Thursday, June 25, 2020

Supporting Planned Parenthood IS Systemic Racism

If you are truly concerned with ending Systemic Racism in this country, then abolishing the flagship organization of the abortion industry known as Planned Parenthood is the first place to start. Their founder and role model, Margaret Sanger, devoted her life to eugenics. She was an evil sociopath who wanted to exterminate black babies before they were ever born. If anyone in the 20th century was more evil than Adolf Hitler, it was Margaret Sanger.

Margaret Sanger was mentally sick and demented, morally twisted and delusional. She hated people whom she deemed inferior to herself because of race, intelligence or financial status and devised a plan to systematically eliminate them from existence. In keeping with her legacy of Hate, 80% of all Planned Parenthood facilities are located within walking distance of Black and Latino communities--by design. The majority of abortions in this country are performed on minority women—52%. THAT is Systemic Racism. Planned Parenthood receives Half a Billion dollars from the Federal Government each year and then makes large contributions to politicians to keep the money flowing and influence legislation. Last year Planned Parenthood executed 345,672 innocent babies before they ever had the chance to be born. That means that they murdered approximately 179,750 Black and Latino children. If you truly believe that black lives matter, then you must stand against this racist company that massacred 179,750 minority children last year to prevent them from entering our society. 

If you believe that encouraging Black or Latino women to abort their babies will benefit them or society in any way, then you are a Racist. If you believe that abortions help poor women to "prosper" financially or in their career, then you are prejudiced in favor of the wealthy and advantaged. You are an elitist who looks down on others. If you support an organization that has made countless millions of dollars by exploiting vulnerable women, pressuring them to pay to have their babies terminated in the womb, then you are depraved. If you support the organization Planned Parenthood, then you ARE Systemic Racism. If you support the abortion industry that has massacred over 60 million babies, then you are evil and an enemy of God. I hope you will repent and change your mind. 

Murdering minority babies is not new. The racist Egyptian ruler Pharoah became concerned that the Hebrew people, a minority in Egypt, were becoming too numerous. He feared them and viewed them as "other," and not his own subjects. He ordered Shiphrah and Puah, the Hebrew midwives, to kill all male infants the moment they were born. These two brave women blatantly defied Pharoah and respected God more than the government and were protected and rewarded. And do you know what their reward was? God gave them families and children of their own!!! Children were the reward. Psalm 127:3 declares that 

Children are a gift from the Lord. The fruit of the womb is His reward. 

Pharoah could not even stand up to these two remarkable women and did not dare punish them. He did however order all Hebrew parents to throw their sons into the Nile river. But Moses' mother would not kill her child. When she was no longer able to hide him from the Egyptian soldiers, she prepared a basket of reeds and lined it with tar to keep it water tight and afloat and then placed him inside it among the reeds where it could not float away. His sister Miriam watched over him continually. Providentially, Pharoah's daughter found him and had compassion. Moses' own mother was given her son back and paid a salary to nurse and care for him. Ultimately, God used Moses to bring the Egyptian empire to its knees and set the slaves free. 

Most people are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye,” but miss the fact that it only applied to one situation. The law that Moses delivered, found in the book of Deuteronomy, mitigated the revenge culture of the ancient world. But there was one instance in which absolute equivalent revenge was not only allowed, but required under the old law:

When men get in a fight and hit a pregnant woman so that her children are born prematurely but there is no injury, the one who hit her must be fined as the woman's husband demands from him, and he must pay according to judicial assessment. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. -Exodus 21:22-23.

The law shows us what sin is. It teaches us the difference between good and evil, holy and unholy, right and wrong. If the law required reimbursement, punishment or death for the accidental or careless cause of harm or death to a child in the womb, how much more serious of a sin is it to intentionally kill a child in utero? 

One of the most heinous acts of terrorism in the ancient world was to cut the pregnant wives of one's enemies in the stomach with a sword, killing both mother and pre-born child to prevent the perpetuation of their bloodline, nation or race. Every day, Planned Parenthood is committing acts of domestic terrorism against minority children, sanctioned by the Supreme Court of our land, funded by our federal government and supported by politicians. THAT is Systemic Racism. In the first chapter of the book of Amos, the prophet records God's words of judgement and punishment against the Ammonites because they ripped open the pregnant women of Gilead. God's anger burned against the violent murder of pre-born children. 

Obviously, I'm not suggesting the death penalty for those involved in abortion, but rather emphasizing the seriousness of the sin. When we speak of abortion, we should be Redemptive. Women and young girls walk into abortion clinics full of fear, tricked into believing they have no other option, fooled by Satan and deceived by an organization that is designed to profit from their misfortune. They walk out as murderers—with either a seared conscience that suppresses remorse---or with feelings of loss, shame, pain or guilt. We need to offer them forgiveness and hope for the future. JESUS already died to avenge that child’s death. He paid life for life--the price required for the mother’s forgiveness. He has balanced the scales and made things right. The child is safe in heaven with him. She needs mercy, grace, help, healing and restoration.

Women who become pregnant as a result of rape and incest are lied to and told that abortion will "get rid" of or solve their problems. But that is a lie straight from the devil's mouth. He wants to turn a victim into an abuser. He wants to turn the traumatized into the traumatizer. He wants to manipulate the victim of a crime into a becoming a criminal herself by tricking her into committing murder. The best possible outcome in those horrible situations is for the woman to give the child a chance to live and then offer the baby up for adoption if she does not wish to raise her attacker's child herself. She can then go through life with a clean conscience knowing that even though she was horrifically violated and abused, she did not let it change who she is. She gave the child a chance to live and a family a chance to love them.  

