Hi From Cincy

[Evangelical]

As people may or may not be aware, there is no rule that says we must use unleavened bread or leavened bread in the Lord's Table. It does not matter what type of bread is eaten.

However I disagreed that the table as pictured represents the one loaf and Christ who is our unleavened bread - unleavened bread is a better symbol than a leavened one, and a single loaf on the table is a better symbol of the one Body than many loaves.

I am talking about the symbolism of what it represents, not the correctness of the type of bread eaten.

I did not raise the matter of the Law or state that we must use unleavened bread in the Lord's Table. Others misinterpreted what I was talking about symbolism and made this a matter of good versus evil, laws and regulations. In other words, they were swinging from the branches of the tree of knowledge while I was eating from the tree of life.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

As people may or may not be aware, there is no rule that says we must use unleavened bread or leavened bread in the Lord's Table. It does not matter what type of bread is eaten.

However I disagreed that the table as pictured represents the one loaf and Christ who is our unleavened bread - unleavened bread is a better symbol than a leavened one, and a single loaf on the table is a better symbol of the one Body than many loaves.

I am talking about the symbolism of what it represents, not the correctness of the type of bread eaten.

I did not raise the matter of the Law or state that we must use unleavened bread in the Lord's Table. Others misinterpreted what I was talking about symbolism and made this a matter of good versus evil. In other words, they were swinging from the branches of the tree of knowledge while I was eating from the tree of life.

If you were really eating from the tree of life, you would not be using every little, meany item to condemn the rest of the body of Christ -- as you regularly do. How did you become such a "communion cop," where only you know who is eating from the tree of life?

But thanks for finally admitting to the truths I was relating from scripture -- and somewhat refreshing I should add.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If you were really eating from the tree of life, you would not be using every little, meany item to condemn the rest of the body of Christ -- as you regularly do. How did you become such a "communion cop," where only you know who is eating from the tree of life?

But thanks for finally admitting to the truths I was relating from scripture -- and somewhat refreshing I should add.

You were talking about something different -whether or not we should use leavened or unleavened bread.

You raised the matter of "regulatory ordinances", not I, because you eat from the tree of knowledge.

That is, the first thing that came to your mind was about the Law and regulations and you turned the discussion around to this matter. You were thinking about the Law, not Christ.

I on the other hand was thinking about how the symbol as pictured did not really represent Christ because leaven represents sin and Christ was unleavened. I read StG's words about the one loaf. I saw that the table does not really show this.

You will be unable to quote one word from me where I condemned the Body of Christ for using leavened bread, and why would I? - using the correct type of bread in communion does not turn a sect/denomination into a local church and so why would I care about what type of bread is used in them?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You were talking about something different -whether or not we should use leavened or unleavened bread.

You raised the matter of "regulatory ordinances", not I, because you eat from the tree of knowledge.

That is, the first thing that came to your mind was about the Law and regulations and you turned the discussion around to this matter. You were thinking about the Law, not Christ.

I on the other hand was thinking about how the symbol as pictured did not really represent Christ because leaven represents sin and Christ was unleavened. I read StG's words about the one loaf. I saw that the table does not really show this.

You will be unable to quote one word from me where I condemned the Body of Christ for using leavened bread, and why would I? - using the correct type of bread in communion does not turn a sect/denomination into a local church and so why would I care about what type of bread is used in them?

Evan, but you condemned the picture of the Lord's Table bread by SonsToGlory in post #16 saying "some of the bread is leavened, and some of the bread is unleavened. So this is a symbol of division as the bread is not all the same - even Catholics and Lutherans ensure that the bread is the same" thus condemning the body of Christ for using leavened bread.

Thus it was you you raised the matter of "regulatory ordinances", proving, according to your assessment, that you eat from the tree of knowledge.

Read your posts again, bro. You condemn me for what you actually did. Shame on you. (Rom 2.1)

I simply pointed you to the scriptures which unveil the truths. I do understand though, having listened to Lee for years, that the scriptures frighten you, and it is far safer for you to stick to Lee's teachings, your HWFMR, and Life-Studies.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Evan, but you condemned the picture of the Lord's Table bread by SonsToGlory in post #16 saying "some of the bread is leavened, and some of the bread is unleavened. So this is a symbol of division as the bread is not all the same - even Catholics and Lutherans ensure that the bread is the same" thus condemning the body of Christ for using leavened bread.

Thus it was you you raised the matter of "regulatory ordinances", proving, according to your assessment, that you eat from the tree of knowledge.

