Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 5 Jan, 2012 07:35 PM
I just recently got a copy of a book from a friend who wanted me to tell him if i thought that it was something that every Christian should know when we gather together for communion. I agreed that it did for obvious reasons after researching the whole thing but i wondered how others in Christ might react to it. With that thought, I suddenly figured that this little snippet of information would be an interesting read and stepping stone for discussion on the subject of the Lord's supper. I'd like to know your thoughts on this, if you wouldn't mind.
Here it goes.
THE LORD'S SUPPER:
Rivers of blood have been shed at the hands of Protestant and Catholic Christians alike over the doctrinal intricacies related to Holy Communion.21 The Lord's Supper, once precious and living, became the center of theological debate for centuries. Tragically, it moved from a dramatic and concrete picture of Christ's body and blood to a study in abstract and metaphysical thought. We cannot concern ourselves with the theological minutiae that surround the Lord's Supper in this book. But clearly Protestants (as well as Catholics) do not practice the Supper the way it was observed in the first century. For the early Christians, the Lord's Supper was a festive communal meal.22 The mood was one of celebration and joy When believers first gathered for the meal, they broke the bread and passed it around. Then they ate their meal, which then concluded after the cup was passed around. The Lord's Supper was essentially a Christian banquet. And there was no clergyman to officiate.23 Today, tradition has forced us to take the Supper as a tongue-tickling thimble of grape juice and a tiny, tasteless bite-size cracker. The Supper is often taken in an atmosphere of solemnity. We are told to remember the horrors of our Lord's death and to reflect on our sins. In addition, tradition has taught us that taking the Lord's Supper can be a dangerous thing. Thus many contemporary Christians would never take Communion without an ordained clergyman present. Often, they point to 1 Corinthians 11:27-33. In verse 27, the apostle Paul does warn believers not to participate in the Lord's Supper "unworthily." In this instance, however, he appears to have been speaking to church members who were dishonoring the Supper by not waiting for their poor brethren to eat with them, as well as those who were getting drunk on the wine. TRUNCATING THE MEAL So why was the full meal replaced with a ceremony including only the bread and the cup? Here is the story. In the first and early second centuries, the early Christians called the Lord's Supper the "love feast."24 At that time, they took the bread and cup in the context of a festive meal. But around the time of Tertullian, the bread and the cup began to be separated from the meal. By the late second century, this separation was complete .15 Some scholars have argued that the Christians dropped the meal because they wanted to keep the Eucharist from becoming profaned by the participation of unbelievers." This may be partly true. But it is more likely that the growing influence of pagan religious ritual removed the Supper from the joyful, down-to-earth, nonreligious atmosphere of a meal in someone's living room.' By the fourth century, the love feast was prohibited among Christians!28 With the abandonment of the meal, the terms breaking of bread and Lord's Supper disappeared.29 The common term for the now truncated ritual (just the bread and the cup) was the Eucharist.30 Irenaeus (130-200) was one of the first to call the bread and cup an offering.31 After him, it began to be called the "offering" or "sacrifice." The altar table where the bread and cup were placed came to be seen as an altar where the victim was offered.32 The Supper was no longer a community event. It was rather a priestly ritual that was to be watched at a distance. Throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, there was an increasing sense of awe and dread associated with the table where the sacred Eucharist was celebrated." It became a somber ritual. The joy that had once been a part of it had vanished.34 The mystique associated with the Eucharist was due to the influence of the pagan mystery religions, which were clouded with superstition.35 With this influence, the Christians began to ascribe sacred overtones to the bread and the cup. They were viewed as holy objects in and of themselves.36 Because the Lord's Supper became a sacred ritual, it required a sacred person to administer it.37 Enter now the priest offering the sacrifice of the Mass.38 He was believed to have the power to call God down from heaven and confine Him to a piece of bread.39 Around the tenth century, the meaning of the word body changed in Christian literature. Previously, Christian writers used the word body to refer to one of three things: (1) the physical body of Jesus, (2) the church, or (3) the bread of the Eucharist.