From the first sessions of sex Ed, young girls who become pregnant outside of marriage are told the lie that having a child will ruin their life, but the truth is that murdering a child will ruin their life. Time and again I have witnessed rebellious, out of control young women, calm down, straighten their lives out and experience great joy in motherhood. The child rescued them as much as they rescued the child by choosing life. We should support organizations such as Embrace Grace that show the love of Jesus by providing assistance and support to young mothers-to-be in need. 

Let's examine what the Bible teaches about pre-born children. When Elizabeth heard her Cousin Mary's greeting, her child John reacted in the womb:

For you see, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped for joy inside me. 

John the Baptist heard Mary, who arrived with Jesus, the Savior of the world alive inside of her, and he reacted with emotion in the womb. This pre-born child felt joy.

The foolish Supreme Court decision in the landmark Roe vs. Wade case that essentially "legalized" abortion in this country was based on antiquated pseudo-scientific fallacy. With the invention of ultra sound imaging, we now know much more about the way a child develops in the womb. For example, in child development class, we learned that the ear bones begin to develop in the 8th week of pregnancy. It is unclear how early the child can begin to hear, but by the 16th week, the ears are fully formed and the child hears everything the mother hears. This is why it is important for mothers to be careful what they watch and listen to. It also means that mothers can take great pleasure in speaking to their babies. They are learning in the womb. As usual, proper science proves the Bible has been correct all along. 

In Jeremiah 1:5, God tells the prophet:

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.


Psalm 139:13-16 describes the creation of each and every child conceived:

For it was you who created my inward parts. You knit me together in my mother's womb. I will praise you because I have been remarkably and wonderfully made. Your works are marvelous, and I know this very well. My bones were not hidden from you when I was made in secret, when I was formed in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw me when I was formless; all my days were written in your book and planned before a single one of them began.


Every baby is respectfully and carefully made by God. It is God who gives that child a soul and this is a spectacular reality that demands our reverence. Every child is created in the image of God and is worthy of dignity, honor and respect. We can never allow any person, party, political agenda or greedy, exploitive abortion organization to devalue human life. Every child conceived has a plan and a purpose designed by God. It is a horrific sin to stop that life before the child ever draws breath. A mother's womb should be the safest place for a baby to be.

Because of Jesus, our job is not that of Avenger or Revenger. Our job is to offer help and hope, to bring them to the redeemer. Our job is protector, finding ways to offer assistance and support. If you want to end Systemic Racism, then you must stand against the abortion industry and its flagship organization, Planned Parenthood. All people are created in the image of God. We must protect all human life. And we must offer redemption, forgiveness and restoration to those who have participated in the evil of abortion because Jesus already died for them. He already paid the penalty for their sins. Their lives are sacred too.

We can talk philosophy and even change minds about the wicked practice of abortion, but what we really need to do is support women. Planned Parenthood is violating their not-for-profit status in every abortion clinic on a daily basis by making money off the desperation of disadvantaged women. They have been proven by Live Action to be guilty of selling baby parts for profit. Planned Parenthood has defrauded the government out of Billions of tax dollars to make it's executives rich. Planned Parenthood even took 80 million dollars of stimulus money which lawmakers specifically forbid them from having. As I mentioned before, that organization receives $500,000,000 in taxpayer money each year. Wouldn't it be great if the Federal Government reallocated those funds to provide formula, diapers, clothing and car seats for babies? And speaking of car seats, the government should end the dishonest practice of putting expiration dates on car seats to force families to buy a new one for each child.  They could also increase WIC. For 4 years working at a grocery store, I personally witnessed the effectiveness of this wonderful program which provides formula and nutritious food for Women, Infants and Children according to need. What if Planned Parenthood facilities were repurposed into pregnancy centers where women in need could receive free pre-natal care? Or provide free pediatric care for infants and young children? Those facilities, which have essentially been paid for by government dollars, could be used to host parenting classes, kinder-music and provide a wide variety of services that empower and assist women and children. Instead of cultivating a culture of death and usury, these places could be utilized to nurture a vibrant culture of life and equality.

I do not anticipate that our government will ever do these things, though we should advocate for it. But perhaps the Church can...

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

The Order of Salvation

I disagree with any theological system which claims that Regeneration precedes Repentance and Faith.  Regeneration is a term that is synonymous with being born again, saved or renewed by the Holy Spirit. It is absolutely wrong to teach that a person can be saved without first repenting of their sins and placing their faith, hope and trust in Jesus Christ alone for their salvation. Yet, this incorrect ordo salutis, or order of salvation, which claims that people are saved before they repent of their sins, is shockingly common. Paul contrasted that view when he wrote:



If you confess with your mouth “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. One believes with the heart, resulting in righteousness, and one confesses with the mouth, resulting in salvation. –Romans 10:9-10



This passage clearly demonstrates a cause and effect. If you believe with your heart, which is faith, then the result is that you will be justified, or put into a right standing with God. If you confess with your mouth, then you will receive salvation. One action clearly precedes the other. Believing in your heart and confessing with your mouth are pre-requisites for receiving salvation. 

To be saved comes from the Greek word sozo. It means to make whole or heal, to keep safe, to rescue from danger or destruction. It means to be saved from injury or danger and restored to health. 

In verse 13, Paul goes on to explain:



For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.



