"...What Jesus and His disciples were eating on that occasion was the Passover meal - that commemorative supper that brought to mind the night Israel was delivered from Egyptian bondage. That memorial was commanded by God and had been observed by the Jews since the days Moses. It was an observation unique to the Old Testament and to the Jews. Christians do not observe it because it is not immediately relevant to us. Neither is it commanded of us. Jesus however, was a Jew under the Law of Moses so He did observe it, every year of His earthly life. And on this particularly occasion He used it to institute a new memorial that would be for Christians based on an event that was about to happen – the shedding of His own blood for the forgiveness of the sins."

Introduction

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial located in Washington, D.C. is a national war monument that honors members of the U.S. armed forces who served in the Vietnam War during the years of 1965 to 1972. 58,226 American soldiers lost their lives in that conflict. An additional 153,303 U.S. soldiers were wounded, bringing the total casualties to 211, 529. The Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial consists of three separate parts — the Three Soldiers statue, the Vietnam Women's Memorial, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, which is the most commonly recognized part of the commemorative. The main component of the memorial was completed in 1982 and is located in Constitution Gardens on the National Mall, just northeast of the Lincoln Memorial. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial is maintained by the U.S. National Park Service, and receives around 3 million visitors each year.

The Christian memorial referred to by New Testament writers as "The Lord’s Supper" was instituted and completed in 33 A.D. This memorial honors the sacrificial death of a single individual, Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It consists of two parts: The eating of unleavened bread which represents the body of Christ and the drinking of grape juice which represents His blood. This memorial is commonly recognized and observed in nearly every part of the modern world. It is maintained voluntarily by ardent followers of Jesus Christ and is visited and revisited regularly by countless millions of Christians around the world.

In this message I would like to focus briefly on the observance of The Lord's Supper. Those of you who are new in Christ need to hear it. Those who have been in Christ for awhile can benefit from a review. I won’t cover every aspect of the subject – just the basics. We’ll start first with:

Two passages from the gospels and one from an epistle of Paul tell us of the origin of the Lord’s Supper. The first is from someone who was actually present during its institution. Matthew’s words about it are recorded in Matthew 26:26-29

According to verse 2 of this same chapter, what Jesus and His disciples were eating on that occasion was the Passover meal - that commemorative supper that brought to mind the night Israel was delivered from Egyptian bondage. That memorial was commanded by God and had been observed by the Jews since the days Moses. It was an observation unique to the Old Testament and to the Jews. Christians do not observe it because it is not immediately relevant to us. Neither is it commanded of us. Jesus however, was a Jew under the Law of Moses so He did observe it, every year of His earthly life. And on this particularly occasion He used it to institute a new memorial that would be for Christians based on an event that was about to happen – the shedding of His own blood for the forgiveness of the sins.

The second reference to the origin of the Lord’s Supper comes from Luke, who was an inspired New Testament prophet himself and also a traveling companion of the Apostle Paul. We read in Luke 22:17-21:

You’ll note that Luke mentions the command to "do this in remembrance of me," something also written in Paul’s words in the third reference to the origin of the Lord’s Supper – this time by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26:

While Paul, the apostle who spoke of himself as one "untimely born," wasn’t an eyewitness to the origin of the Lord’s Supper on the night Jesus was betrayed, according to verse 23 of this passage he nevertheless "received from the Lord Jesus" what he delivered here to the Corinthians.

A primary purpose of the Lord’s Supper then was to serve as a memorial of the death of Christ. Like the Jewish Passover meal, it was to be perpetual throughout the dispensation of the covenant of which it was a part. God knows us very well. He knows that we tend to forget what we don’t rehearse - even the most important things - in only a few months or years. Surely after 2000 years we would have forgotten had not this memorial been established for us.

I believe that it is important that we refer to Bible teachings with Bible names whenever possible to guard against the erosion of important meanings. When we rename things, it is more likely that we will change their meaning.

So what are the designating words used in the Bible to describe this practice?

The phrase "the Lord’s Supper" appears in Paul’s writing – actually in the 20^th verse of the chapter from which we just read in 1 Corinthians 11. There we read: "Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper…." A little explanation of this negative statement is in order. The Corinthian church had taken this solemn memorial instituted by the Lord and turned it into something that Jesus never intended – a common feast where selfishness was on display. Some ate well and others were left out. Paul corrected this by saying to them up front: "What you’re doing here is not the Lord’s Supper." It should have been. But they had changed it to the extent that it had little resemblance to what was originally laid down by Jesus. If I were to say to you after seeing you again for the first time in ten years, "You’re not the person I once knew," I would mean that you had changed to the point that you were very different.

From this negative reference we learn that Paul referred to this memorial as "The Lord’s Supper" – and so should we today.

The phrases "the Lord’s Table" and "the cup of the Lord" are also used in the New Testament to describe this practice. . In a passage that probably refers to the Lord’s Supper, Paul said to Christians who were being tempted by idol worship in 1 Corinthians 10:21: "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons."

The word "communion" is commonly used today to refer to the Lord’s Supper. This comes from 1 Corinthians 10:16 in the King James Version of the New Testament:

Modern translations like the New American Standard Version render the word "communion" as "sharing."

Another Biblical designation for the practice is "the breaking of bread." This one is found in several passages. Acts 2:42 says of the early church, "And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer."

More on this important passage later…

Any command of Jesus is important to His followers. "If you love me you will keep my commandments," the Master said in John 14:15. Anyone uninterested in keeping the commands of Christ has a problem that goes much deeper than the Lord’s Supper.

We’ve already seen Jesus’ command in the passages we read.

"Take, eat; this is My body," Jesus commanded His disciples in Matthew 26:26. Then again in verse 27, "Drink from it, all of you…."

"Do this in remembrance of me," Jesus said in Luke’s account and in Paul’s.

Yet these commands were given to His disciples back then. How do we know that the Lord’s Supper was intended to be a perpetual command coming down to us today?

We know that this memorial was to be perpetuated as we see how the early church, under the direction of inspired apostles, observed it.

In Acts 2:42 we read of the first century church in Jerusalem (which at that time had 12 living apostles present to guide it): "And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer."

In referring to "the breaking of bread," Luke wasn’t reporting on the physical eating habits of the church. (Actually he did report on their common eating habits four verses later in this chapter and there he used a different phrase. In Acts 2:46 he speaks of their "taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart." It seems reasonable to conclude that he was referring to the Lord’s Supper in verse 42. This conclusion is based on the context of the words that surround it. The apostles’ teaching, fellowship, and prayer are spiritual exercises and Luke was reporting on their steadfast practice of them.

Was Jesus’ command to eat the Lord’s Supper intended to be perpetual? It is apparent that the early church believed it was. The apostles who were Christ’s representatives did too, as the church continued in their teaching.

As mentioned earlier, Paul’s negative statement in 1 Corinthians 11:20, "When you meet together it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper…" contains a strong inference that it was supposed to be a purpose of their meeting.

Acts 20:7 also shows us the continuous way in which the early church observed the Lord’s Supper. There we read of the church in the city of Troas: "And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight."

During the seven days that Paul spent in Troas, there was one especially mentioned here: Sunday – the first day of the week. On that day the church at Troas met to break bread – that is, to partake of the Lord’s Supper. That Paul, an inspired Apostle of Christ, approved of their practice is seen in his participation in it. If it was right for them, it must be right for us.

We perpetually observe the command of Jesus to "do this in remembrance of me" just as the early church did under the direction of the Apostles of Jesus.

There is one more passage that deserves our notice here as we discuss the importance of the Lord’s Supper. We read in John 6:53-58:

These words were spoken by Jesus during what we refer to as His "Bread of Life" sermon. In it He compared Himself to the manna of the Old Testament. Just as the Jews in the wilderness ate the manna and lived, so His followers would need to eat Him.

So do these words have any reference to the Lord’s Supper? If they do then we find in them a most critical reason to partake of communion: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves."

Those students of the Bible who believe that these words do not refer to the Lord’s Supper point out that this sermon was preached well before any teaching on communion was given. They suggest rightly that those who heard it, including Jesus’ closest disciples, would not have understood Jesus’ meaning had it pertained to the Lord’s Supper. The point is well made and has some merit. However, on the other hand Jesus sometimes taught in ways that intentionally excluded the understanding of His detractors. This was sometimes the case in His parables. In Matthew 13:11: "To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted." Not everyone understood the meaning of His words at the time He spoke them. Gospel writers also indicate that even some of the things He taught His disciples were not fully understood until later. For instance, when he washed the disciples’ feet He said in John 13:7: "What I do you do not realize now, but you shall understand hereafter." John also makes a statement about the disciples who didn’t understand the significance of the things said at Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In John 12:16 he said, "These things His disciples did not understand at the first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written of Him, and that they had done these things to Him."

Where else in Christian experience do believers "eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood" if not in the Lord’s Supper? The similarity of words to the communion practice is striking at the very least. I believe there is good reason to believe that these words of Jesus looked forward to the time when believers would partake of the Lord’s Supper and unbelievers would not. But even if your conclusion about this passage is different, we’ve already seen that there is still sufficient reason to believe that partaking of this Supper has vital importance.

Consider Paul’s words to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 11:30 where he dealt with people who had perverted the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. He said to them, "For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep." I take this to mean that because of their abuse of the communion observance, many of the Corinthians were weak, sick, and dead spiritually. This seems reminiscent of Jesus’ words, "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves."

Am I saying that there is something magical or life-giving in the emblems themselves? Not at all. I am suggesting however, that the solemn memorial keeps our memory of the most important part of our faith alive. When we don’t have a reminder, we forget and our faith weakens.

Suffice it to say that the Lord’s Supper is important because it is a command of Christ perpetuated by the Apostles in the early church with a strong inference to its absolutely critical necessity. Yes, I’d say it is important!

In considering how often Christians should partake of the Lord’s Supper, many people, in absence of an expressed Biblical command as to a certain frequency, contend that regularity and frequency isn’t an issue at all. They do it only as often as it is convenient or felt to be meaningful. Diversity abounds in the practice of those who view it only as a matter of expedience. Communion is observed yearly, quarterly, monthly, and/or on holidays like Christmas and Easter. It is observed at weddings and baptisms and even at funerals. Sometimes it isn’t observed at all. Is this what Jesus intended?

That neither Jesus nor the Apostles commanded a frequency in Scripture is clear. But that doesn’t leave us without guidance. We’ve already seen in Acts 2:42 that the early church devoted themselves continually to the breaking of bread.

Is it reasonable that the church today should follow this example of continually devoting itself to the apostles’ teaching? How about fellowship? How about prayer? How about the breaking of bread? This is a strong statement pertaining to frequency. If we follow their example of regularity we have a practice that is surely approved by God because we know it was approved by the Apostles.

Beyond this we have the example of Paul’s visit to Troas in Acts 20:7 where we read, "And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight."

Here we have an example of both frequency and scheduling. The church at Troas "gathered together to break bread" on Sunday or, as Luke writes, "on the first day of the week." He didn’t write, "On the first day of the month," or "On the first day of the quarter." Nor did he write, "On the first Sunday of the communion month." The church at Troas met weekly - on Sunday. Did Paul, an inspired Apostle who had Christ’s authority to correct them, disapprove of their practice? Surely not, as he seems to have waited nearly a whole week to join them in their observance! This passage gives strong approval to a weekly, Sunday practice.

The church at Corinth, as already noted in 1 Corinthians 11:20, was supposed to be coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper. Paul expressed that in the negative. Because of their abuse he said, "Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper…." It was supposed to be, but because of their abuse it was not.

So when did the Corinthians meet together? From 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 it seems obvious that they met every Sunday. There Paul gave instructions about a special offering he was collecting: "On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come."

The Corinthians met on the first day of the week. When they met it was supposed to be to eat the Lord’s Supper. We don’t err if we do the same.

The earliest historical sources outside the Bible confirm this regular weekly frequency. I haven’t time to list them here but B.W. Johnson in his People’s New Testament gives a good summary. He says:

We’ve noted several things about a proper observance. We saw from Matthew and Luke that the Lord’s Supper is to be observed as a remembrance of Christ and what He did for us. From this it is obvious that taking the Lord’s Supper is not something we do without careful thought and consideration of Christ’s death. But it is Paul who gives us the clearest and most concentrated instruction of the proper observance of the Lord’s Supper.

Whoever said we could profit from a bad example must have read 1 Corinthians chapter 11. The abuse of communion by the Corinthians prompted Paul’s meticulous rehearsal of a proper observance – to our benefit. We’ll look at verses 25-30:

Since whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup in an unworthy manner is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord (v. 27) we need to be sure we understand a proper observance. A proper observance of the Lord’s Supper involves at least three things:

First, according to verses 24 and 25, it involves a remembrance of Christ’s death. It entails pondering the awful price He paid for our redemption. It is, therefore, a solemn time with no room for frivolity or inattention. If someone were to laugh or daydream his way through the recounting of the violent death of a close friend we would tell him that he was way out of line! Communion is a time to focus attention. It is a time to think about the means of our redemption and the price Jesus paid to save us. It should naturally provoke an attitude of humility and gratitude in us. (As a side note, such remembering can only be meaningful to a Christian. An unbeliever does not acknowledge God’s means of redemption so it is inappropriate for a non-believer to partake of communion.)

Secondly, according to verse 26, it is a proclamation of Christ’s death. A proclamation is a public announcement. Communion is a time for God’s people, when they are together in the public setting, to announce by their participation that they believe and value God’s means of redemption through Christ’s death. His substitutionary sacrifice is the central issue of our faith. It is the reason we are Christians.

Thirdly, according to verse 28, communion is a time of self examination. "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat…." Such self examination should include a review of our lives, our progress (or lack thereof) in our faith.

In a proper manner of partaking, this remembrance of Christ’s death along with our own self examination should remind us that just as we have been in need of His mercy and grace in times past, so we are yet today. That’s because an honest self-evaluation will most surely bring a realization of failure and falling short.

The Lord’s Supper, if properly observed, ought to bring us right back to the foot of the cross of Jesus where we were when we first began this walk. We’re still in need of his mercy! We still need the benefits of His death! We still need to stay close to Him lest we slip away! And He still holds out to us the means of forgiveness.

As I mentioned when this message started, I have not covered every possible question we might have about communion. But these are the basics. Let me conclude with four questions:

Dave Redick is Minister of the Hwy 20 Church of Christ in Sweet Home, Oregon and Editor of The Preacher's Study. He may be reached at pstudysupport@comcast.net.

Copyright © 1996-2008 by The Preacher's Study. Permission is granted to subscribers to use this document in total or in sermon preparation in the context of the local congregation only. Publishing it in a book, on the Internet, or anyplace beyond the local congregation is prohibited.

All Scripture quotations and references are from the New American Standard Version unless otherwise stated.

[Archive]    [Home]   [Comments]   [Search]