The early church fathers saw the church as a faith community that identified itself by the breaking of bread. But by the tenth century, there was a shift in thinking and language. The word body was no longer used to refer to the church. It was only used to refer to the Lord's physical body or the bread of the Eucharist.'� Consequently, the Lord's Supper became far removed from the idea of the church coming together to celebrate the breaking of bread.4' The vocabulary change reflected this practice. The Eucharist had ceased to be part of a joyful communal meal but came to be viewed as sacred on its own-even as it sat on the table. It became shrouded in a religious mist. Viewed with awe, it was taken with glumness by the priest and completely removed from the communal nature of the ekklesia. All of these factors gave rise to the doctrine of transubstantiation. In the fourth century, the belief that the bread and wine changed into the Lord's actual body and blood was explicit. Transubstantiation, however, was the doctrine that gave a theological explanation of how that change occurred.' (This doctrine was worked out from the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries.) With the doctrine of transubstantiation, God's people approached the elements with a feeling of fear. They were reluctant even to approach them." When the words of the Eucharist were uttered, it was believed that the bread literally became God. All of this turned the Lord's Supper into a sacred ritual performed by sacred people and taken out of the hands of God's people. So deeply entrenched was the medieval idea that the bread and cup were an "offering" that even some of the Reformers held to it.' While contemporary Protestant Christians have discarded the Catholic notion that the Lord's Supper is a sacrifice, they have continued to embrace the Catholic practice of the Supper. Observe a Lord's Supper service (often called "Holy Communion") in most Protestant churches and you will observe the following: The Lord's Supper is a bite-size cracker (or a small piece of bread) and a shot glass of grape juice (or wine). As in the Catholic church, it is removed from the meal. The mood is somber and glum, just as it is in the Catholic church. Congregants are told by the pastor that they must examine themselves with regard to sin before they partake of the elements, a practice that came from John Calvin." Like the Catholic priest, many pastors will sport clerical robes for the occasion. But always, the pastor administers the Supper and recites the words of institution, "This is my body," before dispensing the elements to the congregation.`}6 With only a few minor tweaks, all of this is medieval Catholicism through and through.
SUMMARY...
In the same vein, the Lord's Supper, when separated from its proper context of a full meal, turns into a strange, pagan-like rite.'' The Supper has become an empty ritual officiated by a clergyman, rather than a shared-life experience enjoyed by the church. It has become a morbid religious exercise, rather than a joyous festival-a stale individualistic ceremony, rather than a meaningful corporate event. As one scholar put it, "It is not in doubt that the Lord's Supper began as a family meal or a meal of friends in a private house ... the Lord's Supper moved from being a real meal into being a symbolic meal ... the Lord's Supper moved from bare simplicity to elaborate splendor ... the celebration of the Lord's Supper moved from being a lay function to a priestly function. In the New Testament itself, there is no indication that it was the special privilege or duty of anyone to lead the worshipping fellowship in the Lord's Supper. 1151 When Israel had departed from God's original thought, the prophet cried: "Thus says the LORD, `Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; and you will find rest for your souls"' (Jeremiah 6:16, NASB). In the same way, can we shun the vain traditions of men and return to the ancient paths ... those holy traditions that were given to us by Jesus Christ and His apostles ?
QUESTION: The apostle Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, in which he reminds believers of Jesus' words when instituting the Lord's Supper, seem to emphasize communion as a time to remember Christ's sacrificial death. Naturally, then, many believers use it as a time to confess their sin and remember God's mercy. It is hardly an "empty ritual" as you describe it. Your thoughts?
ANSWER: We agree that the Lord's Supper is not an empty ritual for all Christians. At the same time, we regret that so many churches have lost the focus the first Christians had when they celebrated communion. The early Christians took the supper in an atmosphere of joy and celebration. By it, they proclaimed Christ's victorious death and His future coming. They also took it as a full meal in fellowship with the body of Christ, the church. This is the way it was handed down to us by Jesus and the apostles. Therefore we ought to ask ourselves: Is stripping the Lord's Supper from the meal and making it a somber occasion a development or a departure? Have we improved upon what Jesus and the apostles passed down to us, or have we strayed from it?
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 10:00 AM
By the way, some scholArs sy that Jesus didn't eat the pAssover meal because he HAD to be the pAssover Lamb that everyone must eat as well as the bread of life he spoke of. So they say that thias meal haad to be one of the meals during the feast of unleavened breAd.
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 10:09 AM
Interesting... Agapeton, I would like to know if you and the author's writings that you have posted are speaking about the LAST SUPPER, which Jesus ate with His disciples?... OR are you speaking about THE LORD'S SUPPER WHICH IS KNOWN AS THE COMMUNION which JESUS INSTUTIED DURING THIS meal?
