Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). In the context of his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul contrasts human wisdom with divine wisdom. He shows the absolute futility of man apart from the gospel. It is the gospel, he affirms, that is both God’s wisdom and power unto salvation. By “the preaching the cross” man can have “fellowship” or communion with God and the forgiveness of his sins or salvation. The story of the cross appears as weakness and foolishness unto man, but it is the power and wisdom of God to save. Why was such a base, ignoble, weak and foolish thing as “the preaching of the cross” chosen? It was chosen (1) “to confound the things which are mighty” in the eyes of men, (2) “to bring to nought” things that are honored by men, (3) in order “that no flesh should glory in his presence,” and (4) “that . . . he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.”

In the blood of the cross of the Christ we find the hope of the gospel. The center and circumference of all genuine gospel preaching is the cross of Calvary. The echoes of the execution, the cries of the cross, resound and reverberate throughout the gospel. Whether one is speaking of the promises made to Abraham, or of “the hope which is laid up for you in heaven,” he is preaching the cross and making known the true grace of God (Gal. 3:8; Col. 1:5,6). If one claiming to be a gospel preacher speaks of something that is not a part of the blood of the everlasting covenant, he had better cease to preach it (1 Cor. 4:6; Heb. 12:25).

There is a current trend that has borrowed an old philosophy from denominational and modern, fundamental evangelicalism. The concept is this: Let us preach the physical facts of the cross and the actual death of Jesus and let us not dwell on how one becomes a Christian, or on the work, worship and organization of the church. While these items are necessary and important, when we preach them we are liable and likely to ignore “the preaching of the cross.” A more liberal spirit speaks of “preaching the man and not the plan.” Others say that the New Testament is a “love letter” and not a law book; hence, we should bind the “life” of our Lord as recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but not the “rules and regulations” of the epistles.

While we cannot read another person’s mind (1 Cor. 2:11), it is not difficult to see the effects of such teaching. First, though, the word of God does not urge us to “preach the man and not the plan.” Rather, in the most urgent terms, it insists on the constant teaching, “with all longsuffering and doctrine,” of “all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27; 2 Tim. 3:14-4:5). Second, a result of such preaching as they advocate will be the destruction of the plain pattern of gospel obedience and of behavior in the house of God (1 Tim. 1: 16; 3:14,15). Third, the unique and distinct nature of the church will be lost (Heb. 8:5). When the plan, purpose and pattern of any institution is relegated to a secondary status, its original design will be desecrated and destroyed (cf. Rom. 1:21; 1 Sam. 8; 1 Kgs. 12:26-33). Fourth, a false distinction is made between the things of the gospel. Thus, though no apostle ever said so, the Lord’s supper becomes “the most important part of our service.” Ultimately, the day of its observance will become merely a “legalistic,” “Pharisaic technicality,” which concerns only “coldeyed formalists.” Singing unto the Lord, with or without mechanical instruments, becomes inconsequential. Jesus’ death on the cross is our salvation, so sermons on the “how” and “what” of Bible baptism are seen as “divisive and sectarian.” This is the spirit that would feign exalt the cross and lower its conditions.

In opposition to this disposition, we have devoted this series of articles. In the last issue, we noted the things that “Philip the evangelist” did not preach. Now, we shall see:

What Philip Preached

As seen and cited earlier, Philip “preached Christ,” “the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 8:5,12,35). Assuredly, we should all preach what Philip preached (1 Pet. 4:11; 1 Cor. 4:6; Gal. 1:6-12). In the “preaching of the cross,” what did Philip preach? Philip preached:

1. Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. Remember the question of the eunuch, “Of whom speaketh the prophet this?” (Acts 8:34; Isa. 5 3:7,8) It was in response to that query that Philip spoke. One is preaching Christ and his cross when he speaks of Jesus as “him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write” (Jn. 1:45; 5:46,47; Lk. 24:2527). As we address a premillennialist on the throne and the crown of the Christ, we are preaching “unto him Jesus” (Acts 2:30,31; 8:35; 17:2,3; 18:4-6). Some would argue that a book on the errors of premillennialism (e.g., Foy E. Wallace, Jr., God’s Prophetic Word) is a case of ignoring the cross and putting too much emphasis “on refuting false doctrine” while taking the cross “for granted.” It is a false dichotomy. Philip preached Jesus as the answer of the purposes and promises of God, and he was preaching “Jesus” when he did so. Therefore, one is preaching the gospel, the cross, when he preaches of Jesus from the Old Testament (Acts 8:35; 10:43).

