A place to snark and vent about CoC doctrine and/or our experiences in the CoC. This is a place for SUPPORT and AGREEMENT only, not a place to tell someone their experience and feelings are wrong, or why we disagree with them.
Did you every think about the 3000 on Pentecost who were baptized then went and partook of the Lord's supper on that very day? Why they would have had to or else wait until next Sunday.
Hope this simple and straight forward bulletin article clears it up for all you namby pamby people out there saying the Bible isn't a clear blueprint on all 5 acts of worship.
...Notice the words "continued stedfastly" in "the breaking of bread". The words "breaking of bread" is used here in reference to the Lord's supper. The definite article "the" sets this apart from the "breaking bread at home" in the sharing of their common meals seen later in verse 46.
...Acts 20 we read of Paul worshipping with the Christians in Troas. Paul arrived in Troas where it is written that he, Luke and his other traveling companions stayed seven days (Acts 20:6). This would have been on a Monday. It is significant here to note that Paul waited seven days in order to meet with the entire congregation.
...Moreover, if it were acceptable to observe the Lord's Supper on any day of the week other than the first day of the week, Paul would not have been constrained to wait seven days to observe it with his brethren in Troas.
... Pentecost occurred (Acts 2), with the Holy Ghost descending (Acts 2:1-5), on the first day of the week. And 3000 souls were baptized and added to the Lord's church on Sunday and they partook of the Lord's supper on that day
...And we know that if we believe what they believed, live how they lived, teach what they taught and worship how they worshipped...We can follow that pattern precisely and be today what they were then
Ah yes, an uplifting message to be taught over and over to congregants who are already attending weekly.
And if they got there on Monday and then waited 7 days...wouldn't it be Monday again? Seems like it would be 6 or 5 day wait depending on how you count days. There is just no way that passage in Acts 20 says they did not meet with the congregation at any point while they were waiting for their ship to leave. In fact it seems very odd that would happen since Paul was so famous, in demand, and forceful and determined. But seemingly he holed up out at the Day's Inn out by the airport waiting until Sunday to show up at the building address he found in the Yellow Pages.
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
As a rule, I tend to reject as 'legalistic' any theological argument that relies on the presence (or absence) of a 'definite article.' I'm just not sure the original authors were being that careful with their language while writing--not to mention the scribes and translators through whom we got our modern English versions. There are enough discrepancies in the Bible that are dismissed as 'scribal errors' for me to not get too excited about word-for-word parsing of the text. Maybe that's just me. As a COCer I used to be all about the word studies.
The arguments in this article are ridiculous and without merit.
I never studied Greek. However, pastors in churches where I have worked as organist were required to do so in seminary. One time I asked a previous pastor (LCMS church) about the term "break bread." He emphatically stated that it more often than not just means coming together for a meal.
C o C has used Acts 20:7 and some other verses which mention "break bread" as "proof texts" to back up its doctrines. Just another example of how it starts out with what it wants to believe then snatches verses out of context to back up those beliefs.
"Break bread" just means 'eat'. Bread didn't come sliced. You had a loaf on the table and you said the blessing and everybody grabbed the bread and pulled. Bingo. Broken bread.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
There is just absolutely nothing IMO in Acts 2 that would indicate the 3000 "partook of the Lord's supper on that day". I have only heard this recently being claimed by CofC folk...never in decades has that ever crossed my mind to make that assertion since it is completely not mentioned in the text. So I guess that means that the 3000 also sold everything that day and did the distribution also on that same day? This is a ridiculous reading of the text to force this particular event on this specific day.
Anyone else ever hear this idea of the 3000 doing everything on that same day? If so what type of CofC or branch was it?
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
I asked this question once while still a member, and got plenty of dirty looks for asking it, but here goes:
Given: Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, which we call Sunday.
Given: The apostles and believers gathered together 50 days after the resurrection and received the Holy Spirit
Given: From that point on that day has been called Pentecost.
Now here is my question: if you count 50 days from Easter Sunday, you end up on a Monday. So how could the 3000 new believers have taken part in the LS on the first day of the week? They would have had to wait until the following Sunday. Right?
Think for yourselves, and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too."-- Voltaire, philosopher and historian
klp wrote:There is just absolutely nothing IMO in Acts 2 that would indicate the 3000 "partook of the Lord's supper on that day". I have only heard this recently being claimed by CofC folk...never in decades has that ever crossed my mind to make that assertion since it is completely not mentioned in the text. So I guess that means that the 3000 also sold everything that day and did the distribution also on that same day? This is a ridiculous reading of the text to force this particular event on this specific day.
The CoC will twist, force, and warp the Scriptures to fit whatever their belief system demands.
katisha wrote:I asked this question once while still a member, and got plenty of dirty looks for asking it, but here goes:
Given: Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, which we call Sunday.
Given: The apostles and believers gathered together 50 days after the resurrection and received the Holy Spirit
Given: From that point on that day has been called Pentecost.
Now here is my question: if you count 50 days from Easter Sunday, you end up on a Monday. So how could the 3000 new believers have taken part in the LS on the first day of the week? They would have had to wait until the following Sunday. Right?
I am surprised no one at your cofc took joy in answering this math word problem since it is such a technical thing and so related to Acts 2:38. I have no doubt you got dirty looks but was no one able to jump up and answer this?
The confusion in your question derives from asserting that it was 5o days after the resurrection.
Because Pentecost was an annual event preceding Jesus and therefore has not relation to nor is it timed to/from the resurrection. So Pentecost is not measured from the resurrection but instead is a function of Jewish feast weeks ending on a Sabbath. It is AFTER the 7 weeks of festival/feast...so the day AFTER the full seven (7ea) 7day-weeks would be the 50th day and so the Greek based word Pente-cost. And since it is day after the end of the 7 weeks, it must needs be on a first day of a new week (or the day after the 7th Sabbath). So they didn't gather 50 days after his resurrection, but on the day after the 7 weeks of feast were completed. Sorry for the repetition...couldn't find a clear way to state it and did not feel like re-writing.
And no, I do not care to go into the whole how can it be 3 days in the grave if he was crucified on Friday and Raised first thing Sunday morning. Discussing car rental companies policies where any part of a day counts as an entire "rental" "day" is not a great way to explain the salvation on Mankind. IMHO
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
Oh I don't know, klp. At least it is totally relatable!
'pentecost' is 'shavuot' - the 'feast of weeks' and it falls on the fiftieth day after Passover, period.
Now there is a whole OTHER argument over whether Jesus was or wasn't crucified on the day BEFORE Passover, the day OF Passover, or the day AFTER (first day of) Passover....but anyway, Pentecost does fall on the fiftieth day after Passover.
Oh and by the way, just to be more confusing - SOMETIMES a holy day is called 'a sabbath' even when it is nowhere NEAR the actual Sabbath day on the seventh day of the week. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
This is a ridiculous reading of the text to force this particular event on this specific day.