In case you DIDN'T KNOW, there were TWO things that took place during this Passover meal. So which one are you and the author speaking about, because you make references to what Paul speaks about eating of the meal before each other and the poor, but I wonder if you realize what Paul is speaking about here in I Corinthians chapter 11? Because what Jesus did in the taking and blessings of the bread and cup, or not the same as the eating of the Passover meal He ate with his disciples AFTER, he had them to eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
I am also interested in knowing the title of this book from which you have posted, and the name of the author. I would like to read for myself what the author is saying and have this book you speak about for my library. Thanks.
When you read I Corinthians chpater 11, you find that not only did Jesus eat of the Passover MEAL with the disciples, but He also instutited HIS SUPPER, and this is why it is called the LORD'S SUPPER OR COMMUNION separate from the meal, and different from the eating of the main meal of the Passover, and these are two different things that Paul is speaking about when he tells them to eat at home if anyone is hungry: In I Corinthians chapter 11 this is what's written BEFORE THE EATING OF THE LAST SUPPER. Jesus institutes the Communion which is known as the LORD'S SUPPER.
I Corinthians chapter 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, �This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.� In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, �This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.� For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord�s death until he comes.
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world.
So would you mind explaining which supper you are speaking about here from these passages.
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 10:25 AM
John chapter 6:26 Jesus answered, �Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.�
28 Then they asked him, �What must we do to do the works God requires?� Jesus answered, �The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.�
30 So they asked him, �What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: �He gave them bread from heaven to eat.��
32 Jesus said to them, �Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.�
34 �Sir,� they said, �always give us this bread.� Then Jesus declared, �I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father�s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.�
41 At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, �I am the bread that came down from heaven.� They said, �Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, �I came down from heaven�?�
43 �Stop grumbling among yourselves,� Jesus answered. �No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. It is written in the Prophets: �They will all be taught by God.� Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.�
52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, �How can this man give us his flesh to eat?� Jesus said to them, �Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.� He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
Matthew 26:26. While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, �Take and eat; this is my body.�
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, �Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the[b] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father�s kingdom.�
30 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
Luke also records for us this:The Last Supper - Luke 22:7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, �Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover.� �Where do you want us to prepare for it?� they asked. He replied, �As you enter the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him to the house that he enters, and say to the owner of the house, �The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?� He will show you a large room upstairs, all furnished. Make preparations there.�
13 They left and found things just as Jesus had told them. So they prepared the Passover. When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table.
15 And he said to them, �I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.�
17 After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, �Take this and divide it among you. 18 For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.�
19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, �This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.�
20 In the same way, AFTER the supper he took the cup, saying, �This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. But the hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table. The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed. But woe to that man who betrays him!�
Interesting..
Therefore, Agapeton, I would like to know if this what you have posted is speaking about the LAST SUPPER Jesus had with His disciples, OR are you speaking about the LORD'S SUPPER which Jesus HIMSELF INSTITUED and is KNOW AS THE LORD'S SUPPER OR COMMUNION of the Bread and drinking of the cup?
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 10:30 AM
ET, the last supper and the Lord's supper are one and the same since Paul put them together in the text. The same thing Jesus was doing with the disciples is what he told them to do also. Hence do THIS in remembrance of me. The whole precedence of the meal is Jewish symbolism and ritualistic in nature. That is why it is in Matthew (originally written to the Jews by a Jew) mentions it and Luke writes it in his gospel (Luke met Paul in the Gentile nations and tagged along with him. Some say that Luke was the man in the vision Paul saw to ask him to go to his town. The first time "we" is used after that meaning Luke started traveling with them.). Tradition says that Luke got these things from Paul and wrote them in the two volume "book" of the Gospel-Acts. I don't have the name of the book or the name of the author right now, ET, cause I'm at work but I'll post it when I get back home. Ok? I don't know much about him either but I did like some of the stuff he said though.
Still resaearching his stuff. That suffice, sister?
Btw, I really hate my BB. *inserts angry faced dude icon here*
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 12:47 PM
I think what ella was saying agapeton, was that when jesus broke the bread and give it to the disciples and said this is my body.... then the cup this is my blood... then they ate meal that was not the meal! Maybe I am wrong I dont have time to research cause I am on my lunch break but I thinbk thats what she was saying it was 2 things they ate after he said those things about the bread being hgis body and so on
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 01:01 PM
Agapeton said: ET, the last supper and the Lord's supper are one and the same since Paul put them together in the text. The same thing Jesus was doing with the disciples is what he told them to do also.