Read your posts again, bro. You condemn me for what you actually did. Shame on you. (Rom 2.1)

I simply pointed you to the scriptures which unveil the truths. I do understand though, having listened to Lee for years, that the scriptures frighten you, and it is far safer for you to stick to Lee's teachings, your HWFMR, and Life-Studies.

There's a big difference between condemning a denomination for using leavened bread, and pointing out a deficiency in a symbol.

If you review the history of this thread, the first and only person in this thread who raised the matter of regulatory ordinances concerning the Lord's Table was yourself in post #20. You changed the topic from the accuracy of a symbol to one of a regulatory/legal matter.

Rather, I pointed out deficiencies in the symbol, similar to if a person pointed out a missing star on the American flag.

I also highlighted that Catholics and Lutherans use the correct symbols - this was something positive I had to say about these denominations.

Thus, my post was not a condemnation of the Body of Christ for using leavened bread, and, why would I criticize denominational tables for the type of bread they use when it is well known that local church members believe all denominational tables to be invalid, regardless of the type of bread used.

And why would you continue to insist that I condemned the Body of Christ regarding regulatory ordinances when you have discovered that we agree that the type of bread used does not matter? You said that I was "finally admitting to the truths I was relating from scripture".

Actually I did not admit to anything, I have always known that it does not matter what kind of bread is used in the Lord's Table, and was clarifying that. However, I disagreed with the statement that it symbolized the one Body.

From your point of view it seemed as though I was admitting to the scriptural truths you presented, but from my point of view you were talking to a different topic altogether, and when I wrote "there is no rule", this was me showing you that I am not talking about the same thing that you are.

The only circumstance in which I would have raised the matter of ordinances is if StG posted a picture of a roasted pig on the table and declared it to be the Lord's Body. Then I might have said something about using bread in communion and not meat, recognizing that the use of bread over meat would not have validated the table if the table represents division.

There is no rule about the type of bread used in communion or even adding some side salad to accompany it, but if someone pointed to the bread and said it represented the body of Elvis or posted a piece of chicken and said it represented the body of Christ well that is something I would disagree about the symbols.

[byHismercy]

, why would I criticize denominational tables for the type of bread they use when it is well known that local church members believe all denominational tables to be invalid, regardless of the type of bread used.

[/QUOTE]

Evan, can you expound, using scripture, can you show why your statement is true regarding all 'denominational' tables are invalid...why is other christians' symbolic rememberance of Jesus work on the cross invalid? Can you help me understand? Did the Lord shine on this matter in your heart? I am missing it...that is, I can't see it. If you could lead me to scripture, maybe, but please, show us!

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

, why would I criticize denominational tables for the type of bread they use when it is well known that local church members believe all denominational tables to be invalid, regardless of the type of bread used.

Evan, can you expound, using scripture, can you show why your statement is true regarding all 'denominational' tables are invalid...why is other christians' symbolic rememberance of Jesus work on the cross invalid? Can you help me understand? Did the Lord shine on this matter in your heart? I am missing it...that is, I can't see it. If you could lead me to scripture, maybe, but please, show us!

Could we also take a step back and confirm that is that is what the local church members believe? Does Evan have a false premise on this one?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Evan, can you expound, using scripture, can you show why your statement is true regarding all 'denominational' tables are invalid...why is other christians' symbolic rememberance of Jesus work on the cross invalid? Can you help me understand? Did the Lord shine on this matter in your heart? I am missing it...that is, I can't see it. If you could lead me to scripture, maybe, but please, show us!

It is more common sense than scripture although we cannot find a denominational communion anywhere in the bible.

Notice how denominational people refer to these tables as the "Catholic mass" and the "the Baptist communion" and "the Lutheran communion".... they are talking about a communion in a particular division of Christianity. It does not represent what Christ died for - Catholicism, Baptist, Lutheranism etc.

A table which represents a particular denomination e.g. Catholic, baptist etc, is therefore not a table which represents the whole body of Christ. A Catholic does not participate of a baptist communion and a baptist does not participate in Catholic. So... to say these tables are all valid is to say that it is okay to consider the Body and Blood of Christ as belonging to the Catholics or Baptists only. The first Lord's Table was a simple gathering to remember Christ without any reference to denominations. Subsequent tables by early Christians were also simple gatherings. The notion of Catholic mass versus Lutheran communion did not occur until the reformation and denominations came into existence.