An Overview of the Lord's Supper (Part Two)

 An Overview of the Lord’s Supper (Part Two).  Compared to the central position that the Lord’s Supper holds in regular Christian worship, surprisingly few verses outside the four gospel accounts mention its observance. Though often pressed into a Communion application, John 6 does not mention the Communion ceremony.

Jesus explained to the Jewish crowds who had just eaten the miraculous meal of the loaves and fish, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves” (John 6:26). Instead of portraying Communion, Jesus pointed to himself. “I am the Bread of Life, whoever comes to me shall not hunger” (John 6:35). “Everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:40). The crowd understood what Jesus was saying about himself, he came from heaven (John 6:42), but misunderstood his imagery: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (John 6:52). They confused the subject with its metaphor.

The subject of John 6 is the person of Christ, not the work of Christ, per se. The metaphor of believing was eating. “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:53-54). Yet, the repeated phrase, “raise him up on the last day” (vv. 40, 54), clarifies the confusion. Belief in the Son is the point, not the eating of Communion. Ritual doesn’t impart eternal life, only belief in Jesus does.

One of the two passages outside the four gospel accounts that rightly mentions the Lord’s Supper is Acts 2:42-27. In it, the church found a summary of its four main activities: “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (vs. 42). Because it appears in a list and uses the definite article, The Breaking of Bread operates like a proper name grammatically.

Verse 42, therefore, is unlike verse 46: “And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts.” Thus, the second mention of “breaking of bread” in this paragraph was not the Communion (vs. 42), but a general description that modified the main verb, received. In other words, The Breaking of Bread happened when they were gathered for worship service, whereas house-to-house meal sharing throughout the week characterized the early church.

The second passage is 1 Corinthians 10:14-22. The Communion illustrates Paul’s overall logic as to why the church should withstand the temptation to observe both paganism and Christianity simultaneously (i.e., syncretism). “Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry” (1 Cor. 10:14). “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). The Communion is both communal and exclusive. “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor. 10:17). “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” (1 Cor. 10:21). Partaking any ceremonial table is an act of worship. Though idolatry is impotent (vs. 19), Christ will not share his glory with demons. He is rightly jealous for his people (vs. 22).