Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Conversation with Jeff Meyers about the Lord's Supper
I found this post recently, and it really resonated with me. I decided to engage the author (Jeff Meyers) in a discussion about the nature of the Lord's Supper. I was pleasantly surprised to find him so responsive. Unfortunately it seems our conversation has ended with some questions unanswered. I am providing a link so that perhaps we may answer the questions ourselves. So...is it more than bread and wine?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My initial thought is that the Lord's Supper is not less than the partaking of the bread and wine "in rememberance" of Jesus. I see the eating the bread and drinking the wine as markers of the LS. In other words, could it be the minimum requirement? You could have a meal together with the church that includes fellowship, prayer, and Jesus oriented discussion; but without partaking the bread and wine it isn't the LS. It should be distinguishable within the meal itself. The timing of the this doesn't seem of great importance. The gospels differ amongst each other and with Paul, as Justin mentioned earlier. The main point of 1 Cor 11:17-33 seems to be -- eat the LS in a worthy manner. i.e. with a united body remembering Jesus and "proclaming" (1 Cor. 11:26) his death until he returns. Paul implies that the LS isn't primarily to satisfy physical hunger but to bring the body together to focus on Christ. Got to call it a night...
ReplyDeleteI agree, Jonathan. I think the bread and wine as a means of remembrance are definitely the minimum requirement. However, all the other evidence of "mealness" (both in the backdrop and foreshadowing) lead me to think that the bread and wine are ideally observed in the context of a fuller meal.
ReplyDeleteIn the end, whether bread and wine are present or not and whether a full meal is eaten or not, the main point seems to be the explicit remembrance of Jesus and the unity of the body in Him.
Any additional thoughts?
I agree on the emphasis of the explicit rememberance of Jesus and unity of the Body. The bread and wine facilitate the former and a meal can facilitate the latter. The difference, I see, is "wine and bread" clearly being part of the definition of the LS where a meal is not. At least not what we typically consider a meal; eating to satisfy physical hunger. Perhaps the Corinthians treated the LS as a normal meal without a distinct rememberance of Jesus and Paul reminds them in 1 Cor. 11:23-26 of what to do. That being said, I think a meal is a natural context for the LS. A meal innately fosters unity and the LS can flow from that.
ReplyDelete