2. That Christ is the Son of God. We know that Philip “preached Christ unto them.” When Paul “preached Christ,” he preached “that he is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20). So, to preach that Jesus is the Son of God is to preach the gospel, the cross. When one argues with a Mormon or a Muslim on the sonship of the Son of God, he is preaching Christ. Do not be fooled into thinking that one is neglecting the cross of Christ or giving it secondary consideration if he is debating the nature of Deity with a Jehovah’s Witness. To preach Christ is to preach “that he is the Son of God” (1 Jn. 1:1-3; 4:14,15; 5:5,9-12,20). One does not deny the centrality of the cross in salvation when, “by many infallible proofs,” he establishes Jesus as the Son of God (Rom. 1:4).

3. “The things concerning the kingdom of God.” After his resurrection but prior to his ascension, Jesus, too, spoke “of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3). To speak of the kingdom of God is to speak of the rule or reign of God (Matt. 28:28; Eph. 1:20-23; Col. 1:13,18-24). To speak, as we shall presently show, of the kingdom of God is to speak of the church of God (Matt. 16:18,19). However, notice that the text does not say that Philip spoke of the kingdom of God, but of “the things concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 8:12; cf. 1:3 – “things pertaining to the kingdom of God”). But more about that later.

Obviously, not every reference to the kingdom of God is a reference to the church. The kingdom is spoken of in at least three different senses. In this, it is comparable to the word, “saved … .. Saved-may refer to (A) salvation from past sins (Mk. 16:16; Acts 3:19; 2 Pet. 1:9; Rom. 10:9,10), to (B) the present salvation enjoyed by the Christian (1 Cor. 15:2) and to (C) salvation in heaven (Rom. 5:9; 13:11; 1 Pet. 1:9). Likewise, the kingdom of God is spoken of as (A) the universal rule of God (1 Chron. 29:11; Psa. 47:2,7,8; 103:19), as (B) the heavenly kingdom, the abode of the saved in eternity (1 Cor. 15:50; Acts 14:22; 2 Tim. 4:18; 2 Pet. 1:11; Matt. 25:34), and as (C) the church (Matt. 16:18,19; Col. 1:13,18; Heb. 12:23,28).

If I told any 16 year old, “I am going to purchase a car, and I will give you the keys to my automobile,” do you think he would be confused by my use of the terms, “car” and “automobile”? Me, neither! So, Jesus said, “I will build my church . . . and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:18,19). Keys are symbolic of entrance. Control of the keys is control of use and access. The apostles announced the terms of entrance in the kingdom in that they pronounced the conditions of pardon (Jn. 20:23; Lk. 24:47; Acts 2:38,47; 10:39-43,48). One is added to the church or translated into the kingdom when he obeys the gospel (Acts 2:47; Eph. 1:13; 3:6; Col. 1:13).

Observe some parallel comparisons of the church and kingdom of Christ.

1. The church is “a spiritual house” (1 Pet. 2:5; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 3:6).

“My kingdom is not of this world” (Jn. 18:36); hence, it is a spiritual kingdom (Jn. 3:3-8; Rom. 14:17; Heb. 1:8).

2. One is called out of the world and into the church by the gospel (1 Pet. 1:22-25; 2:5-9; Eph. 2:16; 3:6).

One is called unto his kingdom and glory by the gospel (1 Thess. 2:12,13; 2 Thess. 2:13,14).

3. The Lord’s supper is in the church (1 Cor. 10; 11).

The Lord’s supper is in the kingdom (Matt. 26:29).

4. By one Spirit, we are baptized “into one body,” the church (1 Cor. 12:13).

We are “born of water and of the Spirit” to “see” or “enter” the kingdom (Jn. 3:3,5).

5. The temple, tabernacle, house or church is not made with hands (1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 3:6; 8:2; 9:11).

The kingdom was made “without hands” (Dan. 2:44,45).

6. God set Christ on his own right hand and gave him to be head over all things to the church (Eph. 1:20-23; Col. 1:18).

God set his king on his holy hill of Zion (Psa. 2:6). Since kings are set over kingdoms, Christ has rule over his kingdom (1 Cor. 15:24; Acts 2:30,31; Zech. 6:13; Heb. 1:3,8; Lk. 1:32,33).

