Amazon Books Wherefore Art Thou Come Meditations on the Lords Supper

1. My Body, My Blood -- Literal or Figurative?

y Dr. Ralph F. Wilson
Audio (21:00)
http://www.jesuswalk.com/mp3files/lords-supper/1_body_blood.mp3

Simon Dewey (British painter, 1962- ), Last Supper (2001)

Let's begin our study of the Lord's Supper with Jesus' basic argument at the Table relating bread to his body and wine to his blood. We tin can analyze this statement every bit follows:

Bread	has a relationship to	Jesus' Body
Vino	has a relationship to	Jesus' Blood

Exactly what does this hateful? I wonder. But what is the human relationship of one to another I realize that the Lord's Supper is a mystery that tin't be reduced to pure logic. Merely what is Jesus proverb?

The Words of Establishment

Let's consider his Words of Institution of the Lord's Supper, that is, the words by which Jesus began and commanded constancy of this observance.

Matthew 26	Mark fourteen	Luke 22	1 Cor eleven
26While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave information technology to his disciples, proverb, "Take and eat; this is my body."	22While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, maxim, "Have it; this is my body."	19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke information technology, and gave information technology to them, maxim, "This is my body given for y'all; practise this in remembrance of me."	23bThe Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my trunk, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
27Then he took the cup, gave cheers and offered it to them, maxim, "Potable from information technology, all of you lot. 28 This is my claret of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.	23So he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from information technology. 24"This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them.	20In the same way, afterward the supper he took the loving cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.	25In the aforementioned way, later supper he took the cup, saying, "This loving cup is the new covenant in my blood; practise this, whenever you drinkable information technology, in remembrance of me."

As you lot consider Jesus' words, what human relationship or indicate of correspondence is there between the staff of life and his trunk? Between the wine and his claret?

As I suggested in the introduction, theologians accept spent lots of free energy arguing about this. As I think well-nigh information technology, I comes down to 2 possibilities, using the bread in our thoughts:

Breadstuff	has a literal relationship to	Jesus' Body
Bread	has a figurative relationship to	Jesus' Body

The Argument for a Literal Interpretation of the Words of Institution

The largest branches of the Church building, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Churches, interpret Jesus' words literally, that is, they contend that the verb "is" must exist taken literally, as "This is my body" rather than "This signifies my body." Catholic theologians offering several arguments for taking this literally:

1. Jesus discourse in John six:54-57 uses very literal language, which can simply refer to the Eucharist. Since the oversupply of disciples interpreted Jesus as espousing some kind of cannibalism and stopped following him as a result, Jesus must take meant, "eat my flesh and beverage my blood" literally, that is, looking forrard to partaking of the Lord's Supper.¹ We'll consider this passage in item in chapter 9.
2. Nowhere in the Words of Establishment is a hint that a figurative estimation should exist considered. Therefore, in the absence of whatever sign that this should be figurative, we must accept it literally.
3. Paul'due south linguistic communication, "Guilty of the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11:27) requires that Christ is corporeally (i.e. bodily) nowadays in the Lord's Supper.
4. The Church has taken the Words of Institution literally rather than figuratively from the primeval times. This is an statement from tradition, of course, not from Scripture. But how the primeval churches understood the Lord's Supper may requite united states some clues to how the Apostles understood Jesus' command. (See my "Excursus: A Brief History of Estimation of the Real Presence." www.jesuswalk.com/lords-supper/history-existent-presence.htm)

The Argument for a Figurative Interpretation of the Words of Institution

Only there's some other possibility, which has been carefully reasoned past Protestant theologians:

1. Jesus' words should be seen in the context of many parables and figurative references. For example, Jesus says, "I am the Vine" (John 15:i), the Door (John 10:9), the Bread (John 6:41). Jesus' main method of teaching was through parables; for Jesus, parables were not the exception but the rule, though when necessary he explained the parables to his disciples (Marking iv:34).
2. Jesus held the bread in his hand when he said "This is my body," at the same time that the disciples could meet his physical torso. In that location was a clear stardom between the 2. The context therefore requires a figurative estimation.
3. The phrase "this cup is a new covenant" (Luke 22:20) surely doesn't hateful that the concrete cup is the new covenant. That phrase is conspicuously symbolic and figurative. So are the words almost the bread beingness Jesus' body.
4. John half-dozen:27-59 uses assuming terms to explain a spiritual feeding on Christ. This passage concludes, "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for goose egg. The words I accept spoken to you are spirit and they are life" (John 6:63), suggesting a figurative feeding rather than a literal, bodily feeding. Other indicators in the passage also bespeak to a figurative interpretation. We'll examine this passage more fully in affiliate nine.
5. Paul'due south reference to "sinning against the trunk and blood of the Lord" in 1 Corinthians 11:17 does non require the Existent Presence to explain information technology.
6. The Existent Presence (rather than a spiritual presence) in the elements isn't taught in the early church for at least 75 years and perhaps twice that. If the Real Presence and transubstantiation were the church's primitive understanding, you lot'd expect much earlier a clear exposition of this doctrine. Even after an understanding of the Real Presence was common, many Church building Fathers recognized a spiritual interpretation of the Words of Institution. (See my "Excursus: A Brief History of Estimation of the Real Presence.")

