Worship-05B-LordsSupper

Lord's Supper or Lost Supper? (cont.)

�� Well, you may have spotted the word Sabbaton in that sentence, and being the intelligent person you are, quickly figured out it refers to the Sabbath day.� Shouldn't, therefore, the Lord's Supper be kept on Saturday?� Since the previous words in Acts 20:7 already referred to the first day, this word is used as a contrast to the Sabbath, and to help people understand when the first day was.� In other words the first day after the Sabbath was to be remembered.� This is clear in Matthew 28:1 which refers to late on the Sabbath before dawn being just before the first day of the week.� Early Christians sometimes called Sunday the "eighth" day of the week.� Since the word Sabbath is plural, it refers to every first day after every Sabbath.�

�� Some may be thinking that this just means the early Christians met on every Sunday to have a meal.� After all, verse 11 says they ate a meal.� Is it talking about two different things?��

�� From Sunag refers to a religious congregation or assembly and we get the word synagogue from it.� Menon refers to people who are present together as a group.� They met together for religious purposes, specifically to "break bread" of the Lord's Supper.� Later, after midnight, they broke bread for a different purpose.� This time they "ate" a meal, a term also used in Acts 10:10 where they were very hungry.

�� Are there other references to having the Lord's Supper daily?� No, those daily experiences were meals.� Acts 2:46 says the Christians in Jerusalem daily broke bread together, EATING their MEAT with gladness.� The word translated eat here comes from the Greek word, metalam from whence we get our word metabolism.

�� Okay, you may be thinking, it looks like the Christians broke bread as part of the Lord's Supper at the beginning of their meeting, then Paul preached to midnight, then after midnight they ate a meal.� But don't you think this was a practice for just the early church?� After all, many of them had seen Jesus for themselves.� Meeting every Sunday for the Lord's Supper would mean more to them.� Let's look at the last of that sentence.

�� Harmon is extremely important.� Basically, it means to perpetually espouse or adopt in harmony with something.� It is NEVER TEMPORARY.� Vine's EXPOSITORY OF NEW TESTAMENT WORDS says harmon refers to something that is PERPETUAL and on going, such as each and every such day perpetually.

�� So, what part is perpetual?� The day appointed to keep the Lord's Supper is perpetual.� Does it say year?� No, it says day.� Does it say any day of any week of the year?� No, it says the first day of every week in the year.� And not just in the first century, but in the 21st century also.

�� Think about the Old Testament Mosaic command, "Remember THE Sabbath Day to keep it holy" (Exodus 20:8).� Did they keep the Sabbath day once a year?� No, they kept it every week.� Did they keep any day of the week?� No, they kept the seventh day.� THE Sabbath day meant EVERY Sabbath Day.

�� No Jew ever said, "Well, it doesn't specify, so we'll keep the Sabbath once a month, or quarterly or yearly."� So, why would a Christian keep THE first day of the week for breaking bread monthly, quarterly, or yearly?

�� Okay, you're convinced.� But the kind of bread does not make any difference.� But for sure, we certainly don't want to copy the Catholics who use unleavened bread.� So we'll use leavened bread to prove we're not following the pope.� Would it really be following the pope to use unleavened bread?

�� Klasai Arton refers to bread, often the shewbread used by the priests in a Jewish religious ceremony.� What kind of bread was it?� Did it matter?

�� When Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, he was actually keeping the Passover Feast, also called the day of Unleavened Bread (Luke 22:7, Deuteronomy 16:5-8).� Observers were to clean their house and make sure there was nothing with yeast in it anywhere.

�� In 1 Corinthians 5:7, it says Jesus became our Passover lamb that was eaten at that feast.� Therefore, we do not have meat at the Lord's Supper.� However, he took that same unleavened bread which originally referred to the Jews being in a hurry to eat and leave slavery in Egypt (Exodus 12:8ff) and said it now represented his body.

�� Jesus gave new meaning to the yeast also.� He referred to the "yeast of the Pharisees" (Matthew 16:6 & 12) being their distorted teachings of God.� Still later, the Bible referred to the "yeast of malice and wickedness" (1 Corinthians 5:8).�

�� Therefore, the kind of bread we use for the Lord's Supper does have significance.� If Jesus specifically used unleavened bread, and he referred to yeast as evil, who are we to change the symbols and use any kind of bread we want?� If we begin using leavened bread, we may as well add sugar and chocolate and make it chocolate cake while we're at it.

�� So, what are the two firsts in this Acts 20:7 scripture?� We are to meet on every first day of every week in the year.� AND, the primary purpose we are to meet that makes the first day unique is that we are to keep the Lord's Supper.