7. “Saved,” “us,” “righteous” are “the house (church) of God” (1 Pet. 4:17,18; Heb. 3:6; 1 Tim. 3:15).

“Righteousness” is the sceptre of Christ’s kingdom (Heb. 1:8,9; Rom. 14:17).

8. The “mountain,” government, house (church) of the Lord and his word go forth “from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:2,3; 1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 3:6).

God set his king upon his holy hill of Zion; his government, throne, dominion and kingdom began “at Jerusalem” (Psa.2:6; Lk. 1:32,33; 24:47,49; Acts 1:6; 2:5,30,31; 11:15).

9. “Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus” (Eph. 3:21). After his death, Christ was made head over all things to the church (Eph. 1:20-23; Phil. 2:9-11).

“In thy kingdom” equals “into thy glory” (Matt. 20:21; Mk. 10:37). Christ entered into his glory after his death (Lk, 24:26; 1 Pet. 1:11).

10. Christ is the Savior of the body, the church (Eph. 5:23).

Christ will “deliver up the kingdom unto God” (1 Cor. 15:24).

In his farewell address to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:17-38), allow the peerless Paul to tell what he had preached among them. First, he preached “repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Second, he preached “the gospel of the grace of God.” Third, he preached “the kingdom of God” (cf. Acts 19:8; 28:23,31). Fourth, he “ceased not to warn every one night and day” about “grievous wolves” who would speak “perverse things to draw away disciples.” Fifth, he commended them “to God, and to the word of his grace.” Sixth, he taught them “to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus.”

All of the items above are a part of what it means to “preach the kingdom of God,” and to preach the cross. Repentance and faith are essential ingredients of preaching the cross and kingdom of Christ. Preaching God’s grace, which brings salvation and teaches us to live pure lives (Tit. 2:11-14), is preaching the kingdom. Warnings against false doctrines and false brethren are a necessary part of preaching the cross, for such men “are the enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:18). Preaching that encourages benevolence and that reminds us of the words of the Lord Jesus in caring for our fellow man is preaching the cross and its kingdom. Be not deceived by those who would beguile you with smooth words and sweet speeches and have you believe that you are somehow forgetting the cross of Christ when you speak of similar subjects.

4. “The name of Jesus Christ.” To preach the name of Jesus Christ is to preach the authority of the Son of God (Matt. 28:18,19). When David met Goliath “in the name of the Lord of hosts” (1 Sam. 17:45), he came in the power and by the authority of Jehovah. In 1 Samuel 25:4-9, David sent out “ten young men” who were to speak “in (his) name.” “And when David’s young men came, they spake to Nabal according to all those words in the name of David and ceased.” Perhaps the most important aspect of the young men’s work is that they “ceased.” Whenever one speaks or acts in the name and by the authority of the king, he must speak and act as directly commissioned and charged by the king himself. He dares not to do less or more. So, when one speaks or preaches in the name of Jesus Christ, he had better know when to “cease.” He had better know not to go beyond what is written (1 Cor. 4:6). In short, he must speak as divinely directed by the Lord in his word (1 Pet. 4:11).

In Jeremiah 34:16-18, God said, “Ye turned and polluted my name.” How had they done so? How had they polluted the name of the Lord? They did so by doing their own will, by not listening to the Lord’s instructions, by transgressing the covenant, by not performing “the words of the covenant. ” The surest way on earth to incur the Lord’s wrath is to pollute his name, and Jeremiah says that the way we do that is to disobey divine direction of the word of God.

Jesus said, “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me” (Jn. 17:6). And how did he manifest the “name” of God? “For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me” (Jn. 17:8). One preaches the name of Jesus Christ when he makes known the words of Jesus Christ. It is just that simple. If you want to preach his name, if you want to glorify his name, then preach the word, preach the cross. Anything that does not have the name of heaven behind it is without the authority of God. Thus, when Philip preached “the name of Jesus Christ,” when “he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,” he did so with the full power and authority of the Son of God (Acts 2:38; 8:12; 10:48; 19:5). To preach baptism “for the remission of sins” is to preach in the name of Jesus Christ (Lk. 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43,48). It is to preach “the cross of Christ.” When you are too spiritual, too holy, to preach repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, you are too sanctimonious and vainly puffed up by your carnal mind (Col. 2:18).

