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6 :4, Gal 3:27)

To my knowledge there is nothing that the Bible speaks to specifically for the Lord's Supper involving this. We are told not to eat with out discerning ourselves. Much of our instruction involving this comes from 1 Corinthians 11.

27

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. ¹²

28

A person should examine himself, ¹³ and so eat the bread and drink the cup.

29

For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment ¹⁴ on himself.

30

That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.

Don't partake w/out confessing sin and not having a pure heart. We need to take our sin to the cross before we partake.

31

If we discerned ourselves, we would not be under judgment;

32

but since we are judged by (the) Lord, we are being disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

33

Therefore, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.

Eat together w/ believers.

34

If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that your meetings may not result in judgment. The other matters I shall set in order when I come.

Don't partake out of hunger.



I don't see anything that doesn't qualify a nonbaptized believer here.

But let's cut to the heart of the matter. What is baptism?

An outward showing of an inward working.

We get baptized to show to the world the washing away of our sins and rebirth into Christ. What the heart of this question is (to me and me alone), is whether or not a nonbaptized believer has the freedom a baptized believer does.

I don't know.

I don't see anything that says they shouldn't... but I definitely see scripture of our Apostles telling new converts to get baptized and do it quick.

But here's a thought. The apostle's also speak of circumcision almost as fervently. But it's clearly a circumcision of the heart. Is baptism also of the heart? I believe it is. It's definitely a lot easier to do if you get saved at a later age.

Nobody argues that one.

I think they can partake of the Lord's supper. I don't think it's in sin and I don't think it being abusive of their freedom.

But I also think they should get baptized soon after conversion. No reason not to.

Thoughts, questions, ideas, or calvinistic disagreements???