�� Every other day of the week we find Christians singing, praying, reading scriptures, and preaching.� But they never kept the Lord's Supper just any time they wanted.� They were to meet on the FIRST day of the week TO (FOR THE PRIMARY PURPOSE) break bread.

�� Every Sunday, God?� I get to keep the Lord's Supper every Sunday?� Deep down I always wanted to.� But no one agreed with me.� They thought we had to get fancy that day.� All you want is for us to compare our sins with your power to forgive.� That's all.

Not in the Body

�� What happens to us if we do not partake of the Lord's Supper every Sunday?� What happens if we do not go through the process of considering what Jesus did for us, and our sins that caused it?

�� Jesus spent some time on this in John 6:53.� It is dynamic.� It is warning enough to get us to never take the Lord's Supper for granted again.

�� "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you!"

�� In fact, 1 Corinthians 11:33 says that if anyone missed the Lord's Supper, we are to wait for that person.� Most congregation "wait" by returning to worship again in the evening to provide that opportunity for those who had to work or were otherwise tied up during the morning.

�� Well, can we take the Lord's Supper alone?� We could say that the church is the body of Christ, and based on the above verse, we would have to take it with the body.� But that is stretching the meaning a little.� Let's just return to the examples God included in his Bible.� And while we're at it, does a church leader have to hand it to us or put it in our mouth?

�� In the gospels, the Lord's Supper was instituted by Jesus with eleven of his twelve apostles (Judas having left by then).�

�� Acts 20:6 and 7 says Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timothy, Tychicus, and Trophimus were joined by Paul and "the others" at Troas.� There, they "came together" on Sunday in order to have the Lord's Supper.

�� The church in Corinth was having trouble distinguishing between a regular meal and the Lord's Supper.� Paul led into this discussion by saying, "In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your MEETINGS do more harm than good.� In the first place, I hear that when you come together....When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat....Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning" (1 Corinthians 11:17, 18, 20, 27).

�� The following refers to all the times the church gets together.� That would include Sunday, of course, which is the minimum.� "Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another - and ALL THE MORE as you see the Day approaching.� If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God" (Hebrews 10:25-27).

�� Why so forceful?� It is explained in an introductory statement:� "Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds" (Hebrews 10:24).� It is explained further by the brother of Jesus:� (What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?� Can such faith save him?� Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food.� If one of you says to him, 'Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? (James 2:14-16).

�� In other words, while we're examining ourselves before the Lord's Supper, we need to consider whether we've done any good deeds the previous week.� To make us worthy to be saved?� No, to prove our faith in, gratitude for, and love toward God.� James goes on to say, "You believe that there is one God.� Good!� Even the demons believe that - and shudder.� You foolish man...faith without deeds is useless" (James 2:19-20).

�� Oh God, there is so much to think about during the Lord's Supper.� But we've never allowed for much silence.� We need the silence to commune with you.� There's so much to commune about.

But the Depth of Easter....

�� Some readers may have concluded that everything noted is true, but they cannot let go of that one very special Sunday of the year when there are special programs proclaiming Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

�� Let us never think that officially remembering Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection once a year is sufficient.� Let us never think we can thank Jesus for what he did for us in the way he prescribed for us just once a year.

�� However, if it is against conscience of some to stop celebrating with a special Easter service once a year, then don't.� Romans 14:6 and 19 says, "He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord.� He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.....Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification."

�� If a special celebration of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection can attract people who normally never darken a church building door, do it.� But, again, not to the elimination of the other Sundays of the year.

�� The same is true of Christmas.� All Bible scholars agree that there is never any command or example in the Bible for us to set aside a special day or days to remember Jesus' birth until he comes.� This is the one time of the year that even atheists are forced to say the word Christ, for they cannot say Christmas without doing so.� Madolyn Murray O'Hare celebrated Christmas.�

�� Do atheists and agnostics celebrate Christmas for selfish reasons?� Certainly.� Most of us do too, if we are willing to admit it.� But, Paul saw good even in the selfish proclamation of Jesus.� He said,

�� "The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains.� But what does it matter?� The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached.� And because of this I rejoice" (Philippians 1:17-18).

�� But, do not neglect the other 51 Sundays of the year to remember Jesus death until he comes.� Once these special holy days take precedence to the point of eliminating the ones stipulated in God's Word, they become misleading.

�� Besides, who would want to eliminate the special time once a week when we consider the depth of Jesus' sacrifice, and the reason - our sins?

�� Yes, God, I appreciate Easter.� But I'll never see it again like I used to.� I could never come back to life alone.� Jesus did it first to prove you'll do the same for me!� Oh resurrection day!� How I long for it.� Every day.