Again, the “name of Jesus Christ” is the “power of Jesus Christ” (Acts 3:6,12,16; 4:7,10,12). Study those texts. It was in the name, by the power and authority of Jesus Christ, that the lame man was raised up. There is no other power or authority under heaven “whereby we must be saved.” Further, Ephesians 1:20-23 and Philippians 2:9-11 are coordinate passages. Christ was “given . . . a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow . . . and every tongue should confess” (Phil. 2:9-11). Pentecostal people say that this name is the name, “Jesus.” No, that cannot be, for he was given that “name” at his birth, however, this “name” was his dominion, power and authority, when, after his death, he “was made head over all things” (Eph. 1:20-23; Col. 1:18; Matt. 28:18; Lk. 24:46,47).

Philip preached this “name.” When he did so, “both men and women” “believed . . . and were baptized” (Acts 8:12). When one, like Billy Sunday of yesteryear or Billy Graham of today, claims to “preach the name or cross of Christ,” we know they are not doing so, for “men and women” are not believing and being baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” as they were when Philip truly preached his name, cross and kingdom (Acts 2:38; 8:12; 10:43,48; 16:31; 19:5). Remember, those who leave off or neglect the word of God, on this or any other part, are polluting the name of God (Jer. 34:16-18). They are not exalting the cross of Christ. They are not “preaching the cross.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 13, pp. 390-392
July 2, 1992

By Dan King

After Moses had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt and through the wilderness, they encamped on the plains of Moab, with the promised land just on the other side of the Jordan river. There he rehearsed with them the exploits he had experienced with their parents and themselves through the years now past. In the course of this careful reconstruction of events, the tired old leader spoke of one particular memory he had, namely, of that time when he had despaired of the obligations of his office. He had informed the Israelites: “I am not able to bear you myself alone” (Deut. 1:9), and, “How can I myself alone bear your cumbrance, and your burden, and your strife.” The job was too great for him! Israel had come to be so large a nation that one man could never judge their problems and handle all their strifes by himself.

Great a man as Moses was, he knew his limits. This passage teaches many good lessons and sets forth a number of helpful principles which are not only represented here, but throughout the Word of God. All church workers today should consider these thoughts and apply them to their own situation. Now, if you are not a worker in the church (and you know whether you are or not), then you need to become one. God has no place in his kingdom for those who merely wish to sit back and watch – or worse than that – sit back and watch others work and then criticize them! The majority of the parables of the kingdom are “work situation parables,” that is, they describe people working in the fields or vineyards, fishing, investing, or engaged in some other productive enterprise. The obvious conclusion we are to draw from this is that God wants us to be “producers” too. When you become a worker, then you will appreciate the significance of the following points gleaned from Deuteronomy, chapter one.

1. The principle of human limitation. In vv. 9 and 12 Moses expressed his exasperation with the endless tasks before him. He could have worked himself completely “into the grave” and would never have been through. “I am not able. . . ” and “How can I. . . ” express the frustration he felt. Teachers, elders, deacons, preachers – all Christian workers – at times feel the same way. Some are working to make a living for their families, attempting to spend some time with their children and spouses, while contributing their spare time to the cause of Christ. In the face of these pressures, sometimes they are faced with the unrealistic expectations of others. Do not feel that you are alone, Moses felt the same way.

2. The principle of multiplying workers. Moses told the people to find among themselves men of ability and wisdom which he would appoint over the tribes: “Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you” (v. 13). This inspired man knew that, to get more work done, you must have more workers. Concentrating the efforts of the same few will not increase the output of a congregation today to any large extent. What the church needs is more people who are not already involved in the work to “pitch in. ” Why did Jesus choose twelve men as his apostles? Why did he send out the seventy? Why did he appear to “above five hundred”? Because one man could not do it alone. Jesus was not sent to do all of God’s work, but to prepare workers and get the work started. When he had accomplished that, he was ready to go back to his Father. The Lord said: “The harvest truly is great, but the laborers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth laborers into his harvest” (Lk. 10:2); and, in another place: “Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal” (Jn. 4:35-36).

3. The principle of shared responsibility. The judges were charged by Moses to hear the cases between brethren, and only to bring the case to Moses if it were too hard for them to settle (vv. 16-17). Moses was not so jealous of his position that he was unwilling to “delegate responsibility.” No successful person can be. Often church workers are so anxious to guard a job for themselves that they refuse to train others to take their place when they are gone or are out of town. This can be the product of petty jealousy, and ought never to rear its ugly head in the kingdom of God. The result can be an almost permanent hardship for the church in the event they move, have extended sickness, or are taken from us by death. Learn to share responsibility. This is God’s way. Paul told Timothy to train others to take his place, even as Paul himself had trained Timothy (2 Tim. 2:2).

4. The principle of ultimate accountability to God. “Ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s” (v. 17). Those of us who are doing little for the work of Christ, save showing up occasionally at the worship services, had better know that someday we must all give account to God (2 Cor. 5:10). “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be” (Rev. 22:12). So said God about the judgment. Those of us who are not producing anything toward the cause of Christ, save concern on the part of faithful and vigilant workers, need to awake to what the judgment will be about. It will be “according to our works,” as per this and other scriptures.

Apply these divine principles to your labor in the kingdom of heaven. They will make of you a more fruitful worker, and the overall effect will be the growth of the church and a greater volume of work done.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 13, p. 396
July 2, 1992

By Mark Mayberry

Introduction

To understand the significance of the Lord’s Supper and to keep it properly is of highest importance to the Christian. A proper observance of the Lord’s Supper will yield great spiritual blessings, but an improper observance of this memorial feast will result in great condemnation. Let us diligently study this subject and then make proper application of what we learn.

A. Origin of Observance

How did this practice originate? Just before his death, on the night that he was betrayed, Christ instituted the observance of the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-29; Mk. 14:22-25; Lk. 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25). For generations, the Passover feast had commemorated God’s deliverance of Israel from Egyptian captivity (Exod. 12:21-27). However, in celebrating the Passover with his disciples, Jesus gave it a new meaning.

B. Emblems of Observance

The first element of the Lord’s Supper is unleavened bread. Unleavened bread is bread baked from unfermented dough, i.e., bread that is made without any yeast. The Passover was also called the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Lord originally commanded the Jews to use such bread because they were to eat the Passover in haste (Deut. 16:1-3). Later leaven came to symbolize the evil influence of sin that must be purged away (Matt. 16:6; 1 Cor. 5:6-8). Thus the unleavened bread represents the broken body of our sinless Savior.

The second element of the Lord’s Supper is the fruit of the vine. This symbolizes his blood that was shed for many for the remission of sins. In the Old Testament, the blood of animals was shed in the place of the offender. However, the blood of bulls and goats could not completely remove the stain of sin. A better and more perfect sacrifice was needed. Jesus is that sacrifice! We now find permanent forgiveness through the blood of Christ (Eph. 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:18-19; Rev. 1:5). The Lord’s Supper celebrates this fact!

C. Day of Observance

When was the Lord’s Supper observed? The early church regularly assembled on Sunday for worship (1 Cor. 16:1-2). On this day Christ was raised from the dead. On this day the church was established. One of the primary reasons the disciples came together on the first day of the week was to “break bread.” Sometimes this expression refers to eating a common meal (Acts 2:46; 27:35), but it often refers to the observance of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 10: 16; Acts 2:42; 20:7). Thus we clearly understand that the Lord’s Supper was observed on the first day of the week..

D. Frequency of Observance

How often did early Christians observe the Lord’s Supper? To answer this question, we need to understand how necessary inference is used to establish Bible authority. A necessary inference is something that is clearly implied by the things that are stated. Necessary inference is simply a part of the reasoning process. When evidence is collected and a conclusion is drawn, that conclusion is our inference. It is “necessary” to the extent that the evidence demands it.

Jesus often taught through parables or illustrative stories, and then called upon men to infer the necessary spiritual lesson and apply it to their lives. For example, in debating with the Sadducees about the resurrection, Jesus argued that God’s statement to Moses from the burning bush necessarily implied that Abraham enjoyed a continuing existence beyond the grave (Matt. 22:23-33). Jesus also used this approach in reassuring John the Baptist that he was indeed the Christ (Matt. 11:2-6).

We learn how often to partake of the Lord’s Supper through necessary inference. It was the practice of the New Testament church to observe the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). The question might be asked, “Which first day?” Since none is specified it follows that they did it each first day. Whenever there was a first day of the week, they observed the Lord’s Supper. A comparison might be made to the Old Testament commandment to observe the Sabbath day. Which Sabbath day? God did not specifically say, but the Jews clearly were to infer that each Sabbath day was sacred (Num. 15:32-36). As often as there was a Sabbath day it was to be observed. So it is with the Lord’s Supper. New Testament Christians met every first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2, RSV). In their weekly assembly they partook of the Lord’s Supper. Observing the communion on a monthly, quarterly, or yearly basis is without Bible authority.

E. Purpose of Observance

1. A memorial or commemoration. Men often erect monuments and memorials to past events. Our government has dedicated sites, such as Gettysburg, Arlington National Cemetery, the wreck of the USS Arizona, the Vietnam Memorial Wall, etc., to honor those how have fallen in battle. These places are considered hallowed ground. Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and Independence Day parades and celebrations remind us of those who gave their lives for the sake of freedom.

On a personal level, we treasure the tattered pictures of our loved ones. We save momentos that remind us of past joys. From time to time, we return to the old homeplace of our youth and think about days long past. Occasionally we revisit the family cemetery, and standing silently beside the tombstones of our ancestors, we are reminded that someone lived and was loved, died and is fondly remembered.

The Lord’s Supper is a memorial that reminds us of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (1 Cor. 11:23-25). If our Lord had not died on the cross, forgiveness and redemption would not have been possible. If the resurrection had not occurred, we would be without hope. Thus it is not surprising that the death, burial and resurrection of Christ is the central theme of the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1-5). Calvary was the greatest sacrifice in human history. The Lord’s Supper is the world’s greatest monument to the world’s greatest event.

No personal relics of Jesus have been preserved. There is no grave site we can visit for his tomb was left empty. Instead, he left only the Lord’s Supper. Through observing this memorial feast we are continually reminded that Jesus suffered and died for our sins. The unleavened bread recalls to our minds the broken body of the Lord, and the fruit of the vine reminds us of the Saviour’s blood that was shed for our sins. In observing this memorial, our minds are carried back to that awful night when Jesus was betrayed in Gethsemane, to the cruel mob, to the unlawful trials held under the cover of darkness, the mockery and humiliation he endured, the long agonizing walk to Calvary, the anguish of the cross, the nails that were driven into the hands and feet, the spear that pierced his side, and the blood that was shed for you and me (Isa. 53:3-6).

Knowing that man was prone to forget, Christ appointed this supper to keep the memory of his great sacrifice alive in our hearts. No greater calamity could befall a Christian than to forget what God had done for us. The one who forgets the death of Christ will also forget to live for the Lord.

2. Communion. The Lord’s Supper is an expression of our union with Christ and with one another (1 Cor. 10:16-17). The word communion comes from the Greek word koinonia, which means partnership, joint participation, a sharing together, or fellowship. Observing the Lord’s Supper is an outward expression of our unity as Christians. Furthermore, in partaking of this feast, one shares in the benefits of the Lord’s sacrifice (1 Cor. 10:16-17).

In the context of 1 Corinthians 10:14-22, Paul warns the Corinthians against becoming involved in idolatrous rites. Eating meat in the idol’s temple unites the eater with evils of idolatry. By participating in pagan festivals, the saints at Corinth were having fellowship with evil. So likewise, when Christians eat of the bread and drink of the cup of the Lord, they were united with Christ and share in the blessings that his sacrifice affords.

We share in these blessings, not only by partaking of the Lord’s Supper, but also by keeping his ordinances and commandments. In order to maintain fellowship with our Saviour, we must walk in the light. Breaking bread is no substitute for godly living (1 Jn. 1:6-7).

3. A proclamation. The gospel must be proclaimed to the whole world (Mk. 16:15-16). Not everyone can stand before a congregation and proclaim the gospel, but every Christian can preach a sermon by partaking of the Lord’s Supper. Through a faithful observance of the Lord’s Supper we proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes (1 Cor. 11:26).

The Greek word translated “proclaim” in this passage is most often used to refer to preaching. Each of us preaches a sermon when observing the Lord’s Supper. No sermon from the pulpit, however eloquent it may be, can speak as effectively as the whole congregation joining together in a solemn, faithful and discerning observance of the Lord’s Supper. It is a proclamation of God’s love and grace. By participating in this event, we publicly confess our faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Surely this is a confession that all Christians take unspeakable joy in making.

By the same token, however, our actions may speak loudly in a negative way. Whispering, giggling, writing notes, clipping fingernails, playing with babies, and day dreaming all indicate that something is wrong with our attitude. An improper observance of the Lord’s Supper will make one spiritually weak and sick. We must examine ourselves and properly discern the Lord’s body. We should reflect on our faith, and resolve to be more dedicated in the future. Those who do not partake acceptably eat and drink damnation to themselves (1 Cor. 11:26-20).