I know from personal experience the need to justify one's doctrine and practice past Scripture, even when the Scriptures don't quite fit. Looking back, I can see places where I've been guilty of that. But to me, the arguments for a figurative estimation of the Words of Establishment are quite compelling. I believe Jesus was speaking figuratively and symbolically.

Remember, we take agreed to respectfully and lovingly disagree with one another. What do you lot know? Perhaps we can learn from and be enriched by each other's understanding. (Notation: I will exclude from the online discussion any who, in my stance, are sarcastic and unloving in their manner.)

Q1. How does your item understanding of the breadstuff and the wine (literal or figurative) help you lot grow closer to Christ when partaking of the Lord'south Supper? (Note: This question is not your excuse to argue, but to larn from one another'due south personal experience of partaking.)
http://www.joyfulheart.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=457

The Trunk and Blood of the Lord

Having said that, we must realize that the Apostle Paul himself used the phrase, "the trunk and blood of the Lord" (1 Corinthians eleven:27) and "body of Christ" and "claret of Christ" (ane Corinthians ten:xvi) with reference to the elements of the Lord'southward Supper. He used it figuratively, I believe. But nevertheless, his very words should keep us from a careless, flippant fashion towards the elements of communion. This is a sacred meal we eat before the Lord in obedience to his words. While the elements are bread and vino, all the same they are more than to us, since for u.s. they are reminders of the extent to which Jesus went for our salvation. When the minister prays a prayer of consecration, such as, "Fix apart these elements from a common to a sacred use," they become sacred in the sense that nosotros must care for them with reverence and respect, not with callous disregard as did the sinning Corinthians who Paul reprimands.

Non "Mere Symbols"

It's easy to react against some corruption or misunderstanding with an opposite but equal extreme. Some Protestants accept come to refer to the elements of the Lord's Supper as "mere symbols," actually using "mere" (an adjective significant "being nothing more than" to modify the word "symbols," as if symbols are to exist despised and minimized). How sorry. Millard Erickson cites one Baptist leader who calls such an extreme "the doctrine of the Real Absence" of Christ in the sacrament.²

As my colleague Gerald Frye has put it, "The elements are the course, simply there is a power in them." The power is the healing, comforting, challenging presence and working of Jesus Christ the Lord through the Holy Spirit. To casually minimize what Jesus himself has instituted is deplorable. Rather, we must seek the 1 who gives power in the sacraments or ordinances, and empathise every bit we may never earlier have understood what He intends to practice in us through them.

Actions on the Staff of life and Wine

The Existent Presence controversy is based on interpreting a verb of existence ("is"), though the original Aramaic that Jesus would have spoken wouldn't have independent such a verb.³ The real key to understanding Jesus' intent lies instead in observing the action verbs independent in the Words of Institution. Virtually of these are pretty straightforward words -- no big mystery, no deep meanings.

• "Took," Greek lambanō, "take hold of, grasp, take in hand."⁴

• "Gave thanks" ("blessed" KJV, Matthew and Mark), eulogeō, means "bless." Jesus is not calling a blessing down on the bread here, only saying a prayer commencement, "Blessed art Thou, O Lord."^five
• "Gave thank you," eucharisteō, "to express appreciation for benefits or blessings, give thanks, express thanks, render/return cheers," particularly of thanksgiving earlier meals.⁶ In Matthew and Marker, eulogeō is used for the breadstuff and eucharisteō for the loving cup, merely in both Luke and one Corinthians eucharisteō is used interchangeably for the prayers of thanks during this forever special Passover meal.
• "Broke," klaō, "intermission," in the New Attestation simply used of the breaking of breadstuff by which the father of the household gave the bespeak to begin the meal.^vii

• "Gave," didōmi, "to give, bestow, grant ... something to eat or drinkable."^eight

• "Take," lambanō, see to a higher place.
• "Eat," phagō / esthiō, "to take something in through the oral cavity, usually solids only also liquids, swallow."^nine
• "Drink," pinō, "to take in a liquid internally, drinkable."¹⁰

And so far we've looked at the words used about the elements themselves. About of these refer to the mechanics of Jesus praying, taking agree of the element, preparing it (past breaking), and asking the disciples to partake of it.