First, you have to call on the name of the Lord, then you will be saved. To call upon the name of the Lord, Epikaleomai Onoma Kurios, means to cry out to God in sincerity and desperation, making an appeal to Him, asking to be called by His name. This means that if you want to be saved, rescued, forgiven and set free from the power of sin, you must humble yourself before God and ask Him to save you. This is why I teach that praying some type of sinner’s prayer is wise. Acts 3:19 teaches:



Therefore repent and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped out.



To repent means to turn away from your sins and turn toward God. Repentance is often left out of the equation in popular church culture, but it is required and absolutely essential if we want to be forgiven of our sins and have the slate wiped clean.



Jesus said that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. –Luke 24:47



Repentance comes first, then we are forgiven of our sins.



Peter further instructed:



Repent and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. –Acts 2:38



If we desire to be forgiven of our sins and be saved by the restoring, regenerating, renewing power of the Holy Spirit, then we must first turn away from our sins. That does not mean that we have to live in sinless perfection, but it does mean that we must agree with God that our sins are wrong and seek his forgiveness and strength to live as He wants us to. Baptism is a way of publicly demonstrating our faith. This verse indicates to me that Baptism should be administered as quickly as possible when a person repents of their sins and confesses belief in Jesus. I will be suspicious of anyone who claims to be a Christian, but has not been obedient to be baptized.



Following the instructions of the passages mentioned above will lead to salvation. But in each case, people are required to turn to God before they are saved.



No one is ever saved before they repent of sin, confess belief or otherwise call out to God. Yet there are still those who claim that people are saved and receive the Holy Spirit before repenting of their sins and placing their faith, hope and trust in Jesus Christ. That is the polar opposite of what Scripture teaches.



The confusion comes because some people forget the CALL of God. Jesus said:



 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them. –John 6:44


It is through the Holy Spirit that God calls us, or draws us toward Himself to be saved. John wrote:



He will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgement. –John 16:7-8



Conviction is good because it calls us to make a decision. When I was a child, I remember pastors talking about hearing the still, small voice of God calling us on the inside. Over and over the book of Hebrews quotes:



Today, if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.



When we have heard the word of God preached and we hear His voice calling us, we must make the choice to either answer the call and be saved or to ignore his voice, reject Him and be hardened in our ways.  He calls first, but we must call back. We have to respond in faith by believing in our heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and confessing with our mouth that He is Lord, the one in charge of our life. We must repent of our sins and turn toward God, calling back to the one who called out to us first, THEN we can be saved.



Any teaching that claims a person can be saved without first repenting of their sins and placing their faith in Jesus is an Inaccurate teaching and a misleading Gospel. It grieves me when men mock the idea of praying a sinner's prayer, speak derisively about deciding to follow Jesus or scorn the concept of asking Jesus into their heart. I understand how some people might be confused because they were in rebellion, running away from God and then suddenly felt God speaking to their heart. They think the moment they heard the Holy Spirit calling them to repentance that they were already saved. But no one is saved until they answer the call. No one will be filled with the Holy Spirit and experience regeneration and renewal without first repenting of sin and placing their faith, hope and trust in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. We need to be rescued from judgement and the power of sin. Our souls need to be healed and restored. God is ready to save you. Have you responded to His calling?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you enjoyed this article, you might like: The Essentials

Friday, May 1, 2020

The Essentials

I was recently asked to write a one page summary of my Christian beliefs. I thought, what are the most essential elements of the faith that should be included in just one page?  

Jesus is the Son of God. He has always existed along with the Father and the Holy Spirit. All things were created through Him. He came to earth and was born of a virgin. He is fully God and fully man. Jesus died on the cross to take the punishment for our sins. He rose bodily from the grave, appeared to many people and ascended into heaven. One day He is coming back to take those of us who believe to heaven to be with Him.  


Jesus’ willing sacrifice was sufficient to provide atonement for the sins of the whole world and every person in it, but only those who repent of their sins and confess Him as Lord will be saved. To be saved a person must call upon the name of the Lord, which means to make an appeal to God, calling out to Him, asking to be called by His name. This is why I teach that we should ask God to forgive us and invite Jesus to come into our hearts through His Spirit. When a person does that, the Holy Spirit takes up permanent residence in their heart. This is known as regeneration or being born again. He renews and restores us and heals our souls. He will never leave us or forsake us. 



Baptism is a command and the first act of obedience which is our public profession of faith that demonstrates we are dying to sin and being raised to new life in Jesus Christ. Believers should immediately by Baptized into the church following salvation.

When we are saved, we are justified, which means to be put into a right standing with God. We receive the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation and the Spirit continually works in our lives, changing us to be more like Jesus. This process is known as sanctification. We continue to mature as we grow in grace and the knowledge of Jesus throughout our lives.  

There will be a judgement where the righteous receive glorified bodies and are rewarded with eternal life in heaven. Unbelievers will be thrown into the lake of fire where all evil will be destroyed. This lends urgency to the Great Commission, when all Christians were sent out to share the Gospel, the good news about the salvation and forgiveness available through Jesus Christ. 



We have the privilege of gathering together as the church to worship God and enjoy fellowship with other believers. The observance of the Lord’s Supper is a beautiful picture of this communion and a reminder of our covenant with God. All Christians have the responsibility to disciple other believers and help them grow. 

Sunday, April 12, 2020

Resurrection Sunday: The Whole Story (Passion Week Part 4)

Imagine that you had been following Jesus as He taught around Galilee, in Jerusalem and throughout Judea. What if you had seen the miracles, heard the teachings, experienced the compassion felt the love, known the man and were convinced that he was the promised Messiah? It must have felt like devastating, soul crushing despair for them to watch their friend be crucified. Imagine that Sunday comes and people are seeing angels, the saints of old come out of their graves and walk around Jerusalem, and Jesus, the man you saw crucified and pierced through with the sword, the man you watched die is seen, ALIVE. There must have been excitement, fear, joy, chaos and every emotion known to man that morning.