What does it mean to eat worthily? Obviously, no one is truly worthy of Christ’s great sacrifice. As sinners we deserve condemnation. Salvation is an expression of God’s grace, not our goodness. Despite our best efforts, we are still unprofitable servants (Lk. 17:10). However, we must endeavor to walk worthy of our high calling (Eph. 4:1). In observing the Lord’s Supper we must endeavor to partake in a way that is pleasing to God.

The Lord’s Supper is a most solemn observance charged with deep and sacred meaning. It should be observed with reverence and great care. The one who partakes unworthily has sinned, not against mere emblems, but against the Lord himself. He has shown disrespect for Christ’s body and blood.

Let’s take this a step further: If an improper observance makes one “weak and sickly,” pray tell what no observance will do? How can we justify deliberately missing this memorial feast? The Lord was willing to give up the glories of heaven, come to this world of sin and sorrow, and die a shameful death because of his love for you. Do you care enough for him to assemble with the saints when they remember him? Is that asking too much when we consider what he did for us (Heb. 10:25)?

Conclusion

In observing the Lord’s Supper, the Christian must look backwards and remember the death of Christ. We must look inward and examine self. We look outward to those lost in sin and proclaim our faith in the Lord’s atoning sacrifice. We also look forward in anticipation of his glorious return. This feast reminds us that Jesus is coming again. Thus, there is an optimistic quality to this memorial, even in the midst of a sad remembrance.

If properly observed, the Lord’s Supper will increase our love, faith, zeal, hope and joy. May we come to appreciate its meaning more and learn to partake of this divine memorial in a more worthy manner.

The Lord’s Supper is observed in God’s kingdom (Lk. 22:29). Are you a citizen in the kingdom of heaven? If not, why not obey the gospel and be added to the kingdom (Jn. 3:3-5)?

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 12, pp. 365-367
June 18, 1992

By Tom M. Roberts

As past articles in this series have indicated, The Acts is much more than a simple rendition of the beginning of the church and its early history. In fact, The Acts takes upon itself a form of apologetics as it presents the church to the world full of skepticism (Romans) and prejudice (Jews). One is not asked to accept Jesus Christ, the risen Savior, on blind faith. Rather, the evidence is presented to the Romans as in a forensic case; to the Jews as a model of Mosaic orthodoxy. We have already studied the case of evidence, based upon the role of the apostles as “witnesses.” Now, let us examine the case as it would appear in the eyes of those familiar to the Law of Moses.

Was this church something new, unexpected, unheralded? Did one have to turn one’s back on the Law and the prophets in order to accept Jesus of Nazareth? Could a descendant of Abraham remain faithful to his nation and yet become a part of a “sect” that opened its doors to Gentiles? Could a Jew become a part of this Kingdom and avoid conflict with Rome? To Jews, there were many disturbing factors to be considered: the Sabbath, sacrifices, the Temple, the priesthood, and most importantly, the Torah. Could anyone expect a devout Jew to turn his back on millennia of following after Moses and abruptly begin to follow Jesus?

Luke’s approach (by inspiration) was to lay the foundation that Christianity was but an extension, the natural culmination of all that Judaism represented. Rather than violate the law by accepting Jesus, a Jew realized the natural end (purpose) of the law by accepting him of whom the law and prophets testified. In becoming a Christian, a Jew fulfilled his planned destiny from God. As Paul would later declare, “For Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to every one that believeth” (Rom. 10:4). Luke proved that a Jew, in fact, followed orthodoxy when he became a Christian and that only by denying Jesus could he violate the Law.

Before us is another of the great themes from Acts.

Fulfilled Prophecy

When Pentecost occurred, there was not so much a break with the past as a fruition. God was beginning, at that pregnant moment of time, to fulfill the prophets, not destroy them (Matt. 5:17). Luke carefully rehearsed the sermon from Pentecost, showing that the apostles argued their case as Jews to Jews, brethren to brethren, as fellow inheritors of the promises to Abraham and David, not violators of the covenant. The event of the day was the culmination of history, not a break from it.

Without repeating the sermon of Acts 2, we must impress that it is a model of proof to those who loved the Old Testament. Beginning with Joel’s prediction of the “last days,” and continuing through David’s testimony of the Christ, the twelve drove home the fact that God had promised both a king and kingdom and that “this is that” (v. 16) spoken by the prophets. There would be no disloyalty in accepting Jesus as the Christ. It would be disloyal to God not to accept the Messiah. God had raised Jesus to sit upon the throne of David when he raised him from the dead (vv. 30-31). The Holy Spirit, of whom Joel spoke, had poured forth the power on Pentecost (v. 33), even as he had given proof through the works of Jesus of which the multitudes were witnesses (v. 22), as were the apostles (v. 32). The logical conclusion of such a presentation was that “God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified” (v. 36).

That Jesus was rejected by the nation came as no surprise. In fact, the rejection became, in itself, a mark of identity. While the gospel of Luke records the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, it also records the crucifixion. Cries of “Blessed is the King that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Lk. 19:38) turned into cries of “Crucify, crucify him” (23:21). Luke attested to this as fulfillment of Scripture when he recorded Peter and John saying, “He is the stone which was set at nought of you the builders, which was made the head of the corner” (Acts 4:11). This served as a warning to listeners not to repeat the tragedy of rejecting Jesus once again. The King of the Jews had now established the long-awaited kingdom.

From the opening paragraph to the last, Luke presented his case. He began with Christ “speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (1:3) and closed with Paul before the Roman Jews “preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 31).

When Philip went to Samaria, he went “preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). When the disciples were confirmed by Paul on his second journey, he exhorted the brethren to “continue in the faith, and that through many tribulations (they) must enter the kingdom of God” (14:22). In the synagogues, Paul “spoke boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God” (19:8).

And what better source for proof-texts than the Old Testament? The sacred Scriptures, which testified of Jesus (John 5:39), were used to make manifest the ancient testimonies of God. Peter affirmed that Jesus was “that prophet” (3:22-23) like Moses to whom all should pay heed and that “Samuel and all the prophets told of these days” (V. 24). Paul “expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets” (28:23).

A Universal Kingdom

As far back as Genesis 3:15, God promised the “seed of woman” who would become the Christ. In Abraham, he promised blessings to “all the families of the world” (Gen. 18:18) through this promised seed. In David, he promised a king and a kingdom (2 Sam. 7:11ff). Through Daniel, God promised further that the kingdom would consume all other nations (2:44). Isaiah had spoken that “all nations” would be in that kingdom (2:2).

This cumulative evidence, and more, must have been the basis for the heated discussion in Jerusalem in Acts 15 as to the destiny of the Gentiles who believed in Jesus. James summed up the evidence when he stated: “Simeon hath rehearsed how first God visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets” (15:14,15). This is followed by a quotation from Amos 9:11,12.

Surely, we must be struck by the steadfast manner in which Luke pressed his theme of a kingdom that required no treason to embrace. Under the searching light of his presentation, it would have been treasonous not to accept it.

Questions Are Answered

Was this church something new, unexpected, unheralded? No, it was a subject of ancient prophecy. Did one have to turn his back on the Law and the prophets in order to accept Jesus of Nazareth? No, one would establish the law and prophets (Acts 2:30-35; Rom. 3:31) by accepting Jesus. Could a descendant of Abraham remain faithful to his nation and yet become a part of a sect that opened its doors to Gentiles? Yes, if it was understood that God was granting them “repentance unto life” (11:18) as well as the Jews. Could a Jew become a part of this Kingdom and avoid conflict with Rome? Yes, if he realized that “his citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20; Acts 28:17-18). To Jews, there were many disturbing factors to be considered: the Sabbath, sacrifices, the Temple, the priesthood, and most importantly, the Torah. Could anyone expect a devout Jew to turn his back on millennia of following after Moses and abruptly begin to follow Jesus? Yes, if he understood that the Old Testament system was a “yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Acts 15:10), yet it did not require the Christian to do aught I against the people, or the customs of our fathers” (28:17). The typical system was gone; the anti-type had arrived, substance had replaced shadow.

With these things before us, we can only stand in awe at the evidence and testimony presented by this great historian. Another of the great themes from Acts is brought to view with evidence sufficient to convince Jew and Gentile alike that the Christ is now on the throne of David. Our own faith in Jesus is enhanced by the evidence before us and we can only thank God for his Providence in bringing it to our view.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 12, pp. 362-363
June 18, 1992