The Grandest Statement of Faith

But, there will be visitors mingled in with the congregation each Sunday who are not used to the Lord's Supper occurring suddenly without fanfare.� They are used to more pomp and ceremony in connection with it.� Many are confused because they are used to it being kept only on Easter Sunday in March or April.�

�� Not having personally investigated the scriptures regarding the Lord's Supper, visitors may think that your congregation is being sacrilegious.� Be sensitive to their feelings and be prepared.

�� Make a statement about it in the bulletin or order of worship handed to everyone when they enter the building.� Explain what will be happening during the service and why.� Further, the person in charge of the Lord's Supper must explain what is about to happen, using scripture.�

�� The person in charge also needs to talk about what Jesus' death means to him and try to represent everyone in the audience.� (It may be that, since this will take up part of the sermon time, the minister may be put in charge of this each week.)

�� The message of the Lord's Supper is the basic gospel message.� In a nutshell, the gospel is this:

�� "I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand.� By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you.� Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

�� "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance:� That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

�� The Lord's Supper is the most dynamic sermon that could ever be demonstrated.� The Lord's Supper spells out the gospel.� The Lord's Supper makes a connection between Jesus' death on the cross and our sins.� This is a connection most people in the world do not understand.� What an opportunity to explain it!

�� As a result of being told this, after the first gospel sermon, "When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, 'Brothers, what shall we do?' " Acts 2:37?

�� Do we want people to ask us what to do to be saved?� Then have the Lord's Supper every week and proclaim every week that Jesus took our punishment for our sins and died in our place on the cross.� This should prick the heart of anyone except the most hardened.

�� "He actually did that for me?" they will think.� "For me?� I had no idea.� What can I do to accept his gift of salvation?"

The Second-Century Church

�� Around 90 AD, an unknown Christian in Syria wrote in his Didache 14:1:� "Having earlier confessed your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure, come together EACH Lord's day of the Lord, break bread, and give thanks." [12]

�� And in Didache 9; 10; 14 he wrote this:� "Concerning the [Lord's Supper], give thanks in this way:� First concerning the cup, 'We give thanks to you, our Father, for the holy vine of David, your Servant, which you made known to us through Jesus your Servant.� To you be the glory forever.

�� "Concerning the broken bread, 'We give thanks to you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your Servant.� To you be the glory forever.� As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and being gathered together became one loaf, so may your church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom.� Because the glory and the power are yours through Jesus Christ forever.'

�� "No one is to eat or drink of your [Lord's Supper] except those who have been baptized in the name of the Lord.

�� "Having earlier confessed your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure, come together EACH Lord's day of the Lord, break bread, and give thanks.� No one who has a quarrel with his fellow is to meet with you until they are reconciled, in order that your sacrifice may not be defiled.� For this is what was spoken by the Lord. [13]

�� Ignatius, a friend of the Apostle John, said in his Magnesians 9:� "If therefore those who lived according to the old practices came to the new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath but living according to the Lord's day, in which also our life arose through him and his death (which some deny)...." [14]

�� Justin Martyr wrote this around 100 AD in his Apology I,65:� "After we thus wash him who has been persuaded and agreed entirely with our teachings....we pray that we who have learned the truth may be counted worthy and may be found good citizens through our works and keepers of his commandments so that we may receive the eternal salvation.�

�� "When we cease from our prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.� Next there is brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of water mixed with wine.� Taking these he sends up praise and glory to the Father of all through the name of his Son and of the Holy Spirit and makes thanksgiving at length for the gifts we were counted worthy to receive from him.�

�� "When he completes the prayers and thanksgiving, all the people present sing out their assent by saying 'Amen'....When the president has given thanks and all the people have made their acclamation, those called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water for which thanksgiving has been given, and they carry some away to those who are absent." [15]

ADDENDUM I ~ Who Serves It?

�� Historically, in the early church the elders often led the Lord's Supper because it was the Christians' main reason for meeting on Sundays.� Then the deacons distributed it to the congregation.� Actually, who is to lead and distribute the Lord's Supper is not in the Bible; therefore it is left to the discretion of the congregation.� It certainly is not listed among the duties of elders or deacons found in 1 Timothy and Titus.

�� However, by the last of the first century, many made it a regulation that the elders had to administer the Lord's Supper, and the higher the leader's position, the better.�

�� Indeed, Paul warned the Ephesian elders that it would be from among their own eldership that the first heresy would originate.� "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 20:30).� Luke 22:17-19 says that Jesus gave the bread to his disciples and told them to divide it among themselves.� He never handed it to each of them individually.

�� Christians are to keep the Lord's Supper every Sunday.� But the church hierarchy's insistence that only they be allowed to "administer it," that is, to hand it to other Christians, keeps Christians from obeying God's higher command to keep it every Sunday if they don't have someone "ordained" by the church hierarchy in their assembly.

ADDENDUM II ~ Is he Really There?

�� Some well-meaning people believe (because they've been taught this by "religious" people) that the bread and wine actually become the body and bread of Jesus.�

�� In the mid 1500s in England, a Mrs. Prest of Cornwall continually talked with others about the inconsistencies of believing Jesus was actually present in the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper.� When taken before the bishop, she said,

�� "I will demand of you whether you can deny your creed, which says that Christ doth perpetually sit at the right hand of His Father, both body and soul, until He come again; or whether He be there in heaven our Advocate, and to make prayer for us unto God His Father?� If He be so, He is not here on earth in a piece of bread....If He did not offer His body once for all, why make you a new offering?...If He is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth, why do you worship a piece of bread?"

�� The bishop falsely accused her of starting her own church and had her imprisoned.� Many visits followed by people trying to get her to recant, but she would not.� Finally she was sentenced to be burned at the stake, to which she replied, "This day have I found that which I have long sought."� As they lit the fire, she prayed, "God be merciful to me a sinner."� Then, patiently enduring, she was consumed buy the flames and her body reduced to ashes. [16]

�� So, how can we know whether the bread and wine are the actual body and blood of Jesus?� All we have to do is look closely at the above scriptures which recount Jesus instituting the Lord's Supper.� When he said, "This is my body" and "This is my blood" he was still in his actual body, and still circulating his actual blood.� Since Jesus had only one body, his body could not have been in two places at once.��

�� In the early 1600s, in Lisbon, Portugal, an Englishman of Bristol, settled to set up business for his merchant employer.� William Gardiner continued to worship as he had in Britain where historically the Apostle Simon had started the church late in the first century.

�� One day he went to a wedding which included celebration of the mass (Lord's Supper). �He was shocked at the superstition he saw.� He returned the following Sunday where once again he witnessed people worshipping the bread.

�� Gardiner could not hold back his outrage at such misuse of the Lord's Supper.� He sprang forward, snatched the bread from the cleric and trampled it under foot.� Someone in the congregation stabbed him with a dagger.� When they demanded to know why he had done such a thing, he replied he had done so "out of an honest indignation, to see the ridiculous superstitious and gross idolatries practiced here."

�� Thereupon he was sent to prison and tortured excruciatingly.� Finally he was ordered executed.� A large fire was created.� He was pulled up over the fire by pulleys, then let down near the fire where he was roasted by slow degrees.� He bore it patiently, and to the last thanked God for the privilege of defending his truths on earth. [17]

�� As we investigate the Bible further on this subject, we learn that Jesus' Apostles, soon after the beginning of the church, clearly said Christians were not to drink blood:�

�� "James [Jesus' brother] spoke up....'we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood' " (Acts 15:13, 20).� Further, the following letter was written:� "The apostles and elders, your brothers, to the Gentile believers....You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality" (Acts 15:23, 29).

�� Also in the early 1600s in Italy, Daniel Rambaut of Vilario was imprisoned because he did not believe in the real presence of Jesus in the bread and wine (the "host") along with several other beliefs that were not in the Bible.� Although interrogated numerous times by various priests, he continued to say that his understanding of the Bible and his conscience would not allow him to subscribe to such a belief.�

�� Continually he told them that to believe the real presence in the host is a shocking union of both blasphemy and idolatry.� Further, the words of consecration said by the priests called "transubstantiation," which supposedly turned the bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus "is too gross an absurdity for even a child to believe who was come to the least glimmering of reason...nothing but the most blind superstition...." [18]

�� Even in the early church writings, the Lord's Supper was continually defended to pagans who complained that Christians were guilty of cannibalism (as well as incest) because they regularly ate someone's flesh and blood (and were married to those they called their brothers and sisters).� The Christians explained to their accusers that these were both spiritual in nature, and not fleshly.�

�� Theophilus wrote about 180 AD:� To Autolycus III.xv:� "Consider then if those who have been taught such things are able to live indifferently and to be joined in unlawful intercourse or most ungodly of all to eat human flesh....With them temperance is present, self-control is exercised, monogamy is preserved." [19]

If you have questions or comments about this chapter,
you are welcome to join our Godfind discussion group.

Return to Table of Contents

Detailed Table of Contents

Endnotes for This Page

[12].� Ferguson, Everett, Early Christians Speak, Sweet Publishing, Austin, 1971, p. 94

[13].� Ferguson, p. 93-94

[14].� Ferguson, p. 67

[15].� Ferguson, p. 94

[16].� Forbush, William B., Editor, Fox's Book of Martyrs, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, 1968, p. 275-276

[17].� Fox's Book of Martyrs, p. 74-75

[18].� Fox's Book of Martyrs, p. 113-114

�[19] Ferguson, p. 196

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws