____________________________________________________
THE GOSPEL OBSERVER
____________________________________________________
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations...teaching
them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you
always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19,20).
____________________________________________________
October 31, 2004
____________________________________________________
Contents:
1) Are We Using Enough Bread and Fruit of the Vine?
(Tom Edwards)
2) News & Notes
____________________________________________________
-1-
Are We Using Enough Bread and Fruit of the Vine?
by Tom Edwards
Some of us considered recently of just how much of the
unleavened bread and fruit of the vine is necessary for taking
the Lord's Supper. For there are some individuals who feel
that the small portions we use -- just a "pinch" of the bread
and a couple "thimblefuls" of the fruit of the vine -- are not
enough to be called a "supper," any more than a "sprinkling" or
a "pouring" could be called a "baptism" (immersion). And so it
has been suggested by some people that, if we are going to use
such small quantities, perhaps then we should more accurately
call the communion "the Lord's Pinch and Sip." Maybe you, too,
have questions -- and some troubling ones -- about the
necessary amounts that should be used in observing the Lord's
Supper; so let us consider this topic today.
First of all, would we not find this phrase, "the Lord's
Pinch and Sip," very demeaning for something that should be
regarded as the most important memorial this world has ever
known -- and ever shall? For this expression is actually
focusing on the wrong thing -- the physical instead of the
spiritual.
In a similar manner, if we would consume just a little bit
more of the bread and the fruit of the vine than we normally
do, would it then be all right to call it a "snack"? It might
be the quantity of a snack, but I think we can each see how out
of place such a term would be -- and how flippant,
disrespectful, and irreverent -- to use it to refer to the
Lord's Supper. Even though "snack" is not an "evil" term, it
would be truly improper to use it in reference to the
communion. For it would be emphasizing the wrong thing -- the
physical emblems -- rather than the highly important truth of
what those emblems stand for and that intimate communion one
has with God while partaking.
And if one is putting all the emphasis on the physical,
and thinking that he or she must eat the same quantity of the
Lord's Supper as in any other supper, then would it not be
possible for that individual to become emotionally troubled
over whether he or she had actually taken enough or not -- even
after consuming a handful of bread and 16 ounces of the fruit
of the vine? Could there not be doubts?
We need to remember, though, that the Lord's Supper is a
"spiritual" feast for commemorating Jesus' death, and that is
what our attention is to be centered on. To not do so properly,
one can actually become "guilty of the body and the blood of
the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:27) and, thus, incur "judgment to himself"
(v. 29). Paul points out to the Corinthians that some had been
guilty of this very thing, and "For this reason many among you
are weak and sick, and a number sleep" (v. 30).
What further emphasizes the spiritual nature of the Lord's
Supper is Jesus' promise to be present and also partake of it
in the kingdom with them (Matt. 26:29) -- reminding us, too, of
His words that "For where two or three have gathered together
in My name, there I am in their midst" (Matt. 18:20).
Obviously, Jesus is not physically present when doing this; but
spiritually He is. God's kingdom is the church, spiritual in
nature and "not of this world" (Jn. 18:36). As the Bible shows,
the Christian is in the kingdom; and, therefore, made to sit in
"heavenly places, in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6. See also Col.
1:13; Rev. 1:9).
The question has been raised, however, "Why bother with
the physical stuff [in the Lord's Supper] if it's wholly
spiritual? Why not just stop having physical elements at all?"
The best way to answer this is to acknowledge that the
bread and fruit of the vine are to be used because Jesus
Himself instituted these physical elements to represent His
body and blood, respectively, and which are to be taken in
remembrance of Him (1 Cor. 11:23-25).
Also, we can liken this to the physical words that are
printed in the New Testament. They are made from ink and on
paper, but they can become within our hearts "spirit and life"
(Jn. 6:63). What do we emphasize about the gospel, though, the
ink and the paper -- over the spiritual illumination of those
physical words? It was God's intent that the gospel would be
recorded, written down, put into physical form so that we can
read and understand (Eph. 3:1-5) and become the Lord's
spiritually-minded people by it. So we certainly don't want to
disregard the physical nature of the gospel -- or we will never
arrive at the spiritual (See Rom. 10:17; 1:16; 1 Pet. 1:22,23).