Words of Sacrificial Offering

Just at present Jesus uses terms from the vocabulary of sacrificial offerings to depict the meaning of these elements:

"Given" (Luke), didōmi, here used with the meaning, "to dedicate oneself for some purpose or cause, give up, cede."¹¹ Used with a similar pregnant at ii Corinthians 8:v; Matthew 20:28; Marker ten:45; John six:51; one Timothy 2:6; Galatians i:iv; Titus 2:14.

"For" is the preposition huper, "a marking indicating that an activity or event is in some entity's involvement, for, in behalf of, for the sake of someone or something.¹²

"Cleaved for" (KJV), klaō, appears as a variant reading in 1 Corinthians 11:24b. We'll hash out this further in affiliate 4.

"Poured out" ("shed," KJV), ekcheō, "crusade to be emitted in quantity, pour out." In the cultic sense, "cascade out" (compare Leviticus 4:7), especially of Jesus' death, "claret shed for (the benefit of) many..."¹³ The preposition hither also is also huper, "in behalf of."

"Forgiveness" ("remission" KJV), aphesis, is actually a noun, but it describes an action. It means, "the act of freeing from an obligation, guilt, or punishment, pardon, counterfoil."¹⁴

We'll study these in detail in chapters 4 and v, but hither observe that the bread represents Jesus' torso that is "given for" the disciples in a sacrificial sense. The wine represents Jesus' blood that was "poured out" or "shed" for forgiveness of sins. Both verbs conspicuously indicate Jesus' intention that his disciples understand his death as an intentional sacrifice.

Verbs of Eating and Drinking

Jesus is quite articulate that the disciples are to eat the bread and all of them are to drink of the cup. What sense are nosotros to brand out of his control to eat the elements? Why? Ingesting the bread and vino, in my view:

1. Is symbolic of nourishment and sustenance.
2. Connects us to Christ'due south sacrifice on the cross in some mystical way that we'll explore in greater depth in affiliate 3.
3. Is a powerful mode of remembering Christ's death, which we'll develop in chapter 2.
4. Is a way of renewing the Covenant, in a manner reminiscent of how covenants in the ancient Near East that were ratified by the parties, eating and drinking together. We'll develop this farther in chapter 6.
5. Is a way to look forward to the fellowship of all the saints with Christ on the Last 24-hour interval -- variously pictured as the Wedlock Supper of the Lamb and eating with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Nosotros'll develop this further in chapter x.
6. Keeps usa focused on Christ's death. There'southward a tendency to turn Christianity away from a fundamental focus on forgiveness of our sins into a gild for moral improvement. The breadstuff and wine remind us of our roots, of where we've been, of Christ'southward unimaginable dearest for us, of what Christ has washed for u.s.a., and where we're headed eternally.

This is my body, given for you lot, says our Lord. This is my blood of the new covenant, shed for many for the forgiveness of sins. Take, eat. Drink securely of it, all of you.

Prayer

Lord Jesus, how we your children have sinned against the trunk and blood of the Lord in the way we take become divided over what you have given to unite united states of america. Forgive us, Lord. Forgive me. Bring peace to your body, and agreement to our inner hearts, that we might know the power that y'all have placed in the staff of life and vino, your torso and your blood. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen.

References

Mutual abbreviations and references. world wide web.jesuswalk.com/lords-supper/refs.htm

1. J. Pohle, "The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist," Catholic Encyclopedia (1908 edition). Catholic New Testament scholar Raymond E Brown, John ane:281-294 argues that the Eucharistic elements are clearly present in these verse.
2. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Second Edition; Baker Academic,1998), p. 1130.
3. Hill, Matthew, p. 339. Marshall, Final Supper, p. 85.
4. BDAG 583-585, 1.
5. BDAG 407, 2.b. Morris, Matthew, pp. 658-659, footnote 52.
6. BDAG 415-416, 2.
7. BDAG 546.
8. BDAG 242, 2.
9. BDAG 396, 1.a.
10. BDAG 814, one.
11. BDAG 242, x.
12. BDAG 1030-1031.
13. BDAG 312, 1.a.
14. BDAG 155, ii.

Copyright © 2022, Ralph F. Wilson. <pastorjoyfulheart.com> All rights reserved. A single copy of this article is free. Do non put this on a website. See legal, copyright, and reprint data.

popeextured.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.jesuswalk.com/lords-supper/1_body_blood.htm

Share this post