____________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________