In similar manner, we partake of the physical elements in
the Lord's Supper, but they evoke spiritual meaning to us, as
they symbolize the body and blood of our Savior who made the
atonement for every transgressor. As Jesus states concerning
the taking of these emblems, "...do this in remembrance of
Me..." (1 Cor. 11:24,25). This, therefore, is the purpose of
the Lord's Supper. Eating larger quantities of this supper,
however, will not enable us to remember more of Jesus.
In addition, the very fact that the Lord referred to the
bread as His body, and the fruit of the vine as His blood,
stresses the spiritual nature of this meal. But as we think of
these physical emblems, would we feel that by eating more of
the bread, we would then have more of Christ's body? Or that
by drinking more of the fruit of the vine, we would then have
more of His blood? When we take of the communion, some
brethren eat slightly larger pieces of bread than others do,
but we are still partaking of the same one body of Christ.
Some will drink slightly more grape juice than others drink,
but we are still sharing of the same blood. One is not really
benefiting more by eating or drinking more than one who would
eat or drink less. These differences make no differences when
it comes to the purpose of the Lord's Supper and our communion
with God.
If, however, we would begin eating large quantities, as if
it were a literal meal that would satisfy our hunger, we would
then be making something out of the communion that the Lord had
never intended; and this is exactly what Paul had prohibited in
his instructions to the Corinthians. For some had corrupted
the Lord's Supper by making a mere carnal meal out of it.
Paul, therefore, admonishes them in 1 Corinthians 11:22, by
saying, "What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and
drink?...." and goes on to warn in verse 34, "If anyone is
hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together
for judgment...."
Therefore, the Lord's Supper was not for the purpose of
satisfying hungry bellies. So by using the small quantities
that we do, it helps us obey Paul's charge and keeps the focus
where it should be -- on the spiritual aspect of the meal, and
not the physical.
This instruction for the hungry to eat at home before they
came to church to take of the Lord's Supper is also another
indication that the quantities to be used in the communion
would be small. For they were not to use the communion to
satisfy their hunger needs. And, in addition, if the only way
that the communion could be a "supper" would mean consuming the
amount normally eaten in a supper, then would not these people
be guilty of gluttony, who obeyed the instruction to eat their
meals at home and then thirty minutes later, for example, would
be taking of the Lord's Supper? Have you ever tried to do two
Thanksgiving Day meals -- one at 2 PM and the other an hour or
two later?
In looking at the word "supper," in referring to the
communion, it comes from the Greek word "deipnon," which is
also translated three times in the NASB as "banquets" and once
as "banquet." So could we not, therefore, think of the
communion as being even more than a "supper"? For a banquet is
a "lavish meal" or "feast," an "abundant meal"; and to "feast"
is to "eat sumptuously." Does this mean, however, that a group
of 50 Christians should be lavished with hundreds of communion
trays and gallons of grape juice to make it more like a
banquet? And then, again, isn't a banquet with more variety
than one food item and one kind of drink? Would that mean,
though, that we should then add to the Lord's Supper to give it
an abundant assortment -- apple in the pig's mouth, piping hot
roast beef and mashed potatoes steeped in gravy, steaming
buttered corn and green beans, grapes dangling over the table's
edge, dinner rolls bulging out of the basket, cakes and figs,
pumpkin pie a la mode, a table sprawled with a wide variety of
food and drink? That sounds like a "banquet."
But the Lord's Supper is not a banquet or meal in that
sense. So why, therefore, is the term "Supper" used to refer
to the communion?
First of all, because that is what the Bible calls it; but
it actually calls it even more than merely "a supper" --
rather, it is "the Lord's Supper" (1 Cor. 11:20). So we can
feel very comfortable in using that phrase; and when we do, we
should know that we are talking about something much more than
merely an ordinary meal.
For what is the purpose for a supper, an ordinary meal,
generally speaking? Is it not to fill our bellies and nourish
our bodies? Is that, though, the purpose for the Lord's
Supper? As we have seen, it is not. For in the Lord's Supper,
the purpose shifts from the physical to the spiritual. In it,
we are concerned with nourishing our spiritual man, realizing
that "Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that
proceeds from the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4) -- and the command,
with regard to the communion, to "do this in remembrance of Me"
is one of those instructions.
We can liken the spiritual nature of the Lord's Supper to
that "food" which Jesus speaks of in John 4:31-34. In this
passage, He is not emphasizing physical food, but rather the
spiritual food that is acquired through doing the will of the
Father; and, therefore, He exhorts others to "Do not work for
the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to
eternal life..." (Jn. 6:27). So "food" doesn't always mean
physical "food," nor should we think of a "supper" as always
meaning what we would generally think of a supper, when it is
being used in a spiritual sense instead -- such as in the case
of the "marriage supper of the Lamb" (Rev. 19:9), where we know
there will be no eating of physical food at all -- but there
will be intimate communion with God!
The term "Supper" in "the Lord's Supper," therefore,
expresses this intimate communion the Christian has with the
Lord, as well as with other saints. For we need to realize
that eating together, during the days of the apostle Paul,
connoted more of a deep personal relationship between people
than it does in our time. Back then, it showed a close
association these individuals had with each other; and the
command, therefore, to "not even...eat with such a one" (1 Cor.
5:11), as a disciplinary action, would have had more of a
humiliating impact on the one being socially ostracized. So
the very idea of having a "supper" together would indicate very
close ties or intimate associations these people had with each
other.
But in the Lord's Supper, it is a way in which the
Christian communes with God Himself; and so it expresses the
intimate spiritual relationship the child of God has with the
Lord and fellow saints. As mentioned previously, even Jesus is
partaking with them -- but, obviously, spiritually speaking
(Matt. 26:29; Matt.18:20) -- and it is not necessary to take
large quantities of the bread and fruit of the vine in order
for this to be so.
Rather than teaching that a large amount of the bread and
fruit of the vine must be taken in order for the Lord's Supper
to be observed scripturally, we infer the opposite to be true.
That to take too much would make something out of the supper
for which it is not intended. For since it is a spiritual
feast, larger quantities of bread and the fruit of the vine
cannot make it more so, but can detract from it and pervert it
when consuming too much.
And one last closing thought: do you remember those (of
John 6:26) who sought the Lord only for the bread? I'm not
saying that people would want to take of larger portions in the
communion merely for a similar reason; but by taking just a
little, are we not then showing that we are seeking after the
spiritual significance of this meal -- instead of merely the
physical aspect of it? It doesn't matter to us whether we can
feel full in our bellies. Rather, we are focusing on Jesus and
His love for us, as seen at Calvary, while we take of this
spiritual feast that commemorates His death. We realize that
this memorial supper is a time for thankfully meditating on
Jesus' atonement for the sins of the world and being truly
mindful of the great importance of it (1 Cor. 11:23-29).
May the Lord's Supper, therefore, always be to us
something more important than even our "necessary food" (cf.
Job 23:12).
____________________________________________________
-2-
News & Notes
The Morris Road church of Christ in Gulfport, Mississippi,
begins their Gospel Meeting today (Oct. 31) with Steven Deaton,
as the guest speaker. The weeknight services will begin at
7:15, and there will also be Monday-through-Friday classes at
10:30 AM. The theme for all of the lessons will be on "God's
First Institution: The Family." Sunday services will be 9:30,
10:30, and 6. There will also be congregational singing for
this Saturday (Oct. 30) that begins at 6 PM.
We were sorry to hear of the passing of Christie Holt's
grandmother and offer our sympathy to all the family and
friends. Let us keep them in prayer.
Also on our prayer list is Eloise Craver (who recently
picked up a bad case of poison ivy), Luther Shuff (who will
have to be scheduled for some out-patient surgery soon), Joe
McGregor (for the inflammation in his joints), and Joe's
brother-in-law Bill Pierce (who is not doing well physically).
We welcome those of you who are visiting with us today --
and hope to see you again soon!
____________________________________________________
MYRTLE STREET CHURCH OF CHRIST
1022 Myrtle Street
Denham Springs, LA 70726
(225) 664-8208
Sunday: 9:15 AM, 10:00 AM, 4:00 PM
Wednesday: 7:00 PM
evangelist/editor: Tom Edwards (225) 667-4520
e-mail: tedwards@onemain.com
web site: http://home.onemain.com/~tedwards/go
____________________________________________________