Ella syas: No, sorry Agapeton, the meal and the Instutition of the LORD'S SUPPER ARE NOT THE SAME. The happened at the same tiime DURING THE MEAL, BUT what Jesus did was seprarte from the eating of the Passover meal...
Maybe you did READ all that I posted to know the difference...
Agaelton said: Hence do THIS in remembrance of me. The whole precedence of the meal is Jewish symbolism and ritualistic in nature. That is why it is in Matthew (originally written to the Jews by a Jew) mentions it and Luke writes it in his gospel (Luke met Paul in the Gentile nations and tagged along with him. Some say that Luke was the man in the vision Paul saw to ask him to go to his town. The first time "we" is used after that meaning Luke started traveling with them.). Tradition says that Luke got these things from Paul and wrote them in the two volume "book" of the Gospel-Acts.
Ella syas: Agapeton this has nothing to do with wht some say, and what others say, Jesus is the one who INSTUTIED WHAT WE, AS CHRISTIAN BELIEVERS CALLED THE LORD'S SUPPER OR COMMUNION. This si the taking of the blessings of the bread, and blessings of the cup, juts as Jesus did, and eatign and drinking there of ... This was NOT THE SAME AS WHEN JESUS AND THE DISCIPLES ATE OF THE PASSOVER DINNER. Jesus illustarts the meaning of this speaicl event in what I posted about Him being the bread of life and the REASON WHY WE EAT THE BREAD (WHICH IS SYMBOLIC OF HIS BODY) AND DRINK OF THE CUP (WHICH IS SYMBOLIC OF HIS BLOOD).. it doesn;t matter what men say ot think or their opinions, it matter what Jesus said and WE AS CHRISTIANS BELIEVERS ARE TO DO THIS IN REMEMBERANCE OF HIS BRUSED DYING BODY, AND THE HIS INNOCNET BLODD THAT WAS SHED FOR THE FORGIVENNESS OF OUR SINS.
... suppose I'm trying to "figer" out your's and the author's objects to, or what it is that you are questioning, or if you are questioing the fact that the pastor and elders of the church are the ones who administer the Communion, that is given out to the church members, or if you what it is you are seeking. In otherword what's your question or point, intent and prupsoe of questioning that you are trying to make, and do you undertsand the purpose of the Communion or Lord's Supper spiritually that Jesus institued? Its very clear that AFTER JESUS DID THIS SPEACILA OFFERING, they then ate of the Passover supper.
Agapeton said: I don't have the name of the book or the name of the author right now, ET, cause I'm at work but I'll post it when I get back home. Ok? I don't know much about him either but I did like some of the stuff he said though.
Ella; Yes, please do becasue I owuld like to read it and find out what his points are and wehter or not he is in agreement with what God says or juts voicing his own OPIINIONS as an unbeliever.
BE AWARE AND SO WARNED: One thing for sure, care must be taken when you are trying to denounce or argue, or question the partaking of the Lord's Supper/Communion of our Lord that He Himself INSTITUED in the body of Christ, and exhort us to do as often as possible in rememberance of Him... trying to oppose or dencounce or discredit this special scared event in the church of eating of the bread and drinking of the cup... that's walking on dangerous grounds in the pits of satan's blasphemy of our Lord's body and His blood... and God will vindicate such denouncment and declare it as unbelief of all who oppose this offering to Him, which is in and of its self is apostasy!
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 01:14 PM
Agaoeton and Elsiah there is nothing to research.. It is already Written as we are suppose to know... What is needed is TO SEARCH he word of God, and its BY FAITH THAT WE BELIEVE WHAT IS WRITTEN IN GOD'S WORD.
How does one research what God said outside fo God's Word of Truth, the Bible?
How does one research FAITH other than from within ones own heart, to have faith to believe otherwise, ITS CALLED UNBELEIF!
You either believe the Bible for it is written it is God's word or you don't...
I believe what is already written, I need not researhc what man's opinions say or may say that Jesus meant.:rocknroll:
Can I get your thoughts on this regaurding the Lord's Supper...
Posted : 6 Jan, 2012 06:58 PM
ella I meant I didnt have time to read those specific scriptures..lol I was pretty sure Jesus said do all this in emeberence of me and then they ate afterwards but I wasnt real sure, thats all I means, If I say research then thats usualy what I mean read the bible..lol ther is nothing else to do:applause:
