My pastor is a "strict" communionist, and so this subject greatly interested me in learning more as I do not share his views on the matter. I wanted to know if I was wrong, or if he had learned and accepted this doctrine uncritically. To understand this book, one must know and understand some of the history of J.R. Graves. History records that he was an extremely contentious man, and that he pursued the implementation of his peculiar doctrines with a passion equal to that of the apostle Paul.
As I read the book, I was amazed that his views had gotten hold of so many good men. The book gives us an open window into his thinking, and reveals that he taught views which were not Biblical. For example, on page 19 and 20 he states that Christ taught that His kingdom was of THIS WORLD. This is a most absurd claim that runs contrary to Christ' own words.
In the book, Graves states: "Christ, in definite terms, declared that his kingdom was present; and [that his kingdom was] upon the soil of Judea, and [that specifically, his kingdom was] within the jurisdiction of King Herod."
Yet, in Christ's own words, Jesus declares that He is not of this world. Speaking to antagonistic Jews, Jesus said: "You are from beneath; I am from above: you are of this world; I am not of this world." (John 8:23)
Again, in John 18, Pilate was questioning Jesus, and he demanded to know if He was claiming to be the King of the Jews. Jesus answered him, saying: "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would I call my servants to fight, so that I would not be delivered to the Jews..." (vs.36)
There is a reason that Graves misquotes Jesus here: he hates the concept that there is a universal aspect to all those Christians - past, present and future - who belong to Christ. Rightly understood, all of those who belong to Christ constitute the citizens of His kingdom. But such a kingdom is spiritual, and not earthly bound.
In order for Graves doctrine of "strict" communion to be true, it must have a foundation built upon the Bible. There is no foundational material in God's Word to support such a view, so Graves deliberately misquotes Jesus to say that His kingdom is OF THIS WORLD. What this does is to allow Graves to further claim that since Jesus' kingdom is of this world, that it is represented in the LOCAL church ONLY. If someone should try to explain to Graves that there is a universal aspect to the church of God, then Graves can quickly dismiss their criticism by saying that communion is ONLY to be represented in a local assembly, because there is no such thing as a universal aspect to the church.
His argumentation (and book) is quite extensive, but merely an exercise in repetitive claims based in great part upon the concept that there is no such thing as a universal aspect to the Church of God.
The book was primarily written as an apologetic against paedobaptism, and so the greater part of its work is toward that end. It was during the majority of the 19th century that tensions between Presbyterians and Baptists were the greatest, and yet many paedobaptists and Baptist churches were sharing the Lord's Table. Graves saw this as unscriptural, and he sought to inform his Baptist brethren of their error.
While there is Scriptural warrant for closing the table to paedobaptists, this book does not have the Biblical answer. This book is based upon several doctrines which are in error, not the least of which are the concepts supportive of Landmarkism.
The book is "valuable" as a resource for understanding the teachings of the father of Landmarkism, and as a view into Baptist history, of which Graves is most certainly a part. But the buyer should use extreme prejudice in examining the statements of Graves.
No comments:
Post a Comment