Four people wrote down the events of that epic morning. In order to get the full story of what happened on the day of Jesus' Resurrection, we need to read all 4 Gospel accounts. This post is my humble attempt to combine and harmonize the reports of Luke the Historian, Matthew and John the Apostles and John Mark who was a young man who witnessed many things and in whose house the Last Supper and other gatherings likely took place.

Early Sunday morning, after the Sabbath day of rest was over, a group of women from the region of Galilee who were followers of Jesus came to his tomb. This group included Mary Magdalene who Jesus had cast 7 demons out of. There was another Mary, who was the mother of Joseph and one of the apostles, James the younger. There was Salome, who was Jesus’ aunt, the wife of Zebedee, who was the mother of Jesus’ cousins, the apostles John and James the elder, known as Bonarges, the sons of Thunder. Johanna, whose husband managed Herod’s household, was also with them. When Jesus died, they had purchased spices and now they brought them to Jesus' grave to make sure the body was given a proper and respectful burial. As they walked along in the twilight before dawn, they wondered how they would move the very large and heavy stone that blocked the entrance to the tomb, but as they arrived at sunrise, suddenly there was a great earthquake, an angel from heaven came like a flash of lightning and rolled the stone away from the tomb. The soldiers guarding the tomb appeared like dead men, either passed out or catatonic with fear.



The women found the angel sitting there on top of the rock, to the right of the tomb, wearing bright white robes. He invited them to look inside, to see the place where Jesus had been laid. The ladies entered the tomb, but Jesus’ body was not there. Suddenly Two angels in dazzling clothing with the appearance of young men appeared among them and asked the women why they were seeking the living among the dead? The messengers told them Jesus had risen from the dead, reminded them of His words that he would be betrayed, crucified and then rise on the 3rd day. The angels sent the women to tell this news to the disciples and to let them know He would meet them in Galilee. Then the women ran to the 11 disciples, to the place where Jesus' inner circle and other believers were gathered, perhaps the same home where the Lord’s last supper had been taken, or maybe back to the home of Mary and Martha in Bethany where they had been staying throughout the week. They were so overwhelmed that they did not mention these events to anyone along the road.



While the women ran to the disciples, the Guards of the tomb gathered themselves up and went to the Jewish leaders who paid them off to tell a lie that the disciples stole the body while they were sleeping. It wasn't a very good lie, because if they were sleeping then they would not have known what happened to the body. The Jewish religious leaders also promised to bribe Pilate, the governor, to keep the guards out of trouble if necessary. Fortunately, both Joseph of Arimethea and Nicodemus were prominent members of the Sanhedrin, and secret followers of Christ. As members of the Jewish high council, they were probably aware of these dirty dealings and they are most likely the ones who informed the disciples of the devious deception. In future years, other Jewish leaders would come to believe, so they could have told the truth as well. Sadly, this lie has caused many Jews through the centuries not to believe in Jesus as their Messiah.



Meanwhile, the women reached the home were the disciples were staying. Mary Magdalene, overwhelmed and having seen the empty tomb blurted out that they had taken her Lord and she did not know where they put him. I’m not sure if Mary had even seen the angels yet, but if she did, She thought they were just men and did not believe what they had said. At the prompting of the angels, the other women remembered the words Jesus had spoken. They were able to calm down just enough from the incredible shock and excitement of seeing angels to explain everything they had seen and experienced, proclaiming the good news about Jesus' rising from the dead to the disciples.  But no one had actually seen Jesus yet. Most of the disciples did not believe them and their words seemed to make no sense. It’s almost as if the words were falling in ears that were still spiritually deaf and needed to be opened.

After Mary Magdalene told Peter and John that Jesus was not in the grave, they sprinted out the door and raced to the tomb with Mary following closely behind. John arrived first. The boy John Mark, the writer of the Gospel of "Mark," may have followed them back as well, the young man had a knack for being a silent observer after all, as he had been in the garden on the night of Jesus’ arrest when he narrowly escaped by leaving his clothing in a Roman soldier’s grasp. Peter entered the tomb first, followed by John. They found the white linen which Joseph of Arimethea had wrapped the body in and found the face cloth folded and laying separately. They did not see the angels, almost as if they were still spiritually blind and needed their eyes to be opened and then they left.



After Peter and John left, Mary Magdalene, who had carefully watched over Jesus body a few nights earlier as it was laid in the tomb, who had come earlier with the other women bringing burial spices for the body, now stood outside of it, overwhelmed with grief, sobbing that they had taken Jesus out of the tomb and she did not know where they had put him. Upon bending down to look inside the cave, she saw the 2 angels all dressed in white. The angels repeated their message, affirming that Jesus was alive, reminding Mary of Jesus' own words that He would be resurrected on the 3rd day and sent her to tell the other disciples the Good News.

 As she ran out upset and in denial and disbelief, she ran into JESUS. At first, Mary thought he was the gardener, the one with the keys and responsibility for watching over the place. Still in shock but determined to finish her mission, she asked if he was the one who had carried Jesus away and asked him to give her the body, but when Jesus said her name, her spiritual eyes and ears were opened and she recognized him, grabbing on to his feet, worshipping Him and exclaiming “Teacher.” She was clearly not seeing a ghost, she physically touched his resurrected, corporeal body. He had to ask her not to cling to his feet because he had not yet ascended to the Father. He told her that he was ascending to his Father and her Father, to His God and her God. She is the first person recorded under the New Covenant to be told that she was a child of God. Mary had shown love and care for Jesus in his death by seeking his body relentlessly. But instead, she found the Living Lord. Jesus showed great compassion and loving care for Mary in allowing himself to be found by her. He sent her to tell these things to his brothers. As the first person to ever encounter the resurrected Christ, she went back with the honor of proclaiming to all those gathered together I have seen the Lord.


That day many of the bodies of the Old Testament saints were raised from the dead, came out of the tombs and entered Jerusalem, appearing to many people. They had been resting in Abraham’s bosom, or paradise as Jesus called it on the cross when He promised the repentant thief they would be together there. They were able to see the Holy City of Jerusalem before they went to heaven. They serve as witnesses that the resurrection of the dead is now possible for everyone because of Christ. Jesus probably ascended to the Father just as he said he was going to and delivered them to heaven to the Father before this next series of events.

Later, that same Sunday, Jesus appeared to Peter and Cleopas as they walked the 7 mile road from Jerusalem to Emmaus. He explained to them all of the things about Himself in the Scriptures from the first 5 books of Moses and all of the Prophets, affirming the validity of the Old Testament canon of Scripture that is in our Bible today and confirming its value remains under the New Covenant. They didn't recognize Him at first, but when He broke bread together with them, they realized it was Jesus and then He vanished into thin air. After hearing the word preached and breaking bread, their spiritual ears and eyes were opened to the reality of the risen Lord. They immediately went back to Jerusalem to the place where the other disciples were gathered together.

That evening while they were telling the other believers about these things, Jesus suddenly appeared right in the middle of them and spoke Peace to them. They thought He was a ghost, so he let them touch his very real body, showed them the scars on his hands and feet and then ate a piece of fish right in front of them, so that there could be absolutely no doubt He was not merely a ghost, but was raised bodily from the dead.

One week later, he appeared to them again and this time Thomas, who hadn’t seen him yet, was able to see and touch his nail scarred hands and the sword scar in his side which proved that his lungs and heart had been punctured and he had been truly dead. Later, he met with the disciples in Galilee as He promised, restoring Peter and having breakfast on the seashore. 


In all, Jesus appeared to over 500 eyewitnesses. He affirmed the Law of Moses as well as the Prophets and also affirmed the Psalms as being Holy Scripture and opened the minds of his followers to understand the Bible. He declared that repentance for forgiveness of sins was to be proclaimed in His Name to all nations. He appointed them as witnesses to these things and told them he was sending them out to be his messengers, but then told them to wait for the Holy Spirit to clothe them with power which happened on Pentecost. He delivered the Great Commission, calling all of us who are believers to go into all the world, bringing the good news of His Resurrection and of repentance for the forgiveness of sins through His name to every nation, Baptizing and making disciples as we go.

Here are links to the other articles in this series: 



Saturday, May 4, 2019

The Significance of the Lord's Supper among Sixteenth Century Evangelical Anabaptists

Imagine the scene, January 21, 1525 in Zurich, Switzerland. On that night, three brave men rejected their own infant baptism, defying their church and the government to be baptized as believers. These men, called the Swiss Brethren, immediately began sharing the Lord's Supper together in private homes and public gatherings. As the movement grew, even amidst constant danger and persecution, these Anabaptists (re-baptizers) loved gathering together to enjoy the fellowship and unity of the Lord's Supper. They were harsh in their criticism of corrupt leaders and a corrupt church/state power system and many were martyred within a few short years. While modern believers of different denominations and traditions should always take a more brotherly and loving tone as we discuss and debate these issues, there is much to learn from these Radical Reformers as we follow their journey to rediscover the Supper of Christ. Here is my paper: 


"The Significance of the Lord's Supper among Sixteenth Century Evangelical Anabaptists"


The early Anabaptists roundly rejected the Catholic treatment of the Eucharist along with its rituals, developing for themselves a unique and robust theology of the Lord’s Supper. Modern Baptists can derive benefit from a careful study of these Radical Reformer’s beliefs about communion and how it was observed. By examining their reasons for rejecting Catholic traditions, studying their understanding of the symbolism in the supper, determining who they allowed to participate in the memorial meal, and discovering their perceptions of the banquet’s purpose, the reader will come to a deeper understanding of the communion of Christ.  

The Corruption of the 16th Century Catholic Communion

The early Anabaptist leaders were vehemently opposed to the observance of the Eucharist being offered by the Roman Catholic Church at that time, denouncing it with colorful and incendiary language.
Menno Simons, a former Catholic priest who became the leader of the Dutch Anabaptists, called it the devil’s table and an abomination made by anti-Christ. He accused the priests of seeking worldly honor and criticized them for their hypocrisy, pomp and idolatry, comparing their ritual to Israel’s worship of the golden calf.[1]
Pilgrim Marpeck, a civil engineer and Anabaptist leader, accused the Pope of knavery and said that he represented the Antichrist. He called the Roman ritual of the supper blasphemous, a gruesome idolatry and a monkeyshine. He felt that the whole situation was scandalous and that the true meaning of communion had been perverted, obfuscated, repressed and forgotten.[2]  
Conrad Grebel, one of the Swiss Brethren, the first group to accept believer’s baptism, called the mass antichristian priestly rites. He referred to it as adulterated false doctrine, an actual idol and even apostasy.[3]
Peter Riedemann, a leader among the relentlessly persecuted Hutterites, called the Catholic Eucharist idolatry and an abomination. He believed that the enemy (Satan) had distorted the Lord’s Supper.[4]
These re-baptizing reformers were more instructive in their refutations of transubstantiation, the Catholic teaching that when the elements of bread and wine are blessed by a priest they are transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ. Prior to his trial, torture and martyrdom, Michael Sattler stated that because Jesus had ascended into heaven and would not return until the final judgement, the bread and wine were not the true flesh and blood of Christ.[5]
Menno called it heresy to treat the Eucharist as a means of grace and deliverance from death and hell. He asserted that because Jesus is risen, he cannot be eaten, adding that because Christ is incorruptible, he cannot be consumed. He complained that because Jesus was sacrificed once for sin, they were attempting to sacrifice him over and over.[6]
In his “Form for the Supper of Christ,” another former Catholic priest turned pastor/theologian, Dr. Balthasar Hubmaier stipulated that the speaker should clearly say that the bread and wine are not flesh and blood.[7]
Riedemann argued from Acts 7:48 that because God does not live in temples made with human hands and since bread is always made with human hands, Christ is not in the bread.[8]  Also expanding the discussion to address the Lutheran view of consubstantiation, the belief that the flesh and blood of Christ are in the bread and wine, Marpeck cleverly insisted that since Jesus was seated at the table with his disciples, the bread and wine did not contain his flesh and blood. He used John 16:25 to point to a time after the institution of the supper when Jesus reminded the disciples how he had been speaking to them in proverbs and parables, but would now speak plainly. Pilgrim reasoned that Jesus had been speaking in such a way at the table and that this supported a metaphorical or memorial view of the meal taught by Christ at His last supper with the disciples.[9]

The Memorial Meaning in the Meal

An important aspect of the Anabaptist understanding of the meaning in the Lord’s Supper comes from the words of Jesus, recorded by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25. They used a reading similar to that found later in the King James Version which reads in part: “Take, eat: this is my body which is broken for you. This do in remembrance of me…This cup is the New Testament in my blood: this do ye as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.”[10]  Most modern translations do not contain the word broken, but it was an integral part of Anabaptist theology which was drawn from a reading consistent with the majority of ancient manuscripts. Some raise concerns about the prophecy of Psalm 34:20 that none of Christ’s bones would be broken. John 19:36 demonstrates that this prophecy did indeed come true. But it is also true that Jesus’ physical body was beaten and broken to the point of death, as Isaiah 53:5 prophesied, saying He would be pierced, crushed, punished and wounded with stripes, which gives credence to the Anabaptist position. In “The Scheitheim Confession,” Michael Sattler stated that the church should share one bread in remembrance of the broken body of Christ and one drink in remembrance of the shed blood of Christ.[11]
Hubmaier encouraged that explanation of the Scriptures accompany the eating of the meal, specifically proclaiming Jesus’ death and suffering. He taught that viewing the elements as anything other than a memorial did violence to the articles of the Christian faith.[12] Grebel wrote that the supper was not a sacrament, but a sign of fellowship meant to remind believers of the covenant of the cross.[13] Marpeck preferred to use the word communion instead of sacrament to avoid confusion about the nature of the event. He observed it as an evening meal of bread and wine in which he encouraged others to consider with reverence and thankfulness that Jesus lost his life for the forgiveness of sins. Like Sattler, he stressed eating from one bread and drinking from one cup in memory of Christ and proclaiming his death. He also placed importance on the broken state of Jesus’ body. He considered correct communion, along with correct baptism and proclaiming the Gospel, to be one of three essential elements of the true church. He believed the Lord’s Supper brought refreshment, strengthening and solace to the soul.[14]  
Menno directly related the memorial nature of the Passover to the memorial nature of the Holy Supper. He portrayed Jesus as the spotless, sacrificial lamb, acknowledging the substitutionary nature of the atonement, mentioning the broken body of Christ and the ardent love he displayed through his death. Menno demonstrates that most Anabaptists did not view communion as a mere memorial. He cited Matthew 18:20 to show that where people were gathered in the name of Jesus, His Spirit was present with them. He said “It is a heavenly power, a living, moving of the Holy Ghost, which warms the heart and mind of the believers, pervades, comforts, anoints, encourages, awakens and enlivens them, makes them joyful and happy in God. For this is the true nature and power of the Lord’s word, if it be rightly preached, and of his Holy Sacraments, if rightly used.”[15]
Dirk Phillips, who became the leader of the Mennonites after the death of his friend Menno, also held to the supper as a memorial and more. He believed that the elements of communion must be understood spiritually. He expounded from John 6:33 that Jesus is the living bread and he demonstrated from Isaiah 55:1 that His Word is the pure wine. Explaining that eating often signifies believing in the Bible, he preached that the true bread of heaven is God’s Word and that believers are fed with that bread. Like Menno, Dirk also went beyond the concept of a memorial, teaching that participation in the meal refreshed the soul and made one joyful in the Holy Spirit.[16] 

Who May Eat Of the Lord’s Table?

Riedemann wrote that before taking communion people should examine themselves to make sure they are true members of Christ.[17] Menno also encouraged self-examination. He harshly criticized the Catholic Church for opening communion to all people including adulterers, gays, idolaters, drunkards and others whom he felt did not meet the Biblical qualifications to be guests at the Lord’s Table. He insisted that communion was only for truly believing Christians who had been born of God. In addition to explaining the Scriptures, he offered a chance to respond prior to partaking in the meal.[18]
Hubmaier prescribed the confession of sins and offered a formulaic prayer of forgiveness. He provided an opportunity to ask questions about essential matters. Also an advocate of self-examination, he admonished the people to think about whether they truly believed and were grateful, hungering for bread from heaven and had the desire to care for their neighbor. Drawing from 1 Corinthians 11:29 which warns about eating the supper unworthily, he compared falsely eating the supper to Adam’s eating of the forbidden fruit which brought death. He only allowed baptized believers to participate in the meal writing that “as faith precedes love, water baptism must precede the Lord’s Supper.[19]
Marpeck described the supper as a gathering of Christian believers and warned that damnation would result from eating and drinking by unbelievers. He taught that the Lord’s Supper was for the church which was made up of believers who had been brought together by baptism. He went so far as to teach that one of the two main functions of communion was to cut off and ban unbelievers, separating themselves from evil. This was pre-requisite to the other main function of the meal in Marpeck’s theology which was to hold the church together, uniting them in faith and in love.[20]

The Purpose of Unity in the Body of Christ

Sattler wrote that “whoever has not been called by God to one faith, to one Baptism, to one Spirit, to one body, with all the children of God’s church cannot be made [into] one bread with them.”[21] One of the most fascinating aspects to the Anabaptist theology of the supper is their treatment of the symbolism in 1 Corinthians 10:17: “For we being many, are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread.”[22] Simons, Riedemann, and Phillips all share an interesting expositional idea of this verse with another Hutterite leader, Claus Felbinger, who states it beautifully and succinctly: “As natural bread is composed by the coming together of many grains, ground under the millstones…and wine is composed of many grapes, each sharing its juice with the rest in the wine press, so that they become one drink. Even so are we also, in that we become completely one nature with Him, in life and in death, and are all one in Christ.”[23] 
Riedemann treated the meal as a sign of the community of Christ’s body. Using the picture of grain scattered about, he emphasized that people are scattered and divided with different ideas, but are led together by faith and united into the body of Christ.[24]
Menno emphasized faith, love peace and unity in the supper. Like different grains, he pointed out that the church consists of many believers brought together by God’s word. He accentuated the importance of service, acting in love toward one another, being friendly, long-suffering and peaceful. For Menno the supper was a Christian banquet where true believers experienced harmony in the presence of God.[25] His friend Dirk also emphasized harmony and the fellowship of the meal. He pointed out that unity comes from the Spirit.[26] Modern Mennonites still draw from these examples, using the parable of the grains and citing the “Didache,” a book of ancient Christian teaching from about 100 A.D. which indicates that at that time the Lord’s Supper and the Love Feast were one and the same.[27]
Dr. Hubmaier also realized the importance of exhibiting an attitude of love and thanksgiving in the supper. He promoted brotherly love and the fellowship of the saints through eating the meal together. He included a pledge of love to be recited before eating together which expressed love to God and included reminders to love one’s neighbor and practice fraternal admonition. Like the others, he also taught that believers become one loaf and one body through the supper.[28]
Even Ulrich Zwingli, the magisterial former mentor of the Swiss Brethren, who is often credited with creating a mere memorial view of the meal, wrote that it was an intimate union of the body and a symbol of that union.[29] His former mentee, Conrad Grebel, called it a supper of fellowship. He believed the words spoken during communion were words of unity, not consecration. He wrote that the meal should be eaten with joy if faith and brotherly love are present, agreeing that the church becomes one loaf. He added that if a person ate the supper but did not intend to live in a brotherly way, then that person ate condemnation.[30]
Marpeck also taught that those who eat the bread become one body. He called the gathering an assembly of love, a time of fellowship that builds a bond of love and a lovely Christian meal. He taught that believers should be consoled and delighted during the event. He echoed another important Anabaptist belief that the supper was a time for people to get right with God and be reconciled with other believers, calling it a fellowship of love.[31]
Unity was a major theme and purpose for the Lord’s Supper in Anabaptist belief which, along with many other aspects of their rich theology, made it into their hymns. Matthew 26:30 records that after the last supper was eaten, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn and then departed. The Anabaptists also wrote and sang hymns of communion, sometimes using familiar melodies from the Eucharist and re-writing them with better theology. They sang about baptism and the Holy Spirit’s role in bringing the church together. They remembered the connection to Passover and sang of Jesus as the Lamb. They warned of hypocrisy, invited others to join the body of Christ and sang about opening their hearts to Him. This verse beautifully expresses the theme of unity found in these hymns: “Just as one bread from many kernels, and one drink from many berries, so all true Christians, are one bread and one drink, without deceit or duplicity, in Christ the Lord. He nourishes us, multiplying true love and communion.”[32]

Conclusion

The Lord’s Supper was a vibrant and vital part of Anabaptist church life. Modern Anabaptists still consider it to be a profound and formative symbol.[33] The early Anabaptists took the meal in homes and observed it in worship gatherings, but their primary focus was not on where it was taken or how the elements were offered, but rather on the meaning and purpose of the gathering. By rejecting the man-made traditions of the established church, they were able to come to more Biblical convictions about the supper of Christ and its meaning.
Rather than adopting the sometimes harsh rhetoric of the radical reformers in their denunciation of the old practices, modern believers would do well to note the apologetic tone of Conrad Grebel’s letter to Thomas Muntzer which was at the same time brotherly, corrective and appealing in tone.
Embracing a memorial view of the supper, they restored a solemn remembrance of the work of Jesus Christ, proclaiming His suffering and death for the forgiveness of sins. Even in their zeal to protect the table, many of them provided an opportunity to hear the Gospel and respond prior to participating in the meal.
The early Anabaptists were not shy about correcting one another. In fact, brotherly confrontation and correction were not considered divisive actions, but were an important aspect of their observance of communion, intended to protect unity by separating from unbelievers and drawing wayward brothers and sisters to repentance. They promoted the practices of self-examination, repentance and reconciliation. By only allowing baptized believers to participate, the supper was reclaimed as a unifying meal to comfort the followers of Jesus. While they did promote self-examination prior to eating the meal, they also encouraged a time of thinking about others and attempting reconciliation. First, they focused inward, getting right with God. Then they focused outward, getting right with each other. They could rejoice in the fellowship and unity that comes through the Holy Spirit when the true church is gathered together.
The Anabaptist commitment to serving a Biblical communion meal led to a gathering filled with purpose. They restored the reverence, remembrance, fellowship, joy and unity of the Lord’s Supper to His church in their time. Learning from their example can enrich the observance of communion for His church today.





Estep, William R. The Anabaptist Story. Third Edition ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1996.

Goncharenko, Simon V. "Balthasar Hubmaier's Integration of Discipline and Theology." Chap. 9, In The Anabaptists and Contemporary Baptists, edited by Malcolm B. Yarnell III, 155-179. Nashville, Tennessee: B & H Academic, 2013.

Harder, Leland, ed. The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism: The Grebel Letters and Related Documents. Classics of the Radical Reformation. Edited by Cornelius J. Dyck. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1985.

Klaasen, Walter, ed. Anabaptism in Outline. Classics of the Radical Reformation. Edited by Cornelius J. Dyck. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1981.

Klassen, William and Walter Klaasen, eds. The Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck. Classics of the Radical Reformation. Edited by Cornelius Dyck and Walter Klaassen. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1978.

Kroeker, Wally. "The Element of Unity in the Anabaptist Practice of the Lord's Supper." Direction Journal 12, no. 3 (July 1983): 29-38.

Pipkin, Wayne and John Yoder, eds. Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism. Classics of the Radical Reformation. Edited by Cornelius J. Dyck. Translated by Wayne Pipkin and John Yoder. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1989.

Rempel, John D. "The Lord's Supper in Mennonite Tradition." Vision 2, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 4-15 (accessed 2/29/2019).

Rideman, Peter. Confession of Faith. Translated by Kathleen E. Hasenberg. Great Britain: Hodder and Stoughton, 1950.

Simon, Menno. Menno Simon: The Complete Writings. Elkhart, Indiana: John F. Funk & Brother, 1871.

Snyder, Arnold. "Was the Bread Only Bread and the Wine Only Wine? Sacramental Theology in Five Anabaptist Hymns." Conrad Grebel Review 24, no. 3 (Fall 2006): 26-44.

Ste. Marie, Andrew V. I Appeal to Scripture! The Life and Writings of Michael Sattler. Manchester, MI: Sermon on the Mount Publishing, 2018.

The Holy Bible: Authorized King James Version. World Bible Publishers. Belgium.



[1] Simon, Menno, Menno Simon: The Complete Writings (Elkhart, Indiana: John F. Funk & Brother, 1871), 37-40.
[2] Klassen, William and Walter Klassen, eds. The Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1978), 261-296.
[3] Harder, Leland, ed. The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism: The Grebel Letters and Related Documents (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1985), 286-288.
[4] Rideman, Peter. Confession of Faith (Great Britain: Hodder and Stoughton, 1950), 82-87.
[5] Ste. Marie, Andrew V. I Appeal to Scripture! The Life and Writings of Michael Sattler (Manchester, MI: Sermon on the Mount Publishing, 2018), 136.
[6] Simon. Menno Simon: Complete Writings. 37-40.
[7] Pipkin, Wayne and John Yoder, eds. Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1989), 393-408.
[8] Rideman. Confession of Faith. 82-87.
[9] Klassen. Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck. 261-296.
[10] The Holy Bible: Authorized King James Version. (World Bible Publishers: Belgium), 142.
[11] Ste. Marie. Life and Writings of Michael Sattler. 116.
[12] Pipkin. Balthasar Hubmaier. 393-408.
[13] Harder. Sources of Swiss Anabaptism. 286-288.
[14] Klassen. Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck. 261-296.
[15] Simon. Menno Simon: Complete Writings. 37-40
[16] Klassen, Walter, ed. Anabaptism in Outline (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1981), 204-208
[17] Rideman. Confession of Faith. 82-87.
[18] Simon. Menno Simon: Complete Writings. 37-40
[19] Pipkin. Balthasar Hubmaier. 393-408.
[20] Klassen. Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck. 261-296.
[21] Ste. Marie. Writings of Michael Sattler. 116.
[22] Authorized King James Version. 141.
[23] Estep, William R. The Anabaptist Story (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1996), 136.
[24] Rideman. Confession of Faith. 82-87
[25] Simon. Menno Simon: Complete Writings. 37-40.
[26] Klassen. Anabaptism in Outline. 204-208.
[27] Kroeker, Wally. “The Element of Unity in the Anabaptist Practice of the Lord’s Supper.” Direction Journal 12, no. 3 (July 1983): 29-38.
[28] Pipkin. Balthasar Hubmaier. 393-408.
[29] Harder. Sources of Swiss Anabaptism. 310.
[30] Ibidem. 286-288
[31] Klassen. Writings of Pilgrim Marpeck. 261-296.
[32] Snyder, Arnold. “Was the Bread Only Bread and the Wine Only Wine?” Sacramental Theology in Five Anabaptist Hymns.” Conrad Grebel Review 24, no 3 (Fall 2006): 26-44.
[33] Rempel, John D. “The Lord’s Supper in Mennonite Tradition.” Vision 2, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 4.