The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Is the Lord's Supper equivalent to Passover &

(other OT feasts)

I do not have any reference books available and I wonder how to respond to those who argue for paedo-communion.

Their argument is that in the OT feasts everyone were invited to participate, so why should we prevent baptized children from doing the same.

Is the relationship between the Lord's Supper and Passover as direct as that of Baptism and Circumcision?

Is the reason for not allowing baptized children not to participate is strictly based on them not being able to examine themselves, or does it go into the core that they may not be saved.

Didn't the Passover include a test of maturity and understanding? As I recall, the youngest need to be of an age to ask what these thing meant and understand the answer.

Are these the same folks that argue for infant baptism? If so they may not care about the examination part. That said, I've known some kids who are saved and know it and are MUCH better at self-examination than grown ups who want to save face more often than not.

To me, saying that the Lords Supper is equivalent to the Passover puts it in the realm of things like Catholic Eucharist (sp?) where the wafer becomes more than a symbol. The bread and the wine is no more effectual than the water in the baptistry. Its what happens on the inside that matters most.

The correct way to respond is with scripture alone not with human speculation or tradition. Infants are to be baptized because the promise belongs to them (Acts 2:38, 39) but infants are not to be communed until they can examine themselves (1 Cor. 11:28).