The Lord’s Supper and Transubstantiation. The Lord’s Supper is the greatest memorial ever given to man. It is a celebration of the death of the sinless Son of God and the declared anticipation of His return. The Lord’s Supper and Transubstantiation.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
The Lord’s Supper is the greatest memorial ever given to man. It is a celebration of the death of the sinless Son of God and the declared anticipation of His return.
“26: And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
27: And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
28: For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
29: But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father\'s kingdom” (Matt. 26).
Brief biblical facts:
Instituted by Jesus (Matt. 26: 26-30).
2. Observance set forth (I Cor. 11: 23-26).
A. In remembrance (Luke 22: 19).
B. With anticipation (I Cor. 11: 26).
C. Self-examination (I Cor. 11: 28).
D. Worthily (I Cor. 11: 27).
3. Place and time (Luke 22: 29, 30; Acts 20: 7).
Brief biblical facts:
A. Declare Jesus’ death (I Cor. 11: 26).
B. Keep alive spiritually (I Cor. 11: 29, 30).
C. Keep Christ in memory.
Division regarding the Lord’s Supper.
It is regrettable that there is division over Jesus’
1. Division over frequency of observance.
2. Division over “cup” versus “cups.”
3.Division over “open” and “closed.”
4. Division over fermented/unfermented juice.
5. Division regarding transubstantiation and
“…the Roman Catholic doctrine that the whole substance of the bread and the wine changes into the substance of the body and blood of Christ when consecrated in the Eucharist.”
Jesus did say:
“26: And as they were eating, Jesus took bread,
and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the
disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27:
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it
to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28: For this is my
blood of the new testament, which is shed for
many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26).
A viewed supporting text:
“53: Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I
say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son
of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in
You” (John 6, see vs. 27-58).
The consumption of blood forbidden.
“19: Wherefore my sentence is, that we Trouble
not them, which from among the Gentiles are
turned to God: 20: But that we write unto them,
that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and
from fornication, and from things strangled, and
from blood” (Acts 15).
Is there a contradiction between Matthew 26:
28 and Acts 15: 29?
22: For it is written, that Abraham had two sons,
the one by a bondmaid, the other by a
freewoman….25: For this Agar is mount Sinai in
Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is,
and is in bondage with her children” (Gal.4).
Matt. 26: 29
Cp. I Cor. 15: 50
Jesus told them to eat of his body and
drink of his blood when he was physically
standing before them (Matt. 26: 26-29).
As they partook, he did not physically
Metonymy: “The use of the name of one
object or concept for that of another to
which it is related, or of which it is a part”
“The Metaphor. …Webster says of it: ‘A short similitude;
a similitude reduced to a single word; or a word
expressing similitude with the signs of comparison. Thus,
that man is a fox, is a metaphor; but that man is like a
fox, is a simile, similitude, or comparison’ (Luke 13: 32,
dm). When the Saviour gave the institution of the
supper, He did it in the most beautiful of metaphorical
language (Matt. 26: 26-28)….Paul presents this thought
without the use of the metaphor (I Cor. 10: 16)….But in
11: 23-25 he employs the same figure that the Lord did in
“…To say this is the communion of the body and blood of
Christ, is metonymy of the agent; to say that these are
like the body and blood, would be a simile, but the
beauty and strength would have been removed in that
way; hence the Master chose the form of the metaphor
as the most expressive…” (Hermeneutics, pg. 252-254,
by D. R. Dungan).
“Agar” stood for Mount Sinai in Arabia (Gal.
4: 25, see vs. 21-31). After a similar
fashion, the unleavened bread and the fruit
of the vine stand for Jesus’ body and blood.
The properties of the unleavened bread are
indicative of purity and lack of “corruption.”
The blood of the grape is the life of the
grape and is pure and also without leaven
or fermentation. Hence, perfect
Transubstantiation, its origin:
The formal belief of transubstantiation (when
term used) appeared in the twelfth century and
was initially associated with Hildebert.
The unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine
appropriately stand for the body and blood of
Jesus. As the Christian partakes of each
emblem, he is reminded of Jesus’ death. To
make any more of the elements is to add to the
teaching and introduce irreconcilable doctrinal
conflicts between such verses as Matthew 26:
27, 28 and Acts 15: 29.